March for Life

On One Year Anniversary of His Conviction Three Senators Go to the Senate Floor to Protect Future Kermit Gosnells

By

On One Year Anniversary of His Conviction Three Senators Go to the Senate Floor to Protect Future Kermit Gosnells

This day, May 13, marks the one-year anniversary of the conviction of late-term abortionist Kermit Gosnell.  To mark the anniversary pro-life Senator Lindsay Graham (R-SC) went to the Senate floor and pushed for a vote on one of his bills:

 

Senator Graham: (2:15 PM)

  • Spoke the Pain Capable Unborn Child Protection Act.

    • “One the Pain Capable Unborn Child Protection Act, S. 1670, which is my legislation, and S. 1696, the Women’s Health Protection Act by Senator Blumenthal. Just very briefly, what I’m trying to do is to have an opportunity for the body to talk about two pieces of legislation that relate to the abortion issue, the role of the federal government and very quickly, my legislation would ban abortion at the 20-week period, the fifth month, based on the theory that the child can feel pain at that point in the pregnancy, and that the standard of care for the medical community is you can’t operate on an unborn fetus at the 20-week period without administering anesthesia, and the reason for that is because the child can feel pain.”

 

Incredibly Senators Richard Blumenthal (D-CT), Tammy Baldwin (D-WI) and Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) went to the Senate floor to object and, in essence, defend butchers like Kermit Gosnell:

 

Senator Blumenthal: (2:18 PM)

  • Spoke on the Graham Unanimous Consent and the Women’s Health Protection Act.

    • “The Women’s Health Protection Act would put women’s rights first. The Women’s Health Protection Act seeks full and thorough consideration of these issues, and I seek it through the regular order. Let’s have hearings. Let’s consider these measures in committee. Let’s bring them to the floor in a way they can be debated insightfully and thoughtfully, not this way. The Women’s Health Protection Act protects a woman’s health and her ability to make her own decisions and her constitutional rights.”

Senator Baldwin: (2:26 PM)

  • Spoke on the Women’s Health Protection Act.

    • “This is sea my good friend from Connecticut, senator Blumenthal, and I have introduced a serious proposal, the women’s health protection act. It would put a stop to these federal protections against real estate strictions, like the republican proposal that we were hearing about today. Proposals that unduly limit access to reproductive health care, that do nothing to further women’s health or safety, and that intrude upon personal decision making. And I look forward to working with my colleagues to advance this important legislation through the committee process and through regular order. We know that today’s spectacle meant to produce a serious debate about protecting women’s reproductive health. It’s about a narrow republican agenda to take our country backward and roll back important health benefits for American families.”

Senator Boxer: (2:32 PM)

  • Spoke on abortions.

    • “Dr. Gosnell was convicted and sent to prison. This is a rogue doctor who is now serving life in prison without the possibility of parole for what he did, abusing the trust of being a reproductive health care doctor. So Dr. Gosnell is away, as he should be. And so how does my friend from North Carolina commemorate this? By putting forward a bill that will drive more women to rogue doctors. If you make it illegal for a woman, regardless of her circumstance, she is going to find a way to either save her health, her life, her family. So women deserve to have protections. And the bill that my friend proposed, which would just simply say, after a certain number of weeks, no more abortion, no matter what your health situation is, is very dangerous. Now, I would just say rhetorically, how can you say you’re doing something right for women and their families when you don’t have a health exception?”

Senator Boxer would like you to think that Kermit Gosnell (who she still thinks deserves the title “doctor”) is an aberration.  If anything he is a trend among abortionists.  The “rogue doctors” of whom she speaks are in fact those she seeks to protect with legislation like the ironically named “Women’s Health Protection Act” (WHaPA).  The WHaPA would override the tremendous success we have seen in the states of protecting women’s health while also removing any limitations on abortion.  Not since the abortions for all “Freedom of Choice Act,” supported by President Obama, have we seen a bill that is so anti-mother and child.

 

Section 4 of the bill is loaded with prohibitions for the states including this bill would allow an abortionist to designate anyone, regardless of training, to perform the procedure.   This protects the unlicensed abortionist, but not the woman.  This legislation restricts the off counter use of a drug that has proven to both harm and kill women when used for a chemical abortion.  This protects the lazy abortionist, but not the women who have ended up dying from unlicensed use of abortion causing drugs.

