December 23, 2009 11:01 AM

Abortion Still Threatens Health Care Bill

By
CBSNews
(AP)  Democrats are close enough to taste victory in their quest to remake the nation's health care system, but differences between the House and Senate on abortion could still blow it all up.

The House health care bill would bar any health plan that receives federal money from covering abortions. Under the less restrictive Senate language, plans that get federal money could cover abortion as long as customers pay premiums for the procedure separately with their own money, and the premium payments are kept in a separate account.

"Something's going to have to give," said Rep. Bart Stupak, D-Mich., author of the abortion language in the House.

Unplugged: Interview With Bart Stupak
CBSNews.com Special Report: Health Care

At this point it's not clear what that will be, although all involved in the intraparty dispute say they want to resolve the issue and sign on to a final health care bill for President Barack Obama to sign in January.

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.

Stupak's language bars federal funding from going to any insurance plan 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 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 conservative Nebraska Democrat Ben Nelson's support as the critical 60th vote for the health care bill. It was reached after Nelson offered language nearly identical to Stupak's as an amendment on the Senate floor and it was defeated 54-45.

Democratic leaders 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.

Their language 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 the customer and the money then segregated. And states would be allowed to decide whether or not abortion could be covered by health plans operating in the new exchanges.

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. But 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 on Health Care:

Obama Defends Health Bill as Passage Nears
Senate Moves Up Final Health Care Vote
A Legal Challenge to Nelson's Health Deal?
Health Care Bill Puts Pain Before Gain
Senate's Deal: Compromise or Corruption?
Tallying the Health Care Bill's Giveaways

More problematic for the final outcome of the health care 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 Tuesday, 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," Stupak said. He's talking with Nelson and others to see where common ground can be found.

Abortion-rights supporters in the House also are evaluating the Senate language. After being taken by surprise after talks in the House broke down and Stupak got his way, members of the House Pro-Choice Caucus are vowing not to let it happen again and say they won't support a final bill that goes beyond current law that generally bans federal funds for abortions.

"Our initial reaction is we don't like it," Rep. Diana DeGette, D-Colo., a leader of the Pro-Choice Caucus, said of the Senate compromise.

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 abortion coverage for people on Medicaid if they do it with state funds.

Boxer said the Senate language walls off private from public funds for abortion. She declined to say directly how she'd vote if the language became more restrictive.

"If the goal was to build a firewall we did it, and that's my last comment on it," Boxer said in an interview Tuesday.

AP
Add a Comment
by Virgo200745 December 25, 2009 4:13 PM EST
Harold Pollack's opinion piece about the abortion issue argues cogently that it is not a non-issue, and looks for evidence (something in short supply) of the difference that restrictions on abortion will make to the lives of low-income women. Wait - that's all women except those pregnant from rape, incest or whose lives are threatened by the pregnancy. Let's just hope at this time that further restrictions do not result from the harmonisation of the House and Senate bills.
Reply to this comment
by msjb1 December 24, 2009 6:52 AM EST
If they are going to put you in jail for not buying health insurance maybe I will be able to get my teeth fixed and new glasses while I am imprisoned.
Reply to this comment
by msjb1 December 24, 2009 6:47 AM EST
This plan is not done by the dumocrats its totally done by 3 or 4 generations of taxpayers, Obama will be in history books before the country ever gets out of debt, nobodys getting free healthcare everybody will be paying for it everytime they buy something remember nothing is free just pay your share. The only people that get things for free are called politcians. I can't wait to hear some of the people finally say why did we vote them in. They will wake up when there is a new line on the deduction page on their paychecks healthcare 10 percent of the gross.
Reply to this comment
by kansas1946 December 23, 2009 6:40 PM EST
It just goes to show that politicians care NOTHING about their constituants. They should be fighting against the mandate that will force people to buy insurance, not worrying about the non-issue of abortion.
Reply to this comment
by dmwj2 December 23, 2009 1:05 PM EST
Agreed... if you desire an abortion for "convenience" YOU should pay for it. If it is a medically necessary procedure (result of rape or incest, or endangering the mother's life), it should be covered by medical insurance. Women do not get pregnant "by accident"... they make a "mistake" and should pay for it, one way or the other (men too!)
Reply to this comment
by retm-w December 23, 2009 12:13 PM EST
You want an elective abortion, then pay out of your own pocket. Just like elective plastic surgery.
Reply to this comment
by RCC_Soldaten December 24, 2009 8:56 AM EST
That's pretty much what an abortion is. First they stick a rod into the baby's skull - suck the brain tissue out. Then proceed to dismember the child and take him or her out piece by piece. Of course this 'procedure' stops the beating heart and ends all brain activity. I think that's the definition of murder or manslaughter.
by ajvw December 23, 2009 10:30 AM EST
"Abortion Still Threatens Health Care Bill"

good. something needs to threaten it.
Reply to this comment
by ToolMangler1 December 23, 2009 5:33 PM EST
WHY!!!!!
You repugs had the majority for 7 years and did nothing but give away the country. Now it is our turn and you won't lift a finger to help the country, instead you kill anything that 'might' help someone just because it was done by the Democrats. The GOP is a POS.
by patocc123 December 24, 2009 8:42 AM EST
One problem is that your base and the DNC has gotten you so convinced that the last 8 years where the worst times this country has seen in the existence of this country. Now when they are doing it to your team instead of defending the action you still attack the other team.

Better to attack to prove your point, a great lesson you've learned from the republicans. Sad thing is that you have become them and have no clue that you have.

The DNC and thier lemmings are the new RNC and thier lemmings.
.
Scroll Left
Scroll Right More »
CBS News on Facebook