Sebelius: President Rules Out Public Funding for Abortion

This guy will compromise anything! He voted for infant abandendment when he was a Senator. Anything for a vote huh prez?

This is to Mary. What do you mean “there’s no question public funding will be made available for abortion”.
Have you read the bill? Or did you have a trance or a vision where you saw the future? Or maybe you have been watching too much Faux (propaganda) news which ultimately has damaged your brain and your ability to be objective? Which one is it?

I just don’t get it. I should not be this hard to pass legislature that both sides realized is absolutely necessary. Other countries have done so. Why not us? I want the Obama plan, with the public op. Dems did not always agree with Bush, but negotiated to the point that his legislature passed – though with retrospective regret. Repubs were in office, and this present situation is 100 percent their responsibility. So be it. Let’s move forward and try something different. It certainly could not be any worse. Any plan is 100percent better than what we have, and 200 percent better than doing nothing.

…so the president says, “NO GOVERNMENT FUNDED ABORTION!”
I guess we are just supposed to breathe a sigh of relief and say, “Oh, okay, thanks for clearing that up!” and just believe it and go on….?
…and..where did the very first comment from the National Right to Life person go?

LOng T: It is totally absurd to say that the president voted for “infant abandonment” when he was a senator. How many doctors and nurses could be silenced about that? It is a ridiculous and malicious assertion. President Obama has two babies of his own. There is a law on the books in Illinois that guarantees lifesaving medical assistance to ANY child, and that includes a child that survives an abortion procedure. What you attempt to do is paint the president as a barbarian. You only succeed in painting yourself as a fool.

Obama will say any thing,with out reading the amendments,The Hyde Amendment does contain language that will allow federal funds to be used for Abortions.

phoenix lady: Yes, there is a law on the books in Illinois that protects ANY child – which Obama tried to vote down-twice. Sorry, more precisely, the first time he courageously voted “present”, the next time “no”. Fool? you decide

when a bill does not explicitly deny one thing or another it allows it. it’s the nature of legislation. has anyone found language in the health care bill that states “no illegal immigrants are eligible” or “no funds shall be allocated for abortions”? no, it isn’t there. obama is counting on his not too bright supporters to believe him, and they do.
only fox practices journalism. switch off the rest.

I posted the very first comment in this thread, but it disappeared. I posted again, and after awhile it disappeared again. I have spoken to ABC This Week staff by phone, who professed bafflement and said it must be some technical issue, perhaps involving internet links in my post. I will try one more time, this time omitting most of the specific links to back-up documentation — but you can find most of it on our website at w w w – dot – nrlc – dot – org
As the legislative director for the National Right to Life Committee (NRLC), my advice would be: Watch what they do — it is more important than what they say. For months, the President, his staff, and his congressional allies have been saying all sorts of misleading things about the abortion-related implications of different legislative proposals. Their disinformation campaign is now unraveling, but it is by no means clear that they have really decided to come clean.
The biggest abortion-related concerns with H.R. 3200 pertain to (1) a proposed insurance program that would be run entirely by the federal government (the “public option”); and (2) a proposed new premium-subsidy program (“affordability credits”) to help tens of millions of people buy health insurance. For many weeks, the White House — including the President himself — has made statements indicating either that the traditional Hyde Amendment would prevent the new programs from funding abortion, or that language adopted in a House committee (the Capps-Waxman Amendment), over the objections of pro-life members, would ensure that only “private” funds are used to pay for abortions. Each claim collapses under scrutiny. In fact, the bills approved by the House and Senate committees would put the federal government into the business of funding abortions directly, and also in the business of subsidizing the purchase of private health policies that cover elective abortions — and all with federal funds, which are the only kind of funds that the federal government can spend.
Unfortunately, everything we have seen so far would suggest that President Obama’s latest so-called “pledge” not to provide “federal funds” for abortion, articulated in the joint session speech on September 9, was just the latest in a series of highly misleading statements on the subject — statements that employ a distorted and contrived terminology, or that rely on misdirection and evasion.
H.R. 3200, as amended by the Capps-Waxman Amendment, explicitly authorizes the Administration to cover elective abortions in the public fund. Congressional Democratic leaders (Reid, Pelosi, et al) claim that the abortions will be paid for by “private funds.” The claim that a federal agency would be spending private funds on abortion, not federal funds, is absurd on its face — a political hoax.
The funds in a citizen’s bank account are “private,” but once he or she writes a check to the IRS to pay income taxes, the funds become federal government funds, public funds, deposited in a U.S. Treasury account. The same would be true of the money collected by the Department of Health and Human Services to run the public fund. Once an enrollee made a “premium” payment to DHHS, the funds would no longer be “private” — they would be federal government funds, as truly and completely as the funds that are collected by the IRS.
It is really pretty simple: Abortionists would send their bills to the DHHS, and they would receive payments drawn on the U.S. Treasury. This would be direct federal government funding of elective abortion, using federal funds (which are, in reality, the only kind of funds that the government can spend). It would be impossible to enroll in the public fund without paying a premium that was increased specifically to cover the cost of elective abortions.
A September 8 NRLC media advisory that summarizes these issues is posted on our website under the headline, “Obama dupes news media on government-funded abortion” (Sept. 8).
While running for president, Barack Obama promised Planned Parenthood that “reproductive services” (which includes abortion) would be “at the heart” of his health plan, and that his public plan would cover them. H.R. 3200 contains the fulfillment of that commitment, which Mr. Obama now seeks to smuggle into law behind a smokescreen of misleading rhetoric. See Politifact’s new review of Rep. Boehner’s recent statement regarding Obama’s history on this issue.
Douglas Johnson
Legislative Director
National Right to Life Committee
Washington, D.C.

