I am on Medicare. Abortion is not covered.

[Undercurrent]

I'm a woman, and have had an abortion. I strongly believe in my right, and the rights of all women to control our own reproductive health.

I'm 100% disabled and have been on Medicare for nearly 2 decades. Because of the Hyde amendment abortion isn't covered under Medicare except in the case of rape, incest or if pregnancy is a threat to the life of the mother. (I also understand that some private insurance will not cover abortion.)

I don't see the Stupak amendment as a reason to scrap the whole health care reform package anymore than I think Medicare should be eliminated because it doesn't cover abortion.

[Lars39]

1. It used to be covered.

Why do you have less healthcare than those of a previous generation?

[Undercurrent]

5. It's sadly true

that after 1976 the availability of abortion services became much more limited for those of us on SSDI, and SSI. This needs to change. No doubt about that at all.

We need to repel the Hyde amendment (and the Stupak amendment if it ever become law). This battle needs to be waged.

[ChicagoSuz219]

11. Not to my knowledge... nt

[Lars39]

14. Here ya go:

http://www.prochoice.org/about_abortion/facts/public_funding.html

[ChicagoSuz219]

16. Thanks... not for 32 years...

Do you know how contraception & the morning-after pill are treated in the bill?

Wouldn't the same state laws still apply re: Medicaid, etc.?

[Sebastian Doyle]

30. Because we have less of a Democratic party than previous generations

No, I'm not talking about the theoretical "majority". Just the ones who actually vote on Democratic principles.

More to the topic though, was abortion coverage added immediately after Roe v Wade, or was it a while after that. I would assume it wouldn't have been in the original bill (even if legal then), since the original Medicare was targeted to those over 65, and hence usually past reproductive age.

[rwheeler31]

2. Oh Honey maybe you could have an alien visit tonight.

[Undercurrent]

6. LOL

Huh?

Just when I think there may be room for an intelligent exchange on the internet, up pops a weirdly cryptic comment.

Oh well.

[ezgoingrl]

3. I don't think it's a reason to scrap it, either.

At the same time, I'm pretty ticked that a bunch of self-righteous religious zealots think they have any say AT ALL about what I do with my own body. They shouldn't have any right to say what you do with yours, either.

They sold our rights as human beings. On top of that insult, there are 64 of them who're supposed to be on our side of this issue.

As a human being, a citizen of this country and as a woman, I think I've earned the privilege of being angry about this.

Edit: Removed an extra our

[dflprincess]

4. The Stupak amendment is designed to make it illegal or

at least, more difficult for private insurers to offer abortion services.

If they get by with this, don't think they won't try to pull the same stunt with contraception.

Personally, I'm fed up with both parties using women's health and reproductive rights as a bargaining chip. Abortion is a medical procedure, it should be covered.

[BrklynLiberal]

7. Absolutely right!!!

[BklnDem75]

8. Link please?

Last I checked, the amendment prevents funding and nothing more.

[saracat]

9. It also makes the Hyde amendment permannent as opposed to

a "renewal" and banns abortion coverage by Private insurers who particiapte in the exchange. Do some research.

[demwing]

10. Link?

My reading is that it bans subsidy payment on elective abortion policies, but private insurers can offer riders, which the policy holders must pay for on their own.

No change in law.

[saracat]

24. Yes and what riders are demanded for any other medical treatments?

And it does make Hyde permanent.

[BklnDem75]

12. Hmmm... let's see...

Hyde Amendment... funding. Bans abortion by private insurers... funding. Thank you for agreeing with me. Now back to my request, a link stating the Stupak amendment will make abortions illegal.

[quiller4]

15. Actually, the house bill expands contraceptive coverage rather than shrinks it.

[Aramchek]

22. you are wrong. look at the text of the amendment.

(b) OPTION TO PURCHASE SUPPLEMENTAL COVERAGE OR PLAN - Nothing in this section shall be construed as prohibiting any nonfederal entity (including an individual or a State or local government) from purchasing separate or supplemental coverage for abortions for which funding is prohibited under this section, or a plan that includes such abortions, so long as-
(1) Such coverage or plan is paid for entirely using funds not authorized or appropriated by this Act; and
(2) Such coverage or plan is not purchased using-
(A) individual premium payments required for an Exchange-participating health benefits pan towards which an affordability credit is applied; or
(B) other nonfederal funds required to receive a federal payment, including State's or locality's contribution of Medicaid matching funds.
http://documents.nytimes.com/the-stupak-amendment#p=3

[saracat]

25. So women must pay the mandate and the premiums and yet must purchase a rider to be

covwered for abortion? That is okay with you? Really? What other conditions require purchase of a rider?

[Aramchek]

26. they have to pay extra for abortion coverage now, nothing will change

[saracat]

27. Not under all policies they don't and so reproductive care poor women still won't be able to afford

be able to afford reproductive care. And more Wanted babies will have to be provided for under the "new" HCR which will help bankrupt this plan and other resources not only destroying the chances of the mother and keeping her in poverty but effecting society detrimentally as well As for nothing will change, why would that be a good thing? Hyde will now be p;permanent.That is a change and women will be banned from coverage by private insurers in the exchange unless they pay for riders.Again, what else is being treated in that manner? And it is justifying the Hyde amendment and permatizing it ,which as Democrats, we are alleged to oppose.

[Aramchek]

28. poor women don't get federally funded abortion at present

Healthcare Reform was never supposed to be an expansion of abortion funding.
Nor a restriction of abortion rights.

That's just what Obama said today.

[saracat]

31. So why is it then a restriction? Any woman who receives any kind of subsidy is banned from buying

private insurance riders that cover abortion Since she is banned from both public and private coverage for many that is banning abortion.

