YES THEY DID! Health Care Passed.

Overheal

Im sure thats why the first lady was so mum during the presidency.

Amerika

Remember when we were discussing this and how everyone swore up and down that abortions would not be paid for by federal funds? They even specifically promised, by a means-absolutely-nothing executive order, to not allow federal funds for abortion, in order to get Bart Stupak and other pro-life democrats to sign onto the bill?

Well, IMO anybody who believes anything this lying administration promises is a moron. And this just helps to solidify my position.

$160 million to Pennsylvania alone.

http://www.earnedmedia.org/nrlc0713.htm.

And before the Obamabots jump to his defense, here is the pertanant part:

“…includes only abortions and contraceptives that satisfy the requirements of" several specific statutes, the most pertinent of which is 18 Pa. C.S. § 3204, which says that an abortion is legal in Pennsylvania (consistent with Roe v. Wade) if a single physician believes that it is "necessary" based on "all factors (physical, emotional, psychological, familial and the woman's age) relevant to the well-being of the woman."

Doctor, I’m pregnant again and I need another abortion.
How are you going to pay for this?
I don’t have any money and I’m on welfare.
Sorry, but the new Obama heath care reform bill doesn’t pay for abortion on demand.
Oh my, what am I going to do, this pregnancy has me so upset that I can’t sleep at night.
Well now that’s something completely different, let’s go suck some brains out. Nurse, fill out the paperwork for government payment.




.

kev9100

Amerika wrote: »

Doctor, I’m pregnant again and I need another abortion.
How are you going to pay for this?
I don’t have any money and I’m on welfare.
Sorry, but the new Obama heath care reform bill doesn’t pay for abortion on demand.
Oh my, what am I going to do, this pregnancy has me so upset that I can’t sleep at night.
Well now that’s something completely different, let’s go suck some brains out. Nurse, fill out the paperwork for government payment.




.

I really hope that was a (awful) joke. If you are so blind that you think the decision to have an abortion isn't one of the most difficult and painful decisions someone can make, I pity you.

Overheal

Executive Order -- Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act's Consistency with Longstanding Restrictions on the Use of Federal Funds for Abortion

EXECUTIVE ORDER

ENSURING ENFORCEMENT AND IMPLEMENTATION OF ABORTION RESTRICTIONS IN THE PATIENT PROTECTION AND AFFORDABLE CARE ACT

By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, including the "Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act" (Public Law 111-148), I hereby order as follows:

Section. 1. Policy. Following the recent enactment of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (the "Act"), it is necessary to establish an adequate enforcement mechanism to ensure that Federal funds are not used for abortion services (except in cases of rape or incest, or when the life of the woman would be endangered), consistent with a longstanding Federal statutory restriction that is commonly known as the Hyde Amendment. The purpose of this order is to establish a comprehensive, Government-wide set of policies and procedures to achieve this goal and to make certain that all relevant actors -- Federal officials, State officials (including insurance regulators) and health care providers -- are aware of their responsibilities, new and old.

The Act maintains current Hyde Amendment restrictions governing abortion policy and extends those restrictions to the newly created health insurance exchanges. Under the Act, longstanding Federal laws to protect conscience (such as the Church Amendment, 42 U.S.C. 300a-7, and the Weldon Amendment, section 508(d)(1) of Public Law 111-8) remain intact and new protections prohibit discrimination against health care facilities and health care providers because of an unwillingness to provide, pay for, provide coverage of, or refer for abortions.

Numerous executive agencies have a role in ensuring that these restrictions are enforced, including the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), and the Office of Personnel Management.

Sec. 2. Strict Compliance with Prohibitions on Abortion Funding in Health Insurance Exchanges. The Act specifically prohibits the use of tax credits and cost-sharing reduction payments to pay for abortion services (except in cases of rape or incest, or when the life of the woman would be endangered) in the health insurance exchanges that will be operational in 2014. The Act also imposes strict payment and accounting requirements to ensure that Federal funds are not used for abortion services in exchange plans (except in cases of rape or incest, or when the life of the woman would be endangered) and requires State health insurance commissioners to ensure that exchange plan funds are segregated by insurance companies in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles, OMB funds management circulars, and accounting guidance provided by the Government Accountability Office.

