{"id":225,"date":"2009-09-17T11:13:34","date_gmt":"2009-09-17T11:13:34","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/blog.beliefnet.com\/lynnvsekulow\/2009\/09\/concerns-about-the-baucus-heal.html"},"modified":"2009-09-17T11:13:34","modified_gmt":"2009-09-17T11:13:34","slug":"concerns-about-the-baucus-heal","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.beliefnet.com\/columnists\/lynnvsekulow\/2009\/09\/concerns-about-the-baucus-heal.html","title":{"rendered":"Concerns About the Baucus Health Care Bill"},"content":{"rendered":"

The bill<\/a> <\/font> introduced to reform health care by Senator Max Baucus (D-MT) has splintered the Democrats and so far has no support among Republicans.  <\/span>As reported earlier, Senators Grassley and Enzi, in fact, have expressed concerns about the abortion provisions.  <\/span><\/font><\/font><\/font><\/p>\n

<\/span><\/font><\/font><\/font> <\/p>\n

<\/span><\/font><\/font><\/font>Based on our initial reading, we too have concerns with the abortion provisions in this bill.<\/font><\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

First, with regards to a minimum benefits package, p. 25 of the bill states that abortion “cannot be a mandated benefit as part of a minimum benefits package except in those cases for which Federal funds appropriated for the Department of Health and Human Services are permitted.”  <\/span>We are concerned that, if the Hyde Amendment is scrapped by the pro-abortion Congress, then abortion on demand could be mandated as a minimum benefit.  <\/span>Since 1976, the Hyde Amendment has been added each year to the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) appropriations bill.  <\/span>The amendment prevents federal funding of abortion, except in limited circumstances.  <\/span>However, Congress could, at some point, fail to add the Hyde Amendment to the HHS appropriations bill, thus eliminating its protections.<\/font><\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

Second, the bill permits health care plans to cover abortions for which federal funds are prohibited, but tax credits and cost-sharing credits cannot be used “to pay for abortions beyond those permitted by the most recent appropriation for the Department of Health and Human Services.”  <\/span>Under the bill, “insurers participating in any state-based exchange that offer coverage for abortion beyond those permitted by the most recent appropriation for the Department of Health and Human Services must segregate from any premium and cost-sharing credits an amount of each enrollee’s private premium dollars that is determined to be sufficient to cover the provision of those services.”  <\/span><\/font><\/font><\/font><\/p>\n

<\/span><\/font><\/font><\/font> <\/p>\n

<\/span><\/font><\/font><\/font>Furthermore, the “Secretary shall also establish a process using an estimated actuarial value by which insurers that provide coverage for abortions beyond those permitted by the most recent appropriation for the Department of Health and Human Services must demonstrate that no federal premium and cost-sharing credits are used for the purpose of paying for such abortions.”  <\/span><\/font><\/font><\/font><\/p>\n

<\/span><\/font><\/font><\/font> <\/p>\n

<\/span><\/font><\/font><\/font>We are concerned that what this means in practice is that if the Hyde Amendment is scrapped, then federal funds, tax credits, and cost-sharing credits could be used to pay for abortion on demand.  <\/span>Additionally, even while the Hyde Amendment is in place, federal funds, tax credits, and cost-sharing credits can subsidize plans that provide abortion coverage, even though an accounting mechanism attempts to segregate funds.<\/font><\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

Third, under the bill, each state exchange would be required to include a plan that “provides coverage of abortions beyond those for which Federal funds appropriated for the Department of Health and Human Services are permitted. The Secretary would also ensure that in each state exchange, at least one plan does not provide coverage of abortions beyond those for which Federal funds appropriated for the Department of Health and Human Services are permitted.”  <\/span><\/font><\/font><\/font><\/p>\n

<\/span><\/font><\/font><\/font> <\/p>\n

<\/span><\/font><\/font><\/font>Therefore, at least one plan would be mandated to cover elective abortion.  <\/span>Furthermore, if the Hyde Amendment is scrapped, there is not a requirement that each state exchange include a plan providing no abortion coverage.  <\/span><\/font><\/font><\/font><\/p>\n

<\/span><\/font><\/font><\/font> <\/p>\n

<\/span><\/font><\/font><\/font>Fourth, p. 25 of the bill contains a provision that “would ensure that state laws regarding the prohibition or requirement of coverage or funding for abortions, and state laws involving abortion-related procedural requirements are not preempted.”  <\/span>This provision would also ensure that “Federal conscience protections” are not preempted.  <\/span>It is unclear, however, how this provision would work in practice, particularly if the Hyde Amendment is deleted.<\/font><\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

Barry, there’s legitimate concern<\/a> in the pro-life community about this new bill and other measures that already have been introduced.  <\/font><\/font><\/font>In addition to concerns raised by Senators Grassley and Enzi, there’s also concern from some Democrats in Congress.  <\/span><\/font><\/font><\/font><\/p>\n

