Feeds: 
symbol identifies content for paid subscribers only.
White House to Dems: Deal With Abortion on Your Own.
Bad news for those of us who've been hoping President Obama would confront members of Congress who are using abortion to delay health reform: The Times reports that Obama called anti-choice Democrat Bart Stupak -- who has sworn to beat back any bill that includes even private plans that cover abortion -- and told him to work the issue out within the Democratic Party. The problem is, the White House has given no indication as to what "working it out" should look like. Should women who receive insurance affordability subsidies be denied access to every health plan covering abortion? (Currently, most employer-provided plans do offer some abortion coverage, so this would be a radical shift.) That's what Stupak and his allies would like to see. They aren't satisfied with provisions that would simply prevent public funds from paying for abortions, by segregating the public money from private premiums and co-pays.
Stupak's logic follows that of the Hyde Amendment, which already prevents federal Medicaid dollars from paying for most abortions. The strategy is to use government health care programs to restrict the reproductive freedom of the poor, and now the middle class. But Stupak's proposed ban on abortion coverage for women receiving subsidies -- women who could earn as much as $43,000 annually -- would have the effect of discouraging abortion coverage across the board, since plans that deny coverage would be eligible for more government support and could legally attract more customers.
A pro-choice White House should be saying a firm "no" to these shenanigans. Reform should expand -- not restrict -- women's access to reproductive health care.
--Dana Goldstein
COMMENTS (7)
I'm sure all will be fine. As Ms. Magazine told us last year, Obama is what a feminist looks like!
Posted by: mara | September 29, 2009 11:14 AM
I don't think anyone should be surprised that the antichoice right is taking it's shot at diminishing women's rights. And I don't think it's too surprising that the president doesn't want to say no them. I'm 61 and fairly jaded about what you can expect from moderates when women's rights are in the mix. The White House has to "succeed" on the health care issue. If that means shoving women aside, well, they'll probably do it if they have to. Infuriating, yes, but not really shocking, I'm sorry to say.
Posted by: margaret s. | September 29, 2009 12:31 PM
I don't see Obama signing a bill which restricts reproductive freedoms. He just wants someone else to do the fighting. Which is, I think, rational. If I'm wrong — and I really hope I'm not — anyone is free to say, "I told you so". (I'm listed.)
Posted by: Ben Rosengart | September 29, 2009 9:14 PM
A first trimester abortion costs what? $300 to $500? A dozen condoms costs about $7.99 or less.
Perhaps those who care more about access to abortion than about access to health care generally should make the argument that the kind of folks who are too stupid or too irresponsible to "self-insure" against unwanted pregnancy dilute the gene pool by breeding.
Posted by: John in Nashville | September 30, 2009 7:24 AM
God, I hope you are right, Ben R... I am beginning to feel very hopeless about what Obama's unwillingness to stand strong for women and all the others who elected him.
Posted by: Deb in Oregon | September 30, 2009 2:40 PM
If one read carefully and listened carefully, it was always easily deducible that Barack Obama was willing to throw overboard women's reproductive rights if in amy way that gets in the way of other things he thought more important.
Those present votes were indicative of an unwillingness to go out on the limb for women's reproductive rights. Just like now he's unwilling to go out on a limb or even help keep the limb intact on reprocutive rights for women.
In Aug there was that flap about only women who were truly crazy could qualify for the mental health part of the the health carve out in Roe. No he was absolutely wrong on what the law meant.
Then the first thing that got thrown overboard in the stimulus bill was contraceptive coverage for poor women.
Unlike bill clinton he put the Hyde amendment into his own budget. Bill clinton never did that. Now he's perfectly willing to tolerate estending the Hyde amendment to deny poor women, middle class women and everyone except really wealthy women the right to access to safe, inexpensive abortions.
What is it with him and poor women...and now other women.
From little nuances in past actions and past statementsone can discern how one governs. You just have be clear eyed about it
Posted by: debcoop | September 30, 2009 4:32 PM
Obama is just following his muslim heritage and how they treat women. Feminists should have questioned a little more about the facts surrounding his birth and upbringing before now. Now it's too late to complain. Unless we can get him impeached for his illegal status soon. Lawsuits on his birth status have been filed.
Posted by: John | October 1, 2009 9:51 PM