« U.S. Suggests Softened Darfur Stance | Main | Doonsbury Takes on The Fellowship »

August 5, 2009

AP: Proposed Health Insurance Would Allow Abortion Coverage

Proposed health care legislation could allow a new government-sponsored insurance plan to fund abortions, the Associated Press reports.

Pro-life groups want specific restrictions on a health care plan that offers abortion, and a measure was passed, then reversed last week in a House committee.

The new federal funds would take the form of subsidies for low- and middle-income people buying coverage through the health insurance exchange. Subsidies would be available for people to buy the public plan or private coverage. Making things more complicated, the federal subsidies would be mixed in with contributions from individuals and employers. Eventually, most Americans could end up getting their coverage through the exchange.

The Democratic health care legislation as originally introduced in the House and Senate did not mention abortion. That rang alarm bells for abortion opponents.

Since abortion is a legal medical procedure, experts on both sides say not mentioning it would allow health care plans in the new insurance exchange to provide unrestricted coverage.

It would mirror the private insurance market, where abortion coverage is widely available.


The Wall Street Journal explains how a state universal health-care program has impacted a Catholic hospital system.

This spring in Massachusetts, a Catholic hospital system announced a joint venture with a secular company to provide insurance to the poor under the state's universal health-care program.

The venture fulfilled one pillar of Catholic social teaching -- caring for the needy.

But it violated another principle, because the state-run health plan for low- and moderate-income adults subsidizes abortion. The Catholic hospital didn't perform abortions but was required to refer patients to clinics that would, an act the church considers immoral.

Conservatives are also concerned about how health-care plan would impact end of life decisions.

The focus of their ire is a provision tucked deep inside the House bill that would provide Medicare coverage for an end-of-life consultation once every five years. If a person falls ill with a life-threatening disease, more frequent sessions would be allowed.

...But proponents of the end-of-life care measure say it does nothing close to what McCaughey, Thompson, Boehner and others assert.

The provision would require Medicare to cover advanced care consultations for the first time, but it does not mandate individuals to take advantage of the benefit, proponents say. The consultations would take place between the patient and a doctor or nurse practitioner, not a government bureaucrat. And there would be no requirement for the individual to sign a directive or living will at the end of the discussion.

Comments

Of course, this comes two days after LifeNews.com had to expose Ap for misleading readers about the abortion coverage: http://lifenews.com/nat5311.html

Does anyone know WHO wrote the health care bill that would force us to pay not only for abortion but also for infenticide (late-term abortion) and possible euthanasia? Obama and most Congress people have not even read it! They just want it approved!

It seems all these bills that Congress is being coerced to approve have been written by the same U.S. enemies who selected Obama to impose Marxism on us! Who wrote the health care bill? The Apollo Alliance, George Soros, the United Nations?

No wonder the Russians are gloating. "The American descent into Marxism is happening with breath taking speed, against the back drop of a passive, hapless sheeple…” http://english.pravda.ru/opinion/columnists/107459-american_capitalism-0

probably the same nutcase who wrote your post. i just don't understand why nut cases like you don't commit yourselves to the assylum and give us all a break!

Well, all well & good, but - what about the 11 year old raped by a sexual deviant - are you going to make this chikd carry a chikld and probably have a chikld with mental problems?? I don't think so. In fact, both children would be mentally scarred.God understands.

I recently came across your blog and have been reading along. I thought I would leave my first comment. I don't know what to say except that I have enjoyed reading. Nice blog. I will keep visiting this blog very often.

Susan

http://ovarianpain.net

No matter what the reproductive nazis say, they will always attempt to use taxes to subsidize abortion. Else, why don't they let stay those conservative provisions? If you don't believe it, I have some cheap swamp land in Florida to sell you.

"God understands."? (Christian Lawyer)

I don't like to quote the Bible to people, but when you assert that God understands then we should look to God's word to see what He understands rather than putting words in His mouth.

Jeremiah 1:5 - Before I formed you in the womb I knew you.
Psalm 139:13 - You created my inmost self, knit me together in my mother's womb.
Acts 17:25 - it is he who gives everything -- including life and breath -- to everyone.

God understands that He is the origin of all life and with our cooperation brings life into the world. No child is created without His will.

John 8:43 - Why you not understand what I say? Because you cannot bear to listen to my words.

Commandment - Thou shalt not kill.

God understands. He said so. Do you?

Sorry, previous post was addressed to granny not Christian Lawyer.

Granny - Are you going to kill the 11 year old rape victim too? After all, she is scarred as well. And you didn't want any scarred children with mental problems in this world. If that's your solution, then 3/4 of the world should be euthanised. Because we all have some problems. According to your crowd, there are some people that should not be allowed to live. Justice Gingsburg agreed. She said that's why we have legal abortion. (Shades of Adolph Hitler!)
You know, when my wife had our babies, I could hardly wait to hold them. When a abortion doc destroys a baby, I wonder: is there any one there to hold and love the little one as he/she dies? I don't think so. They are treated as so much medical waste. I can't imagine letting a little infant lie on a cold metal table and struggle without holding and comforting him. No! To do so is heartless and cruel. As for the 11 year old who is raped by the sexual deviant, let's kill the deviant instead of the victim. That makes more sense.

The plan you contribute to at work (if you're covered by an employee plan) very likely covers abortion. Yes, I've never heard one single objection about that. More hypocrisy.