Sebelius, Van Hollen Criticize Stupak For Claims About Abortion Coverage In Health Reform

Main Category: Abortion
Also Included In: Health Insurance / Medical Insurance
Article Date: 09 Mar 2010 - 2:00 PDT

email to a friend   printer friendly   opinions  

In appearances on several Sunday talk shows, Democratic officials continued to put pressure on Rep. Bart Stupak (D-Mich.) over his claims that the abortion-coverage provisions in the Senate health care reform bill (HR 3590) would allow federal funding to pay for the procedure, The Hill reports. If the issue becomes too divisive, it could delay health reform negotiations and ultimately the final vote as Democrats work to gather enough support to pass reform legislation, according to The Hill. Stupak has said that about 12 other lawmakers will join him in opposing any final legislation that does not include his language prohibiting abortion coverage in health plans that insure people who receive federal subsidies.

During an appearance on CNN's "State of the Union," Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee Chair Chris Van Hollen (Md.) said that Democrats are continuing to reach out to Stupak. Van Hollen said, "We are going to continue to work with Bart Stupak and those members for whom [abortion coverage] was the biggest concern." Van Hollen added that several antiabortion-rights senators, including Sens. Robert Casey (D-Pa.) and Ben Nelson (D-Neb.), "were clearly satisfied" with the abortion coverage language in the Senate bill, which "met our objective of making sure that no public funds go to abortion" (Yager, The Hill, 3/7). Under the Senate bill, health plans that receive federal subsidies would be allowed to offer abortion coverage, but customers would be required to send in two separate checks each month -- one for the abortion coverage and another for the rest of the plan. Stupak's amendment would prohibit abortion coverage even if consumers used their own money to pay for it (Women's Health Policy Report, 3/5).

In an appearance on MSNBC last week, Stupak said that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) was "incorrect" when she said that "there is no public funding of abortion" in the Senate bill. Stupak said, "In the Senate bill, it says you must offer insurance policies that will be paid for by the federal government that covers abortion. You must do so."

On NBC's "Meet the Press" on Sunday, HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius said Stupak is "misinformed about what the Senate language does, but he wants comprehensive health reform. I know that he has this principled issue." She said, "There is no federal money paying for abortions," adding, "That's [not] just ... my statement, it is what ... a legal analyst who has looked at the Senate bill, it's what the fact checkers who look at the statements say." During an appearance on ABC's "This Week," Sebelius said abortion services "are provided, and people will pay out of their own pockets, in both the Senate and the House, but they do it in slightly different ways" (The Hill, 3/7).

Democratic leaders are considering a two-part strategy to pass health reform, CQ Weekly reports. The House would first pass the Senate health reform bill in its current form, and both chambers would then pass a separate "corrections" bill negotiated by the White House and congressional Democratic leaders. The corrections bill would be considered in each chamber through the budget reconciliation process, which effectively shields it from a filibuster in the Senate because such measures require only a simple majority vote to pass (Wayne/Epstein, CQ Weekly, 3/8). Because budget reconciliation bills can only address issues that directly affect the federal budget, it is not likely that abortion could be addressed through such a measure (Women's Health Policy Report, 3/5).

Van Hollen said Democratic leaders "will continue to explore ways to get it done. But, as has been made clear by the parliamentarian, under the reconciliation process, the majority rule process, there are limits to the changes you can make in the Senate bill." He continued, "So this is going to be a discussion, and we are going to be engaged in that dialogue for some time until we get it done" (The Hill, 3/7).

Abortion-rights advocates have expressed concern about adding new restrictions to abortion coverage under either version of health reform legislation. Planned Parenthood Action Center President Cecile Richards said the Senate provision is "the most severe restriction on private health insurance coverage for abortion in 35 years." On Friday, Planned Parenthood called on its supporters to urge their representatives to "say no to any anti-choice side deals with Bart Stupak" and correct the Senate provision on abortion coverage (O'Connor, Politico, 3/5).

President Obama has set a March 18 deadline for the House to pass the Senate bill. Sebelius said that she thinks the deadline will be met but that Obama would not walk away from his top legislative priority if the House does not act by the 18th (AP/Google, 3/7).

Slate Opinion Piece Argues Against Trying To Override Parliamentarian

U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops Associate Director Richard Doerflinger has suggested that if the Senate parliamentarian refuses to allow lawmakers to use the budget reconciliation process to make changes to the Senate reform bill's abortion provisions, then Democrats should try to override the parliamentarian, a process that would take 60 votes, according to Slate columnist Timothy Noah. Noah writes that to do so "would require Senate Democrats to flout the parliamentarian on a matter that lacks any ambiguity whatsoever" with regard to whether abortion coverage is considered a budget-related matter. The "health reform's abortion language will not affect federal spending, because neither the Senate bill nor any language acceptable to Stupak would allow the federal government to spend taxpayer dollars on abortion," Noah says. He adds that "overruling the parliamentarian in a fashion so blatantly illegitimate would invite the health reform bill's opponents to challenge the parliamentarian's favorable rulings on other reconciliation items, which might conceivably unravel health reform altogether" (Noah, Slate, 3/5).

AUL President Attacks Senate Language in Wall Street Journal Opinion Piece

In a Wall Street Journal opinion piece, Americans United for Life President and CEO Charmaine Yoest claims that Stupak's amendment resembles the Hyde Amendment's existing restrictions on federal funding of abortion and that "the legislation most likely to move forward in Congress would be the single greatest expansion of abortion since the 1973 Roe v. Wade decision" (Yoest, Wall Street Journal, 3/4).

NewsHour Examines Role of Abortion Issue

PBS' "NewsHour" on Friday examined how last week found Democratic leaders "confronting an issue they thought they had put to rest: abortion." The segment includes recent comments from Pelosi and Stupak on the issue (Suarez, "NewsHour," PBS, 3/5).

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.

© 2010 The Advisory Board Company. All rights reserved.

• Additional
• References
• Citations