Health Care Reform Is Far From Dead

President Obama is meeting with Democrats and Republicans in the coming days to try to work out a health care plan.

Washington State Insurance Commissioner Mike Kriedler explains why the Nelson language will lead to insurers dropping abortion coverage.  (Click Here to Read Com. Kriedler’s Letter.)

Professor Karen Pollitz writes, “One must question whether any insurer would bother offering abortion coverage at the cost of so much red tape.” “Because health reform also requires insurers to increase their loss ratios, the two-check requirement makes it doubtful that insurers would offer abortion coverage at all.” (Click Here to Read Prof. Pollitz’s Analysis.)

PollitzGeorgetownUniversityAnalysisof2Check Provision

AffinityHealthPlanNOToTwoCheckSystem

WCLA – Choice Matters Endorses Peter Harckham for New York State Assembly!

“Peter Harckham has stood up for women’s reproductive health as a County Legislator and will continue to do so in Albany. Harckham is a strong fresh voice for women. He supports a woman’s right to choose and understands the reproductive health issues confronting women.”
Catherine Lederer-Plaskett, President, WCLA – Choice Matters

Tuesday, February 9th, there is a Special Election in the 89th Assembly District to determine who will represent YOU in the New York State Assembly if you live in Mount Kisco, Bedford, Pound Ridge, Lewisboro, Harrison, North Castle, New Castle, and White Plains.

This seat became vacant when Adam Bradley was overwhelmingly elected Mayor of White Plains.

Please remember to vote if you live in this district, and, if you know anyone who lives there, please let them know how important this Special Election is.

In a Special Election–where the turnout is historically low–every vote matters.

Your one vote could change the outcome of this election.

Please share this post!

The only aspect of the Massachusetts election about which everyone agrees is that the Democrats no longer have a 60 vote super-majority in the Senate.

But maybe that’s not such a bad thing. Not much was getting done because the extreme right wing of the Democratic Party was holding the rest of its Senators, and thus the country, hostage. Just look at how effectively Nelson and Lieberman used the threat of withholding their votes to decimate health care reform. That’s exactly why the Senate bill includes the Nelson Amendment—and they were just getting started.

In an interview with LifeSiteNews.com, Nelson announced he would have held the health care bill hostage once again when another 60 vote threshold was required, demanding that to get his vote, the Senate would to have incorporate an even harsher, anti-choice, anti-abortion rights amendment which he refers to as Nelson/Hatch/Casey.

Much has been said about the Massachusetts election over the past two weeks—what it meant; what it did not mean; and who was at fault.

Here’s a little insight: Perhaps more than anything else it was a matter of bringing Coal to Newcastle.*

Why would anyone go to Massachusetts and try to sell health care reform as the reason to elect a candidate?? Massachusetts is one of the few places in this country that actually has a mandated health care plan. Its residents know up-close and personal the pros and cons of mandated care. Why would a Massachusetts voter think it was a great thing to use his or her tax dollars to pay for health care reform in Nebraska? Massachusetts is already paying for Massachusetts!

Yes, Scott Brown ran a good campaign, but it wasn’t perfect! The Democratic machine simply failed to do its homework. Had they talked about the tax savings for the nation at-large if the uninsured no longer had to use emergency rooms for medical care, perhaps the unemployed, under-employed, and the simply-making-it-by would have stopped and listened. The Democrats failed to listen to the issues particular to the people of Massachusetts.

There are national issues, local issues and universal ones. The Democrats tried to make national concerns local ones without defining the universal elements and truths.

*For those who are unfamiliar with this reference: Newcastle Coal

The Stupak amendment (aka the Stupak – Pitts amendment) is the anti-abortion amendment included in the House of Representatives Health Care bill. The Nelson amendment is the anti-abortion amendment included in the Senate bill.

The Nelson Amendment IS the Stupak Amendment with Window Dressing!
The Stupak amendment and the Nelson amendment are one and the same. The only difference is that the Stupak amendment bans abortion coverage outright while the Nelson amendment does it by placing such onerous obstacles in the path of insurance companies that they cannot afford to provide coverage.

The Stupak amendment bans any abortion coverage completely from the insurance exchanges that would be established by health reform to provide affordable health coverage. This includes both the private plans in the exchange and the so-called “public option,” which would be the government-run alternative to costly private insurance plans. Even women buying insurance with their own private money will not be able to get a plan that covers abortion. Instead, they will have to buy a separate abortion “rider” to the plan at an extra cost.

This dangerous amendment undermines the ability of millions of women to purchase private health insurance that covers abortion, even if women pay for all or most of the premiums with their own money. This amendment reaches much further than the Hyde Amendment, which has prohibited public funding of abortion in most instances since 1977.

