Abortion looms as possible health bill deal killer

Dec 23, 2009 By ERICA WERNER , Associated Press Writer

(AP) -- The way abortions are covered under health care reform is a major obstacle to finalizing the legislation, even though the House and Senate both agree that no federal money should be used.

The stumbling block is whether insurance plans that get federal money are completely barred from covering abortions, or whether they can cover it as long as they require customers to write separate checks for the procedure using their own money.

Why does that matter?

Because the House and Senate solved the dispute in slightly different ways, neither of which makes everyone happy, and now they have to find a further compromise.

"Something's going to have to give," said Rep. Bart Stupak, D-Mich., author of the abortion language in the House. At this point it's not clear what that will be.

At this point it's not clear what that will be, although talks to resolve the issue have already begun and all involved in the intraparty dispute say they want to be able to support a final health care bill.

"We want to see a health care bill passed and we don't think it's particularly helpful for anyone to draw a line in the sand," said Rep. Diana DeGette, D-Colo., a leader of the House Pro-Choice Caucus.

Abortion threatened to derail both the House and Senate legislation before last-minute compromises satisfied anti-abortion Democrats in both chambers. But those hard-won deals look very different.

The passed by the House in November bars federal funding from going to any that includes abortion coverage. That's a significant limitation because Congress' redesigned health care system would give federal subsidies to millions of lower-income people to help them buy insurance at new marketplaces called exchanges. Since the bulk of purchasers in the exchanges would be receiving federal subsidies, most, if not all, insurance plans would be receiving federal money and therefore would be barred from covering abortion.

Stupak's House language does allow insurers to offer separate rider policies covering only abortion, but abortion-rights activists contend such policies would be unlikely to materialize because there'd be little market for them. They note that most women don't plan for abortions ahead of time.

Abortions in the first trimester typically cost between $350 and $900, according to Planned Parenthood.

The Senate's abortion compromise was designed to secure support from conservative Nebraska Democrat Ben Nelson as the critical 60th vote for the bill, headed for final passage Thursday.

Nelson offered language nearly identical to Stupak's as an amendment on the Senate floor, but it was defeated 54-45.

Democratic leaders then scrambled for a compromise that would satisfy him. In the end, Nelson himself worked with Senate leaders, White House officials and Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif. - representing abortion-rights supporters - to come up with a deal.

That would allow health plans that receive federal subsidies to sell insurance plans covering abortion. But those plans would have to collect separate premiums for the procedure from customers, and keep the money in a separate account segregated from federal funds. Additionally, states would be allowed to block health plans operating in the new exchanges from covering abortion.

Nelson said the language achieves his goal of ensuring that no federal money may go for abortion. Boxer said that although it wasn't her first choice, it still allows women to obtain abortion coverage. The deal has been rejected by outside groups on both sides of the issue - something that Boxer and Nelson both cite as evidence that they achieved a fair outcome.

More problematic for the final outcome of the bill, the Senate language has met a cool reception from Stupak, who said that he and 10 or so other House members could oppose the health overhaul if it's included. But Stupak is showing some flexibility. In an interview he termed the language "unacceptable," but also said he's not yet ready to say he would oppose a final bill over that issue alone.

"I do believe this is not an insurmountable issue. I think it can be worked out," said Stupak, who's talking it over with Nelson and others.

Abortion-rights supporters in the House also are evaluating the Senate language. After being taken by surprise when talks in the House broke down and Stupak got his way, DeGette and others in the Pro-Choice Caucus are vowing not to let it happen again and say they won't support a final bill that goes beyond existing law.

Currently an annually renewed law called the Hyde Amendment bars the federal government from covering abortions under Medicaid except in cases of rape, incest or where the life of the mother is threatened. Similar prohibitions cover other federal programs, although states may choose to pay for coverage for people on Medicaid if they do it with state funds.

