Scott Zipperle

I had a substantive post for today planned, and then life took over. So you get more pro-life songs to get you through the weekend. The first one was sent to us after the last time we posted on pro-life songs. The song is “Can I Live?” by Nick Cannon from 2005. It is a song that is a semi-autobiographical account of how Cannon’s mother decided not to have an abortion.

Next we go waaaay back to 1986 and “Abortion” by Doug E. Fresh & the Get Fresh Crew A pro-life rap song that describes abortion as a “distortion” and states the “world’s morals are out of proportion.” When first released the song was banned from the radio.

And from the great year of 1976 “Adiós, mamá” by Trigo Limpio. A Spanish-language song written from the perspective of a fetus that comes to terms with the news the woman carrying it intends to have an abortion.

I didn’t say they were all toe tappers folks. Have a good weekend!

Earlier I wrote of a pro-life “rider” called the Mexico City Policy.  But for those who are not up on legislative lingo the obvious question is “what exactly is a pro-life rider?”  Here is my feeble attempt to elucidate (ding ding ding – word of the day!).

For many years pro-life measures have been added to Congressional appropriations bills to prevent taxpayer dollars from being used to promote or perform abortion, protect the consciences of health care professionals, and prevent funding for unethical human embryo experiments.  Often referred to as pro-life riders, each year these provisions are included in legislation reported out of Appropriations subcommittees.  One seasoned pro-life champion prefers the term pro-life “provisions” – as opposed to “riders.”  The term “riders” gives an indication that these legislative actions are only “along for the ride.”  He tends to explain it more articulately than I, and I agree with him, so I try to use it as often as possible when talking on the subject.

Some of these measures have been in place for over thirty years.  The Hyde Amendment, for example, has been in effect since 1976.  Enacted under a Democratic Congress, the Hyde Amendment has been renewed by administrations and congresses regardless of party control. Without retaining pro-life provisions on annual appropriations bills there is no assurance taxpayer dollars will not be used to fund or promote abortion. 

Over the years these different provisions have gone through different changes.  Like the Dornan Amendment which when originally passed in 1988 guaranteed no tax dollars (federal or DC funds) can be used for abortion in DC.  When President Clinton took office in 1993 this provision was removed only to be restored in 1996 when the Republicans took over both chambers of Congress.  Subsequently a Democratic Congress and President Barack Obama once again open the door for tax funded abortions in 2009, and it was only after some outside pro-life pressure that the new Republican majority in the House restored the prohibition in 2011.

Even the granddaddy of the pro-life provisions had sad changes to it.  Originally the Hyde Amendment, passed in 1976, prevented federal funding in Medicaid for performance of ALL domestic abortions.  In 1993 pro-abortion folks, bolstered by a President Clinton once again, forced changes to the law, opening the door for some taxpayer funding of abortions.  Just recently a similar provision in the Defense Authorization added the same changes to that appropriation.

Not all of the changes have been bad ones though.  I was honored to be a small part in 2011 in codifying one of the pro-life provisions.  Thanks to the now-current Vice President of Government Affairs at Family Research Council (FRC), working closely with House Leadership and Judiciary Committee staff, the passage of the “Weldon Patent Ban” as part of the “America Invents Act” to prevent patenting of human embryos was a huge, though not loudly trumpeted victory for the pro-life movement. FRC took no position on the bill in full but praised codifying into law a major pro-life provision.

This new law made permanent the ban authored by former Congressman Dave Weldon (R-FL) that had been renewed each year since 2004 on the Commerce, Justice and State Appropriations bill to prevent the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office from issuing patents on “human organisms.” The House of Representatives, led by Judiciary Committee Chairman Rep. Lamar Smith, added the Weldon language into the bill to make this ban permanent and it was ultimately signed into law by the most pro-abortion President in history, Barack Obama.  How is that for irony?

