Democrat congresswoman admits at townhall meeting abortion in healthcare plan

At an August 10 townhall meeting in San Jose, CA, Democrat Congresswoman and Obamacare advocate Zoe Lofgren admitted abortion is covered in the House versions of the nationalized healthcare plan:

... [A]bortion will be covered as a benefit by one or more of the healthcare plans available to Americans, and I think it should be.

See for yourself:

I was pleasantly surprised by the overwhelmingly applause the questioner received in support after saying, "Abortion is clearly not healthcare."

[HT: David Schmidt]


Comments:

That roar of applause has refreshed me to the fact that everyday people have no desire for infanticide, and this crap of, "Pro-lifers are just wealthy people who don't get it," is being put to rest in communities across America. :)

Though, seriously, this is completely unfair. No other elective procedure gets covered, and health leaves out so many things that are necessary (I'm not sure about this health bill, it's really confusing) and for a fact Darfur got cut from the budget but we have to pay for abortion?

Then I personally want a say in what happens in those hell houses. If we have to pay for it then this is no longer a, "Keep your big noses out of it," issue.

Posted by: Vannah at August 12, 2009 11:22 AM


The longer the intensive push on the healthcare debate continues, the more convinced I am we're seeing FOCA being implemented, at least as far as the Democratic leadership is concerned.

What's completely wrong about this legislative process is - it's not really happening. We're seeing massive "design by committee," which is showing huge limitations, and even advocacy that's so nebulous and hazy, there's no consistent message within that leadership.

In other words, we're still seeing campaign rhetoric, and nothing tangible, because to bring it down to something substantial means they can't waffle or weasel their way out of it.

The Democratic leadership needs to be committed. Please.

Jill, your point that Obama implicitly trusted abortionists to do the right thing even if they committed malpractice, but now non-abortionists are considered untrustworthy in their practices needs to be amplified.

Posted by: Chris Arsenault at August 12, 2009 12:00 PM


Abortion will be in any bill that gets voted on. It is seen as a tool for reducing health care costs.
If this monstrosity ever passes, the implementing regulators will set up rewards for doctors who convince more women to kill their babies. We already know that at least 3 BO appointees support forced abortion of "defective" babies.

Posted by: Mark at August 12, 2009 12:41 PM


"no other elective procedure gets covered"

Well, from what I understand, sex-change surgeries are to be covered as well, are they not? That's just as elective as abortion. And euthanasia.

Our current administration is rotten to the core.

I have to say that I wish this video continued a few more moments so that we could finish listening to the crowd's reaction to the "abortion will and should be offered" comment... AND the Congresswoman's response to it. The reaction we started to hear from the crowd didn't sound like a positive one, and it shouldn't be.

Posted by: army_wife at August 12, 2009 8:14 PM


I just got an email from Larry Riesman an editor for the Scripps paper and he won't put my letter in the opinion section of the paper unless I can tell him what page of the bill abortion is covered on. Any ideas?

Posted by: muriel at August 13, 2009 12:31 AM


She is referring to private providers. The Hyde amendment prohibits federal funds to be used to cover terminations, and I believe only New York state covers abortions with its medicaid program.

Jill, you are spreading lies and fear. Well done, I must say, because it is working. Your side will win again in preventing medicare from being expended to cover all Americans who want/need it.

Posted by: Dhalgren at August 13, 2009 6:47 AM


Please point out all of the lies Jill is spreading and refute them with the truth, Dhalgren.

I am not afraid. I refuse to pay for someone else's abortion, but I am not afraid.

Posted by: carla Author Profile Page at August 13, 2009 7:22 AM



I just got an email from Larry Riesman an editor for the Scripps paper and he won't put my letter in the opinion section of the paper unless I can tell him what page of the bill abortion is covered on. Any ideas?
Posted by: muriel at August 13, 2009 12:31 AM

Sorry Muriel, specifics not allowed. Just tell him if Obama is behind it then it must be evil.

