Obama administration blocks Indiana law defunding Planned Parenthood
No surprise, the Obama administration will attempt to block Indiana from enacting a new law that defunds Planned Parenthood. From the Associated Press:
The Health and Human Services Department rejected changes in INs Medicaid plan Wednesday, saying it illegally bans funding for Planned Parenthood, and sought to make clear that a similar fate awaits other states that pass legislation barring any qualified health care provider.
State officials signaled they would not accept HHS’ decision.
In a letter sent to IN’s Medicaid director, Medicaid Administrator Donald Berwick said IN’s plan will improperly bar beneficiaries from receiving services. Federal law requires Medicaid beneficiaries to be able to obtain services from any qualified provider.
“Medicaid programs may not exclude qualified health care providers from providing services that are funded under the program because of a provider’s scope of practice,” Berwick wrote in a letter…. “Such a restriction would have a particular effect on beneficiaries’ ability to access family planning providers.”
IN’s law bars Planned Parenthood offices in the state from receiving federal money because it provides abortions, among other services.
Quoting Planned Parenthood CEO Cecile Richards from USA Today:
“The new law in IN prohibits nearly 10,000 women from accessing preventive health care, such as contraception, cancer screenings, and STD testing and treatment, from Planned Parenthood health centers,” Richards said.
True that – and yeah – but it doesn’t block those women from accessing care at a wider array of healthcare facilities, as the Obama administration knows full well. As I’ve mentioned before, there are only 28 PPs in IN but hundreds (specifically, 800) of other qualified Medicaid providers in the state such as doctors offices, Federally Qualified Health Clinics, county health departments, and immediate care clinics. These offices actually provide better and more convenient healthcare to women because their services aren’t limited to gynecological care.
A May 27 letter to DHHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius, which was signed by both of IN’s US senators and 6 congressmen (including Mike Pence), made the state’s case:
… [T]he Medicaid Act declares that “[i]n addition to any other authority, a state may exclude any individual or entity [from participation in the state’s Medicaid program] for any reason for which the Secretary could exclude the individual or entity from participation in [Medicare].” We believe that the Hyde Amendment provides a sufficient and time-honored foundation for such an exclusion.
Will IN stand strong? Will the Obama administration then withhold Medicaid funds, jeopardizing the healthcare of all of IN’s poor, including the women it claims to be defending, and children? I expect it will, all to protect abortion and Planned Parenthood.
[Photo via YourDailyNewsFix.com]
Jill Stanek is a nurse turned speaker, columnist and blogger, a national figure in the effort to protect both preborn and postborn innocent human life.
“True that – and yeah – but it doesn’t block those women from accessing care at a wider array of healthcare facilities.”
That’s not even relevant. Federal law is clear and unambiguous on this issue. Indiana’s state legislature as well as Mitch Daniels knew that this kind of nonsense wouldn’t stand, but they went ahead with it anyway as a political sop to social conservatives.
Will the Obama administration then withhold Medicaid funds, jeopardizing the healthcare of all of IN’s poor, including the women it claims to be defending, and children?
Of course they will. Obama will throw anyone under the bus to get what he wants, and he has absolutely no control over his temper when he doesn’t get his way. He’s like a five year old who thinks he was made king and he just gets angrier every time he finds out there are limits to his power. Sacrificing the poor who need medical care just because he loves abortion that much is nothing. He’ll do it in a cold minute.
This is awesome. I am so glad Mike Pence is taking this battle to them. They have been skirting the Hyde amendment too long. I think this will hold up in court specifically because of all the other places available to women who want non-abortive services.
Let there be defunding on earth; and let it begin with Planned Parenthood.
Wait you mean a state government cannot dictate how FEDERAL funds are distributed in a FEDERAL program…. Who knew?
