Posted by 
Where it is written “subsection A”, note that this is referring to “abortions for which public funding is NOT allowed.” And where it says “subsection B”, it is referring to “abortions for which public funding IS allowed. This begins on page 140 of the 1502 page newly submitted bill.
‘‘(3) ASSURED AVAILABILITY OF VARIED COVERAGE THROUGH EXCHANGES.—
14 ‘‘(A) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary [Kathleen Sebelius] shall sure that with respect to qualified health benefits plans offered in any exchange established pursuant to this title—
18 ‘‘(i) there is at least one such plan that provides coverage of services described in subparagraphs (A) [does not provide abortion coverage] and (B) [does provide abortion coverage] of paragraph (2); [line 20, pg 140]
The current bill mandates an abortion coverage option be available through any qualified health benefits plan in the exchage:
(A) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall assure that with respect to qualified health benefits plans offered in any exchange established pursuant to this title—
(i) there is at least one such plan that provides coverage of services described in subparagraphs (A) and (B) of paragraph (2); and
(ii) there is at least one such plan that does not provide coverage of services described in paragraph (2)(A); [line 14, pg 141]
The next bit discusses segregation of funds, and in layman’s terms, this says that even though these entities may be federally funded or get large sums of government money, they have to segregate the funds which pay for (provide) abortions. What does this mean in terms of a family budget? It means a husband and wife both work. He brings home 2,000 per week and she brings home 1,800 per week. If this family budget was going to provide abortions, it would mean that even though their combined salaries benefit their household as a whole, the actual money spent on the abortions will have to come out of the 2,000 that he brings home for that week. So essentially it is the same 3,800 pool of money, but we’re splitting it up to make it sound better. Another way to describe it is if that man goes out and buys a new Corvette without discussing it with his wife. When she freaks out, he says, “Don’t worry honey, I’m going to make the payments out of MY salary, it won’t come from yours at all. See what I’m getting at here? It’s just semantics.
‘‘(c) NO DISCRIMINATION ON THE BASIS OF PROVISION OF ABORTION.—A qualified health benefits plan may not discriminate against any individual health care provider or health care facility because of its willingness or unwillingness to provide, pay for, provide coverage of, or refer for abortions.’’ [line 6 pg 144]
This basically means that no plan, even one that was highly against abortion, could not discriminate (i.e. not cover services at facilities that provide abortions–like planned parenthood) against any doctor or health care provider because of their WILLINGNESS to provide or refer for abortions. This feels eerily like something we call a “loophole.” The plan itself may not cover abortions, but the plan cannot refuse to pay for services at…say…an abortion clinic.
Will be updated as time permits. It is however, a 1500 page bill!
Recent articles of interest:
Radical leftist Dede Scozzafava can’t stand the heat
Fox News Reaches Across Party Lines
Victory against Big Labor: Home health providers reject SEIU, AFSCME power grab
It is amazing how creative the liberals get when it comes to abortion. It appears that this is going to be in there come hell or high water…which is one of many reasons why the whole health reform should be voted down. There is no such thing as a compromise it appears…only agendas.
[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Nevada Right to Life and teri g, Political Integrity. Political Integrity said: Abortion coverage MANDATORY in Baucus bill exchanges! http://is.gd/4slkv #tcot [...]
A serious and honest question here:
How long do you think it will be until the LORD puts the smack-down on America because our leaders love the wholesale slaughter of innocent lives?
I’m not being facetious. I really wonder if we aren’t having the troubles we are having because as a Nation, meaning our leaders, we condone, sponsor, support, pay for, push, and otherwise do not abhor abortion.
May God have mercy on this Nation.
Social comments and analytics for this post…
This post was mentioned on Twitter by PINupdates: Abortion coverage MANDATORY in Baucus bill exchanges! http://is.gd/4slkv #tcot…
The problem, in my opinion, is that too many people have an “out of sight, out of mind” mentality when it comes to abortion. They plug their ears and scream “la la la la la la la…I’m not listening!!!” If you try to explain to them exactly WHAT an abortion is, at which stage of development their child is, and how non-clinical of an act it truly is. If you dare show them a photo or video of the procedure, you are truly barbaric, and not fit for polite company. But if what they really believe in their heart of hearts, is that it is “just a medical procedure that requires a lot of deep thought and soul searching…” then answer me this: Why is it that when someone contemplates having brain surgery to remove a tumor, and the Dr. shows them a video of the procedure before the fact and explains all the risks and potential effects, he’s just being a thorough doctor. And why is it that a patient who is going to have knee surgery will go and try to find photos and descriptions of the procedure online before they go under the knife? Not sure? I am. It’s because these ARE just medical procedures. The pictures of what exactly takes place are gross, they’re not something you want to see when you are eating a Sunday dinner, but they’re just a fact of life. No one would call you a monster for making them available to your best friend if she was considering having the surgery.
But if you dare be so bold as to pass along a photograph of an abortion procedure, of an aborted baby, of any of the numerous desecrated body parts that result from the procedure, suddenly you are nothing more than a vicious animal. How can that be? Is not the “pro-choice’s” argument that this is not a baby, but merely medical waste? Do they not claim that it is nothing more than a “blob of cells” and that “it feels no pain”? If they truly believed all of these things to be true, would it honestly be any different than viewing any other surgery? I think we all know the answer to that…Liberal, Democrat, Conservative, Republican, or undecided. They are only offended because they do know, at home, alone, when no one is around to hear their views, that this act is a crime against nature. They know they are wrong to support it, whether they believe in God or they think that pink fairies made us all. Wrong is wrong. This isn’t a matter of “forcing religious views down someone’s throat” as I’ve heard it so eloquently put before. No need to redirect the self-loathing at those who would shed light on what you (who claim to be “pro choice”) are trying so hard to ignore.
The issue is not abortion per se, but who bought the right to have it placed in the Health Care Bill as an entitlement, glorifying it as just another procedure that is available to everyone — I’d like to see how many men use this right even though they are going to have to pay for it in the one size fits all plan.
[...] at Political Integrity Now. AKPC_IDS += "5876,";Popularity: unranked [...]
[...] Comment: Let’s not forget, abortion coverage is MANDATORY in the Senate health care [...]