Under The Nelson amendment:
Any state can prohibit insurance companies from providing abortion coverage in the insurance exchanges they will be setting up. That would affect private plans offered through the exchange, and it would affect all women getting insurance through the exchange whether they receive subsidies or not.
Any person enrolled in an insurance plan that covers abortion must write two separate checks for payments – one to pay for the cost of the abortion services in the plan and another for the rest of the services. It’s not called a rider, but it acts like one! It will create some of the same barriers that making abortion coverage available through riders would have.
Also forget about privacy! Any person working in a bank or insurance company will easily know who has opted for abortion coverage, and let’s hope that that person is not an anti-choice extremist. Remember how they have posted pictures of people entering abortion clinics on the web. Here’s a new way to intimidate.
Then comes the challenge for the insurance companies:
Insurance plans have to estimate the cost of abortion coverage and segregate the funds received to pay for that coverage. The estimate must not be less than $1 per enrollee, per month. State insurance commissioners must ensure that plans are complying with the requirement to segregate funds.

Plans that cover abortion must provide consumers with notice of that coverage as part of the summary of benefits and coverage explanation, at the time of enrollment.

Health plans cannot discriminate against providers or facilities because they’re unwilling to provide abortion. (This appears to protect anti-choicers but not pro-choice providers—another double standard!)

Analysis of the Nelson amendment by Prof. Sara Rosenbaum, George Washington University School of Public Health & Health Services:
The Nelson abortion provision “extends beyond the Hyde amendment” and “can be expected to have a significant impact on the ability or willingness of insurance issuers to offer Exchange products that cover a full range of medically indicated abortions.” In addition, the analysis states that the amendment could have “spillover effects” into the health care marketplace beyond the Exchange.

“For several reasons this provision could be expected to chill issuers’ willingness to sell products that cover a range of medically indicated abortions. They would have to comply with complex audit standards and more importantly, they would have to collect an additional fee from each member of their plan, a step that could be expected to encounter broad resistance. (It is also not clear what the consequences would be for plan members who do not make the payment or whether non-payment would place them in arrears). The more logical response would be not to sell products that cover abortion services.”

Both amendments turn the clock back on women. They are anti-choice, anti-woman, and anti-health care reform!

Former Tennessee Congressman Harold Ford, Jr. is considering a primary challenge of Senator Kirsten Gillibrand.

In 2006, when running for Senate, Ford unequivocally stated that he was anti-choice.

Please click on the video below and listen to Ford in his own words.

Now, Ford wants you to believe differently.

He knows that New York voters are pro-choice voters so he has decided to rewrite the past.

In an interview with the New York Post (1/13/10), Ford said, “I am pro-choice — have always been since I entered politics almost 15 years ago.”

Children have an appropriate chant, “Liar, liar, pants on fire.”

Here’s a little more:

Yesterday, secure in the knowledge that he would have the necessary 60 votes to avoid a filibuster, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid introduced his “manager’s amendment” to the Senate Health Reform bill, which included a huge betrayal of women.

That provision would likely mean that in many conservative states, there would be no abortion coverage in the commercial insurance plans that would be sold to consumers through these state exchanges. (Please see below for more details on this amendment.)

We, the pro-choice community, stand together in the belief that women should not lose ground in the new health-care system. That is not health care reform.

As NOW president Terry O’Neil said, “Right-wing ideologues like Nelson and the Catholic Bishops may not understand this, but abortion is health care, and health care reform is not true reform if it denies women coverage for the full range of reproductive health services.”

Although the Senate bill includes other provisions that stand to improve women’s access to reproductive-health services, the language of the Nelson amendment regarding abortion coverage comes at too great a price for reproductive health.

What Next
Remember this is not the end. The Senate will reconvene at 1 a.m. Monday for a procedural vote, with the final vote scheduled for Christmas Eve.

Then the Senate bill must be reconciled with the House bill.

What We Can Do
First, keep up the pressure on the Senate!
Get on the phone and call your Senators TODAY at 1-877-264-4226 OR 1-202-224-3121.

For Senator Schumer:
Telephone: 202-228-3027
Fax: 202-224-0420
http://schumer.senate.gov/new_website/contact.cfm

For Senator Gillibrand:
Telephone: 202-224-4451
Fax: 202-228-0282
http://gillibrand.senate.gov/contact/

If you don’t know who or where to call or email? Visit http://www.senate.gov/.

Let Your Senators Know:
1. You Vote and You Oppose the New Nelson Amendment;
2. The Senate bill already contained the abortion restrictions of current law, and the New Nelson amendment must go.

Next, Contact Your House Representatives!
Get on the phone and call your Representatives TODAY. They are back in their districts. You can also click here to find their contact information.

Let Them Know:
1. You Vote and You Oppose the New Nelson Amendment and the Stupak-Pitts Amendment;
2. The Capps Amendment already contained the abortion restrictions of current law, and the New Nelson amendment and Stupak-Pitts Amendments must go.

While you have their attention, ask your Senators and Representatives:
1. When did it become the right of individual states to pick and choose which federally recognized civil rights they will enforce and which ones they will ignore or obstruct?
2. What would they do if a state refused to enforce anti-Jim Crow legislation or desegregation laws?
3. States that only provide exchanges that do not include abortion are doing just that. They are picking and choosing!

Your House members are now home in their districts, and your Senators will be soon, as well. The holiday season is a good opportunity to drop by their district offices or call them. Demand that they stand strong against the new Nelson Amendment and the Stupak-Pitts amendment.