From a friend on the Hill:

Pro-life Groups:

As you know, finding out about abortion coverage on the exchanges or marketplaces created under the Affordable Care Act is extremely difficult.  In the 27 states that allow plans to cover elective abortion on the exchanges, it is almost impossible for consumers to identify whether or not the plan they are considering includes elective abortion. 

(Yester)day, Rep. Chris Smith (R-NJ) released information about abortion coverage in a small subset of plans called Multi-State Plans (MSPs), which are unique because their contracts are negotiated with the federal Office of Personnel Management (OPM).  There are over 150 MSPs sold by Blue Cross Blue Shield and available in 30 states and the District of Columbia. According to a letter from the Director of OPM all but two of these MSPs exclude abortion.  The two that include elective abortion are sold in Alaska.

This information may be helpful to consumers searching for plans that exclude elective abortion since generally plans that have “Multi-State Plan” in their title will not include abortion, but consumers should be aware that not all Blue Cross Blue Shield plans will exclude abortion.  They must look for “Multi-State Plan” in the title if they want to select a plan without abortion coverage. 

 As explained in the press release from Rep. Smith (attached below), there are still potentially thousands of plans being sold on Affordable Care Act exchanges that include elective abortion – contrary to the longstanding principles of the Hyde amendment.  Furthermore, the exchanges fail to provide information about abortion coverage to consumers. The letter from OPM speaks to this issue stating that only the States and HHS can improve abortion coverage transparency. Rep. Chris Smith calls on President Obama to direct HHS to be transparent about abortion coverage in Obamacare plans.  

New Jersey’s Fourth Congressional District

Co-Chair of Bipartisan Congressional Pro-Life Caucus

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE                  Contact: Jeff Sagnip (202) 225-3765

Nov. 13, 2013                                                                http://chrissmith.house.gov

Rep. Smith says Obamacare Massively Violates Hyde Amendment, but Notes Most “Multi-State Plans” Exclude Abortion

Washington, DC—“Rollout of the Obamacare exchanges revealed that many health insurance plans throughout the nation will subsidize abortion on demand—even late term abortions,” said Rep. Chris Smith (NJ-04), Co-Chairman of the Congressional Pro-life Caucus.

“Billions of taxpayers’ dollars will now be handed out as credits to buy pro-abortion health insurance—a clear violation of the Hyde Amendment’s fundamental principle of restricting funds to abortion subsidizing health insurance plans. At its core, the Hyde Amendment has two parts. It prohibits funding for abortion and funding for any insurance plan that includes abortion except in the case of rape, incest or to save the life of the mother,” Smith said.

            “Obamacare further breaks with longstanding law by establishing new abortion surcharges and an unseemly marketing secrecy clause. The new law requires premium payers to be assessed an abortion surcharge every month to pay for abortions. But many pro-life Americans may unwittingly purchase pro-abortion plans because of a marketing secrecy clause,” said Smith.

            “For pro-life individuals seeking health insurance on the exchange in the states with Multi-State Plans available, it will be a relief to know that with only two exceptions, any of the Blue Cross Blue Shield plans with ‘Multi-State’ in their title will exclude elective abortion,” Smith said. He also noted that “in many cases Blue Cross Blue Shield Plans that do not include the words ‘Multi-State’ in their title will include elective abortion.  Since abortion coverage is not clearly identified on the exchange websites, consumers may have difficulty identifying which plans exclude abortion.”

In response to a letter spearheaded by Rep. Smith (R-NJ), the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) has confirmed that all but two of the plans with “Multi-State Plan” in their title and sold on the Obamacare exchanges exclude elective abortion coverage. In a letter, OPM made this important clarification regarding Multi-State Plans, which constitute a small segment of just over 150 of the plans sold under Obamacare. Which of the thousands of other Obamacare plans cover abortion remains unknown.

“When searching the many more plans available on their state’s exchange pro-life Americans remain unable to ascertain which plans, if any, exclude abortion. It is an outrage that Members of Congress had to write to OPM just to learn whether abortion is included in the currently available multi-state plans, which are just a small subset of plans. While it is a step in the right direction to have information about this one set of plans, Americans continue to be left in the dark regarding the thousands of other plans sold on the federally facilitated marketplace and the state-run exchanges,” said Smith.