A September 8 NRLC media advisory that summarizes these issues is posted on our website under the headline, “Obama dupes news media on government-funded abortion” (Sept. 8).
While running for president, Barack Obama promised Planned Parenthood that “reproductive services” (which includes abortion) would be “at the heart” of his health plan, and that his public plan would cover them. H.R. 3200 contains the fulfillment of that commitment, which Mr. Obama now seeks to smuggle into law behind a smokescreen of misleading rhetoric. See Politifact’s new review of Rep. Boehner’s recent statement regarding Obama’s history on this issue.

So basically the NLRC is saying to the President “You Lie!”. It sure looks like the right wing lockstep wingnuts are rapidly spreading cases of the “Whine Flu”.
======================================
If you can’t help progress, at least get out of the way!

westcoast….you have control of house senate and the president….no one is in your way except for the american people.

Aimai,
No neck crew? What kind of anti-disfigurement comment is that? I’m in the process of checking to see if I have a neck. Yep, there’s a neck.
======================================
If you can’t help progress at least get out of the way.

Obama = When State Senator = Voted for infaticide

When I see threads like those above I despair. Will Americans be able to raise themselves above their petty bickering, and ti-for-tat and recognize a problem? Will Americans be able to set aside the vested interests and address core needs? Stop obfuscating? If we were CEOs of a company with a budget like healthcare in America we should be fired for profligate spending and waste – severe mismanagement. We are all responsible for the bad situation we are in. We are too caught up in the politics to address the elephants in the room. This is not the America that guides the world. This is like a badly supervised free for all. America, don’t be scared. Solve the problem and embrace change, like you always have. It keeps you ahead of the pack!

“Or maybe you have been watching too much Faux (propaganda) news which ultimately has damaged your brain and your ability to be objective? Which one is it?”
Oh, you’re probably one of those “objective” Kool-Aid drinkers who believed in Obama’s promises of TRANSPARENCY, and FISCAL DISCIPLINE, and NO LOBBYISTS, and LESS WAR, and 3 MILLION GREEN JOBS.
So how’s that change working for you?

“…its health plan discriminated against women because it did not offer prescription contraceptive drugs…”
You’ll find if you check behind the headline that the reason for that is that they were paying for men to get reproductive aids (implants, ED drugs, etc.) so its discrimination not to offer women reproductive medicine.
I would think that that would be a good thing since it prevents abortions when women have access to have good contraceptive advice.
“One of these federal agencies will just require any conscience opposed institution to pay for abortions because it is discrimination not to do so…”
Oh, yes, the “let’s assume I’m right” argument. There’s nothing in HC reform that changes Fed rules on abortion but since you don’t like Obama, or the Dems or govt. – you want us to assume that eventually in the great by-and-by you will be right.
Sorry, Charlie, we want facts not speculation or assumptions about what the bill says. Go ahead and read it and then tell us what parts support your argument.

The final bill will have specific language that will deny abortions with federal funds.
The House bill is NOT the FINAL bill.

Why does the Right-to-Life people believe that the House bill will be the FINAL bill?
The Senate Finance committee is working on SPECIFIC language in the bill that will make sure that NO Federal dollars will be used to pay for abortions.

