Senators Refuse Anti Abortion Provision In Jokercare Bill
Sep 30, 2009 3 Comments ›› Erik Wong
WASHINGTON — The Senate Finance Committee turned back Republican-led efforts to tighten abortion restrictions in health-overhaul legislation, and the Senate’s top Democrat said he wants to bring a sweeping bill to the floor in two weeks.
Majority Leader Harry Reid said Wednesday he expects to begin Senate debate the week of Columbus Day, which would be the biggest step forward yet for legislation designed to accomplish President Barack Obama’s goal of extending health-insurance coverage to tens of millions of Americans.
Many hurdles remain before the bill is ready for debate in the Senate. Mr. Reid, a Nevada Democrat, must referee a blending of the Finance Committee package with a more liberal bill approved by the Senate Health Committee. The legislation must be scrubbed by the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office, the official scorekeeper of all legislation on Capitol Hill. And Mr. Reid must solidify support among Democratic centrists worried about the scope of the bill, which is likely to cost in the neighborhood of $800 billion to $900 billion over a decade.
But the majority leader put the Senate on notice that he wants to move quickly, saying he is canceling a planned recess the week of Oct. 12. “I think with health care, which is really beginning to ferment, it wouldn’t be right for us to be gone,” Mr. Reid said.
The Finance Committee bill reflects efforts by Chairman Max Baucus (D., Mont.) to steer a moderate course on health policy. Among other things, the legislation would expand coverage by creating a network of nonprofit health cooperatives to compete with private insurers instead of creating a government-run health plan, which Mr. Baucus joined committee Republicans in voting down on Tuesday.
In the House, Democratic leaders, meeting behind closed doors, continued efforts Wednesday to nail down details of a bill to bring to the House floor. House leaders still want to include a public insurance plan in their bill and are considering a proposal to require it to negotiate payment rates directly with health-care providers. That would be a concession to moderate Democrats, who had complained about a proposal to tie payments to low rates used by Medicare.
The sparring in the Senate over abortion underscored the sweep of the health legislation, which not only makes fundamental changes to a key segment of the U.S. economy but inflames passions on a range of social issues, from personal liberty to immigration.
Mr. Baucus said he didn’t want to turn the health debate into one about abortion. “This is a health-care bill. This is not an abortion bill,” he said. “We are not changing current law.”
The legislation sets up subsidies for lower-income people to buy insurance and makes the subsidies subject to existing limits on abortion. Those limits, enacted annually in routine government-spending bills, bar the use of federal funds for abortion, except in cases of rape, incest and saving the life of the mother. Under the Baucus bill, private health plans would be required to prevent federal insurance subsidies from mingling with any private funds used to provide abortion procedures.
But Sen. Orrin Hatch (R., Utah) said the current-law limits could easily lapse. He called on Mr. Baucus to fold the language into the health bill, making it permanent law. “All I’m asking for is specific language in the bill,” Mr. Hatch said. “Let’s codify it.”
Mr. Hatch also proposed to require women to get a separate insurance policy covering abortion procedures.
Abortion-rights supporters said the rights of women were in danger. “This is not maintaining the status quo,” said Sen. Maria Cantwell (D., Wash.). “It is a major, major change, and a poison pill.”
The Hatch amendment failed 13-10 on a mostly party-line vote. Sen. Olympia Snowe (R., Maine) joined Democrats in opposing it, while Sen. Kent Conrad of North Dakota was the lone Democrat in favor.
The committee also rejected an amendment Mr. Hatch said was needed to ensure the government doesn’t discriminate against health-care providers who refuse to perform abortion procedures for moral or religious reasons.
Separately, the committee rejected a proposal by Sen. Chuck Grassley (R., Iowa), who cited the need to beef up “citizenship documentation” in suggesting individuals should have government-issued identification when applying for Medicaid. He said the amendment was needed to curb fraud.
Democrats countered the proposal would likely deter legitimate Americans from getting assistance. “This is just one more barrier,” said Sen. Jeff Bingaman (D., N.M.).