[Aramchek]

32. that is not what the amendment says.

it says that if you are using a subsidy to pay for your plan,
you must buy a supplemental plan to cover abortion

(b) OPTION TO PURCHASE SUPPLEMENTAL COVERAGE OR PLAN - Nothing in this section shall be construed as prohibiting any nonfederal entity (including an individual or a State or local government) form purchasing separate or supplemental coverage for abortions for which funding is prohibited under this section, or a plan that includes such abortions, so long as-
(1) Such coverage or plan is paid for entirely using funds not authorized or appropriated by this Act; and
(2) Such coverage or plan is not purchased using-
(A) individual premium payments required for an Exchange-participating health benefits pan towards which an affordability credit is applied; or
(B) other nonfederal funds required to receive a federal payment, including State's or locality's contribution of Medicaid matching funds.
http://documents.nytimes.com/the-stupak-amendment#p=3

[saracat]

33. It does stipulate if you are receiving any form of subsidy that you cannot purchase private

heath care supplements. This is what the pro-choice groups are most concerned with as well as the making "permanent " the Hyde act. If you read this carefully you will understand the application.People already receiving subsidies are not allowed to purchase riders. If A and B stipulate this.

[Aramchek]

34. do you have any real text for that, or is it just hearsay?

I have read the amendment numerous times, and see no language that does what you say.

In fact, I see language that specifically allows the purchase of supplemental abortion plans.

Here is a link to where it discusses this in the amendment:
http://documents.nytimes.com/the-stupak-amendment#p=3

See for yourself.

[saracat]

35. Sections A and B from your own posting olf the Amendment stipulate that

Anyone receiving any subsidies cannot purchase abortion coverage. These are the conditions under which coverage cannot be purchased.


so long as-
(1) Such coverage or plan is paid for entirely using funds not authorized or appropriated by this Act; and
(2) Such coverage or plan is not purchased using-
(A) individual premium payments required for an Exchange-participating health benefits pan towards which an affordability credit is applied; or
(B) other nonfederal funds required to receive a federal payment, including State's or locality's contribution of Medicaid matching funds.

[Aramchek]

38. it says you can't buy a abortion plan with any federal help. that is clear

you are taking it a few steps too far.

parts B and C specifically refer to supplemental coverage for abortion

[saracat]

37. And you might read this to read to comprehend

Mother Jones: Why Stupak is more radical than you think.
Stupak is a Radical Change
By Jeralyn, Section Legislation
Posted on Mon Nov 09, 2009 at 08:38:39 PM EST


Mother Jones: Why Stupak is more radical than you think.

The two parts to the Stupak amendment:

*****The Stupak amendment mandates that no federal funds can be used to pay for an abortion or "cover any part of any health plan" that includes coverage of an abortion, except in cases where the mother’s life is in danger or the pregnancy was the result of rape or incest.

Part 1 is just the Hyde Amendment. But, part 2?

*****Where pro-lifers won big was on the second part, which could significantly limit the availability of private insurance plans that cover the procedure. That’s because Stupak’s amendment doesn’t just apply to the public option—the lower-cost plan to be offered by the government.



*****The House health care bill will also provide subsidies to help people and small businesses purchase plans on an exchange. This represents a lucrative new market for insurers: anyone earning less than $88,000 for a family of four qualifies for assistance, as well as certain small companies. But to gain access to these new customers, insurers will have to drop abortion coverage from their plans.

And on the supplemental insurance issue:

*****Imagine if all insurance plans worked like a smorgasbord, in which you tried to guess the operations and medicines you might require sometime in the future. How many procedures would you actually fork out for in advance? Five states already have similar "rider" laws in place, but according to Sonfield, "No one seems to have come up with evidence that these plans are ever sold."

more:
http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2009/11/price-healt...

[Aramchek]

39. all that says is that abortion can't be in a plan that is purchased with any type of subsidy

Parts B and C refer supplemental abortion insurance, in particular.

[saracat]

40. None of the pro choice groups agree with your interpretation

Nor does Rep. Degette, the Pro-Choice Caucus Nancy Snyderman or Rachel Maddow but keep on believing whatever makes you feel good.

[stevenleser]

41. What did these folks say exactly and what was their proof?

Links?

[saracat]

42. Here are several links:

http://www.now.org/press/11-09/11-08.html

http://www.prochoiceamerica.org/news/press-releases/2009/pr11072009_househcrbillstupak.html

http://blogs.abcnews.com/george/2009/11/liberals-to-pelosi-get-rid-of-stupak-language-or-we-wont-back-health-reform-.html

[stevenleser]

43. I read them and decided to download the full bill and stupak amendment in .pdf form

I can say now that the concerns are not founded. Feel free to pm me if you want a copy.

[saracat]

44. I have read it as well and you are WRONG. Who are you to decide all those people are mistaken?

All of us can read too and your interpetation is incorrect.

[stray cat]

13. So do DUers now have to campaign to get rid of evil Medicare?

:sarcasm:

[high density]

18. That's the ticket!

We must stop Medicare!!!!!

[dsc]

17. In 17 states it is

which under Stupak the simliar private senario can't take place.

[optimator]

19. don't compare it medicare

Medicare is non profit, and not mandatory.

[Aramchek]

20. you are a brave and honest soul. be prepared to be called a woman-hater

I salute you.

[prolesunited]

21. She's a woman

so that would be a strange argument.

[Aramchek]

23. I know. Rationality doesn't effect those who would attack her.

[mentalsolstice]

29. Ya know, about women on SSDI and Medicare

They're supposed to be too old or too disabled to have sex or to have anyone want to have sex with them. :sarcasm:

[Skittles]

36. here

http://www.now.org/press/11-09/11-08.html