Loading ...Health care bill passes after anti-abortion language added
flockwoodThe Obama administration and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi won the first major vote on health-care reform, by a vote of 220-215. But the legislation only passed because language was added making clear that the government-mandated insurance plans would not pay for abortions except in the cases of rape, incest of where the mother’s life was in danger. Women who want “abortion insurance” can still purchase it, but they’ll have to pay an additional premium. Taxpayers won’t be forced to subsidize the procedure, as House Democratic leaders originally envisioned.
Reuters has all the details here. Sixty-four Democrats sided with Republicans to pass the language.
November 8th, 2009 at 6:36 am
I wonder how many of our illustrious states people actually read that bill. I am for it.
November 8th, 2009 at 8:58 am
The issue of taxpayers being forced to pay for things that they find objectionable is not as cut and dried as many may think. Many of us taxpayers involuntarily underwrite programs that we do not support. Over the last several years I helped to pay for domestic espionage, secret prisons, secret arrests, torture, and erosion of basic constitutional freedoms. Back then I really needed someone to insist that I had a right to opt out. Where was Congressman Boehner?
Remember too that when one person avoids paying taxes then the burden falls on the rest of us. That means whenever Catholics give money to their church and claim those donations as tax deductions, I am effectively subsidizing their religious beliefs. That includes some measure of political lobbying for policies that I find objectionable, not to mention the legal fees to protect criminal priests. Is it fair to make me an unwilling financier of Pope Benedict and his organization? I don’t see how it is any less fair to allow private citizens to make private decisions about their legal healthcare choices, even if those insurance policies are supported by the public via tax deductions or government subsidies.
November 8th, 2009 at 10:57 am
Good point, Jose. Well said indeed.
The problem with these folks is that they see everything only through their own religious prism. One often wonders why religious fundamentalists and evangelicals feel they need the power of the state to enforce their religious beliefs, if those beliefs were truly those of God.
November 8th, 2009 at 11:25 am
Well Jose, I challenge you to find a better place to live on the face of this earth.
November 8th, 2009 at 11:30 am
The reason I would like to see this bill pass is different from most people. Privacy laws have prevented companies from leaking or posting individuals who play a key role in insurance and drug company profits. In the event that this bill does pass and companies do fold and go into bankruptcy, public record will reveal who major players are in this greed filled industry. Then the fun will begin.
November 8th, 2009 at 12:26 pm
Perplexed, while I love this country (and even my troubled Commonwealth of Kentucky), and have enough family and friends here that I don’t suppose I’ll ever move away, I don’t operate under the myth that we are somehow the “best” country in the world in which to live. Today, any industrialized, western nation is a good place to live. I can’t tell that people in Western Europe, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, or Japan are any more worse off than we are, and in most of these countries, the average person has a better lifestyle than they do here. And, in just about all of them, working class people are FAR better off than they are here, what with national health care, minimum wages on which you can actually live, and other social programs.
November 8th, 2009 at 2:46 pm
Well perp, I am looking for a better place to live, but I’m looking for it right here. Some folks are content to wring their hands and settle for mediocrity because it takes too much money or effort to fix a problem. Some folks can’t be bothered to object when our so-called leaders undermine our key American values of freedom and fairness. Maybe THEY should go find some other country where they can live in peace.
November 8th, 2009 at 3:47 pm
Abortion will never be abolishes, get over it….
November 9th, 2009 at 10:02 am
There is plenty of truth in what all is said. BTW, Norway is a wonderful country, run much better than ours. Where children are actually required to receive 15 min. of play time for every 45 min. of instructional time, regardless of the weather. A phrase in Norway goes like this – this is no bad weather, just badly dressed children. I wonder how different our country would be if we didn’t have career politicians, if they had to rely on the same heath care as the bill they pass, if they did not have a gauranteed retirement plan, if they had to pay for their retirement like 90% of their constituents. What we need is a sweeping overhaul of the people who run this country. But then I doubt that will happen. Even if we managed to replace even 1/2 of the memebers in both houses, the PAC’s will find what the newbes price is and buy them out too. I hate to be so pessimistic, but I don’t see anything that gives me hope, except for my faith.
November 9th, 2009 at 3:51 pm
I wonder how the government intends to ensure that the abortion is being sought out as a result of rape, incest, or the health of the mother. Are they going to require the woman to file a police report? Will the doctor have to testify?
November 9th, 2009 at 6:28 pm
If Stupak’s amendment carries in the Senate will that mean hospitals will denied federal funds if they offer abortion services? If that be the case will it also mean that insurance companies that include abortion services as part of their policies be excluded from being a part of a health care system? If such happens only pro life will be offered on a nation-wide basis. I just wonder if that was Stupak’s intent. If so he’ll be toast in the 2010 wlections.
November 10th, 2009 at 1:46 pm
I do worry about the unintended consequences of this legislation, and it truly pisses me off that my taxes pay for war, torture, capital punishment, viagra for people on medicare and medicaid (I’m guessing that is true) and parole for sex offenders but it doesn’t provide complete reproductive health care for women. I’m all for making abortion rarer and there are better ways to do it than this way.
