Call for action: Abortion Coverage in Interim US Health Care Pools

by d

A lot of fuss has been made about so-called “Obamacare,” the US’s new health insurance legislation. It went on for months, etc., etc., and was finally passed in March. Now they have to sort out how they’re actually going to carry it out, including the transitional programs that will help people limp along until the full bill comes into effect.

NARAL Pro-Choice America warns:

The Obama administration just announced it will exclude abortion coverage in the temporary health-insurance pools that will transition us into the new health-care system.

This policy means that women who are part of these pools because they have significant health problems, such as diabetes or cancer, will not be able to access abortion care, even if their health is at further risk

The administration’s policy is similar to the ban proposed by anti-choice Rep. Bart Stupak (D-Mich.). That’s unacceptable – even if it applies to a program that will last only about three years.

Abortion is the most common surgical procedure women receive. At a time when the country is on the cusp of implementing nationwide health-insurance coverage, we should not treat abortion care differently in the new high-risk pools.

Help us fight back. Tell President Obama that the abortion-coverage ban was not part of the agreement on health reform and that he should not exclude abortion coverage from newly created high-risk pools.

They have a petition to sign here.

I did not know that “Abortion is the most common surgical procedure women receive.” That’s actually really scary. It shouldn’t be. I’m pro-choice, and pro-abortion in a number of circumstances (for instance, when the parents-to-be are still in effing high school), but that doesn’t mean I don’t find abortion regrettable. It is.

I am 100% pro-contraception. Prevention is the better part of cure. We wouldn’t have to worry so much about abortion is we educated our children and made contraceptives more available to everyone.

As for using federal money in health care programs to fund abortions, well, I can sympathize with people who don’t like that. But then I’d like to be able to chuck Viagra from the plan, too.

4 Comments to “Call for action: Abortion Coverage in Interim US Health Care Pools”

  1. Oh, this whole bill has been watered down. Mostly due to scare tactics courtesy of the Conservatives. I’m pretty sure that abortion was never going to be covered in the plan, but I might be wrong. The provision that was signed in later only made the language stronger to shut the Republicans up. And while I could understand why someone wouldn’t want abortion to be paid for by tax dollars, I still have to say I think it should. In can see how in some cases it would be more of an elective surgery. But, in many cases (such as when the mother’s health or life are at risk, in cases of rape/incest) I don’t think it falls under the category of elective. Or, it shouldn’t, anyway. Just because some people don’t agree with abortion doesn’t mean that it shouldn’t be covered in the federal health care bill. I honestly think that many people who raise a fuss over that are actually trying to discourage abortion by making it harder for women to obtain one. Not that they JUST don’t want their tax dollars to fund something they don’t believe in, which is generally their argument. Its also their argument that they don’t mind gay marriage as long as it isn’t called marriage. That’s what Gov. Lingle said, promising not to veto a civil union bill if one came to her desk when she was still running for office, but then when it came time to put her money where her mouth was, she vetoed it. I think its just a tactic to make what they’re really trying to do sound more reasonable. Then again, maybe I’m being too cynical about it.

  2. “exclude abortion coverage” ? how did that happen ? through Church ?

    • Why was it not included in the first place? I honestly don’t know. Maybe they anticipated the backlash from the conservatives and anti-choice activists. Although, churches often do contribute money to anti-choice and conservative activists and politicians.

    • Yes, what we call “The Religious Right-Wing” has an enormous amount of influence in America. They petition hard to get elected officials to listen to them. And when politicians have other objections to something, one of their most effective tactics is to get the religious factions riled up about it. In this case, Republicans have been out to get Obama since before he was elected, and so they’ve been trying to tear apart anything he does. They made it sound like the new health care bill would pay for abortions, when it didn’t. (There’s already legislation about how federal money can be used regarding abortion.) As V mentioned, the Stupak Amendment tightened the language. It was a sop to the religious base.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: