Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Point taken, but the problem is that the Senate will not even agree to that language, which can already be widely interpreted as you have noted. They insist on including an elective medical procedure.
If elective procedures are going to be included on top of medically necessary care, where do we draw the line?
Few things. First off this is not about abortion. What Stupak is attempting to do is change abortion law to ban Private Insurers from offering abortion as an elective coverage that the policyholder would pay for. Current abortion law in this country, bans federal funding of abortion, and if someone would want abortion covered they would need to pay for that coverage out of pocket. That is exactly what the Senate Bill's language does. Keeping abortion law the same as it is now, not changing it in any way. Stupak is trying to change it.
Anyway the whole point is moot because the language can not be changed. Even if Pelosi, Reid (who is pro-life btw) Obama, etc all agreed to go with Stupak's language they couldn't. This is because if any changes are made to the Senate bill, even if its just very slight changes in the language, the full Senate would need to vote on it again, and the GOP would filibuster.
The more they work on this bill, the bigger it gets....the bigger it gets. the more of a mess it turns into. If you're a democrat, you can't just say that the bill is a disaster at this point and that you want nothing to do with it....you have to answer to Obama, Pelosi and Reid and the legacy they want for themselves. Being able to use abortion funding as an issue, is just one of many reasons for not voting for it but, it's one that can't be just simply ignored or labeled as misinformation by Obama and Pelosi (and ompany), like so many of the other reasons can.
Few things. First off this is not about abortion. What Stupak is attempting to do is change abortion law to ban Private Insurers from offering abortion as an elective coverage that the policyholder would pay for. Current abortion law in this country, bans federal funding of abortion, and if someone would want abortion covered they would need to pay for that coverage out of pocket. That is exactly what the Senate Bill's language does. Keeping abortion law the same as it is now, not changing it in any way. Stupak is trying to change it.
Not so. When private insurers receive payments that are, or are in the form of, government subsidies, government rules apply. Stupak believes in retaining the rules already in place. The language currently in use was posted earlier in this thread. Elective abortions can be a cash-basis service provided by doctors/clinics. Insurance for such is not necessary.
Not so. When private insurers receive payments that are, or are in the form of, government subsidies, government rules apply. Stupak believes in retaining the rules already in place. The language currently in use was posted earlier in this thread. Elective abortions can be a cash-basis service provided by doctors/clinics. Insurance for such is not necessary.
No, Stupak doesn't believe in keeping the current rules in place he wants to change them. Currently, private insures can offer elective abortion coverage, the same rules applies with the Senate bill, and just like now no federal funding can go to the abortion coverage. What Stupak wants to do is bar Private Insurers from offering abortion coverage that is paid for by the insured. He wants to stop Private Insurers from offering abortion coverage even though they are allowed to do it now. That is changing abortion rules.
No, Stupak doesn't believe in keeping the current rules in place he wants to change them. Currently, private insures can offer elective abortion coverage, the same rules applies with the Senate bill, and just like now no federal funding can go to the abortion coverage. What Stupak wants to do is bar Private Insurers from offering abortion coverage that is paid for by the insured. He wants to stop Private Insurers from offering abortion coverage even though they are allowed to do it now. That is changing abortion rules.
You don't get it. It's not private insurance anymore when government subsidies are used to pay for it. It then becomes partially to completely government provided insurance, much like Medicare Advantage. Keep elective abortions as a cash-basis private service provided by doctors/clinics, as they are now.
Those who wish to provide elective abortion services to people who receive government subsidies for their health insurance, can contribute to a privately held fund for such.
You don't get it. It's not private insurance anymore when government subsidies are used to pay for it. It then becomes partially to completely government provided insurance, much like Medicare Advantage. Keep elective abortions as a cash-basis private service provided by doctors/clinics, as they are now.
Those who wish to provide elective abortion services to people who receive government subsidies for their health insurance, can contribute to a privately held fund for such.
However the language in the Senate Bill clearly states, any elective abortion service can NOT be paid through the subsidy. If someone were to want a policy with elective abortion coverage, they would have to pay for that elective coverage out of pocket, any subsidy would not cover the abortion.
Regardless, the point is moot because the language can't change due to the fact it would require another vote in the Senate and the GOP would never allow that vote to happen through a filibuster.
However the language in the Senate Bill clearly states, any elective abortion service can NOT be paid through the subsidy. If someone were to want a policy with elective abortion coverage, they would have to pay for that elective coverage out of pocket, any subsidy would not cover the abortion.
You still don't get it. The elective abortion insurance would be attached to government subsidized insurance.
Like I said, Keep elective abortions as a cash-basis private service provided by doctors/clinics, as they are now for those who are on Medicaid, etc. Those who wish to provide elective abortion services to people who receive government subsidies for their health insurance, can contribute to a privately held fund for such.
You still don't get it. The elective abortion insurance would be attached to government subsidized insurance.
Like I said, Keep elective abortions as a cash-basis private service provided by doctors/clinics, as they are now for those who are on Medicaid, etc. Those who wish to provide elective abortion services to people who receive government subsidies for their health insurance, can contribute to a privately held fund for such.
Whether or not its attached to a plan with a subsidy does not mean the subsidy will be used to pay for it. It SPECIFICALLY bans it, someone would have to pay extra to get that elective coverage, and can't use a subsidy for it. That $$$ MUST be private. Also if someone is getting a subsidy for a Private plan, that plan is still Private. Claiming Public funds are used for it is an outright lite, because while public funds might be used for the plan in itself, it is not use for elective portions of the plan. The Stupak Amendment also goes a bit further and can ban those who are not getting a subsidy from getting the coverage if they enter into the Exchange.
Regardless, as I said the whole point is moot because the language can't change. Even if Pelosi, Reid, Obama and everyone else in the Democratic caucus decided ok, lets put the Stupak language in the Senate bill, they wouldn't be able to do it because the GOP would filibuster.
Whether or not its attached to a plan with a subsidy does not mean the subsidy will be used to pay for it. It SPECIFICALLY bans it, someone would have to pay extra to get that elective coverage, and can't use a subsidy for it. That $$$ MUST be private. Also if someone is getting a subsidy for a Private plan, that plan is still Private. Claiming Public funds are used for it is an outright lite, because while public funds might be used for the plan in itself, it is not use for elective portions of the plan. The Stupak Amendment also goes a bit further and can ban those who are not getting a subsidy from getting the coverage if they enter into the Exchange.
Who's providing the exchange? The government. There's the problem. The elective abortion coverage would be provided by government subsidized insurance.
Like I said, keep elective abortions as a cash-basis private service provided by doctors/clinics, as they are now for those who are on Medicaid, etc. Those members of the American population who wish to provide elective abortion services to people who receive government subsidies for their health insurance, can contribute to a privately held fund for such.
Surely there are at least some people who wish to contribute to such a fund, so where's the problem?
an abortion is not more than a grand.)low cost)...if the guy couldnt keep his 'pride' in his pants, then he should pay for the service.....if she doesnt get it(the abortion), he will be spending a grand a month for the next 18 years anyhow
abortion should not be covered under any insurance......except in the case of rape, or medical emergency
ALL birth control SHOULD BE covered though......i really cant stand uit when I see these kids, 18, 19, 21 and have already had 3 kids and 4 abortions........have the guy put a damn raincoat on, for pete's sake, or get her the pill, or something.....prevention is the key,. not aborting an already done mistake
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