WestCoastMessenger, the list of analysts who recently have looked at Mr. Obama’s 2007 promises to put abortion “at the heart” of his health plan and in his public plan, and/or who have found his recent disclaimers to be inconsistent with the actual content of the legislation, gets longer by the day, and includes quite a number not usually associated with the “right wing.” These include FactCheck, Politifact, The New York Times, Time magazine, and now George Stephanopoulos. That does not mean that any of those sources has called the President a liar. But, as Mr. Stephanopoulos said on today’s program, language to prevent the use of public funds for abortions “is not in there now,” which is correct, and contrary to what the White House and top congressional Democrats have been saying for many weeks.
Douglas J
Legislative Director
National Right to Life Committee

WestCoastMessenger, the list of analysts who recently have looked at Mr. Obama’s 2007 promises to put abortion “at the heart” of his health plan and in his public plan, and/or who have found his recent disclaimers to be inconsistent with the actual content of the legislation, gets longer by the day, and includes quite a number not usually associated with the “right wing.” These include FactCheck, Politifact, The New York Times, Time magazine, and now George Stephanopoulos. That does not mean that any of those sources has called the President a liar. But, as Mr. Stephanopoulos said on today’s program, language to prevent the use of public funds for abortions “is not in there now,” which is correct, and contrary to what the White House and top congressional Democrats have been saying for many weeks.
Legislative Director
National Right to Life Committee

ob wan…you know the dems can go it alone but they dont have the votes themselves. wasnt the dems who fillibustered many of bushes nominees?whats the term…reconciliation, i think, where the dems can go it alone.change your parties leadership and something meaningful might get done. cap and trade…oooh thats so important. anything with nanacy pelosis face on it will not pass in the senate. get used to it or vote her out.

“The Senate Finance committee is working on SPECIFIC language in the bill that will make sure that NO Federal dollars will be used to pay for abortions.”
And you believe them? They’ve lied about everything else! Hahaha. Except for Obama’s shills, nobody is stupid enough to believe they won’t implement a backdoor way to fund abortions with public funds. LIBERALS RUN CONGRESS. THEY LIVE FOR THIS.

ob wan…all my children have health care because they are lucky enough to have jobs which they earned by paying their own way through college.they didnt qualify for a dime of grants they had to put their name on the line. we all want lower premiums and better care so lets scrap the public option, deal with illegals, and pay for your own abortion or find an abortion doc thats willing to work for free.in the mean time we can give the truly legal needy vouchers to pay for their insurance, or give the insurance companies tax incentive to provide free coverage to the needy. lets quit wasting time and create some jobs,

“wasnt [SIC]the dems who fillibustered many of bushes [SIC] nominees?…”
Exactly, MANY but not all. Reps now require a super-majority to pass anything.
“whats the term…reconciliation, i think, where the dems can go it alone.”
Yes, there are parts of the bills that it could be interpreted only needed a simple majority vote. But it would be bad form, like the Reps holding open votes long past the rules to strong-arm their members, back when they were in charge. The Dems are trying to avoid using such tactics, but it may be necessary.
“yada-yada-yada”
and the rest of your post is childish nonsense.

This debate would never occur if the 5 of 6 Republican appointed Supreme Court justices favored for pro-life rather than pro-choice. Roe v Wade was decided 6 to 3 in favor of pro-choice and 5 of the 6 that voted for pro-choice were Republican picks. A Supreme Court can overturn Roe v Wade, but despite 6 of 8 years (Bush II) where Republicans had a majority in all three branches of govt, it was never overturned.
Also, during the Clinton administration, abortions decreased by 17%. It rose by 14% during the Bush II administration. So if you are pro-life vote for a Democrat.
This is just the latest of Republican smear tactics. The irony of the Republican party is that they argue for pro-life (albeit only every four years during election cycles) but are opposed to providing support for life after it.

I am glad that the administration is trying to make sure that no public money gets spent to fund abortion in this new health care bill. They now need to exclude U.S. taxpayer money from being sent to the UN and its agencies to fund abortion overseas. We also need a seroius discussion and action against the evils of abortion in this country. In light of all of the scientific evidence and technology to clearly see and affirm that there is a human being inside each pregnant woman, why do we continue to pretend that abortion is about anything else but elective murder. We should fill the streets of DC and march on the mall–like MLK in the 60s–to end this outrage. Surely this is more important than taxes or public options or any other domestic political agenda.

When do the lies stop. OBAMA has told
us very plainly on Wednesday night that
he was only “..using..” PUBLIC OPTION
as an example. HE KNEW WHAT HE SAID!
HE WAS AWARE OF IT!
DOES HE UNDERSTAND IT?
Now we have one person on ABC telling us
he would never consider a bill without
PUBLIC OPTION.
We have another, AXELEROD, telling us
he would not consider a bill without it?
OBAMA IS LAUGHING AT THE AMERICAN PEOPLE

Give me one rational reason that President Obama, who is at the very LEAST an intelligent person with ambition, would have wanted to go on record as being FOR the destruction of babies who somehow survived abortion procedures and were lying there, helpless and viable infants, on an operating table. What would ever contain the outcry of healthcare professionals who can’t possibly all be evil murderers? Why does it not make sense that President Obama would, in the very rare cases that something like that happened during an abortion procedure, have voted to protect the child and see it placed in foster care or adopted. No net loss to him politically at all. It is insane to suggest he wants to murder children. Abortion is a legal procedure.