 

Want to make sure a doctor can’t “phone in” a chemical abortion?  This legislation would restrict doctors “phoning in a chemical abortion – allowing presumably anyone designated by an abortion doctor to distribute life ending drugs via the Internet.  Again, this protects the lazy abortionist, but not the women who have ended up dying from unlicensed use of abortion causing drugs.  Laws requiring an abortionist to report cases of statutory rape for girls as young (or younger) than 12 and laws requiring permission of a legal guardian to have the invasive and destructive procedure known as abortion would be illegal. 

 

Ironically this bill would create more Kermit Gosnell’s and both protect those butchers as well as allow them to flourish. The “Women’s Health Protection Act” protects Kermit Gosnell, but not the woman.

Section 6 then gives Attorney General virtually unrestricted powers to abuse the office against pro-lifers as well as possibly legislators or elected officials who would enforce ANY law that seeks to protect a woman. 

 

This is legislation only Planned Parenthood could love, and love it they do.  The bill has 36 sponsors in the Senate and 60 in the House of Representatives; however, it is clear this is the wish list of many pro-abortion folks in DC.  This bill would not only lead to more abortions, it would also lead to more deaths of both mothers and children. 

 

By

March for Life Stands Against HHS Mandate

“As a proud American, it breaks my heart to see the government force businesses and religious non-profits against their will to carry drugs and devices which can destroy rather than prevent life.” – Jeanne Monahan

On May 8th, March for Life President Jeanne Monahan stood with pro-life leaders to support Priests for Life as their case against the HHS contraceptive mandate was heard in federal court.  WATCH Jeanne Monahan’s comments below:

By

The Unsung Heroes of Mother’s Day

BirthmomsAs the May flowers come to life and Mother’s Day rolls around, let’s remember to honor the unsung heroes of the holiday – birthmoms.

Every year, 20,000 domestic infant adoptions in the U.S. occur. Tragically, contrast that with over 1.2 million abortions in the U.S. annually.  Every abortion statistic represents a life, full of potential and hope, which was snuffed out.

However, thousands of women each year, when faced with an unexpected pregnancy choose to make an adoption plan.  By choosing life, birthmoms make the choice to change the world forever through the life of a child.  What would the world be like if Steve Jobs, Nelson Mandela, and Eleanor Roosevelt, all whom were adopted, had never been given a chance at life? 

At this year’s March for Life, under the theme “Adoption: A Noble Decision,” Molly Anne Dutton shared how her birthmom was the victim of sexual assault and faced an ultimatum from her husband to abort.  However, she found her way to Lifeline Child Services in Birmingham, Alabama and made an adoption plan for Molly Anne.  This beautiful and courageous young woman would not be here today without the decision of her birthmom!  Another one of our speakers, Ryan Dobson of Family Talk Radio, had a similar story of owing his life to a brave birthmom.  You can watch his story below:

Studies have shown that many mothers fear that by placing her baby for adoption, she is a “bad mother;” she fears that she is abandoning her child.  In reality, adoption is a heroic decision!  It is a decision that is not right for everyone, however, when chosen it is noble and generous. Additionally, there are approximately 500,000 loving couples in the United States waiting to adopt.  The truth is that adoption is the most heroic thing that a mother, who is not ready to care for a child, can do!

When a mother chooses adoption over abortion, birthmom, adoptive parents, and the baby all benefit tremendously from her decision!  Adoption is not abandonment, but a beautiful opportunity for a happy future.

Be sure to check out the many fantastic resources available to women who are facing an unexpected pregnancy or are considering making an adoption plan, and join us on Friday, May 9 to cherish and celebrate the women who make the noble decision to become a birthmom and choose adoption.           

By

Abortion Coverage Subsidies

Download this document as a PDF.

Are You Subsidizing Abortion Coverage?

For background information on abortion coverage in Obamacare state exchanges, click here.

