Who currently subsidizes abortion? Many pro-lifers don't know
If this highly regressive amendment makes its way into the legislation that Barack Obama eventually signs, millions of less affluent women who obtain access to affordable health insurance will thus join the ranks of low-income women on Medicaid, most of whom live in states that don't cover abortion procedures. The two-tiered system that dictates who in America has "choice" (more privileged women do, less affluent women do not) will be further entrenched.
But if the social consequences of Stupak-Pitts are clear, the logic is not. Supporters of the provision evidently want to assure taxpayers that they will not be forced to subsidize abortion in any way. But if they are serious about this, why haven't they drawn up an amendment abolishing tax breaks for employer-sponsored health insurance? As Jonathan Cohn has pointed out, this is by far the largest subsidy in health care policy today. (It is also a regressive subsidy, but that's another story.) If the employer-sponsored insurance that a worker gets happens to cover abortion – which, in roughly half the cases, it does – than that taxpayer already subsidizes abortion.
The purists who don't want any of their dollars to subsidize abortion have another problem. As Amy Sullivan of Time has observed, plenty of pro-life people likely have no idea whether their private health insurance plans include abortion services (in which case their premiums indirectly fund the procedure). The same goes for pro-life organizations. Sullivan did a bit of digging and found out that Focus on the Family provides its employees insurance through Principal, a company that - you guessed it - covers abortion procedures.
"If health reform proposals have a fungibility problem, then Focus does as well," Sullivan notes. "And if they don't think they do have a fungibility problem, then it would be interesting to hear why they think the set-up proposed in health reform legislation is so untenable."
http://www.thenation.com/blogs/notion/494818/who_subsidizes_abortion
-
- groups:
- News, Current Tonight, Progressive America, Humanism, 4 more
-
- tags:
- News and Politics, News, Abortion, Health Care Reform, 2 more + add
-
-
- WakeUpPeople
- added this
-
The intrusion of theological argument into public policy is damaging to the democratic process.
-
Hmmm... I'm willing to bet that congress' insurance plans cover abortion. Aren't we therefore paying for it already in this regard?
-
-
- good_stuff
- 9 days ago
-
-
"We don't like to kill our unborn; we need them to grow up and fight our wars."
-
Abortion is protected by law. The majority of insurance companies cover it. If you oppose reproductive rights, you can choose a private insurance company that does not cover it. If you can't afford private insurance, you will have to contribute to your company's plan, or go without health insurance. As it is currently, most pro-lifers do not have the means to avoid contributing to abortions. This article states that even a pro-life organization pays premiums to a pro-choice insurance provider
People need to remember that the public option is an option. If you don't like that your premiums will go to abortions, don't buy into the public option. Prior to the Stupak-Pitts Amendment, there was specific language in the bill that guaranteed that no tax dollars would be used for abortions. Only premiums from public option participants would be used. The problem is that govt can't make it legal and deny it at the same time.
-
When are prolifers going to understand that their attempts to abolish abortion don't do anything of the sort. All they do is abolish SAFE abortions. Poor people are still going to have them backalley style.
I really like the point the article made about choice being not a question of freedom but of affordability. I thought the civil rights era brought to light the obvious fact that "separate but equal" is never equal.
-
Switch "abortion" to "slavery" and you guys sound like a bunch of slave owners.
Liberals have no conscience. Your posts prove the point.
-
-
- Average_JoeMN
- 9 days ago
-
-
AvgJoe, What does that even mean? If you switch every word in your comment with "smiley faces" that would make you a smiley face owner.
-
-
- WakeUpPeople
- 9 days ago
-
-
The pro-life must be widely religious..
-
-
- metalcookiesxy70
- 9 days ago
-
-
If I kill your mother, I'm a murderer.
And if you kill your mother, you're a murderer.
If I kill your unborn child, then I'm a murderer.
But if you kill your unborn child, it's your "right to choose". -
fuck liberals and conservatives.
-
-
- ThresholdBroken
- 9 days ago
-
-
the right will never change their position on abortion. they will never compromise and you know that. is there a way the left could change and win?
-
I don't think the amendment is about abortion, its about control and about tricking conservatives to vote republican or blue-dog democrat again (even voting against their own interest, again). Plus, if you don't have enough poor population, then you don't have enough future soldiers to attack 3rd world countries and help US corporations steal more resources.
-
This whole abortion issue is meant to kill reform. Don't let it side track you from the real issue which is WE NEED EVERYONE TO BE COVERED IN THIS COUNTRY BY INSURANCE!!!!!!!
-
If we don't pay for abortions for the poor those girls to go to drastic measures like coat hangers or soda bottles just like it use be.
-
-
- LadybugLady
- 9 days ago
-
-
Who funds Abortion?!
Gotta mirror?-
-
- s0uthc0ast
- 8 days ago
-
-
Why aren't women who are raped or don't want a baby being counseled to use the morning after or abortion pills and save taxpayers a lot of money.
-
When you're talking about the 'logic' of people who automatically refer to 'baby-killing' and 'murder' regardless of the state of development of the fetus, you aren't dealing with the smartest bunch to begin with. The hypocrisy of that position for citizens of a nation which murders families. in their homes on a global scale is astounding.
North of the 49th people against government subsidizing abortions ran up against resistance from physicians. They flat refused to assign the job of deciding whether or not a procedure was warranted to bureaucracy dealing with orders from on high. Every patient automatically needed it for valid medical reasons.
Since doctors are denying the state's right to interfere with medical treatment which they claim based on need rather than protocol - prepared to deny services rather than be mandated into that route - the real nature of the claim of tyranny shows up clearly...and it's not the doctors. -
"As Amy Sullivan of Time has observed, plenty of pro-life people likely have no idea whether their private health insurance plans include abortion services (in which case their premiums indirectly fund the procedure). The same goes for pro-life organizations. Sullivan did a bit of digging and found out that Focus on the Family provides its employees insurance through Principal, a company that - you guessed it - covers abortion procedures."
Brilliant.
Before you force another woman who is going through an ectopic pregnancy to DIE in childbirth thanks to your so called " Christian Values," ya better read your OWN health insurance handbook. Suckers.
-
-
- Found_Avenue
- 6 days ago
-