Details about the New Nelson Amendment
(from Raising Women’s Voices for the Health Care We Need)

“Legislative experts are still evaluating what the new language on abortion will mean in practice, but here are some bullets on what we think we know so far:
* States can choose to prohibit abortion coverage in the insurance exchanges they will be setting up. That would affect private plans offered through the exchange, and it would affect all women getting insurance through the exchange whether they receive subsidies or not.
* Federal funds cannot be used to pay for abortion services except as allowed by the appropriation for the Department of Health & Human Services. This is confirms that as long as the Hyde amendment restrictions — prohibiting use of federal funds to pay for abortion except in cases of rape, incest or threat of life to the mother — are in place, federal funds cannot be used to pay for abortion services in this health insurance plan either.
* Any person who enrolls in an insurance plan that covers abortion will have to make two separate payments – one to pay for the cost of the abortion services in the plan and another for the rest of the services. It’s not a rider, but it’s likely to create some of the same barriers that making abortion coverage available through riders would have. For example, people may be less likely to choose the plan that covers abortion, just as they would have gone without the abortion rider, because the separate payments will highlight their decision to buy abortion coverage, something they might like to keep private, and because they don’t anticipate needing the coverage.
* Insurance plans have to estimate the cost of abortion coverage and segregate the funds received to pay for that coverage. The estimate must not be less than $1 per enrollee, per month. State insurance commissioners must ensure that plans are complying with the requirement to segregate funds.
* Plans that cover abortion must provide consumers with notice of that coverage as part of the summary of benefits and coverage explanation, at the time of enrollment.
* When information is provided about plans in advertising or by the exchanges or by the Secretary of Health and Human Services, it will report the payments in a combined way, rather than dividing cost of the abortion coverage from that of other services.
* Health plans cannot discriminate against providers or facilities because they’re unwilling to provide abortion.
* No state laws are pre-empted by abortion provisions of the bill, and no federal laws on abortion will be affected either.”

ELECTION 2010
This Health Care Reform Process is a clear example of the importance of the election of only 100% pro-choice candidates to office.

In Congress and the New York State Senate anti-choice lawmakers still outnumber pro-choice leaders.

Choice Matters needs your help to change this.

We have made progress over the years, but in local elections we saw success by anti-choice forces with the election of a Right-to-Life County Executive and an anti-choice County Vice-Chair.

Support Choice Matters through contributions and volunteering. The battle over the 2010 elections has already begun!

Thank you for standing by your pro-choice convictions and supporting women’s access to abortion.

As you read this, Senate majority leaders are working to gain the support of the 60 senators needed to pass a health reform bill. Everything is on the table-especially abortion and any form of the public option.

Senator Ben Nelson (D-Neb.), who proposed the Senate version of the Stupak-Pitts amendment, says he will not vote for the final bill without additional restrictions on abortion coverage.

Yesterday, President Obama met with anti-choice Senator Robert Casey (D-Pa.) to discuss options for the handling of abortion coverage.

(Remember the Stupak-Pitts Abortion Ban Amendment came in the 11th hour, in the middle-of-the-night negotiations!)

Another problem facing the Senate Leadership is Senator Joe Lieberman (I-Conn) who has stated that he will not support a public option or a Medicare buy-in. He has threatened to vote to sustain a filibuster if the buy-in option is included.

The “buy-in” is a provision, negotiated last week as an alternative to the public option, that would allow people ages 55 to 64 to buy into Medicare.

However this problem may have been resolved. Senate Democrats met Monday night and appear to have decided to omit both the public option and the Medicare buy-in to appease Senator Lieberman.

Even if the bill passes in the Senate, it is unclear how they expect to sell a no-form-of-public option health care bill to House Democrats who have demonstrated their commitment to the public option.
In an effort to unite the Senate majority around health care reform, President Obama invited all Senate Democrats to the White House this afternoon.

TAKE ACTION TODAY

Call your Senators and Tell Them:
1. Not to compromise any further on abortion restrictions in order get the vote of anti-choice Senator Ben Nelson. The Nelson-Hatch amendment which mirrored the Stupak-Pitts amendment has already been defeated, and an abortion compromise should be off the table!

New York’s Senators are Senator Schumer and Senator Gillibrand.
For Senator Schumer:
http://schumer.senate.gov/new_website/contact.cfm
Telephone: 202-228-3027
Fax: 202-224-0420
For Senator Gillibrand:
http://gillibrand.senate.gov/contact/
Telephone: 202-224-4451
Fax: 202:228-0282
If these are not your senators, you can reach your senators through the Capitol switchboard — 202-224-3141

By a vote of 54-45, the Senate rejected the Stupak-like amendment co-sponsored by Senators Ben Nelson (D-NE) and Orrin Hatch (R-UT).

Their amendment closely mirrored the language of the Stupak-Pitts Amendment included in the House bill which bans abortion coverage from any health care reform-even in insurance coverage that now provides it.

You Made This Happen! This success is due to each and every one of us who spoke out. Our Senators heard us loudly and clearly.

Please take the time to thank Senators Schumer and Gillibrand for voting for the motion to table this amendment.