ACTION PLAN

Exchange Research Guidelines

Below are the 28 states and localities that include abortion in the state exchanges (other states have voted to opt-out of such coverage):

California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, District of Columbia, Georgia, Hawaii, Illinois, Iowa, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Montana, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Mexico, New Jersey, New York, North Carolina, Ohio, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Texas, Vermont, Washington, West Virginia and Wyoming.

Consumers shopping for plans on the ACA exchanges want to know if their plan covers abortion. This is very hard to decipher. Many plans do not specify on the website whether their benefits package include abortion.

To find out for yourself you can visit Healthcare.gov to find the plans or link to the state-run exchange. Explore the summary of benefits coverage for each plan offered in the state. Use the search tool to scan for the words “abortion” and “termination,” and also scroll through to the section at the end of each benefit list to review the list of additional excluded and covered benefits.  Keep a record of whether abortion is a covered benefit, excluded or not mentioned at all. Ideally, print the relevant page of each plan for your records.

Once you have identified all the carriers operating on the exchange, and the status of the plans’ abortion coverage, calls should be made to the carrier companies. Ideally, a local resident should make the calls to inquire as to whether the plan includes abortion coverage.

A suggested script is below. The caller should take very careful notes of what the carrier says, and if possible, get the name of the person they are talking with.

General script:

Hi, I’m shopping for a healthcare plan and I was looking at your plan options on healthcare.gov. Can you tell me which of them include coverage for abortion? OR Can you tell me which of your plans don’t include abortion coverage?

Typically you will get a general answer – “its’ covered,” and you will want to try to dig a little more, “is it always covered, are there any exceptions?”

If they ask why you want to know, you should say whatever you are comfortable with. One suggestion is “I don’t want to be paying into the abortion pool.”

Try to write down whatever they tell you, as carefully as possible. Please try to get a name of who you speak with. Record your notes, including the time of the phone call.

 

When the project is complete please send a complete record back to us at March for Life at info@marchforlife.org identifying

1)      How many plans are offered in the state?

2)      Which and how many of those plans identify their abortion coverage policy online.

3)      How many plans actually cover abortion (based on what you learned by calling).

4)      What you learned from the carriers by making phone calls.

 

Here is an example of a summary of research for New Jersey:

Between January 22 and 23, 2014, we reviewed all the healthcare plans available for individuals shopping on the New Jersey Exchange. We examined the summary of benefits for each plan as made available on the internet. None of the 31 plans offered made any mention of abortion coverage, either as an excluded or covered benefit.

On January 23 we called the three insurance companies administering the plans: Blue Cross Blue Shield, Amerihealth and Health Republic Insurance of New Jersey and asked if abortion coverage was included. Blue Cross Blue Shield and Health Republic Insurance of NJ both said abortion was a covered benefit, so at the very least, 14 of the 31 plans cover elective abortion. The third carrier, Amerihealth, was a little squishier, saying abortion could be covered if it was pre-approved.

 

By

Abortion Coverage in Obamacare

Download this document as a PDF. 

BACKGROUND:

Pursuant to Section 1334 of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) the federal Director of the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) is required to ensure that there is at least one multi-state qualified health plan in each exchange that does not provide coverage for those abortions for which federal funding is prohibited as defined in the Hyde Amendment. Consequently, under the ACA, at least one of the “multi-state” plans approved by the Office of Personnel Management for possible availability on all the state exchanges should exclude elective abortions.  So the requirement is on the insurer who offers that health plan, not on the states.  And even the insurer is not required to cover all 50 states until FOUR YEARS after the plan’s approval. 

Insurance plans sold on the exchange will be eligible for federal subsidies even if the subsidized plan covers elective abortion – a radical departure from the policy governing all other federally subsidized health programs. This departure is accompanied by new accounting measures that will result in a mandatory abortion surcharge for many premium holders.  Despite the requirement by law there is little clarity on the subject of health insurance plans that do not cover abortion.  

 

ADMINISTRATION COVER-UP?

In an October 30, 2013 appearance before the Energy and Commerce Committee, Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary Kathleen Sebelius agreed to provide a list of Obamacare plans indicating whether abortion is covered. Specifically, Rep. John Shimkus (R-IL) asked “Can you provide for the committee the list of insurers in the federal exchange who do not offer as part of their package abortion coverage?”  Sebelius replied saying “I can do that sir…We should be able to do it…I know that is the plan, I will get that information…”  

To date the Secretary has not provided the list discussed at the October 30 hearing. 

