The DNC issued a “rapid response” this afternoon to GOP claims that the Democrats’ Senate health care bill would levy an “abortion premium fee” on taxpayers. Here’s the full text:
After his failed attempt to distort and derail health insurance reform in the House, Minority Leader John Boehner is now turning his attention to the Senate bill where his distortions are, and we can barely believe it’s possible to say this, even farther removed from reality. Writing on the GOP Leader Blog today, John Boehner falsely stated that the Senate health reform bill would lead to a “monthly abortion fee” – a notion as ridiculous as it is inaccurate. In fact, the Senate bill specifically states that insurance plans will not be allowed to offer abortion services without proof that “no federal funds are used for such coverage.” And as Roll Call reported today, under Senator Reid’s plan abortions will not be paid for with federal taxes and public insurance plans will only pay for abortions “…if the money could be segregated so no federal tax dollars are used for the services.”
With such clear evidence to the contrary, we’d like to believe that this is the last time we’ll hear this scare-tactic from Boehner and the Party of NO… but since all Republicans have to offer are more lies, we’re not counting on it.
Rep. Boehner Claimed “Sen. Reid’s Government-Run Health Plan Requires A Monthly Abortion Fee.” Rep. Boehner wrote on his GOP Leader blog a post titled, “Sen. Reid’s Government-Run Health Plan Requires A Monthly Abortion Fee,” writing that, “[b]eginning on line 7, p. 118, section 1303 under ‘Voluntary Choice of Coverage of Abortion Services’ the Health and Human Services Secretary is given the authority to determine when abortion is allowed under the government-run health plan. Leader Reid’s plan also requires that at least one insurance plan offered in the Exchange covers abortions (line 13, p. 120). What is even more alarming is that a monthly abortion premium will be charged of all enrollees in the government-run health plan. It’s right there beginning on line 11, page 122, section 1303, under ‘Actuarial Value of Optional Service Coverage.’ The premium will be paid into a U.S. Treasury account – and these federal funds will be used to pay for the abortion services. Section 1303(a)(2)(C) describes the process in which the Health Benefits Commissioner is to assess the monthly premiums that will be used to pay for elective abortions under the government-run health plan and for those who are given an affordability credit to purchase insurance coverage that includes abortion through the Exchange. The Commissioner must charge at a minimum $1 per enrollee per month.” [GOP Leader Blog, 11/19/09]
REALITY: BOEHNER IS LYING OR JUST WRONG ON ABORTION FUNDING IN SENATE BILL
Senate Bill: Plans Will Not Be Allowed To Offer Abortion Unless It Can Be Confirmed That “No Federal Funds Are Used For Such Coverage.” The Senate health reform bill stated clearly: “PROHIBITION ON FEDERAL FUNDS FOR ABORTION SERVICES IN COMMUNITY HEALTH INSURANCE OPTION. – …The Secretary [of Health and Human Services] may not…provide coverage of services…unless the Secretary – … assures, in accordance with applicable provisions of generally accepted accounting requirements, circulars on funds management of the Office of Management and Budget, and guidance on accounting of the Government Accountability Office, that no Federal funds are used for such coverage.” [Patient Protection Affordable Care Act, HR 3590, 11/18/09]
Roll Call On Senate Abortion Section: “The Procedure Would Have To Be Paid For With Money Derived From Premiums Instead Of Federal Taxes;” Public Insurance Option Could Pay For Abortions “Only If The Money Could Be Segregated So No Federal Tax Dollars Are Used For The Services.” Roll Call reported that, “[t]he Senate version, unveiled Wednesday evening by Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.), would allow women receiving federal subsidies the option to choose insurance plans covering abortion in a new health insurance exchange. The procedure would have to be paid for with money derived from premiums instead of federal taxes. And the Senate bill allows the public insurance option to pay for abortions, but only if the money could be segregated so no federal tax dollars are used for the services.” [Roll Call, 11/19/09]
THE ARGUMENT THAT HEALTH CARE FUNDS WILL PAY FOR ABORTIONS BECAUSE OF FUNGIBILITY HAS BEEN SHOT DOWN REPEATEDLY
