Blogs Comment On Abortion Coverage In Health Reform, The Catholic Health Association's Endorsement Of Health Reform, Other Topics

Main Category: Abortion
Also Included In: Health Insurance / Medical Insurance;  Medicare / Medicaid / SCHIP;  Sexual Health / STDs
Article Date: 17 Mar 2010 - 5:00 PDT

email to a friend   printer friendly   opinions  

The following summarizes selected women's health-related blog entries.

~ "Healthcare Reform Bill Abortion Debate is Nonsensical," Robert Schlesinger, U.S. News & World Report's "Thomas Jefferson Street": The issue of how health reform would handle abortion coverage is "of the angels-on-the-head-of-a-pin nature, unrelated to what the bill actually does but focusing on what theoretical ripple effects it might have" because the "bill on offer simply wouldn't use taxpayer dollars to fund abortions," U.S. News & World Report columnist Robert Schlesinger writes. Schlesinger notes that several experts have pointed out that antiabortion-rights claims about the bill "are, in fact, mistaken." He continues, "But as is often the case in politics, the facts of the matter are beside the point," especially because media coverage of health reform has left "the casual observer to believe there's a chance that the bill could directly fund abortions." Schlesinger writes, "The clearest sign that the phantom abortion debate is the pivotal issue for health care reform could be the collective GOP silence on it," Schlesinger notes. He concludes, "Republicans have made a great show of playing up House-Senate Democratic divisions ... but they have been content to let the abortion issue play out without their interference -- making it partisan might just help Democratic leaders" (Schlesinger, "Thomas Jefferson Street," U.S. News & World Report, 3/12).

~ "Obama Administration Pushes Back on Abortion Claims," David Herszenhorn, New York Times' "Prescriptions": The Obama administration "is now pushing back" against antiabortion-rights groups that claim the Senate health reform bill's abortion coverage language "would also expand the availability of abortions through government-financed community health centers," Herszenhorn reports. He continues that an internal HHS memo "maintains that the Community Health Center Fund established by the health care legislation would not change existing federal laws and rules," including the Hyde Amendment, which prohibits federal Medicaid funding of abortion services except in cases of rape, incest or to save the woman's life. President Obama and HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius have "repeatedly stated their strong commitment to ensuring that health insurance reform does not change the status quo on abortion policy," the memo states, adding, "Regardless of whether the Senate bill would do so, there have existed for over 30 years regulations that prohibit federal funds from being used for abortion services." According to Herszenhorn, the "more aggressive posture" by the White House "comes as the health care legislation is heading into a pivotal week in the House, with a vote perhaps by this weekend" (Herszenhorn, "Prescriptions," New York Times, 3/14).

~ "A Pro-Life Case for Health Reform," Richard Lowery, Sojourners' "God's Politics": In his post, Lowery, a minister and Bible teacher, "urge[s] pro-life members of Congress" to vote for health reform because "45,000 Americans die each year because they don't have health insurance," not including "the number of pregnancies that end in miscarriage or the number of children born with life-threatening conditions because the mother lacks access to prenatal care." Noting that the bill "explicitly bans federal funding of abortion," he writes that "[w]e can end this slaughter of the innocents." He continues, "On abortion, this bill keeps the legal status quo and actually makes it easier for women to choose to carry their pregnancies to full term." While Lowery acknowledges that the bill "is not perfect," he concludes, "it will save the lives of tens, maybe hundreds of thousands of Americans every year -- born and not-yet-born," urging that "[t]his is the time for moral courage, not political calculation," and that "'Yes' is the pro-life vote" (Lowery, "God's Politics," Sojourners, 3/12).

~ "Why The Senate Health Bill Is 'The Ultimate Pro-Life Effort,'" Igor Volsky, Think Progress' "The Wonk Room": In his post, Volsky comments on T.R. Reid's "powerful" editorial in Sunday's Washington Post that encouraged antiabortion-rights advocates to support the health reform bill. Mitt Romney said that the "ultimate pro-life effort" would be to increase health care coverage, which is also "one of the most powerful tools for reducing the number of abortions ... to oppose expanded coverage in the name of restricting abortion gets things exactly backward." Volksy writes, "It's a fairly logical argument that hasn't penetrated the abortion debate: pregnant women who don't have access to affordable health care for their babies or for themselves may be more encouraged to abort their pregnancies than woman who can meet the medical needs of their children." He continues, "[W]omen who have access to affordable health care can purchase affordable contraceptives -- be taught how to use them-- and prevent unintended pregnancies in the first place." Adding that a group of 25 "pro-life Catholic theologians and Evangelical leaders" sent a letter to Congress urging them to pass health reform, Volsky suggests that "Pro-life advocates in the House should take note" (Volsky, "The Wonk Room," Think Progress, 3/15).