Pathetic republican political nonsense…
Alice – No the federal government will not withhold federal funds from its own program. They will just direct the Medicare controller to continue business as usual and ignore the right-wing state legislature. They have no right to say where that money is spent. It is up to the private individual to decide where they want to be treated within the Medicare approved care providers of which Planned Parenthood is a part. This story has nothing to do with Obama. It is about Mike Pence WAY over stepping his legal boundaries. It is about Mike trying to make political points with the anti-choice movement but that is all. He knew this would never go through as he knows he does not have the power to dictate what the federal government does with it’s money.
Truthseeker – The Hyde amendment says that no federal money can go to pay for an abortion, not no money can go to a organization that provides abortion as one of its services. PP does not spend federal grant money on abortions. PP spends federal money on the other 97% of what they do like treating and preventing sexually transmitted diseases and cancer screenings which is a service to all Americans even if you never step foot inside a PP clinic.
There shall be only one choice, Obama has decided, and that choice is abortion.
Abortion uber alles.
especially for lebens unwertensleben.
“PP spends federal money on the other 97% of what they do like treating and preventing sexually transmitted diseases and cancer screenings which is a service to all Americans even if you never step foot inside a PP clinic.”
No, it’s not. It is only a service to those individuals receiving the service.
Biggz,
The Hyde amendment was meant to restrict monies funding abortuaries period.
Can federal funds be used to build the abortuaries?
Can federal funds be used to buy the tools used to abort?
Can federal funds be used to light the abortuary rooms and power the vaccuums?
Can federal funds be used to advertise abortion services?
Can federal funds be used to pay the abortionists salary?
Hippie – No if you had sex with a girl who had just been to a PP clinic two weeks before you met her and got treated for a STD you would be a beneficiary of PP clinic services even though you never set foot in the clinic yourself… see my point?
Truthseeker – That may have been the intensions of Mr. Hyde but that is not how the law was written. As for the rest of your questions the answer is yes, but that is not spending money on abortions that is spending money on power, building materials, medical instruments, and overhead. Seeing as how less than 5% of what PP does is actually abortion they have many more things to spend their federal funds on. Try actually going inside of a PP clinic before you start talking about how they do business sir.
One last thing about using words to dehumanize people…
Pro-choice people are called…
Pro-aborts
Pro-death
Purveyors of racial genocide
Baby Killers
Godless heathens
Evil intents
Sick minded
Murderers
That is using language to dehumanize someone so you can hate them, look down on them, or in some cases kill them. Most people who work at abortion clinics are parents themselves who go to church on Sunday and pay their taxes. They attend BBQ’s on the weekends and watch football. They are good decent people who really care about women and children. It is true they are far more concerned about the children a mother already has or the situation they might be bringing a child into than the welfare of a fetus but don’t think for a minute they don’t love children.
Anyone seeing and parallels here yet?
Define pro-choice for me Biggz and I can tell you which ones of the descriptions below are a fit. Pro-choice to what? Finish the phrase so I can be clear what you mean by pro choice. Pro-choice to ….. what?
BUt I’ll go through your list with you. My intention is not to dehumanize you; it is to define pro-choice.
Pro-aborts – do all pro choice people value their right right to abort children greater than their value of their unborn offsprings lives? If yes, then it fits.
Pro-death – do all pro choice people value the death of unborn children greater than they value the unborn childs lives? If yes, then it fits.
Purveyors of racial genocide – do all pro choice people ever value the profit from abortion greater than they value the race demographic of the people they commit abortion on? If yes, then it fits.
Baby Killers – do all pro choice people condone killing unborn babies? If yes, then it fits.
Godless heathens – do all pro choice people rail against God? If yes, then it fits.
Evil intents – do all pro choice have the intent to condone killing unborn children? If yes, then it fits.
Sick minded – Is it indicative of a sick mind to choose to kill unborn children ? If so, then it fits.
Murderers – is it murder when you kill unborn children? If yes, then it fits.
You may be surprised when the Hyde amendment is found to preclude federal funds from paying the doctor to perform the abortion or build an abortuary. I have a question for you Biggz. According to current law can Obamacare Exchanges build abortuaries and staff abortionists?