I hereby direct the Director of the OMB and the Secretary of HHS to develop, within 180 days of the date of this order, a model set of segregation guidelines for State health insurance commissioners to use when determining whether exchange plans are complying with the Act's segregation requirements, established in section 1303 of the Act, for enrollees receiving Federal financial assistance. The guidelines shall also offer technical information that States should follow to conduct independent regular audits of insurance companies that participate in the health insurance exchanges. In developing these model guidelines, the Director of the OMB and the Secretary of HHS shall consult with executive agencies and offices that have relevant expertise in accounting principles, including, but not limited to, the Department of the Treasury, and with the Government Accountability Office. Upon completion of those model guidelines, the Secretary of HHS should promptly initiate a rulemaking to issue regulations, which will have the force of law, to interpret the Act's segregation requirements, and shall provide guidance to State health insurance commissioners on how to comply with the model guidelines.

Sec. 3. Community Health Center Program. The Act establishes a new Community Health Center (CHC) Fund within HHS, which provides additional Federal funds for the community health center program. Existing law prohibits these centers from using Federal funds to provide abortion services (except in cases of rape or incest, or when the life of the woman would be endangered), as a result of both the Hyde Amendment and longstanding regulations containing the Hyde language. Under the Act, the Hyde language shall apply to the authorization and appropriations of funds for Community Health Centers under section 10503 and all other relevant provisions. I hereby direct the Secretary of HHS to ensure that program administrators and recipients of Federal funds are aware of and comply with the limitations on abortion services imposed on CHCs by existing law. Such actions should include, but are not limited to, updating Grant Policy Statements that accompany CHC grants and issuing new interpretive rules.

Sec. 4. General Provisions. (a) Nothing in this order shall be construed to impair or otherwise affect: (i) authority granted by law or Presidential directive to an agency, or the head thereof; or (ii) functions of the Director of the OMB relating to budgetary, administrative, or legislative proposals.

(b) This order shall be implemented consistent with applicable law and subject to the availability of appropriations.

(c) This order is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers, employees or agents, or any other person.

BARACK OBAMA

THE WHITE HOUSE,
March 24, 2010.








Just sayin'.


According to Stupak himself he was aware that's what the Bill did: it reinforced the existing amendments and directly applied them to new and future healthcare reform. He appeared to be under no illusion about the exceptions.

Amerika

kev9100 wrote: »

I really hope that was a (awful) joke. If you are so blind that you think the decision to have an abortion isn't one of the most difficult and painful decisions someone can make, I pity you.

I wish you were right, but reality is a not always pretty. And I have worked with people who consider abortion just another form of birth control, and think nothing of it. My former next door neighbor was a doctor who performed abortion on demand. His stories would make you sick. If it shocked you good! Because this is just the way it is here quite often. :mad:

Overheal

Amerika wrote: »

I wish you were right, but reality is a not always pretty. And I have worked with people who consider abortion just another form of birth control, and think nothing of it. My former next door neighbor was a doctor who performed abortion on demand. His stories would make you sick. If it shocked you good! Because this is just the way it is here quite often. :mad:

And abortion on demand is not covered.

Amerika

Overheal wrote: »

And abortion on demand is not covered.

You are right. But abuses will abound when you add the emotional and psychological loopholes. Also, no executive order or regulation can override a statutory mandate unless Congress passes a law that prohibits federal funding from being used in this manner. And Congress refused to make it law.

Overheal

Amerika wrote: »

You are right. But abuses will abound when you add the emotional and psychological loopholes. Also, no executive order or regulation can override a statutory mandate unless Congress passes a law that prohibits federal funding from being used in this manner. And Congress refused to make it law.

