« | »

Health Bill To Direct Tax $ To Abortion

Buried in the ‘Money & Policy’ section of the New York Times:

Health Bill Might Direct Tax Money to Abortion


July 20, 2009

WASHINGTON — An Obama administration official refused Sunday to rule out the possibility that federal tax money might be used to pay for abortions under proposed health care legislation.

Peter R. Orszag, the White House budget director, asked whether he was prepared to say that “no taxpayer money will go to pay for abortions,” answered: “I am not prepared to say explicitly that right now. It’s obviously a controversial issue, and it’s one of the questions that is playing out in this debate.”

Under the House bill, for example, most insurers would have to provide an “essential benefits package” specified by the health and human services secretary, who would receive recommendations from a federal advisory committee. Opponents of abortion want Congress to prohibit inclusion of abortion in that benefits package, while advocates of abortion rights say the package should be left to medical professionals to determine.

In an analysis of the House bill, the National Right to Life Committee said that ordinary principles of administrative law could allow the Obama administration to determine what would be included in the benefits package. “There is no doubt,” the group said, “that coverage of abortion will be mandated, unless Congress explicitly excludes abortion from the scope of federal authority to define ‘essential benefits.’ ”

Even if the health secretary did not require coverage of abortion, the group said, “federal courts would interpret the broadly worded mandatory categories of coverage to include abortion.”

Susan M. Pisano, a spokeswoman for America’s Health Insurance Plans, a trade group, said that most insurance companies offered benefit packages that included abortion coverage but that many employers decided not to buy such packages.

Douglas D. Johnson, legislative director of the National Right to Life Committee, said the House bill, like one approved last week by the Senate health committee, “would result in the greatest expansion of abortion since Roe v. Wade,” the 1973 Supreme Court decision that established a constitutional right to abortion.

In the three House committees that approved comprehensive health care bills last week, Republicans tried unsuccessfully to restrict coverage of abortion

There doesn’t seem to be any ‘maybe’ about it.

From page 773 of 1018 page HELP bill:



SEC. 1920C. (a) STATE OPTION.—State plan approved under section 1902 may provide for making medical assistance available to an individual described in section 1902(hh) (relating to individuals who meet certain income eligibility standard) during a presumptive eligibility period. In the case of an individual described in section 1902(hh), such medical assistance shall be limited to family planning services and supplies described in 1905(a)(4)(C) and, at the State’s option, medical diagnosis and treatment services that are provided in conjunction with a family planning service in a family planning setting.

And there are similarly vague references throughout the bill.

This article was posted by Steve on Tuesday, July 21st, 2009. Comments are currently closed.

14 Responses to “Health Bill To Direct Tax $ To Abortion”

  1. Liberals Demise says:

    OOOPS …..how’d that get in there?
    I like the fact that it is buried on pg.773 of 1018 pg. Help Bill that no one was gonna read anyway.
    Can’t be bothered to read them things these days!!

    • Liberals Demise says:

      Better hurry and pass this thing before Barry gets “snippy”!

    • pianogirl88 says:

      Too late LD…Barry has already gotten snippy, and it’s not going to get any better any time soon.

  2. RightWinger says:

    Let’s see here. We ration health care to seniors & those with pre-existing conditions but we make sure that money is available so that abortions can be performed. Yeah that’s the Obamacrat way!

    Of course the left will spin this to say the money will be used for abortions where the mother’s life is in danger or rape/incest, but how many of these “dangerous” episodes actually take place, say in the course of a year? Contrasting of course with how many abortions are performed as a method of birth control.

  3. proreason says:

    Get rid of the undesirables at the beginning and at the end.

    More to redistribute to SEIU, UAW and the other brain-dead zombies in the middle.

    Because hey, if you’re alive…..abortion can’t get you!

    Worry about getting old later.

  4. Trogdor says:

    Under this legislation, Obama would have been aborted via government funds. That is the eugenics they bitterly cling to.

    “In a family planning setting”? WTF? How about in a family UNPlanning setting, called UN-planned parenthood.

    • catie says:

      In the Washington Times they’ve run op ed pieces Monday & Tuesday about the number of black babies aborted, the location of the abortuaries in minority neighborhoods and about Sanger and her not wanting black or poor white babies born. Hell, she even met with the Klan about 12 times.
      They were very interesting to say the least. I don’t know why he is so vehemently pro-death. He has to know that his chances of being born would be slim to none if he had been born in 1974. I don’t know. I can’t even pray for him anymore.

    • proreason says:

      “I don’t know why he is so vehemently pro-death”

      Live people breathe and use resources the obamy cabal could be using for their own pleasure.

      Plus, it’s fun to have life and death control over people. The ultimate power trip.

  5. David says:

    Paying for abortions HAS to be mandated in the legislation. It is the only way to get around the obvious fact that if a person with a moral backbone gets elected they could easily appoint the bureaucrats that would say that abortions are as medically necessary as plastic surgery and pull the plug. The abortionists would scream that it violates the constitutional right to privacy. Here is the catch, if bureaucrats deciding not to pay for abortions violates the constitution then this bill is unconstitutional. Lets bring it to SCOTUS! Either Roe v. Wade stands or Obamacare. Either govt. can or cannot dictate medical decisions, it can not be both ways.

  6. Right of the People says:

    Is it too late for a late term abortion for the pencil-necked geek in the WH?

  7. canary says:

    what if Obama’s mother had access to such abortion asks Rep. Todd Tiahart, Republican from Obama’s mother’s birth state Kansas.

    Click to link to watch youtube.

    At beginning of speech democrats start to walk out, chairman stands and triumphantly grand slams gravel. Tiahart requests to stike “Federal” from bill.
    Approx. 3 minutes into video, Tiahart pitches strike

    Tiahrt’s Opposition to Taxpayer Funded Abortions July 20, 2009
    Online at: http://www.gop.gov/blog/09/07/20/tiahrts-opposition-to-taxpayer-funded

    …if you think of it in human terms, there is a financial incentive that will be put in place, paid for by tax dollars, that will encourage women who are single parents, living below the poverty level, to have the opportunity for a free abortion. If you take that scenario and apply it to many of the great minds we have today, who would we have been deprived of? Our president grew up in those similar circumstances. If that financial incentive was in place, is it possible that his mother may have taken advantage of it?

    (Abortion is illegal in Indonesia, where Obomba’s mother got pregnant and gave birth to Obama’s half-sister. He quotes his mother that she regretted ever going to Indonesia though she worked and traveled for International governments in Indonesia for 20 yrs,. Obama says his closeness to Lulu led to her sending him back to America. Obama observed his mother’s love for Lulu distance soon after arriving in Indonesia. After all, he told the crowds he would not want his own daughters punished if they became pregnant)

  8. Celina says:

    If this is all about family planning is the government going to now pay for fertility treatments? Or for those of us who are so inclined Fertility Awareness Methods of family planning like Creighton Model or Billings Method?

    Didn’t think so.

  9. canary says:

    Pro-choice would become Forced-choice. This is a Civil Rights violation. For many It’s a violation of freedom of religion, as many Americans believe wrong. And scientists, and Obama said medical care would be scientifically based.

    Obama and Michelle could pioneer their own private charity chain of clinics.
    “The Obama’s Legacy for Mankind.” Pictures hanging on the walls of Obama and Michelle bumping butcher knives.

« Front Page | To Top
« | »