Explore further: AMA examines economic impact of physicians

1 /5 (1 vote)
add to favorites email to friend print save as pdf

Related Stories

Decision day for health care in the House

Nov 07, 2009

(AP) -- President Barack Obama is trying to close the deal in the House on his health care overhaul, facing a make-or-break vote that's certain to be seen as a test of his presidency.

Obama hails 60th Senate vote for health care

Dec 19, 2009

(AP) -- Jubilant Democrats locked in Nebraska Sen. Ben Nelson as the 60th and decisive vote for historic health care legislation Saturday, putting President Barack Obama's signature issue firmly on a path ...

Medicare buy-in plan runs into Senate resistance

Dec 13, 2009

(AP) -- A plan to let people as young as 55 buy into Medicare, heralded as a breakthrough in the Senate's health care debate, ran into resistance Sunday from lawmakers who can make or break Democrats' efforts ...

Landmark health bill passes House on close vote

Nov 08, 2009

(AP) -- The Democratic-controlled House narrowly passed far-reaching health care legislation, handing President Barack Obama a hard-won victory on his chief domestic priority though the road ahead in the ...

Health Care bill clears key Senate test

Dec 21, 2009

(AP) -- Landmark health care legislation backed by President Barack Obama passed its sternest Senate test in the pre-dawn hours early Monday, overcoming Republican delaying tactics on a 60-40 vote that all ...

Recommended for you

AMA examines economic impact of physicians

8 hours ago

(HealthDay)—Physicians who mainly engage in patient care contribute a total of $1.6 trillion in economic output, according to the American Medical Association (AMA)'s Economic Impact Study.

Less-schooled whites lose longevity, study finds

8 hours ago

Barbara Gentry slowly shifts her heavy frame out of a chair and uses a walker to move the dozen feet to a chair not far from the pool table at the Buford Senior Center. Her hair is white and a cough sometimes interrupts her ...

How to keep your fitness goals on track

8 hours ago

(HealthDay)—The New Year's resolutions many made to get fit have stalled by now. And one expert thinks that's because many people set their goals too high.

Suddenly health insurance is not for sale

Apr 18, 2014

(HealthDay)— Darlene Tucker, an independent insurance broker in Scotts Hill, Tenn., says health insurers in her area aren't selling policies year-round anymore.

User comments : 4

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

freethinking
2 / 5 (4) Dec 24, 2009
The Democrats Health care bill will include public abortion funding no if and or buts. The democrats who voted for the bill who said they were against abortion KNEW that it would be included so unless they quit the democratic party THEY ARE responsible for its inclusion.

Make no mistake, every elected democrat is responsible for every aspect of this bill. The abortion funding, the death pannels (though they wont call it that), the government funds going to ACORN, insurance companies, unions, and every thing else hidden in a bill they say they didn't read.
marjon
2.3 / 5 (3) Dec 24, 2009
Where is the science story here?

Also, why not discuss the pros and cons of other socialist systems around the world?

That may be worth posting on this site.
deafgirl01
not rated yet Dec 30, 2009
I wonder if anyone is willing to pay federal money for IVF -- Well, I feel just as some people feel they don't want government paying money for women to put in embryos in their body, I don't want to pay money to take out embryos or fetus.

It is better if they got funding from charities and such.
marjon
1 / 5 (1) Dec 30, 2009
I wonder if anyone is willing to pay federal money for IVF -- Well, I feel just as some people feel they don't want government paying money for women to put in embryos in their body, I don't want to pay money to take out embryos or fetus.

It is better if they got funding from charities and such.

I think some states mandate such coverage.

More news stories

Cancer stem cells linked to drug resistance

Most drugs used to treat lung, breast and pancreatic cancers also promote drug-resistance and ultimately spur tumor growth. Researchers at the University of California, San Diego School of Medicine have discovered ...

Making graphene in your kitchen

Graphene has been touted as a wonder material—the world's thinnest substance, but super-strong. Now scientists say it is so easy to make you could produce some in your kitchen.