Abortion Coverage Likely To Be Next Battle In House Health Reform Legislation
Abortion coverage could become the next "sticking point" in debates over health reform between the House leadership and conservative Democrats, the Los Angeles Times reports. During most of the battle over a health care overhaul, abortion-related issues have taken a "back seat" to clashes between House Energy and Commerce Committee Chair Henry Waxman (D-Calif.) and fiscally conservative Blue Dog Democrats over the cost of the House bill (HR 3200). However, reproductive health issues are increasingly coming into play, with some other conservative Democrats threatening to withdraw support for the bill if coverage of abortion services is not explicitly excluded from receiving federal funding. Rep. Bart Stupak (D-Mich.) and 18 fellow Democrats in June wrote a letter to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) stating that they "cannot support any health care proposal unless it excludes abortion from the scope of any government-defined or subsidized health insurance plan." According to the Times, Stupak has "vowed" to press Waxman to include restrictions on abortion coverage in the Energy and Commerce Committee"s version of the House bill. Abortion-rights supporter Rep. Louise Slaughter (D-N.Y.), chair of the House Rules Committee, opposes Stupak"s proposal. Slaughter spokesperson Vincent Morris said, "The starting point for Rep. Slaughter of the health care debate was protecting abortion rights."The Hyde Amendment currently prevents the use of federal Medicaid funds for abortion services. The reach of current law restrictions "grows murkier" if the government forms its own health insurance plan to compete with private insurers or creates a new market that allows the public to choose between various private plans, the Times reports. Both options are under consideration in Congress, and abortion-rights opponents fear that abortion services would be covered unless the language of the bill explicitly forbids it.Abortion-rights supporters argue that the bill would maintain the status quo, as insurance companies already are able to choose whether to cover abortion services. New government restrictions could mean that women seeking abortion coverage would have to choose a more expensive private plan rather than a lower-cost, government-subsidized option, according to abortion-rights advocates. Another concern, they say, is that insurers who currently cover abortion would discontinue that coverage to take advantage of government incentives. In a recent statement, the Planned Parenthood Federation of America said, "Opponents of women"s health and health care reform are exploiting health care reform as a way to push for unprecedented prohibitions on abortion coverage in the private marketplace."The Obama administration is attempting to remain neutral on the issue, the Times reports. White House press secretary Robert Gibbs recently said that "a benefit package is better left to experts in the medical field to determine how best and what procedures to cover." The House bill currently establishes a Health Benefits Advisory Committee to recommend which "essential benefits" should be covered under any government-supported insurance plan. In an interview with CBS News last week, President Obama said that he believes it is "appropriate for us to figure out how to just deliver on the cost savings and not get distracted by the abortion debate."According to the Times, the Obama administration"s silence on the issue is "precisely what worries" antiabortion-rights advocates. Rep. John Fleming (R-La.) said that Obama is "actually making an affirmative statement in favor of" federal funding for abortion services by not taking a stand on the issue (Oliphant, Los Angeles Times, 7/28).
Oncology