Like I’ve said before, if you are “pro life” and don’t currently house a foster child you are to some degree a hypocrite.
November 10th, 2009 at 2:16 pm
I agree. I would rather see no need for abortions, but making them illegal or impossible to obtain is not the responsible way to do it. It’s akin to fixing the foreclosure problem by banning foreclosures. Though the supply is reduced, the demand still remains.
November 10th, 2009 at 2:47 pm
The other issue, Cheese, that none of the anti-choice folks want to deal with is the impact on the reduction of crime that legalizing abortion has caused. The evidence shows that the drop in violent crime in the US over the past 30 or so years tracks the legalization and utilization of abortion. I have asked on this board several times what solution the anti-choicers have for the crime wave that will no doubt hit if they succeed in making abortion legal, but so far no one has given a coherent answer.
November 10th, 2009 at 4:00 pm
I wonder what so-called “pro-life” people expect will happen if they were to succeed at banning abortion…
November 10th, 2009 at 4:13 pm
Cheese, I think they think that women would stop having abortions, just like presumably those supporting prohibition in the ’20s thought people would stop drinking. Substitute back room abortion for bathtub gin, and the script’s the same.
November 10th, 2009 at 6:44 pm
Its a social issue that needs to be addressed with education and persistence. Its also a socioeconomic problem. Once again how far does government go in our lives. With a decline in church attendance and participation, I don’t see any improvement in the future, unless of course some catastrophic events takes place and puts the world on a moral watch.
November 11th, 2009 at 5:00 pm
I believe we are NOT doing enough socially to enforce our founding values. This dislike for the hard work of teaching abstinance by families and parents is shameful. It is a major problem in our society. Those are the people pushing the belief of, “Well, they are going to do it anyway – there is nothing we can do.” — which basically stokes permissive attitudes. Enough is enough! I have daughters, I have real concerns – but I am a really engaged parent. I don’t let my teenage daughter go out and get tattoos and piercings and put herself in social circumstances which lead to that type of activity. Why can’t other parents do that too? No, instead they want to reach into my wallet for the money to pay for their lack of interest as parents. Well I say NO. If abortion is ok in your family, then YOU pay for your daughters and wives abortions. That is a choice that is best left to the families and individuals and NOT forced on everyone.
Madgebaby is against covering Viagra under Medicaid and Medicare, but is shocked that there would be a limit on “complete reproductive care for women”. I do not know all the ins and outs of Medicare and Medicaid, but I would assume that hormone therapy is available under their coverage. Reproductive health and sexual health apparently are covered, then. And do we NOT have WIC and various other programs in place to provide assistance to pregnant women? There are numerous organizations already funded to aid expecting mothers. Besides, it’s hard for me to file destruction of life under the title “reproductive care”. Is that not the opposite? And I DO feel qualified, I am raising a child that is not my own (biologically) – because like most “pro lifers” I do think that life is sacred. I think it’s misdirected to make an accusation based on a stipulation of having to be raising a foster child. I see that as a weak tool to make an argument, sorry.
That is not to say that the system cannot be run better. There is ALWAYS room for improvement when the government is running something. That is why we need to keep them OUT of our healthcare system. There is simply NO “One Size Fits All” model that fairly covers all citizens, ESPECIALLY regarding a hot button topic like abortion. What we need the government to do instead of making laws threatening US with fines and jail time if we don’t comply, is enforce laws limiting frivolous lawsuits and make it once again affordable to privatize hospitals and drive down costs through free market competition. It would work – it’s happening now, with hospitals in India and other places ramping up business by offering medical procedures at a fraction of what it costs here in America.
November 17th, 2009 at 10:41 am
I would like to post this. I am not sure it shoul be posted with you. Can you help me?
This is a poem I was led to write down after reading “Abortion, The Silent Holocaust, March, 1985.
Mama and Daddy Speak For Me (Title)
Mama and Daddy Speak for Me
For I am just beginning and brand new.
Tell of my uniqueness,
For I am just forming in this soft place.
Fight for my right to live,
For I am too tiny to shake my fist!
Speak for me Mama and Daddy,
For my mouth cannot express my plea.
Discuss the alternatives with this woman,
Who holds me unwanted within her womb.
Help her to see there is no choice but life;
I must have my say.
Tell her I cannot be returned –
I’m hear to join the human race!
I’ve been sent directly from the hand of God!
A God who never makes mistakes.
I am full of life and love;
And just waiting to give my love away.
To her it is a long 9 months,
But for me it means a lifetime!
Mama and Daddy speak for me;
I am made in the image of God.
I have a purpose and a spirit.
Help her to change her mind today!
I don’t want to die; I am suppose to live!
The world was meant to know me.
Allow me to give glory to God!
Tell her for me, Mama and Daddy.
This is my silent plea.
Just give me a chance!
Betty Erwin
Elk River, Minnesota
November 17, 2009