Various thoughts on current events with an emphasis on politics, legal issues, books, movies and whatever is on my mind. Emails can be sent to email@example.com; please put "blog comments" in the subject line.
Yes. Unlike some representative said during the floor debate earlier today, abortion IS health care, particularly when women (or girls) are "confronted with a choice between two serious harms: serious health damage to themselves on the one hand and abortion on the other." You might not LIKE the choice to undergo this medical procedure, done by doctors to protect the health and well being of the patient. But, if it isn't "health care," what is it?
It is duly noted that the government is now (wrongly) allowed to discriminate by religious and moral belief and deny funding even to those who require an abortion to prevent various significant health concerns. At least admit what you are doing as you try to deprive needy individuals of protections in extreme cases or deny individual choices respecting health insurance. The type of emergency care at issue here covers the extreme cases even many strong pro-life types would admit are tricky situations. Likewise, many against abortion would realize that health plans include coverage of things they personally oppose.
It is a tad annoying that we are supposed to find it perfectly acceptable to use government money to pay for religious education because the overall plan is "neutral" and individual choice is involved without it being an Establishment Clause issue, in fact to do otherwise would violate the Free Exercise Clause, but individuals can't make their own health care choices in disfavored areas. Then, it is a problem because the government is paying for abortions. Not the individual by means of her own health care choices, such as those who decide to have a child in other cases. They are okay, Their moral and religious choices are acceptable. Thanks, Father GOP.
Abortion is a deeply personal choice that some people find immoral in various cases. But, it is a personal choice, just like most health choices are inherently personal on some level. The Hyde Amendment is bad policy, if not probably unconstitutional (just like a few states have found it to be pursuant to their own constitutions when the states deny funding selectively that way), but we are stuck with it for the moment. The Republicans will continue to try to make things worse.
The fact Obama has promised to veto this latest version even if it somehow managed to get through the Senate (it is not likely to) underlines (yet again) why it pays to have him as President.