Z:
If you are looking for civility of discourse you will find this blog a thousand times more civil than the typical lunatic fringe choice blogs. Start by preaching civility to your fellow travellers at the Daily Kos and their spawn. Take the log out of their eyes and then come back and remove the speck in ours.
Don’t expect us to pull out a violin when you tick off the list of things that some people call pro-aborts. Babies are being brutally and some say painfully dismembered and we are supposed to soft pedal and coddle the perpetrators of that reality? Sorry–no can do.
Seems pretty simple to me – Indiana should turn down the $4.3 billion in federal funding that went to Medicaid in their state – they could raise taxes to cover that amount of money and should be good to go. If they don’t want the rules the feds put down, they should be willing to fund things themselves.
It is true they are far more concerned about the children a mother already has or the situation they might be bringing a child into than the welfare of a fetus but don’t think for a minute they don’t love children.
Biggz, the fetus is a child. An unborn child. And it is selfishness and not love for children that kills one to benefit another.
EX-RINO,
All Indiana wants is to have the Hyde amendment enforced. I’ll ask you the same question I asked Biggz. According to current law can Obamacare Exchanges build abortuaries and staff abortionists?
Truth -
What provision of the Hyde Amendment do you believe Indiana doesn’t think is being enforced?
You need to restate your question to clarify what you mean. Thanks.
SEC. 507. (a) None of the funds appropriated in this Act, and none of the funds in any trust fund to which funds are appropriated in this Act, shall be expended for any abortion.
(b) None of the funds appropriated in this Act, and none of the funds in any trust fund to which funds are appropriated in this Act, shall be expended for health benefits coverage that includes coverage of abortion.
(c) The term `health benefits coverage’ means the package of services covered by a managed care provider or organization pursuant to a contract or other arrangement.
It says no federal funds shall be expended for any abortion. And no funds can be used by managed care provider or organization whose services cover/include abortion. Note the words “or organization’ in the text of the law. Biggz seems to think that the law would allow for paying abortionists salaries and building abortuaries etc. I think it is reasonable to say the provision of the law that says no federal funds can be expended to pay for abortions prohibits federal funds from being used to build abortuaries and or staff abortion workers etc. On a related question; do you believe the Hyde Amendment allows Obamacare Exchanges to use federal funds to build abortuaries and staff abortionists?
The term `health benefits coverage’ means the package of services covered by a managed care provider or organization pursuant to a contract or other arrangement.
I think Planned Parenthood would be disqualified from funds because they are an organization that includes abortions in their package of services.
Truth – as it relates to Medicaid, at least my understanding (and please, if you can find a good source, correct me if I’m wrong) – is that if a provider submits a claim for medicaid money for services of abortion, it is rejected. It doesn’t mean that the facility can’t offer abortions. The “package of services”, my understanding at least, is that a health care insurance company offering insurance can’t include abortion in those services and get federal subsidies (though there is a specific provision that allows it at the state level).
I don’t believe, under Hyde, that federal funds could be used to build an abortion clinic. On that note, I believe I read Indiana has something like 90 clinics (I may be way off), and only a handful offer abortion – so while I don’t believe money can go to reimburse abortion services, those other clinics (and even the ones that offer abortion) provide other services but abortion that would be covered via medicaid. Whether or not you consider that paying for their salaries, I’m not sure.
So yeah – I don’t quite see the issue here – the feds have rules – and Indiana is trying to say “we want the money but we don’t like your rules”. I think they should reject all federal money for medicaid then.
Ex-RINO said; “I don’t believe, under Hyde, that federal funds could be used to build an abortion clinic.”
Why not? You are not being clear. What about the new mega-abortuary Planned Parenthood built in Aurora IL? It is a huge complex built for abortions (they put it there so they could commit interstate abortions on Indiana’s unemancipated minors (as long as they can keep the Illinois Parental Notification of Abortion Act of 1995 tied up in courts and unenforcable. Besides abortions they also hand out contraception. Could federal funds be used to build and maintain the new abortuary in Aurora? Where in the Hyde amendment does it say that federal funds could not be used to build such an abortuary?
