Should abortions be covered in Obamacare
By Brian Kirwin | Wednesday, December 2nd, 2009 | PolicyObama’s health care takeover was almost derailed in the House of Representatives by a group of pro-life Democrats who supported the Stupak amendment, which made abortions clearly not a covered service in the plan. They gave the margin of victory.
The Senate doesn’t seem so thrilled with the language of that amendment, and several writers opine that without House/Senate agreement on this key issue, the whole bill goes down in flames.
Comments on other posts are also debating whether abortions should be covered under some health care plans that are awash with taxpayer dollars, and whether people who profit from providing them are the best fit for …..oh….say a State Senate Seat.
Took me about 10 minutes with Google to find this.
This company calls it “termination of pregnancy” – cute, huh? It’s on page 5.
This one actually calls it “abortion” so kudos for being straightforward about it.
http://www.satilla.csb.state.ga.us/QPManuals/GA PROVIDER MANUAL.pdf
The Stupak amendment was addressing similar things in that even if no federal taxpayer dollars were involved, if you were in the government plan, even at your own expense, abortions can not be covered.
It’s a hazy area and one up for debate. It gets complicated when private companies take taxpayer dollars to provide services that may or may not be services taxpayers want.
And it might just be the issue that ends Obama’s health care takeover.
Tags:
Contribute for Conservatism!
Share this post
About the author
The right wants to jeer him. The left wants to censor him. Moderates usually want both. Brian Kirwin is a political consultant and public relations strategist in Virginia Beach with a lightning-rod flair. Brian also serves on the VB Arts & Humanities Commission and frequently appears on Hampton Roads theatrical stages, if only to prove that all actors aren’t liberals. Kirwin’s columns stir up debate and hit the political scene with no punches pulled.
Comments
6 Responses to "Should abortions be covered in Obamacare"
The sad truth is that the ultimate agenda of the liberal movement is to fully fund an effort to rob a certain segment of our society (the unborn) their basic rights that the Constitution was written to protect.
The dirty little secret that the left does not want to talk about is the targeted way in which Planned Parenthood builds their clinics in predominately minority based neighborhoods. This organization that still receives Virginia tax dollars, was founded by the racsist Margaret Sanger. Then again, Republican Dede Scozzafava received the “Maggie Award” from this organization, so it is difficult for a weak and elite Republican establishment to claim the moral high ground. The left and some on the right will be willing to sell out basic human rights in the name of “choice.” It makes me wonder what other liberties will be sold out in the name of “choice.”
The House Dems that backed this amendment were not Pro-Life. “Opportunist” is probably a better word. Claim “cred” with Pro-Life voters, while simultaneously saying it was a vote of necessity to get the thing passed with the base.
So Amerigroup of Georgia gets kudos from you for actually calling the procedure an “abortion”, but Amerigroup of DC doesn’t earn the same commendation because they call it “termination of pregnancy” on page 5 (but they did call it “abortion” on page 3, up in the Family Planning section)?
Hey…wait just one gol-darned minute…I think I recognize the name “Amerigroup” from somewhere else in this blogoshpere…better go check…
Couldn’t be correct…McWaters is pro-life, right?
McWaters is definitely pro-life! He believes life begins at conception. However, Amerigroup is required to cover abortions “as
permitted under federal law…,” but none of the funds “shall be expended for any abortion except where the life of the mother would be endangered if the fetus were carried to term or where the pregnancy is the result of rape or incest.” It’s unfortunate, but AGP doesn’t have a choice, and I can’t imagine any of you guys would not want a woman (or girl) in one of those situations to not be allowed to do that.
I don’t know, Susan. Why not ask the voters in one of the millions of dollars of campaign advertising you’re producing?
Leave your response
The comments section is for meaningful discussion. Readers are reminded to post comments that are germane to the article and write in a common language that steers clear of personal attacks and/or vulgarities.
Please take a moment to review our comment policy.