TIME: Same Standard Used To Claim Health Care Reform Would Fund Abortions Could Be Applied To Focus On The Family To Determine That It Too Funds Abortions. Time Magazine’s Amy Sullivan asked, “Does Focus on the Family Fund Abortions?” She noted that, “[i]t does if you hold the organization to the same standard is uses to insist that health reform would result in publicly funded abortions. A few weeks ago, I wrote about the fungibility argument that many pro-life groups and politicians have employed to oppose health reform. The problem, they say, is that if any insurance plan that covers abortion is allowed to participate in a public exchange, then premiums paid to that plan in the form of taxpayer-funded subsidies help support that abortion coverage even if individual abortion procedures are paid for out of a separate pool of privately-paid premium dollars. You can debate about whether it makes sense to use this strict standard, but that’s the argument. But are those pro-life organizations holding themselves to the same strict standard? As it happens, Focus on the Family provides its employees health insurance through Principal, an insurance company that covers ‘abortion services.'” [Time – Swampland, 10/28/09]
Politifact: There Is Nothing To Support The Claim That Taxpayers Would Subsidize Abortion And The Statement Is “False.” “The word ‘abortion’ was never mentioned in the initial health care plans released by the House and Senate. The decision of whether to offer abortion coverage in the proposed public plan, then, would be left up to the health and human services secretary. Abortion opponents said that would allow Democrats to slip abortion into the plan as part of the standard coverage. In an op-ed piece on July 23, House Republican Leader John Boehner of Ohio repeated the concerns of many who oppose abortion that the Democratic-backed health care reform plan ‘will require (Americans) to subsidize abortion with their hard-earned tax dollars.’ … Chris Korzen, executive director of Catholics United, which opposes abortion, said his group doesn’t want to see an important health care plan derailed by a ‘misleading campaign’ that claims the health care plan would mean taxpayer-subsidized abortions. ‘The goal should be to maintain the current policies,’ Korzen said. ‘That Capps Amendment accomplishes just that. It specifically prohibits taxpayers funding of abortions. It disappoints me that there are people who are still making that claim.’ … In fact, in a key version of the bill- the one passed by the House Energy and Commerce Committee – members went to great pains to include an amendment to ensure that federal money is not used for abortion coverage. Again, things could change as the health reform package works its way through Congress, but for now, we don’t see anything to support Boehner’s claim that taxpayers would subsidize abortions. And so we rule his statement False.” [Politifact, 8/7/09]
NYT Editorial Pointed Out Hypocrisy: Reform Critics Don’t Want Government Between Patients And Doctors To Dictate Treatment, Except When It Comes To Abortion; Proposed Compromise Is More Restrictive Than Current Law. “Critics of pending health care reforms claim they want to ensure that the government does not thrust itself between patients and doctors to dictate what medical procedures can be performed. Yet many are trying to do just that when it comes to one legal and medically valid service: abortion…[Sen. Baucus’ Compromise] proposal would prohibit the use of federal tax subsidies to pay for almost all abortions. Health plans could provide abortion coverage provided they used only the premium money and co-payments contributed by beneficiaries and kept that money segregated from the subsidy. In every state, there would have to be at least one plan that covers abortions and one that does not. This compromise is still far more restrictive than the rules for other tax-subsidy programs. The subsidy for employees’ contributions to their health coverage at work, for example, can be used to buy insurance that covers abortion. Roughly half of the employer-provided policies cover the procedure. Nor are there any restrictions on paying for abortions with the tax-favored health savings accounts so beloved by conservatives.” [New York Times, 10/1/09]
Rep. Boehner Repeated Claim PolitiFact Called “False” A Month Ago; Anti-Abortion Group On Taxpayer-Subsidized Abortions: “It Disappoints Me That There Are People Who Are Still Making That Claim.” PolitiFact on July 23rd reported on Rep. John Boehner’s statement that the health reform plan “will require [Americas] to subsidize abortion with their hard-earned tax dollars,” and deemed it “false.” In its discussion on the merits of the claim, it noted that, “Chris Korzen, executive director of Catholics United, which opposes abortion, said his group doesn’t want to see an important health care plan derailed by a ‘misleading campaign’ that claims the health care plan would mean taxpayer-subsidized abortions. ‘The goal should be to maintain the current policies,’ Korzen said. ‘That Capps amendment accomplishes just that. It specifically prohibits taxpayers’ funding of abortions. It disappoints me that there are people who are still making that claim.'” [Politifact, 7/23/09]