The OPM letter also specifies that only the States and the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services can control whether abortion benefit information is displayed to consumers shopping in the Marketplace.

            “It is up to President Obama to direct HHS to inform consumers about abortion coverage in Obamacare plans.  His law already breaks with the decades old Hyde Amendment by allowing federal subsidies for plans that include abortion, now he won’t even give consumers the ability to make an informed choice,” Smith said.

The “Abortion Insurance Full Disclosure Act,” (H.R. 3279) was introduced by Smith to require prominent, transparent disclosure of abortion coverage for each plan offered on an exchange.  It also requires that the amount of the abortion surcharge be clearly identified for each plan that includes elective abortion.

###

A lot of media is focused on President Obama repeatedly “misleading*” the American people that if they like their health insurance they can keep it.

However that was not the only “untruth**” the President uttered to make sure his signature health care law got passed.  To ensure the votes of Democrats who until Obamacare passage were considered pro-life, President Obama signed an Executive Order saying that his health care law maintains the status quo.  Of course the exact opposite became true as government mandates and funds became a taxpayer-funded slush fund to subsidize the abortion industry.  Immediately pro-life groups cried foul, pointing out that such an Executive Order was as useless as the paper it was printed on.  We were not alone. 

A little under a year after passage a Congressional Research Service (CRS) report pointed out what had been obvious to everyone except for perhaps now retired lawmakers Rep. Bart Stupak (D-Mich.) and Senator Ben Nelson (D-Nebr.).  The CRS report found that neither current law (Hyde Amendment), nor the health care law, nor the Executive Order signed by the President, nor HHS’ contract solicitation for the high-risk pool program specifically prevent federal funds from being used to finance abortion coverage in state high-risk pools.

It wasn’t just CRS.  Abortion-giant Planned Parenthood, the pro-abortion Center for Reproductive Rights and at least 22 pro-abortion Members of Congress also knew Obamacare funded abortions.

On abortion funding, Obamacare is a boon to the abortion industry.  Under the new health care law, the Director of OPM may administer plans that cover elective abortion and even mandate elective abortion in all but one of the plans he or she administers. Additionally, language in the law gives the Secretary of Health and Human Services tremendous power, including the ability to mandate that every health care plan offer abortion coverage as part of “preventive services.”  The health care law also allows for taxpayer subsidies for policies with elective abortion under a system of accounting gimmicks, and charging an “abortion surcharge” for anyone who enrolls in a federally subsidized health care plan that covers elective abortions – regardless of if the enrollee agrees with the policy or not.

President Obama has thrown his Executive Order under the bus numerous times, most recently when his Office of Personnel and Management ruled that members of Congress and their staffs will be able to buy health care plans that pay for abortions, even though the premiums are funded largely by taxpayer money.

While the President has sort of apologized for his “now false***” statements on keeping your health care plan he has not said word one on abortion funding.   Despite growing proof every day of how Obamacare is subsidizing the death of children.

The President isn’t alone on continuing the “fiction” as the Senate Democrats still maintain there is no abortion funding or subsidies.  They continue the charade despite that abortion-giant Planned Parenthood, which is profiting nicely from passage of Obamacare, has helpful hints on how to get tax funded abortions. 

Speaker Pelosi “misrepresented****” about the position of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) on the issue of abortion in the health care bill that ultimately passed saying that there is no funding of abortion in the health care bill – despite the fact the USCCB made it clear they knew there WAS such government funding in the bill. (Also during the debate one of Speaker Pelosi’s leftenants, Rep. Lynn Woolsey (D-Calif.) threatened the USCCB with an IRS audit because of their position on the health care bill and abortion funding.)

Well Mr. President, when will you come clean on abortion funding?

*LYING TO

**LIED

***LYING LIKE A RUG

****LIED SO BADLY HER PANTS ARE STILL ON FIRE