I’m glad that HHS is calling Indiana out on this and has put them on notice.
Next, I can’t believe the Hyde Amendment is lied about. I also can’t believe that people don’t realize that PP has operates on mostly Private Donations to their Private Foundation.
I can’t understand why a woman can’t walk into PP and pay for her own abortion if PP is the only provider. I can’t understand that if she doesn’t have the money, that PP has a sliding scale from people who voluntarily choose to donate to PP’s Private Foundation which covers abortion.
If it’s not okay for someone to donate for someone else to have health services, then should we defund Catholic Charities or any faith based charity, because that would be inadvertently funding the church that the person is in, the building of it, the electricity, the other bills, the pastor. In that case, I only want secular charities to get federal funding, due to the separation of church and state. But oh, money is not fungible in that case.
It’s not enough that they are transparent in their financial reporting, it’s not enough that Pro-Life people insist it be audited constantly. Pro-life organizations have to deny funds that deny medicaid people the right to go to PP.
I’m curious is anyone talking about these Federally Qualified Health Centers or Community Health Centers as they’re called in Ohio, the state I’m in, is aware of the fact that 1.3 Billion of the 2.1 Billion was cut. I’m curious if anyone knows that the one in Dayton, Ohio a city near me, has to now do fundraising so that people can get care from the Federal Qualified, non abortion providing, health center.
I’m curious if anyone has used these to know that you have to go on a waiting list. There are 2 in my city and the health department and still all of them having waiting lists. Whereas, PP, you call or can walk in and get an appointment, or get Emergency contraception after hours.
In summary, I didn’t mean to offend anyone, I’m not talking to anyone on this board, I haven’t read any of the posts, I am simply providing my differing opinion to what I have read on here. Thank you very much and I look forward to reading other people’s opinions.
Ally,
The Hyde amendment is already law and it specifically denies funds to organizations that provide abortion services. I would agree with you that no federal funds should go to any church based organizations that choose to commit abortions as part of their ‘services’.
EX-GOP – It is very hard to get even more tax dollars from people who are already struggling with unemployment and home foreclosures.
Truthseeker –
Pro-aborts – We are not Pro-Abortion. We are pro-freedom.
Pro-death – We love life and children. Not too worried about a fetus.
Purveyors of racial genocide – 100% lie! Low income clinics are put in low income areas. The question is “why are so many minorities in the low income bracket”. Here’s a hint… It’s not PP’s fault.
Baby Killers – We have never killed a baby. We advocate for the right to end a pregnancy at a woman request by chemically or physically removing it from her body. Which takes away the fetuses life support, so it dies.
Godless heathens – Pro-choice comes in all flavors including Catholic as you well know.
Evil intents – How could helping women, screening for cancer, and curing diseases be evil?
Sick minded – How can we all be sick minded when we all have families and children that look up to us. I don’t think it is sick minded to try to up hold the rights and freedoms that women fought so hard for 40 years ago.
Murderers – We have never murdered anyone, nor do we condone it to others, or even praise people who do commit murder like some “Pro-Lifers” have. I don’t recall any bombs going off at any CPC’s… A fetus would have to be a person for it to be murdered. Abortion in most cases these days are induced miscarriages in the first few weeks of pregnancy. At that point the fetus is not even visible without really looking for it, so hardly a baby.
About the Hyde amendment, if I am reading this correctly it says that no federal funds can be used to pay for an abortion or used to build a clinic that is expressly for abortions and every single client is there for an abortion. However if a clinic provides a multitude of sexual health services of which one is abortion then it is ok because that building or doctor is not there to do abortions but to service clients with all forms of treatment for a wide range of ailments. If less than 5% of what PP does is abortion then the other 95% can be federally funded as normal. All the Hyde amendment really says is you have to pay for your own abortion unless you go to PP and qualify as low income then there are funds available to you that were collected from PP employees and the general public.
“truthseeker says:
June 3, 2011 at 4:08 pm
Ally,
The Hyde amendment is already law and it specifically denies funds to organizations that provide abortion services. I would agree with you that no federal funds should go to any church based organizations that choose to commit abortions as part of their ‘services’.”
Truthseeker, you missed my point here.
Pro-Life organizations have PP audited constantly to make sure that only the woman and private donations which comprise of 66% of PP’s budget pay for the woman’s abortion.
The point about Catholic Charities and other charities and social service organizations was this, while Pro-Lifers do not want any federal funding to go to abortion, they are willing to say things like money is fungible and they just move money around.
And my point was, who’s to say that Catholic Charities, doesn’t move my taxpayer money around to pay for church expenses, like building worship areas, paying a pastor and other church employees, for the utilities for the worship area, where is the transparent reporting on that, are they audited constantly as well as other little faith based charities to make sure my money doesn’t get moved around to go to support the church worship area, thus violating the establishment clause, the separation of church and state.
If anyone wants to assure me that my tax money isn’t going to support the worship area and staff, please let me know.
However that comment was not about abortion, it was about the fact that in reality churches which are mainly responsible, I know there are people from other religions and atheists that are Pro-Life, but many of the major Pro-Life organizations are faith based, that have charities, may be violating the establishment clause and using federal funding.
Now, if I’m wrong on that and they have to report substantially and ensure that federal funds used for say a faith based run soup kitchen are just for that, then I will be happy to admit I’m wrong.
That was my whole point. Please let me know if you do not get the connection between the hyde amendment dictating that federal funding can’t go for abortions or utility bills or paying the staff member performing it and the fact that the establishment clause keeps federal funding from going to worship activities in any way. Because that was my whole point.
Ally says:
The point about Catholic Charities and other charities and social service organizations was this, while Pro-Lifers do not want any federal funding to go to abortion, they are willing to say things like money is fungible and they just move money around.
Ally, thank you for your sincere interest. Indeed, money is fungible–no argument from us. PP can use taxpayer money to buttress their unborn baby killing business. Truthseeker’s example of Aurora’s giant abortion facility is spot on. Federal funds and State of Illinois loan guarentees provided funding for a Planned Parenthood facility that has 13 recovery rooms for abortion clients. Oh, by the way, they also perform exams and distribute pills and condoms there, but make no mistake about their primary reason for the huge facility–it is for abortions and we taxpayers paid for it or are otherwise on the hook for it. Prior to building the mega-clinic they operated out of a storefront a few miles away. PP’s own statistics say that a mega facility commits at minimum 5000 abortions annually. A reasonable person could conclude that there is some crossover between the federal funds that support PP’s Title X services and the abortion end of the business. Catholic Charities on the other hand does not use a single dime of taxpayer money or anyone else’s money to end human life.
I propose a solution: PP gives up their 360 million/year from us taxpayers and the same for Catholic Charities.
“A reasonable person could conclude that there is some crossover between the federal funds that support PP’s Title X services and the abortion end of the business. Catholic Charities on the other hand does not use a single dime of taxpayer money or anyone else’s money to end human life.
I propose a solution: PP gives up their 360 million/year from us taxpayers and the same for Catholic Charities. ”
Thank you for at least a small concession on the catholic charities thing. That says a lot about you.
I understand that no taxpayer funding for abortion is very near and dear to your heart and the heart of other Pro-Lifers.
To me, the defunding of faith based charities is dear to my heart. Your solution of taking faith based social service organizations away or them giving it up and raising it on their own is that the same faith based lobbyists, churches and organizations, who want PP defunded because they believe PP isn’t abiding by the law of the land is that they are not going to say, oh no, we don’t want the government’s money or they’re not going to say faith based social service organizations should have to make their financial reporting transparent and that they should be audited. It’s a hypocrisy, I’ve never understood since the Bush initiative making it legal. Even though if they use it for worship purposes they won’t be caught due to the fact that they don’t demand that themselves be audited.
If I seem angry, it’s because I was part of an evangelical fundamentalist cult that thought our country was a theocracy. They caused a lot of pain, but I know most Christians aren’t like that, but I want the establishment clause to be respected. Just like Pro-Life people want the Hyde Amendment to be enforced.
Ally, I don’t see the hypocrisy. There are lots of non-religous charities out there. The Hyde amendment prohibits federal funds from being use to commit abortions; it does not prohibit federal funds from non-relious organizations. I am still missing the logic of your point. If you are concerned then you could get together the support and pass a law that no Title X funds can be used by organizations that use churches.
Biggz said:
About the Hyde amendment, if I am reading this correctly it says that no federal funds can be used to pay for an abortion or used to build a clinic that is expressly for abortions and every single client is there for an abortion.
Biggz, can you paste the section of the amendment you read to get those specifics?
“Ally, the Hyde amendment prohibits federal funds from being use to commit abortions; it does not prohibit federal funds from building churches. Simple solution if you are concerned about that; get together the votes and pass a law that no Title X funds can be used by organizations that use churches. ”
Okay, I will repeat myself, I am not talking about the Hyde Amendment when I’m talking about faith based social service organizations get for doing things such as providing a soup kitchen, homeless shelters, food banks, clothing banks, so on and so forth, you keep bringing this back to Title X and PP and abortion.
I realize that the Hyde Amendment is just about abortion. I get it and I get that you are just focusing on abortion.
I am focused on the Establishment Clause, the separation between church and state and that I’m not convinced churches that run faith based social service organizations, adhere to. For all I know they are violating the Establishment clause when they get money under whatever Government program that they get funds from. Again in no way, am I talking about Title X and abortion here.
Though a reasonable person could draw a parallel and say that Title X can’t go to abortion because of the Hyde Amendment, just as any other federal government money from any other program in the federal budget can’t go the ministry part of the church because of the Establishment Clause. Yet the Social Service Organizations that are run by churches are not checked and do not do adequate transparent financial reporting to give me or any other person like me peace of mind that federal funding that to a faith based Soup Kitchen doesn’t go to the Worship Activities or Worship Staff, instead of going to the soup kitchen. Again I am talking about the uneasy lack of assurance that faith based charities adhere to the Separation of Church and State.
I respect that you want no tax payer funding for abortions.
Please understand that I want assurance that there is no taxpayer funding for a Church’s Worship and Staff that Lead Church Services due to the Establishment clause.
Just like you want assurance that your money doesn’t go to funding of abortion.
My whole point from the beginning was that there are things that I don’t want my tax money going to. But the funny thing is, I never get to choose what my tax dollars go to.
And yes it is the same thing enforcing that organizations that receive federal funding adhere to the federal laws.
Thanks for sticking with it Ally. I do see the point you are trying to make now but I don’t know of any soup kitchens that have built churches. Do you know any soup kitchens or faith based CPC’s that receive federal funds? If so, can you name any example for me and the amount they get? My experience with soup kitchens and faith based CPCs is that they are smaller, privately funded organizations. Do the big ones like United Way or Salvation Army get federal funds?
Question for you Ally. Do you interpret the Establishment Clause to mean faith based organizations can be disallowed government services that non-faith based organizations receive? If so, can you provide me with any examples of this?
Ally, should a Christian valedictorian at a graduation ceremony be allowed to write his speech about his devotion to God and the daily prayer that helped him succeed at high school?
Biggz,
We know PP lies and we know statistics they offer might just as well count each individual birth control pill as a service. Answer this question for me.
How much profit (in dollars) did Planned Parenthood make last year on all services total and how much of that profit was from abortion?
Biggz – my point is, a state can’t play by its own rules when the funds have rules attached.
Truth – you asked “why not” – and I think you stated the answer later – funds are concerning payment of services, not building of buildings.
truth – you asked about soup kitchens or CPCs that received federal funding – you can find quite a bit of info in a hurry – here is one:
http://gracecommunity.com/media/gccs-mobile-soup-kitchen-receives-federal-emergency-food-shelter-funds-for-2010/
They received $11K in stimulus money to expand soup kitchen operations