<\/span><\/font><\/font><\/font> <\/p>\n

<\/span><\/font><\/font><\/font>Consider the comments from Rep. Bart Stupak (D-Mich.)<\/a> who said he will vote against the House health care reform bill (HR 3200) if he is not allowed to offer a “more explicit” ban on federal funding for plans that cover abortion services <\/font>and he has indicated he has the votes<\/a> to kill the House measure.   <\/span><\/font><\/font><\/font><\/p>\n

<\/span><\/font><\/font><\/font> <\/font><\/p>\n

Barry, abortion is part of this debate, whether you think it should be or not.<\/font><\/p>\n

<\/font> <\/p>\n

To subscribe to “Lynn v. Sekulow” click <\/font>here<\/font><\/a>.<\/span><\/span><\/font><\/font><\/span><\/font><\/font><\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

The bill  introduced to reform health care by Senator Max Baucus (D-MT) has splintered the Democrats and so far has no support among Republicans.  As reported earlier, Senators Grassley and Enzi, in fact, have expressed concerns about the abortion provisions.    Based on our initial reading, we too have concerns with the abortion provisions in…<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":163,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[6,8,217,172],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-225","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-abortion","category-congress","category-health-care","category-pro-life-2"],"yoast_head":"\nConcerns About the Baucus Health Care Bill - Lynn v. Sekulow<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.beliefnet.com\/columnists\/lynnvsekulow\/2009\/09\/concerns-about-the-baucus-heal.html\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Concerns About the Baucus Health Care Bill - Lynn v. Sekulow\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"The bill  introduced to reform health care by Senator Max Baucus (D-MT) has splintered the Democrats and so far has no support among Republicans.  As reported earlier, Senators Grassley and Enzi, in fact, have expressed concerns about the abortion provisions.    Based on our initial reading, we too have concerns with the abortion provisions in…\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.beliefnet.com\/columnists\/lynnvsekulow\/2009\/09\/concerns-about-the-baucus-heal.html\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Lynn v. Sekulow\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2009-09-17T11:13:34+00:00\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Jay Sekulow\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Concerns About the Baucus Health Care Bill - Lynn v. Sekulow","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.beliefnet.com\/columnists\/lynnvsekulow\/2009\/09\/concerns-about-the-baucus-heal.html","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Concerns About the Baucus Health Care Bill - Lynn v. Sekulow","og_description":"The bill  introduced to reform health care by Senator Max Baucus (D-MT) has splintered the Democrats and so far has no support among Republicans.  As reported earlier, Senators Grassley and Enzi, in fact, have expressed concerns about the abortion provisions.    Based on our initial reading, we too have concerns with the abortion provisions in…","og_url":"https:\/\/www.beliefnet.com\/columnists\/lynnvsekulow\/2009\/09\/concerns-about-the-baucus-heal.html","og_site_name":"Lynn v. Sekulow","article_published_time":"2009-09-17T11:13:34+00:00","author":"Jay Sekulow","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.beliefnet.com\/columnists\/lynnvsekulow\/2009\/09\/concerns-about-the-baucus-heal.html","url":"https:\/\/www.beliefnet.com\/columnists\/lynnvsekulow\/2009\/09\/concerns-about-the-baucus-heal.html","name":"Concerns About the Baucus Health Care Bill - Lynn v. Sekulow","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.beliefnet.com\/columnists\/lynnvsekulow\/#website"},"datePublished":"2009-09-17T11:13:34+00:00","dateModified":"2009-09-17T11:13:34+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.beliefnet.com\/columnists\/lynnvsekulow\/#\/schema\/person\/d09bc4c4bba2ac87034ee529f100fbaf"},"breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.beliefnet.com\/columnists\/lynnvsekulow\/2009\/09\/concerns-about-the-baucus-heal.html#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.beliefnet.com\/columnists\/lynnvsekulow\/2009\/09\/concerns-about-the-baucus-heal.html"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.beliefnet.com\/columnists\/lynnvsekulow\/2009\/09\/concerns-about-the-baucus-heal.html#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.beliefnet.com\/columnists\/lynnvsekulow"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Concerns About the Baucus Health Care Bill"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.beliefnet.com\/columnists\/lynnvsekulow\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.beliefnet.com\/columnists\/lynnvsekulow\/","name":"Lynn v. Sekulow","description":"A debate blog about church, state, faith and politics with Jay Sekulow and Barry W. Lynn","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.beliefnet.com\/columnists\/lynnvsekulow\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.beliefnet.com\/columnists\/lynnvsekulow\/#\/schema\/person\/d09bc4c4bba2ac87034ee529f100fbaf","name":"Jay Sekulow","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.beliefnet.com\/columnists\/lynnvsekulow\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.beliefnet.com\/columnists\/lynnvsekulow\/wp-content\/wphb-cache\/gravatar\/574\/574bc7f1605fea9a78a1b3bac65ceb15x96.