House Passes 'No Taxpayer Funding For Abortion' Act On 42nd Anniversary of Roe v. Wade
An antiabortionist holding a rally sign in 1983. (Photo: Corbis)
This afternoon, on the 42nd anniversary of the Supreme Court’s Roe v. Wade ruling which determined that a woman’s choice to have an abortion is guaranteed based on her right to privacy, the U.S. House of Representatives passed H.R. 7, the No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion Act, which seeks to end the coverage of abortion services by private insurance companies.
The name of the bill does not precisely reflect its content, as current legislation already prevents taxpayer dollars from being allocated for abortion services; rather the bill seeks to restrict private insurance companies that offer coverage through the new Affordable Care Act Marketplace from presenting plans that would include coverage for abortion services. The law would make it illegal to use tax credits and other subsidies to purchase private insurance for abortion — raising taxes for small businesses and families and taking coverage away from many women. Furthermore, the bill also has almost no exceptions for women whose health is at risk, thus forcing many women to pay out-of-pocket for a potentially life-saving, and expensive, medical expense.
The bill does not allow any exceptions for abortions that may be deemed necessary to protect a woman’s health, even to protect against serious medical conditions.
In addition to coinciding with the anniversary of Roe v. Wade, the vote was also timed by GOP leadership to take place alongside the annual March for Life; thousands of protesters have descended on Washington to express their support for measures such as H.R. 7 as well as their belief that abortion should be illegal in this country. “[T]ragically, nearly 3,000 unborn children are still killed every day in the United States,” Carol Tobias, president of National Right to Life, said in a statement.
A vote had previously been scheduled for Thursday on the Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act but was cancelled late Wednesday after Republicans learned they had lost the support of female Republican House members who were essential for the bill’s passage. These women representatives, led by Reps. Renee Ellmers (R-NC) and Jackie Walorski (R-Ind), were motivated by the long-documented unpopularity of such measures by moderate and independent female voters, an essential national voting block for Republicans.
Related: Abortion Bill Dropped Thanks To Female GOP
The newly passed No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion Act will now head to the Republican-controlled Senate for a vote. The White House issued a statement earlier Thursday, however, noting that if the bill were to pass both bodies of Congress, President Obama will nonetheless veto it, which is well within his presidential jurisdiction.
In a statement, the Office of the President said, “The Administration strongly opposed H.R. 7. The legislation would intrude on women’s reproductive freedom and access to health care; increase the financial burden on many Americans; unnecessarily restrict the private insurance choices that consumers have today; and restrict the District of Columbia’s use of local funds, which undermines home rule. Longstanding Federal policy prohibits the use of Federal funds for abortions, except in cases of rape or incest, or when the life of the woman would be endangered. This prohibition is maintained in the Affordable Care Act and reinforced through the President’s Executive Order 13535. H.R. 7 would go well beyond those safeguards by interfering with consumers’ private health care choices. The Administration strongly opposed legislation that unnecessarily restricts women’s reproductive freedoms and consumers’ private insurance options. If the President were presented with H.R. 7, his senior advisors would recommend that he veto this bill.”
Related: The 6 Anti-Abortion Bills Congress Introduced In Its First 7 Days
In today’s debate on H.R. 7, Rep. Jerry Nadler (D-NY) argued, “It seems many Republicans believe in freedom, provided nobody uses that freedom in a way of which they do not approve,” also commenting on the hypocrisy of the anti-Affordable-Care-Act rhetoric espoused by the Republican majority in light of the introduction of this bill. He continued, “If you like your health insurance you should get to keep it — unless it is for choices they [the Republicans] don’t like.”
A notable argument on the Republican side of the aisle in favor of the bill came from Rep. Mike Kelly (R-Pa.), who asked how Americans can beg for intervention on behalf of the loss of human lives and human rights violations in Syria, when the same kinds of actions are being taken domestically in terms of the thousands of unborn children killed each year through abortion.
In a statement earlier on Thursday from Hal Lawrence, MD, Vice President and CEO of the American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG), said that while ACOG was glad to see the vote on the Pain Capable Unborn Child Protection Act had been dropped, the organization remains “disappointed that House leadership continues to target abortion by pivoting to payment policies. All women should have access to the medical services they need — including reproductive care — regardless of the ability to pay. Medical care must be guided by sound science and by the patient’s individual needs, not by legislative mandates or financial concerns.”
Related: Over 50 Percent Of Women Now Live In States Hostile To Abortion
Speaking on behalf of the Democratic minority in today’s debate, Reps. Gwen Moore (D-Wis.) and Suzan DelBene (D-Wash.) both also spoke of the ways that H.R. 7 specifically targets those living in poverty and augments income inequality, especially for minority voters and those on Medicaid.
“Their real goal is to ban abortion altogether,” said Cecile Richards, president of the Planned Parenthood Action Fund in a statement following Thursday’s vote. “The bill passed by the House today — just like the dangerous 20-week ban — is a thinly veiled attempt to eliminate abortion access and undermine a woman’s ability to make personal decisions about her own health care. There have been headlines recently saying House Republicans ‘aren’t wasting any time’ introducing anti-women’s health bills. We disagree: They’re wasting all of our time. The public has been clear that further restrictions on abortion are not their priority, and that they don’t want Congress to take women backward.”
Your Next Read: Why Women Are Giving Up The Pill
