“What My Amendment Won’t Do,” is an article written by Bart Stupak, Democratic representative from Michigan. His article informs readers of how the Stupak-Ellsworth-Pitt amendment in the House health care reform bill will and will not affect Americans. First he claims that the amendment maintains current law and the status quo. The Hyde amendment, passed 33 years ago, prohibits federal money to fund abortions, however, the law does not limit private insurance companies from offering plans that do cover abortions. Stupak argues that this new amendment, Stupak-Ellsworth-Pitt, would not change current legislation. Women receiving money from the federal government are prohibited from using that money to fund an abortion. These women can obtain an abortion from a private facility and use their own money. In no way, would this amendment make obtaining an abortion more difficult for women according to Stupak. Further, Stupak argues that the majority of Americans do not want their tax dollars spent to fund abortions and the house should maintain laws preventing such action. Stupak also notes that he encourages Congress to develop a health care plan that will offer health insurance to more Americans, although urges Congress to maintain its stance on federal funding for abortions.
Stupak is indeed persuasive in his article. He informs his reader that the new amendment will not change access to abortions. He feels the Stupak-Ellsworth-Pitt amendment is a win-win for both pro-choice and pro-life supporters. Although I he evades answering how private insurance companies will respond to the amendment, he does offer a comprehensive response that will hopefully answer many of the questions those opposing the amendment have.
The health care reform proposal has sparked controversy on numerous levels, however, abortion appears to be one of the leading areas of debate. For decades, women (and men) in the United States have fought hard to earn the right to make choices to their own bodies. Many women view the Stupak amendment as a huge regression. Laws passed at the federal level creating greater restriction on abortions will affect millions of women. Many will argue that abortions are still covered under private insurance plans. Pro-choice supporters argue that by prohibiting federal funding can lead to greater hardships for women seeking an abortion.
Planned Parenthood, a pro-choice organization, offers a different perspective. As an organization, they feel this amendment would ultimately create many barriers for women in need of an abortion. Women would need to maintain two different types of health insurance coverage, one that covers abortions and one that covers everything else. Please view the Planned Parenthood video below for a brief synopsis of the hardships this amendment, or others similar to it, could potentially create if passed.
Another interesting article I located regarding private insurance companies and abortion policies notes that currently, 5 states restrict insurance coverage of abortion in private insurance plants and 4 limit coverage to cases when the life of the mother is at risk.
Here are a few other highlights from the article:
1) 12 states restrict abortion coverage in insurance plans for public employees
2) 3 of the states provide abortion coverage only when the woman’s life in endangered
3) 2 of the states flatly prohibit any insurance coverage of abortion for public employees
For additional information here in the link to the article: www.guttmacher.org/pubs/spib_RICA.pdf
Article: http://www.lexisnexis.com.ezproxy1.lib.asu.edu/us/lnacademic/results/docview/docview.do?docLinkInd=true&risb=21_T8305791991&format=GNBFI&sort=RELEVANCE&startDocNo=26&resultsUrlKey=29_T8305791994&cisb=22_T8305791993&treeMax=true&treeWidth=0&csi=6742&docNo=43
Additional Sources:
http://www.plannedparenthoodaction.org/healthreform/?gclid=CP227_KppZ8CFR4Eagod-gqfmQ
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment