by JivinJ

CFC then asked the “should nots” if they’d “support allowing health insurance plans that receive government subsidies to cover abortion if that coverage was paid for with private funds, not government funds?” The majority of “Should not” respondents still said “Should not” but when combined with the minority of people who favored abortion services being covered by government subsidized insurance, CFC claims “voters do not agree with proposed healthcare reform legislation on the issue of insurance coverage for abortion.”
Of course, survey respondents weren’t told that in the accounting scheme (Capps Amendment) favored by pro-choice groups the “private funds” actually become public funds since they go to the federal government and are paid out by the federal government or that every person in the plan would also have to pay at least $1 for abortion coverage. But why mention those little details when your only goal is to convince people abortion coverage is more popular than it really is?

He said he is puzzled by criticism he has taken about language banning federally funded abortions.
“I cannot understand the level of anger and frustration aimed at me because this language that I put together does ban (federally funded abortions). It absolutely bans it,” he said.
Nelson said the Senate bill stipulates that if an insurer writes a plan with abortion coverage, they must write a similar plan without abortion coverage. People who choose to have an abortion coverage rider on their policy will have to pay that portion of the premium out of their own pockets.

[Photo attribution: TheDailyBeast.com]