Obama wants abortion coverage in reform bill, Catholic League charges
Imprimir Incrementar tamaño de fuente Disminuir tamaño de fuente

President Obama / Bill Donohue

New York City, N.Y., Aug 11, 2009 / 02:36 pm (CNA).- Health care reform is hitting a wall, claims Catholic League president Bill Donohue, and if you want to know why, the answer is opposition to coverage for abortion.

According to Donohue, President Obama has thus far refused to ask Congress to pass an amendment to exclude abortion coverage from public funding because Obama is so committed to making the procedure more available.

Echoing observations made by pro-life advocates, the Catholic League president notes that only 35 percent agreed with Obama on allowing funding of abortions overseas and that a later Gallup poll found that a majority of Americans now consider themselves pro-life.

Despite these findings, Donohue charges that the president and his staff are so extreme that they are "apparently willing to sink health care reform before ever excluding abortion from the final bill."

As it tries to deal with the public backlash against the various health care proposals, the White House has created a "Reality Check" section to answer objections people have to the bills.

Noticeably absent from a list of objections that includes rationing, euthanasia, veteran’s care and private insurance, is the issue of taxpayer funding for abortions, notes Donohue. "There’s a reason for that—every time an amendment has been introduced to formally exclude abortion, it has been defeated."

Amendments to exclude abortion from any health care coverage were proposed by Bart Stupak (D-Mich.) and Joseph Pitts (R-Penn.) but were voted down.

An amendment was later proposed by Rep. Lois Capps (D-Calif.) to the House Energy and Commerce Committee and was approved. The Capps proposal was billed as a compromise on the abortion issue, but it contained a provision requiring that at least one insurance plan in each ‘premium rating area’ would cover abortion.

Although the U.S. Bishops support health care reform, they have strongly voiced their objection to including abortion in health care coverage on two occasions.

Bishop William Murphy first expressed the bishops’ objections in a letter sent to members of Congress on July 17, saying that it was objectionable to make Americans "pay for the destruction of human life."

Cardinal Justin Rigali, the U.S. bishops’ pro-life chairman, followed up the earlier letter by writing on July 29 to Senate House Energy and Commerce Committee members. His message was: "Much-needed reform must not become a vehicle for promoting an ‘abortion rights’ agenda or reversing longstanding current policies against federal abortion mandates and funding."

Imprimir Incrementar tamaño de fuente Disminuir tamaño de fuente
Subscriber comments:
Published by: Sr. Catherine Hagaba
Uganda 08/12/2009 03:30 AM EST
I am not a US citizen, yet the past ten years experience of living in the US provided a little window through which I can understand Obama a bit. The US President espouses a moral view that separates what it means to be a person, a human being and performance. In other words,personal and public morality does not matter. All people need to look at is performance. To make matters once, Obama's campaign was heavily funded by pro-choice as well as pro-lifers. Obama thought he could please the two sides by forging comprise. Time is beginning to tell that he might have underestimates the American people. But the future will also tell whether one can build a presidency of popularity....
Rate this comment:
Published by: dAVID LARSEN
scituate Mass 08/11/2009 08:06 PM EST
The only real reason for the health care reform is to include abortion and perhaps euthanasia to cut costs for insurance. The so called reforms of this bill won't make a real difference. Billing is the real problem as the rates are astronomical. No one could afford to pay for them out of their own pocket. Without insurance it is impossible to pay because the rates are negotiable between the health care provider and the insurance companies. The health care provider would never expect to get the submitted amount for costs from the insurance companies. A private payer would have to pay these submitted cost directly to a health care provider if they are without insurance but has means to pay. Also in Massachusetts if one is not covered by insurance they pay a penalty on their income tax. There are no reasonable rates for insurance unless one is in a employer based group plan like Tufts or Harvard Pilgrim and the employee is participatory with the employer in the payment of this insurance coverage. Gone are the days when the employer paid the full premium for healthcare coverage. The proposed government plan is a "Culture of Death"plan nothing more. At best this new plan will be more confusing but I pray I am wrong in this if it passes.
Rate this comment:
ADD A COMMENT (Your e-mail will NOT be published):
NAME:
CITY/STATE/COUNTRY:
EMAIL:
COMMENT:
 
PLEASE ENTER THE SECURITY CODE DISPLAYED ABOVE:
Chars:
* Thanks for your comments. The number of messages that can be online is limited. Length should not exceed 1500 characters. CNA reserves the right to edit messages for content and tone. Comments and opinions expressed by users do not necessarily reflect the opinions or beliefs of CNA. CNA will not publish comments with abusive language, insults or links to other pages.
ADVERTISING
Place your ad here
Resources:
Columns:
News:
Documents:
Tools:
ACI Group:
ACI Prensa