Posted on 11/10/2009 9:56:43 PM PST by rabscuttle385
WASHINGTON - Massachusetts officials are closely monitoring an abortion funding ban in the sweeping health care legislation before Congress to make sure that it does not restrict women’s access to abortion coverage in the state.
Abortion is a covered service for low-income Massachusetts women enrolled in subsidized insurance plans available since 2006 through the state’s landmark health care law.
But the bill that squeaked through the US House late Saturday would prohibit private insurance plans from covering abortion if they accept federal subsidies. It also bans abortion coverage in the new government insurance option.
State officials say there are too many uncertainties about how a new federal system would interact with the state’s to know yet exactly how, or whether, the abortion provision in the House bill would affect coverage in Massachusetts. But theoretically, if the state used new federal subsidies to replace or augment the funds in its existing system, that new money could come with strings attached limiting abortion coverage.
(Excerpt) Read more at boston.com ...
Oh, I’m sure there are plenty of churches that will pick-up the slack should there actually be a ban on federal money to pay for abortions.
**Abortion is a covered service for low-income Massachusetts women enrolled in subsidized insurance plans available since 2006 through the state’s landmark health care law.**
Yet another reason we don’t want Romneycare or Obamacare. Thanks for the post.
How can that be as Romney is so conservative after all lhe is going to the Reagan Library? (sarcasm)
Truth is coming out more and more — Just say NO to Romney! Last thing we need is for a flip flopper to run as a Republican.
Margaret Sanger would be proud!!! She was all for getting rid of the lessers in our society and lo and behold, Massachusetts is doing it well.
But the bill that squeaked through the US House late Saturday would prohibit private insurance plans from covering abortion if they accept federal subsidies.
Fred Thompson said on his AM talk-radio show that it's almost a guarantee that abortion will go back in as soon as the back-room doors are locked.
Also, another indicator is that Obama, trolling for moderate and liberal Republican votes, made a point of the fact that the House bill wouldn't change Bush-era laws forbidding federal subsidies for abortion. The mathematical expression would be, |"Obama Lies"| = |"Abortion's In Like Flynn"|.
It should be noted that even the Stupak amendment requires all health insurance to include abortion coverage for rape, incest, and if the life of the mother is at risk.
To say that abortion coverage is banned in Obamacare is a lie on the left, which wants to scare women into fighting to remove all restrictions on abortion coverage.
In that regard, the Boston Globe is helping the left in spreading this lie.
Remember that the medicare law requires that states cover medically necessary abortions. The only difference I see with Stupak is that Stupak made the “life of the mother” clause a little more solid (although some still think it has a loophole which would cover any abortion where a doctor could argue the woman’s physical OR mental health was effected — which is the current coverage in the Massachussetts health insurance bill).
buh-bye, Mitt
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.