~ "The Vanishing Anti-Choice Democrat: Rethinking the Party's Strategy," Amanda Marcotte, RH Reality Check: Rep. Bart Stupak (D-Mich.) has been "grabbing every moment he can to go on television to denounce the non-existent possibility of federal funding for abortion," so "one might get the impression that he's somehow representative of at least some of the base of the Democratic Party on this issue," Marcotte writes. "Certainly it's well known that part of the 50-state strategy the Democrats concocted to win more elections included having a 'big tent' approach, recruiting more conservative Democrats to win conservative districts," she continues. Marcotte adds, "[S]adly for pro-choicers, it's often reproductive rights that are thrown under the bus in these efforts." According to Marcotte, the "downplaying of reproductive rights is something the Democrats may regret every time Bart Stupak goes on television to proclaim his ignorance about what's in the bill he's opposing as smugly as possible, but even if that wasn't true, there's a reason to believe that now is the worst possible time to consider reproductive rights a negotiable issue when recruiting new blood to the Democratic party." However, "[o]ne thing is certain: As abortion becomes more polarized as an issue, the group of people who might be liberal on some issues, but are conservative on abortion, grows tinier by the day," Marcotte writes. "And investments by the Democratic Party to recruit that vanishing population would be far better spent elsewhere," she concludes (Marcotte, RH Reality Check, 3/15).

~ "Another Reason Health Centers Won't Fund Abortions," Nick Baumann, Mother Jones' "Mojo": Baumann refers to a recent article he wrote for Mother Jones "about how a silly mistake by Senate Democrats -- forgetting to add explicit abortion restrictions to $7 billion in community health center funding in the Senate health care bill (HR 3590) -- opened them up to claims that the money would fund abortion." According to Baumann, "One of the article's key points is that even though the omission of explicit abortion language made it easier for pro-life groups to criticize the bill, it didn't actually mean the community health center money would go to fund abortions." He adds, "And since the money will end up in the same 'pot' as other money that is subject to abortion restrictions, it will be treated as if it did have restrictive language attached." Baumann also notes "another arrow in the quiver for folks who have been arguing that the Senate's big flub won't matter in practice" by citing a legal memo in which HHS lawyers wrote "that 'there have existed for over 30 years regulations that prohibit federal funds from being used for abortion services in programs administered by' the Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA), which is the agency that will be handling the new community health center funding" (Baumann, "Mojo," Mother Jones, 3/15).

~ "Catholic Health Group Accepts Abortion Language in Reform Bill," David Gibson, Politics Daily: Catholic Health Association President Carol Keehan recently "threw her support ... behind the contested Senate reform bill in a move that could give a major boost to the legislation's prospects," Gibson writes. However, the move "could also put the nun and her organization at odds with the Catholic church hierarchy, which continues to oppose the bill due to its provision on abortion coverage," he continues. Keehan "has been a target of conservative critics who think she has been too favorable to the Democratic legislation," although she has "always insisted that she has the same concerns as the Catholic bishops and is in agreement with them on the abortion issue," Gibson says. "How such a division could affect the dynamic in Congress is unclear," he writes, adding, "Some fence-sitters could find Keehan's endorsement the kind of political cover they need to vote for a bill that is so critical to the agenda of the Democratic Party and the president" (Gibson, Politics Daily, 3/13).

~"Legislators Send Va. Governor Bill That Restores 'Trust Women' License Plate Funds to Planned Parenthood," Rachel Larris, RH Reality Check: "Virginia may be on the verge of offering drivers a pro-choice specialty license plate with proceeds from the sale of the plates going to Planned Parenthood," Larris writes. Last month, the state House of Delegates passed a bill (SB 18) that would create a "Trust Women, Respect Choice" license plate, and funds from the sale of the plate would go to a state fund that assists women with unplanned pregnancies. However, Larris reports that the General Assembly on Saturday redirected the funds to Planned Parenthood. Noting that the General Assembly last year approved "Choose Life" license plates, profits of which benefited Heartbeat International crisis pregnancy centers, Larris quotes the bill's sponsor, Del. Bob Brink (D), who said, "Since the Commonwealth had provided a forum for one side of the choice debate last year, we felt it was duty-bound to give equal treatment to the pro-choice position." Larris notes that according to Planned Parenthood of Virginia, funds from license plates would "provide services to low-income women, men, and youth seeking basic reproductive and sexual health care, such as family planning and screening for sexually transmitted infections." Gov. Bob McDonnell (R) now has 30 days to sign or veto the bill (Larris, RH Reality Check, 3/15).

~ "Message in a Bottle," Barbara Kantrowitz/Pat Wingert, Newsweek: The premise behind recent advertisements for GlaxoSmithKiline's human papillomavirus vaccine, Cervarix, "raises questions from some women's health advocates," Kantrowitz and Wingert write. The ad directs viewers to a Web site for more information, where "it's still possible to click on link after link without realizing that this is actually a very subtle way of getting young women to ask their doctors about cervical cancer and the vaccines that help prevent it, one of which is made by the sponsoring company," they continue. National Women's Health Network Executive Director Cynthia Pearson said the ad's message is "fear" and does not target the women who need the vaccine the most, including those who do not receive routine Pap tests (Kantrowitz/Wingert, Newsweek, 3/16).

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