It's really no different than any medical loophole, "Yeah I have chest pains, bump me up to the front of the ER. Yeah my insurance only covers emergencies."

The Joy is there's so many Right-Wing Pro-Lifers out there that keeping Doctors from exploiting said loophole should really be a non-issue.

kev9100

Amerika wrote: »

You are right. Also, no executive order or regulation can override a statutory mandate unless Congress passes a law that prohibits federal funding from being used in this manner. And Congress refused to make it law.

But if Congress had done that, all it would have done is make it even more difficult for poor women to get an abortion for genuine medical reasons. The rich would still be able to get an abortion because they can afford it. How is that fair?

Amerika

kev9100 wrote: »

But if Congress had done that, all it would have done is make it even more difficult for poor women to get an abortion for genuine medical reasons. The rich would still be able to get an abortion because they can afford it. How is that fair?

It has been reported that an estimated 50 million babies in the US have been aborted since 1973. Approximately 24% of all U.S. pregnancies end in abortion.

And the reported Reasons For Abortion:

• 98% Personal Choice (unwanted or inconvenient)
• 1.7% Life/Health of Mother or Child
• .3% Rape/Incest

Still want to talk about fairness?

A true request to me from an employee:
I need off next Wednesday. I have to take my girlfriend to get an abortion.
What’s going on here, you used that excuse last month.
That was a different girlfriend.

Denerick

Amerika wrote: »

A true request to me from an employee:
I need off next Wednesday. I have to take my girlfriend to get an abortion.
What’s going on here, you used that excuse last month.
That was a different girlfriend.

He seems like a real character. Chances are he was lying.

Amerika

Denerick wrote: »

He seems like a real character. Chances are he was lying.

Unfortunately no. And I've met and have know some of his many girlfriends. How someone of his character can get so many beautiful, educated and seemingly sensible girls is beyond me. He refers to jail as "college."

Yet I keep him on, keep lecturing him on responsibility, and keep giving him more chances. Just can't seem to completely shake the curse of Liberalism from my youth.

Denerick

Amerika wrote: »

Unfortunately no. And I've met and have know some of his many girlfriends. How someone of his character can get so many beautiful, educated and seemingly sensible girls is beyond me. He refers to jail as "college."

Yet I keep him on and keep giving him more chances. Just can't seem to completely shake the curse of Liberalism from my youth.

Why do you employ him? Not very conservative of you?

Slash his wages and cut his benefits. He must learn the benefits of self sufficiency.

Amerika

Denerick wrote: »

Not very conservative of you?

Yeah... tell me about it. Maybe that's what they mean by "compassionate conservatism." I should have been a lawyer for how many times I've kept the underprivilidged out of jail.

Slash his wages and cut his benefits. He must learn the benefits of self sufficiency.

Can't becasue of two words in the employment regulation... "Protected Class."

Overheal

Amerika wrote: »

It has been reported that an estimated 50 million babies in the US have been aborted since 1973. Approximately 24% of all U.S. pregnancies end in abortion.

And the reported Reasons For Abortion:

• 98% Personal Choice (unwanted or inconvenient)
• 1.7% Life/Health of Mother or Child
• .3% Rape/Incest

Still want to talk about fairness?

A true request to me from an employee:
I need off next Wednesday. I have to take my girlfriend to get an abortion.
What’s going on here, you used that excuse last month.
That was a different girlfriend.

Awesome: so only 2% of all abortions would be covered under the insurance plan. Or 0.48% of all pregnancies in the US.

Amerika

Overheal wrote: »

Awesome: so only 2% of all abortions would be covered under the insurance plan. Or 0.48% of all pregnancies in the US.

Such a show of naivete is quite disturbing.

Overheal

Amerika wrote: »

Such a show of naivete is quite disturbing.