Posted by: Hal at August 13, 2009 10:07 AM


Ignore Hal, Muriel. :)

I am sorry the editor won't print your editorial as is. Sad. My 2nd one is in our paper today.

I am not much help to you. Sorry.

Posted by: carla Author Profile Page at August 13, 2009 10:12 AM


Posted by: muriel at August 13, 2009 12:31 AM


Why dont you just ask him why the congresswoman in California admitted at the town hall meeting it was in there and then ask why 19 pro-life democrats told Nancy Pelosi they wouldn't sign the bill unless it was taken out?

Or ask him to read through the 1000+ pages of legalese.

Posted by: Kristen at August 13, 2009 10:20 AM


I just got an email from Larry Riesman an editor for the Scripps paper and he won't put my letter in the opinion section of the paper unless I can tell him what page of the bill abortion is covered on. Any ideas?

Posted by: muriel at August 13, 2009 12:31 AM
*******************************************************

http://www.rhrealitycheck.org/blog/2009/07/30/breaking-news-house-committee-passes-capps-amendment-protects-abortion-coverage-private-plans

According to RH Reality check, it is the Capps amendment, which, of course, would not have a "page number" at this time. Apparently, Reisman is either a dolt or is trying to keep your opinion piece out of his paper.

More info on wording in the amendments (The Pitts amendment to assure that no money would be spent toward elective abortion was defeated): http://blog.beliefnet.com/stevenwaldman/2009/07/abortion-kabuki-dance-and-heal.html

Posted by: Kelli Author Profile Page at August 13, 2009 11:40 AM


Dhalgren,

The Guttmacher Institute report (as of August 1, 2009) "State Funding of Abortion under Medicaid" gives a state by state account of what funding is available.


BACKGROUND: First implemented in 1977, the Hyde Amendment, which currently forbids the use of
federal funds for abortions except in cases of life endangerment, rape or incest, has guided public funding for
abortions under the joint federal-state Medicaid programs for low-income women. At a minimum, states must
cover those abortions that meet the federal exceptions. Although most states meet the requirements, one state is in
violation of federal Medicaid law, because it pays for abortions only in cases of life endangerment. Some states
use their own funds to pay for all or most medically necessary abortions, although most do so as a result of a
specific court order.




HIGHLIGHTS:
32 states and the District of Columbia follow the federal standard and provide abortions in cases of life
endangerment, rape and incest.
4 of these states also provide state funds for abortions in cases of fetal abnormality.
3 of these states also provide state funds for abortions that are necessary to prevent grave, long-lasting
damage to the woman’s physical health.

1 state provides abortions only in cases of life endangerment, in apparent violation of the federal standard.

17 states use state funds to provide all or most medically necessary abortions.
4 of these states provide such funds voluntarily.
13 of these states do so pursuant to a court order.

For more information on a state by state basis, go to guttmacher(dot)org/statecenter/sfaa

Posted by: Janet at August 13, 2009 12:04 PM


I just got an email from Larry Riesman an editor for the Scripps paper and he won't put my letter in the opinion section of the paper unless I can tell him what page of the bill abortion is covered on. Any ideas?

Posted by: muriel at August 13, 2009 12:31 AM
*******************************************************

Muriel, I'd call his boss and then his boss' boss. Don't give up.

* * *

"Sorry Muriel, specifics not allowed. Just tell him if Obama is behind it then it must be evil.
Posted by: Hal at August 13, 2009 10:07 AM

You're finally catching on.

Posted by: Janet at August 13, 2009 12:09 PM


We already have government run healthcare. It's called Medicare and Medicaid. Had it
for over 40 years. Except it's going broke. As early as next year. Government has run it
alright...into the ground. Building on that successfull track record, it is now offering to
take over control of even more of our health care. Prescription prices will be lower.

Koolaid will be free. Except a note to you senior citizens: DON'T drink it.

People refer to any plan that will come out as government dependent. This is an oxymoron since if
you are dependent at all (unborn or senior citizen) that will be cause for immediate termination from the program and I do mean TERMINATION.

Posted by: George at August 13, 2009 8:15 PM