The “public option” would pay for abortion

The “public option” would pay for abortion

The government-run insurance plan that would compete with private carriers in the proposed health care legislation would cover abortions.

Health care legislation before Congress would allow a new government-sponsored insurance plan to cover abortions, a decision that would affect millions of women and recast federal policy on the divisive issue.

Federal funds for abortions are now restricted to cases involving rape, incest or danger to the health of the mother. Abortion opponents say those restrictions should carry over to any health insurance sold through a new marketplace envisioned under the legislation, an exchange where people would choose private coverage or the public plan.

Abortion rights supporters say that would have the effect of denying coverage for abortion to millions of women who now have it through workplace insurance and are expected to join the exchange. . . .

A compromise approved by a House committee last week attempted to balance questions of federal funding, personal choice and the conscience rights of clinicians. It would allow the public plan to cover abortion but without using federal funds, only dollars from beneficiary premiums. Likewise, private plans in the new insurance exchange could opt to cover abortion, but no federal subsidies would be used to pay for the procedure.

“It’s a sham,” said Douglas Johnson, legislative director for National Right to Life. “It’s a bookkeeping scheme. The plan pays for abortion, and the government subsidizes the plan.”

"It seems like they are already here and likely to become more prevalent not many ..."

Monday Miscellany, 7/7/25
"quantum computers could break every known encryption system.This is repeating a common misunderstanding. Quantum computing ..."

Monday Miscellany, 7/7/25
"I heard about quantum computing for decades. I haven't checked the Wikipedia article or any ..."

Monday Miscellany, 7/7/25
"I don't recall the US switching sides in the middle of a conflict before. We've ..."

Monday Miscellany, 7/7/25

Browse Our Archives

Follow Us!