I don't see how:

And the reported Reasons For Abortion:

• 98% Personal Choice (unwanted or inconvenient)
• 1.7% Life/Health of Mother or Child
• .3% Rape/Incest

If the Reported reasons Read 98% for the Life/Health of Mother or Child, yes, I would concur. However this data shows 98% of abortions are elective. With that in mind, elective abortions are not given federal subsidies. Hence, only 2% of Abortions would be receiving federal subsidies.

When the statistics state otherwise, and the percentage of reported abortions indicates the potential for false reporting to get federally subsidized abortions, I will agree with you. Until then, you're over-reacting.

Show me some data that indicates the majority of women are cheating the system to get a free abortion and I'll buy you a coke.

Amerika

Overheal wrote: »

Show me some data that indicates the majority of women are cheating the system to get a free abortion and I'll buy you a coke.

Doesn't the system now pay for abortions because of Roe v. Wade, as courts have interpreted the decision as a statutory mandate that the government must provide federal funding for elective abortion through federal programs? If so, at the current time, and under current mandates, there seems to be no need to "cheat."

Overheal

Amerika wrote: »

Doesn't the system now pay for abortions because of Roe v. Wade, as courts have interpreted the decision as a statutory mandate that the government must provide federal funding for elective abortion through federal programs? If so, at the current time, and under current mandates, there seems to be no need to "cheat."

The Executive Order of March 14th and Roe v. Wade are not mutually exclusive. Roe v. Wade protects the right to privacy and the right to an abortion. It doesn't demand that the Federal Gov't fund (or arrange) such an abortion and in fact the executive order and the Weldon and Hyde amendments explicitly forbid funding it (except in those 2% of cases)

Amerika

I wish I could find out how many abortions are federally funded, but I believe the government refuses to make public this information. (If anybody could find out this information I would be grateful). But about a third of Planned Parenthood's annual budget (or about $270 million) is Federally Funded. And lets face it, Planned Parenthood should change their name to Abortion On Demand LLC.

Overheal

Hmm.

http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/pennsylvania-insurance-dept.-evades-questions-on-federal-abortion-coverage/

CNA contacted the Pennsylvania Department of Insurance with NRLC's charges that the plan will ultimately fund non-elective abortions.

Rosanne Placey, press secretary for the department's Communications Office, replied, “Our high risk proposal and any subsequent contracts must comply with federal law and regulations.”

“So that means that federal law as well as the Hyde amendment would control the high risk plan here,” she said. “We could not and would not use federal money to cover elective abortions. The benefits do not include elective abortions. Our plan says that.”

“Also, we could not and would not use federal money to go beyond the scope of the Hyde amendment,” Placey added. “The Hyde amendment says that is only to save the life of the mother, or if the pregnancy is the result of rape or incest. So beyond that very limited scope – funds cannot be used to include abortions.”

In response to Placey's argument, Douglas Johnson, legislative director of NRLC, countered that “there is no language in the law, in the Affordable Health Care Act as they call it, that in any way restricts the use of these funds for abortion,” particularly within the higher risk pool program.

“Everything she is talking about is entirely beside the point,” he charged.

The pool program, Johnson explained, has “nothing to do with the Hyde amendment,” since “the Hyde amendment controls only money that flows through a single pipeline which is the annual HHS (Health and Human Services department) appropriation bill.”

“This program involves no such money – the money for this program is federal money.”

Commenting on the executive order President Obama signed in March, Johnson explained that the Hyde amendment, as stated in the executive order on abortion, only applies to insurance exchange programs and community health center programs.

According to him, the Hyde amendment does not apply to and has nothing to do with high-risk pool programs.

NRLC also reported this week that the language within the high-risk program in New Mexico explicitly covers elective abortions.

^^^ that im gonna go check in a little bit.

Overheal

http://www.krqe.com/dpp/news/health/nm-backtracks-on-abortion-coverage

Looks like they reversed the NM language in their coverage after the Associated Press started asking questions.

