Abortion mandate slipped into bill

At a committee hearing last week, Sen. Barbara A. Mikulski, Maryland Democrat, provided a classic example of a morally bankrupt legislator seeking to insidiously force Americans to cooperate with and fund an objectively evil cause.

On July 9, the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee met to consider amendments to the legislation it is drafting to rearrange the entire U.S. health care system. While chairing the hearing, Miss Mikulski offered an obscurely worded, two-part amendment.

The first part required literally all health insurance companies in America to provide unspecified “preventive care and screenings” for “pregnant women and individuals of child-bearing age.” The specific services involved would be determined later in guidelines approved by a federal agency called the Health Resources and Services Administration.

This part of the amendment said: “A group health plan and a health insurance issuer offering group or individual health insurance coverage shall provide coverage for, and shall not impose any cost-sharing requirements (other than minimal cost-sharing in accordance with guidelines developed by the secretary) for, with respect to women (including pregnant women and individuals of childbearing age), such additional preventive care and screenings not covered under section 2708 as provided for in guidelines supported by the Health Resources and Services Administration.”

The second part of the amendment applied to health insurers participating in government-run insurance networks — so-called “American Health Benefit Gateways” — that the bill directs each state to create. These “gateways,” consisting of a government-run insurance company plus “qualified” private insurance companies, would offer federally subsidized insurance to Americans earning less than 400 percent of the poverty level (currently $88,000 for a family of four).

To qualify for participation in these gateways, Miss Mikulski’s amendment said, the insurer must be certified by the health and human services secretary as including “within health insurance plan networks those essential community providers, where available, that serve predominantly low-income, medically underserved individuals, such as health care providers defined in section 340B(a)(4) of the Public Health Service Act and providers described in section 1927 (c) (1)(D)(i)(IV) of the Social Security Act as set forth by section 21 of Public Law 111-8.”

Like many amendments offered in Congress these days, Miss Mikulski’s was intentionally opaque. It did not plainly state that insurance companies must cover abortion and that taxpayers must pay for the abortions of people making up to $88,000 per year who are participating in federally subsidized insurance plans. But Miss Mikulski was outed anyway.

When she brought her amendment up, an exceedingly polite and understated — but nonetheless stunning — colloquy ensued.

Sen. Orrin G. Hatch, Utah Republican, quietly asked the necessary questions. Pointing to the language mandating that health insurers participating in government “gateways” must include “essential community providers,” Mr. Hatch asked: “Would that include abortion providers? I mean it looks to me like you’re expanding it to where you — well, say for instance, like Planned Parenthood. Would that put them into this system?”

Miss Mikulski was evasive. “It would include women’s health clinics that provide comprehensive services, and under the definition of a women’s health clinic it would include Planned Parenthood clinics,” said Miss Mikulski. “It does not in any way expand a service. In other words, it doesn’t expand, nor mandate an abortion service.”

“No,” said Mr. Hatch, “but it would provide for them.”

“It would provide for any service deemed medically necessary or medically appropriate,” Miss Mikulski said.

In other words, “gateway” insurers would be required to cover Planned Parenthood services, which would include procedures deemed “medically appropriate,” which would include abortions.

“Well, I would have a rough time supporting it on that basis,” Mr. Hatch said. “But I just wanted to get that clarified.”

Then, Sen. Bob Casey, Pennsylvania Democrat, had a go-round with Miss Mikulski.

Story Continues →