Detroit Free Press Opinion Pieces Debate Stupak Amendment

Main Category: Abortion
Also Included In: Health Insurance / Medical Insurance
Article Date: 21 Dec 2009 - 0:00 PDT

email to a friend   printer friendly   opinions  

The Detroit Free Press on Thursday included two opposing opinion pieces regarding Rep. Bart Stupak's (D-Mich.) amendment to the House health reform bill (HR 3962). The amendment prohibits federally subsidized insurance plans from offering abortion services. The Senate recently rejected a similar amendment to its health reform bill (HR 3590). Summaries of the opinion pieces appear below.

~ Fern Ettinger, National Council of Jewish Women: The Stupak amendment "is an enormous step backward for those who believe in the separation of religion and state," Ettinger -- co-chair of public affairs for NCJW, greater Detroit section -- writes in a Free Press opinion piece. The amendment "favors one religious view of abortion and enlists the federal government to enforce it," Ettinger says, adding, "One religious belief system must not be imposed on all of us at the expense of public health." The provision of "affordable, accessible health care to all Americans is a moral imperative that unites Americans of many faith traditions," and the "selective withdrawal of critical health coverage from women is both a violation of this imperative and a betrayal of the public good," Ettinger continues. "The House would do well to follow the Senate's lead and support meaningful health reform that does not include a new sweeping coverage ban on abortion," Ettinger writes, concluding, "American families should have the opportunity to choose health coverage that reflects their own values and medical needs" (Ettinger, Detroit Free Press, 12/17).

~ Rep. Bart Stupak (D-Mich.): In a Free Press opinion piece, Stupak writes that despite claims by abortion-rights advocates that his amendment "goes beyond current law, no one has been able to show where the actual language in our amendment is different from language" in the Hyde Amendment. Stupak claims that under his amendment, individuals receiving federal subsidies to purchase insurance "will be prohibited from using them to pay for abortions or insurance policies that cover abortion." However, the amendment "does not prevent private plans from offering, or individuals from obtaining, abortion services with their own money," he argues, adding that the amendment "specifically states that those who receive federal subsidies can purchase a supplemental policy with private money to cover abortions." Stupak writes that insurance plans included in the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program are prohibited from offering abortion coverage to federal employees but are allowed to offer the coverage to nonfederal workers. "Given that insurance companies find it feasible, and profitable, to offer separate plans now, it is only logical that they would continue to do so on the health insurance exchange," Stupak argues (Stupak, Detroit Free Press, 12/17).

Reprinted with kind permission from http://www.nationalpartnership.org. You can view the entire Daily Women's Health Policy Report, search the archives, or sign up for email delivery here. The Daily Women's Health Policy Report is a free service of the National Partnership for Women & Families, published by The Advisory Board Company.

© 2009 The Advisory Board Company. All rights reserved.

• Additional
• References
• Citations