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.beliefnet.com\/columnists\/lynnvsekulow\/wp-content\/wphb-cache\/gravatar\/574\/574bc7f1605fea9a78a1b3bac65ceb15x96.jpg","caption":"Jay Sekulow"},"description":"Jay Alan Sekulow is Chief Counsel for the American Center for Law and Justice (ACLJ), a law firm and educational organization that focuses on constitutional law.  He is also Chief Counsel of the European Center for Law and Justice (ECLJ). Jay Sekulow has also served as a faculty member for the Office of Legal Education at the United States Department of Justice.  As a member of the faculty he instructed Assistant United States Attorneys and investigators in the First Amendment issues associated with prosecution of obscenity. An accomplished and respected judicial advocate, Sekulow has presented oral argument before the U.S. Supreme Court in numerous cases in defense of constitutional freedoms. Several landmark cases argued by Sekulow before the U.S. Supreme Court have become part of the legal landscape in the area of religious liberty litigation.  In the Mergens case, Sekulow cleared the way for public school students to form Bible clubs and religious organizations on their school campuses.  In the Lamb's Chapel case, Sekulow defended the free speech rights of religious groups, ensuring that they be treated equally with respect to the use of public facilities.  And, most recently, in McConnell v. FEC, Sekulow ensured that the constitutional rights of young people remain protected with a unanimous decision by the high court guaranteeing that minors can participate in political campaigns. A nationally recognized and respected defender of religious freedom, Sekulow has assembled one of the most prestigious law firms in the nation.  Founded in 1990, the American Center for Law and Justice focuses in constitutional law.  The ACLJ, under Sekulow's direction, is involved in public interest and public policy issues working to protect religious and constitutional liberties. In 2007, the Chicago Tribune concluded that the ACLJ has \"led the way\" in Christian legal advocacy.  In 2005, TIME Magazine named Sekulow one of the \"25 Most Influential Evangelicals\" in America and called the ACLJ \"a powerful counterweight\" to the ACLU.  Business Week said the ACLJ is \"the leading advocacy group for religious freedom.\"  Sekulow's work on the issue of judicial nominees - including possible vacancies at the Supreme Court - has received extensive news coverage including a front page story in The Wall Street Journal.  In addition, The National Law Journal has twice named Sekulow one of the \"100 Most Influential Lawyers\" in the United States (1994, 1997).  He is also among a distinguished group of attorneys known as \"The Public Sector 45\" named by The American Lawyer (January\/February 1997).  The magazine said the designation represents \"45 young lawyers outside the private sector whose vision and commitment are changing lives.\" Sekulow brings insight and education to listeners daily with his national call-in radio program, Jay Sekulow Live!, which is broadcast throughout the country on nearly 850 radio stations.  Sekulow also hosts a weekly television program, ACLJ This Week, which tackles the tough issues of the day and is broadcast on a number of networks nationwide including the Trinity Broadcasting Network and FamilyNet.  Sekulow is also a popular guest on nationally televised news programs on ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN, FOX News, MSNBC, CNBC, and PBS.  He frequently contributes articles and commentary to national publications and is often quoted in the nation's leading newspapers including USA Today, New York Times, Los Angeles Times, Washington Post, and Washington Times. A graduate of Mercer University, Sekulow graduated cum laude receiving both a bachelor's degree and doctor of jurisprudence from Mercer University where he served on the Mercer Law Review as an editorial staff member.  Following graduation, Sekulow served as a tax trial attorney in the Office of Chief Counsel for the Internal Revenue Service.  In that capacity, Sekulow prepared and brought to trial tax cases on behalf of the United States Department of Treasury in United States Tax Court. He also received a Ph.D. from Regent University, with a dissertation on American Legal History, and is the author of numerous publications and law articles. Sekulow serves as a member of the Board of Trustees for The Supreme Court Historical Society in Washington, DC.","url":"https:\/\/www.beliefnet.com\/columnists\/lynnvsekulow\/author\/jsekulow"}]}},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.beliefnet.com\/columnists\/lynnvsekulow\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/225","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.beliefnet.com\/columnists\/lynnvsekulow\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.beliefnet.com\/columnists\/lynnvsekulow\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.beliefnet.com\/columnists\/lynnvsekulow\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/163"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.beliefnet.com\/columnists\/lynnvsekulow\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=225"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.beliefnet.com\/columnists\/lynnvsekulow\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/225\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.beliefnet.com\/columnists\/lynnvsekulow\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=225"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.beliefnet.com\/columnists\/lynnvsekulow\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=225"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.beliefnet.com\/columnists\/lynnvsekulow\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=225"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}