[NC Life Alert] NRLC urges House to adopt Stupak-Pitts Amendment

[North Carolina Pro-Life Email List]

What follows is a letter from the  <http://www.nrlc.org/> National Right to
Life Committee (NRLC) to Members of the U.S. House of Representatives, sent
on Saturday, November 7, 2009, at Noon EST.   To take immediate action in
support of the Stupak-Pitts pro-life amendment, click
<http://www.nrlc.org/press_releases_new/Release110709.html> here.

 RE:  NRLC scorecard advisory:  H.R. 3962, the Stupak-Pitts Amendment,
abortion, and the "public option"

 Dear Member of Congress:

 On behalf of the National Right to Life Committee (NRLC), we are writing to
urge you to support the Stupak-Pitts Amendment to the "Affordable Health
Care for America Act," H.R. 3962, that was introduced on October 29.

 H.R. 3962 would create (1) a nationwide insurance program run directly by
the federal government, "the public plan," and (2) an "affordability credit"
program that would subsidize health insurance for tens of millions of
Americans.  These two new government programs will subsidize elective
abortion - a drastic break from decades of federal policy -- unless the
Stupak-Pitts Amendment is added to the bill to prevent this outcome. 

 As NRLC's congressional scorecard for the 111th Congress will clearly
explain, a vote against the Stupak-Pitts Amendment can only be construed as
a position-defining vote in favor of establishing a federal government
program that will directly fund abortion on demand, with federal funds, and
a second federal program that will provide government subsidies to private
insurance plans that cover abortion on demand.  NRLC regards this as the
most important House roll call on federal funding of abortion since the
House last voted directly on the Hyde Amendment in 1997.  If you do not wish
to go on record in support of creating major new federal programs that will
both fund abortions directly and subsidize private abortion coverage, please
vote for the Stupak-Pitts Amendment.  NRLC will regard a "present" vote as
equivalent to a negative vote on the Stupak-Pitts Amendment.

 The Capps-Waxman language, which was added to H.R. 3962 in the House Energy
and Commerce Committee despite the objections of pro-life members of both
parties, has been falsely "marketed" as consistent with the principles of
the Hyde Amendment.  In reality, the Capps-Waxman language would explicitly
authorize exactly the things that the Hyde Amendment prohibits in the
existing Medicaid program:  direct government funding of elective abortion,
and government subsidies for plans that cover elective abortion.

 Allow us to address first the "public option":  Language on page 110 of
H.R. 3962 (lines 1-7) explicitly says that "nothing in this Act shall be
construed as preventing the public health insurance option from providing
for . . . coverage of services described in paragraph (4)(A)."  The
"services described in paragraph (4)(A)" are elective abortions  (i.e., all
abortions, abortions without any limitations whatever). 

 You may have read in news stories or elsewhere that language has been
included in H.R. 3962 that would "segregate" federal funds away from the
payments for abortions.  Those references are completely inapplicable or
nonsensical with respect to the "public option."  It is utterly impossible
to "segregate" federal funds away from abortion within the "public option,"
because the "public option" will be a federal agency program that can spend
only federal funds (like Medicare).  

 Others may have directed your attention to page 246 of H.R. 3962, which
contains a paragraph caption that reads, "Prohibition of Use of Public Funds
for Abortion Coverage." Do not be fooled.  A paragraph caption has no legal
effect whatever.  The operative bill language that immediately follows the
paragraph caption states simply, "An affordability credit may not be used
for payment for services described in section 222(d)(4)(A)" [i.e., elective
abortions].  But an "affordability credit" is only one type of federal
funding.  The language on page 246 does not restrict the use of all other
types of federal funds to pay directly for elective abortions -- and the use
of other types of federal funds is explicitly authorized by the "nothing in
this Act shall be construed" clause on page 110.

 In particular, the so-called "premiums" that will be collected by the
government from citizens who enroll in the "public option" will become
federal funds when the government assumes control of them (as the
Congressional Research Service has confirmed in a
<http://www.nrlc.org/AHC/CRSpublicoptionfederalfunds.pdf>  memorandum dated
October 9, 2009).

 Thus, under H.R. 3962, the public plan would be engaged in direct funding
of elective abortion, using federal funds.  The federal program would pay
abortionists for performing elective abortions.   (It is, of course,
entirely irrelevant whether or not the federal agency hires contractors to
help process the paperwork, as also occurs under Medicare.)  It is untenable
to claim, as some have, that this federal program would pay for abortions
with "private" funds.  The public plan is the federal government, and if it
pays for abortions, it is federal funding of abortion.

 We turn now to the second abortion-related problem in the bill:  the new
premium-subsidy program ("affordability credits").  The Capps-Waxman
language in the bill explicitly authorizes federal subsidies to pay the
premiums of private health plans that cover elective abortions.  This, too,
would be a break with the policy established under longstanding federal
laws, under which federal funds do not flow to health plans that pay for
elective abortions.  For example, the 260 private plans that participate in
the Federal Employees' Health Benefits program are prohibited by law from
including elective abortion coverage, because they are federally subsidized.
Likewise, in Medicaid, current law prohibits not only direct federal funding
of abortion but also federal funding of any fund that pays for abortions -
and this ban covers even state matching funds. 

 Thank you for your consideration of the position of National Right to Life
on this critical matter, which we convey on behalf of our affiliates in all
50 states.

 Sincerely,

 Douglas Johnson

Legislative Director

National Right to Life Committee

 Susan T. Muskett, J.D.

Senior Legislative Counsel

National Right to Life Committee

202-626-8820

http://www.nrlc.org/ahc

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
---- 

Please help us by forwarding this email on to your friends and family 
that may not be on this alert list.
 
To Subscribe to our mailing list click:
http://www.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/nc-pro-life

To Unsubscribe: You may unsubscribe from our mailing list at any time by
emailing ncrtl73 at aol.com.  
or write to NCRTL, PO BOX 9282, Greensboro, NC 27429-0282 

Visit our website at  <http://www.ncrtl.org/> http://www.ncrtl.org

 

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.pairlist.net/pipermail/nc-pro-life/attachments/20091108/de496ac1/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 5675 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : <http://www.pairlist.net/pipermail/nc-pro-life/attachments/20091108/de496ac1/attachment-0001.jpe>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: image/gif
Size: 2845 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : <http://www.pairlist.net/pipermail/nc-pro-life/attachments/20091108/de496ac1/attachment-0001.gif>