Senate Health Bill Would Become
Even More Expansively
Pro-Abortion if
Modified by New Obama Proposals
Part Two of
Three
Editor's note. The following is
from NRLC Legislative Director
Douglas Johnson.
Any member of Congress who votes
for the final legislation
proposed by President Obama will
be voting for direct federal
funding of elective abortion
through Community Health
Centers, and also an array of
other pro-abortion federal
subsidies and mandates.
The health bill passed by the
Senate in December (H.R. 3590)
had become, by the conclusion of
the Senate amendment process,
the most expansively
pro-abortion bill ever brought
to the floor of either house of
Congress since Roe v. Wade. The
Senate bill, as passed,
contained seven distinct
problems pertaining to abortion
policies.(The bill passed
earlier by the House, H.R. 3962,
contained none of these
pro-abortion components, thanks
to adoption of the Stupak-Pitts
Amendment on the House floor on
November 7, 2009, by a vote of
240-194.) President Obama today
proposed "a targeted set of
changes to" the Senate-passed
bill. None of President Obama's
proposed changes diminish any of
the sweeping pro-abortion
problems in the Senate bill, and
he actually proposes to increase
the funds that would be
available to directly subsidize
abortion procedures (through
Community Health Centers) and to
subsidize private health
insurance that covers abortion
(through the premium-subsidy tax
credits program).
If all of the President's
changes were made, the resulting
legislation would allow direct
federal funding of abortion on
demand through Community Health
Centers, would institute federal
subsidies for private health
plans that cover abortion on
demand (including some federally
administered plans), and would
authorize federal mandates that
would require even
non-subsidized private plans to
cover elective abortion.
Here is one problem, offered for
illustration: The Senate bill,
due to a last-minute amendment,
provides $7 billion for the
nation's 1,250 Community Health
Centers, without any restriction
whatever on the use of these
federal funds to pay directly
for abortion on demand. (These
funds are entirely untouched by
the "Hyde Amendment" that
currently covers Medicaid.)
Obama today proposed to increase
that figure to $11 billion, but
without adding a prohibition on
the use of the funds for
abortion. (The House-passed bill
would provide $12 billion, but
in the House bill the funds
would be covered by the
Stupak-Pitts Amendment.) Two
pro-abortion groups, the
Reproductive Health Access
Project and the Abortion Access
Project, are already actively
campaigning for Community Health
Centers to perform elective
abortions. In short, the Senate
bill would allow direct federal
funding of abortion on demand
through Community Health
Centers. A memorandum
documenting this issue in
further detail is posted here:
http://www.nrlc.org/AHC/NRLCmemoCommHealth.pdf
The abortion-related differences
between the House-passed and
Senate-passed bills are far, far
greater than one would gather
from reading superficial
summaries such as those
published repeatedly in the
mainstream news media.
These thumbnail sketches have
tended to focus exclusively and
superficially on certain
provisions associated with
Senator Ben Nelson. NRLC
believes that the Nelson
provisions are unacceptable, but
the pro-abortion problems in the
Senate bill go far beyond the
flawed Nelson provisions. A
letter from NRLC to U.S. House
members, explaining the multiple
pro-abortion components of the
Senate-passed bill, is posted
here:
http://www.nrlc.org/AHC/HouseLetteronAbortionProvisions.html
The U.S. Conference of Catholic
Bishops (USCCB) produced a
13-page memorandum that throws
the many unacceptable provisions
of the Senate bill into stark
relief, which is posted here:
http://www.usccb.org/healthcare/life_conscience.pdf
A substantial number of pro-life
Democrats in the House,
including some lawmakers whose
names have not been mentioned on
the various published lists,
have told their constituents
that they are not going to vote
for the Senate-passed bill
because of the abortion
problems. For pro-life
Democrats, President Obama's
proposal only makes matters
worse. The only thing that would
fix the Senate bill on abortion
is permanent, bill-wide language
that is functionally identical
to the Stupak-Pitts Amendment
adopted in the House on November
7, 2009.
The Obama proposal also would
force rationing of lifesaving
medical treatment, a matter that
will be the subject of separate
comment by the National Right to
Life Committee.
Part Three |