Michelle Lujan Grisham, deputy director of the New Mexico Medical Insurance Pool, said the state's contract with HHS [the federal body explicitly barred from funding elective abortions by amendments mentioned previously in thread] stipulated that the plan must follow federal law, but there was no clear-cut mention of abortion coverage.

As a result, New Mexico included elective abortion as a covered benefit, following what it was already doing with its own state health programs.

An Internet site describing the New Mexico plan listed "elective termination of pregnancy" as a covered benefit. The plan would pay 80 percent of the cost of an abortion, after the beneficiary met a $500 annual deductible.

Asked about coverage of elective abortion by the AP on Wednesday, Grisham initially responded that the state intended to follow through with its original plan.

A little later, she called back to say her agency was reversing course. "We are in the process of correcting the package so it will not have elective abortion coverage," said Grisham.

In fairness that was a pretty big oversight!

kev9100

Amerika wrote: »

And the reported Reasons For Abortion:

• 98% Personal Choice (unwanted or inconvenient)
• 1.7% Life/Health of Mother or Child
• .3% Rape/Incest

Still want to talk about fairness?

A true request to me from an employee:
I need off next Wednesday. I have to take my girlfriend to get an abortion.
What’s going on here, you used that excuse last month.
That was a different girlfriend.

But wait a second, you're a conservative. You (presumably) believe in personal liberty and the right of women to make their own decisions about their own body. So why are you anti-choice?

Denerick

Oh please. There's nothing more annoying than self righteousness when it comes to abortion.

He believes that abortion is murder of the unborn and thus the woman has no right to end that life. Respect his opinion and move on.

For christs sake. You don't even have to be religious to be opposed to abortion.

Amerika

kev9100 wrote: »

But wait a second, you're a conservative. You (presumably) believe in personal liberty and the right of women to make their own decisions about their own body. So why are you anti-choice?

I do admit I am somewhat torn over the abortion issue. But I also care about the rights of the unborn child.

Animals receive more rights in this country then do unborn children.

It always amazes me how someone can be for abortion but against the death penalty.

Overheal

Amerika wrote: »

Animals receive more rights in this country then do unborn children.
.

have you seen fast food nation yet?

jank

Amerika wrote: »

Doctor, I’m pregnant again and I need another abortion.
How are you going to pay for this?
I don’t have any money and I’m on welfare.
Sorry, but the new Obama heath care reform bill doesn’t pay for abortion on demand.
Oh my, what am I going to do, this pregnancy has me so upset that I can’t sleep at night.
Well now that’s something completely different, let’s go suck some brains out. Nurse, fill out the paperwork for government payment.




.

That is pretty low PJ even for you! You are trivializing it to the point of stupidity.

jank

kev9100 wrote: »

But wait a second, you're a conservative. You (presumably) believe in personal liberty and the right of women to make their own decisions about their own body. So why are you anti-choice?

There in lies the crux and the irony of the right. Want an abortion, NO! Want to burn a flag, NO! Want to post billboard on Atheism, NO!

They are all for freedom of choice until someone chooses something they don't like, they then try and stop it.

The right care more about the unborn than the children born into poverty.

However I can see why it can be so divisive. Me personally, I wouldn't ever ever get my OH an abortion, if she wanted to get one I would be against it. Thats just me but I dont think I have a right to tell another woman what they should do with their bodies.

Its a tough one hence this being THE most divisive issue in America for the last 40 years.

However playing poltiics with it is not the way to go IMO.

amacachi

jank wrote: »

There in lies the crux and the irony of the right. Want an abortion, NO! Want to burn a flag, NO! Want to post billboard on Atheism, NO!

Of course yeah, that's sums up the entire right.:rolleyes:

jank

amacachi wrote: »

Of course yeah, that's sums up the entire right.:rolleyes:

Hey this is the US politics forum. Where we use labels and the least number of words do describe sectors of society. Get with the program.