In December 2013 Secretary Sebelius appeared before the Health Subcommittee of the Energy and Commerce Committee and Rep. John Shimkus (R-IL) questioned her on why she has not provided the list.  In an apparent backtracking from her October 30th commitment to provide a list, Sebelius told Rep. Shimkus that “every plan lists plan benefits and the one plan benefit that they must list by law is abortion services, so as a shopper goes on, I would highly recommend that they look in the plan benefits section…”  When Rep. Shimkus pressed further pointing out that he had examples of summary of benefits documents that do not indicate whether or not abortion is covered, she replied “It is on the website…it is available…”

In March 2014, following up from the previous hearings Congressman Andy Harris (R-MD), a member of the House Appropriations Committee’s Subcommittee on Labor, Health and Human Services, questioned Secretary Sebelius about two key aspects of abortion coverage in the ObamaCare Exchanges.  National Right to Life has a report of Rep. Harris’ remarks:

At [the] hearing, Harris pointed out to Sebelius that the Maryland Insurance Commissioner had said that Exchange plans don’t have to invoice separately for abortion coverage in plans that cover abortion. (Congressman Harris was referring to Bulletin 13-24 issued by the Maryland Insurance Commissioner to insurers over seven months ago on July 31, 2013). Sebelius tried to evade responsibility for what the Maryland Insurance Commissioner was doing, but under pointed questioning from Congressman Harris she conceded that she has supervisory authority over the Maryland exchange. (For more information on how the two separate payments statutory requirement is being ignored, see “Bait-and -Switch: The Obama Administration’s Flouting of Key Part of Nelson ‘Deal’ on ObamaCare” here.)

 

VIOLATION OF CURRENT LAW

103 of the 112 insurance plans that Members of Congress and congressional staff are being directed to (the Obamacare exchange offered in the District of Columbia -DC Health Link) INCLUDE ELECTIVE ABORTION coverage. Only nine plans offered exclude elective abortion.  (Click here to view flyer regarding the nine plans.)

Many congressional staff –knowingly and unknowingly—signed up for these abortion plans marking a distinct departure from the Smith Amendment, a longstanding law prohibiting abortion coverage in plans provided to federal employees.   This was uncovered in an article by Anna Higgins, Director of the Center for Human Dignity at the Family Research Council.  Anna tried to identify which plans in the D.C. HealthLink excluded abortion.  Telephone representatives for the D.C. HealthLink erroneously informed Anna that all plans on the D.C. exchange include elective abortion.  When Anna published her article about her experience, she was quickly contacted by D.C. officials who apologized, gave the information, added a website FAQ, and informed her that D.C. HealthLink staff would be retrained on the subject so as to correctly answer questions in the future. The FAQ is a step in the right direction although abortion coverage is still not easily identifiable when browsing plans on the D.C. exchange.

The amendment offered by Rep. Chris Smith (R-NJ) three decades ago to ban abortion funding in the Federal Employees Health Benefits Programs is still current law. Like the Hyde Amendment, the Smith Amendment prohibits the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) from funding or even engaging in administrative activities in connection with any plan that includes abortion. However, the Obama Administration is now violating the Smith amendment since OPM has begun to administer a system for Members of Congress and their staff to obtain taxpayer-subsidized insurance coverage that pays for the destruction of innocent unborn children.

 

WHAT IS THE CONCERN?

More taxpayer funds mean more abortions.  Experience with Medicaid indicates that unborn children are saved when abortion is not subsidized by the taxpayers. According to publications by the pro-abortion Alan Guttmacher Institute:

·         “In the absence of funding, a significant percentage of pregnancies that would have otherwise been aborted are instead ca
rried to term,”

·         “Approximately one-fourth of women who would have Medicaid-funded abortions instead give birth when this funding is unavailable.”

 

Legislation that addresses the problems of secrecy (short of full repeal):

Rep. Chris Smith’s “Abortion Insurance Full Disclosure Act” (H.R. 3279).

 

What can you do? Read more HERE.

 

640
480