Los Angeles Times: Massive Tax-Funding of Abortion a Reasonable Compromise
by Steven Ertelt
September 8, 2009
Los Angeles, CA (LifeNews.com) — The Los Angeles Times is the latest mainstream media outlet to misrepresent the health care overhaul legislation in Congress. The Times suggests language in the bill paving the way for funding hundreds of thousands of abortions annual is a "reasonable compromise."
With the false headline "Healthcare reform bill doesn’t cover elective abortions," the Times’ editors wrote on Friday that the opposite of what pro-life groups are warning about is true.
"But the provision that antiabortion groups find so objectionable would actually have the opposite effect, forcing private insurers to go further to fund and account for abortion coverage separately from federally subsidized services," the Times claims.
The Times cites the Hyde amendment and other federal laws that prohibit abortion funding in various circumstances, but none of those laws would apply to either the government option or the subsidies the government would give to people to purchase health insurance.
To further support its arguments, the Times cites the Capps Amendment, which pro-abortion lawmakers added to HR 3200 during committee consideration and claims it "would prohibit the basic plans offered through the exchange from covering elective abortions."
The Times says it would "would bar federal subsidies from being used to pay for elective abortions in optional plans" but concedes "it would allow those who receive subsidies to buy such coverage with their own money."
In other words, the Times appears to agree with pro-life groups that say the federal government will get money from Americans paying into the health care system and turn around and give it to people to purchase health care insurance that would pay for abortions.
The Times goes on to say pro-life groups are wrong on the public option fostering taxpayer-funding of abortions and then admits Americans could purchase abortion coverage to go along with their federally-controlled health care plan.
Finally, the Times says the amendment requires that at least one plan that does not cover abortions be included in every region in the public option, but omits the fact that one plan that pays for abortions be included as well.
Reacting to the editorial, National Right to Life legislative director Douglas Johnson tells LifeNews.com that the Times is misleading its readers.
"The editorial board somehow convinced itself that the Capps Amendment ‘would prohibit the basic [private insurance] plans offered through the exchange from covering elective abortions,’ which is about as far off as you can get,’ he explained.
Johnson says the Capps Amendment "explicitly allows such plans to cover all abortions, and it explicitly allows tax-based federal subsidies to go to plans that cover abortions."
"The editorial did admit that the proposed insurance plan to be offered by the federal Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS), the ‘public option,’ could cover elective abortion but then claimed that such abortion coverage ‘would have to be purchased with private funds,’" he said.
"This is nonsense — a federal agency does not spend ‘private funds,’" Johnson explains. "The funds that DHHS would collect for ‘premiums,’ and use to write checks to abortionists, would be public funds, to the same degree as any money collected by the IRS. This is direct federal government funding of abortion."
For the majority of Americans who are pro-life and oppose most abortions, that’s not a reasonable compromise.
Sign Up for Free Pro-Life News From LifeNews.com
Daily Pro-Life News Report Twice-Weekly Pro-Life
News Report Receive a free daily email report from LifeNews.com with the latest pro-life news stories on abortion, euthanasia and stem cell research. Sign up here. Receive a free twice-weekly email report with the latest pro-life news headlines on abortion, euthanasia and stem cell research. Sign up here.