Possible problems with private insurance if abortion is forbidden in health care reform.

madfloridian

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Mon Jul-13-09 08:29 PM
Original message

Possible problems with private insurance if abortion is forbidden in health care reform.

We don't need to cave this time on rights for women and rights for gays. We don't need to cave on union issues. We have the votes. Yes, we do have the votes to get through a Democratic agenda.

To those DUers who are willing and ready to let our party decide medical issues by using religious ideology....that is your right. But if it occurs there will not just be consequences in 2010 and 2012....there will be consequences most likely to women who are covered for abortion and reproductive rights under private insurance.

You need to read Karen Tumulty's article in TIME. She points out other problems that might arise.

Could Abortion Coverage Sink Health-Care Reform?

She mentions how the Hyde Amendment affected paying for abortions under government programs.

The Hyde Amendment, passed by the House on Sept., 30, 1976, forbade Medicaid — a program for poor people, jointly administered by Washington and the states, which had, up till then, paid for about 300,000 abortions a year — from using any federal money to pay for the procedure. All but 17 states followed suit, banning use of their own funds as well; with a few modifications, the ban has stood up ever since.

Then she takes time to point out the difference now with this new consideration of health care reform.

The prospect of sweeping health reform, however, has reopened the issue. While current versions of the legislation do not address the abortion issue at all, late last month, 19 antiabortion Democrats in the House sent a letter to Speaker Nancy Pelosi, warning that they "cannot support any health-care-reform proposal unless it explicitly excludes abortion from the scope of any government-defined or subsidized health-insurance plan."

Most of those who oppose abortion do so because of their religious views. Legislation is being demanded of Congress on the grounds of religious ideology. There are consequences.

Indeed, the abortion question is just one of a myriad of tricky questions that will emerge from the fine print as the health debate moves forward. Democratic leaders say, for example, that they are already prepared to accede to Republican demands that illegal immigrants be excluded from the plan. But other issues, such as abortion, are going to be far more difficult to navigate. (Read "Understanding America's Shift on Abortion.")

If an explicit ban on abortion coverage were imposed, say sources involved in writing the legislation on Capitol Hill, it could have much further-reaching implications than the Hyde Amendment ever did. It could, in fact, have the effect of denying abortion coverage to women who now receive it under their private insurance plans. Nearly 90% of insurers cover abortion procedures, according to a 2002 survey by the Guttmacher Institute, a nonprofit organization whose statistics are relied upon by both sides of the abortion debate.

Under the legislation being worked on by three committees in the House, Americans earning up to 400% of the poverty level — $43,000 for an individual; $88,000 for a family of four — would be eligible for government subsidies to help them purchase coverage. But if the antiabortion legislators get their way, those subsidies would have a big string attached; they could not be used to purchase a policy that has abortion coverage. For many women, that would mean giving up a benefit they now have under their private insurance policies. And it would raise all sorts of other questions if insurers were allowed to discriminate among their customers based on whether or not they are using federal dollars to pay for their policies.

According to the article, 71% favor including reproductive services such as birth control and abortion as part of health reform.

There is a larger issue in play here. It is the fact that our party does not have to compromise away our rights this time. We have a majority that is large enough to put forth a true Democratic agenda.

I hear the talking heads like Chris Matthews spouting forth already on how paying for reproductive rights will crash the health plan.

That is just pure BS. We take stands when we have a majority like this.

There is a form of lobbying going on here now on this issue. There are people warning off women who think such rights should be included. It's working very well, I must admit.