OB-Wan222: The two new programs at issue, that would be created by the pending Democratic health care bill, would not be covered by the Hyde Amendment. The Hyde Amendment is not a government-wide law. It applies only to funds contained in the annual DHHS appropriations bill. As the nonpartisan Congressional Research Service recently confirmed, none of the funds that would flow through the “public option,” and none of the funds involved in the proposed premium subsidy program, would be appropriated through the HHS appropriations bill; therefore, the Hyde Amendment will not apply. President Obama, Senator Harry Reid, and many other policy makers have made misleading statements in suggesting that the Hyde Amendment would apply to the proposed new programs.
The bill, as it now stands, explicitly authorizes the public plan to pay for all abortions, with federal funds — not only in cases of life of the mother, rape, and incest. The amendment our side has advanced (the Stupak Amendment) allows for those three exceptions.
Douglas J, NRLC

What is everyone whining about, there were stark reminders that Obama was the most liberal senator in the senate, had ties with communist/anti-american friends, and said he would want a single payer system. Did we not vote him in?? this is what we wanted, we wanted change so guess what, were gonna have to live with “change”.

Is this the same President who promised unemployment would stay below 8% if we passed th stimulus immediately? That the health care legislation would be done on CSPAN? That all bills would be posted 5 days before they are voted on?
I suspect that the provision that gives $10 billion in the UAW will outrage Americans. I wonder why George “SEIU” Stepanopolus isn’t informing the public about more union bailouts for UAW thugs? What about the 85% of the country that isn’t unionized and are hardworking? Obama doesn’t care about real workers, only the anti-American union jerks stealing from the taxpayers.

alka…we have waited and all we have dead on arrival in the senate cap and trade,no transaprancy, no jobs, no stimulus and the wasting of months on health care the democrats cant pass. regarding color or race who cares but you.

Sebelius is a disgusting human being, ready to allow millions of babies to die for politics.

Christianity is not a single-issue religion and having it hijacked by people whose discussion always ends with “baby killers” is not spreading Jesus’ message in an effective or compassionate way.
In fact, I question whether someone who can be so blind to the issues that women have who are considering abortion is really practicing their faith. Open your hearts and minds. Find joy, give love, and receive grace.

I have no problem with excluding abortion from the bill as long as no funds go to those who insist on over-populating the country further. We should provide coverage for the first pregnancy and maybe 75% for the second, but nothing for subsequent births. Also, zero dollars for infertility procedures and definitely nothing for octomoms.

Actually the right-to-lifers are making stuff up. They need to read the proposed legislation itself.
Truth told, our infant mortality rate is twice as high as the infant mortality rate of Sweden or France. Why? If the right-to-lifers really believed in a right to life, they would insist that every baby get the pre-nataland post-natal he or she deserves. They would back Obama’s health care intiative which includes a public option – guaranteeing medical care for all.
The right-to-lifers are misnamed. As far as they are concerned, it’s OK to bring a baby into the world and let it die. That is NOT right to life.

If it’s in “a bill”…..then why don’t the Republicans let the world to see. There has never been any government dollars to fund abortion….. that is left to the patient and doctor…. does private insurance pay for abortion? Last time I checked woman who Chose had to Pay for this procedure. Who does these idiots think they’re talking too! Do they REALLY believe ALL Americans are uninformed and ignorant to the FACTS.
The Right-to-Lifers should have NO Problem with every American having affordable Healthcare, since thousands Die every year, due to LACK of having HEALTH Insurance in America. Now that would be real “right-to-life.”

Douglas Johnson, you should stop playing on others ignorance, and not be part of the problem based on your ignorance and the need to control any person’s body…..READ the Bill….and furthermore, since when has government money was spent funding abortion. I work in the Healthcare Industry, and a person with a medicaid, medicare card Cannot use it to pay for an Abortion. They pay for that CHOSE out of their pocket.

The vast majority of Planned Parenthood’s work (97%) involves non-abortion services. Like most pro-choicers, Planned Parenthood is doing more to prevent abortion than all the anti-abortion picketers combined. They do this by providing birth control and education to help avoid unwanted pregnancies in the first place.
They also provide low-cost medical care to women. I would have had to skip my well woman exams for years due to lack of comprehensive insurance if it hadn’t been for Planned Parenthood’s sliding scale fees that allowed me to obtain health care for a reasonable cost while I was in school. There was nobody else willing to help me get medical care when I needed it, only Planned Parenthood. I’m not associated with PP in any way, except for being a patient, but I don’t like seeing them being slandered like this when they really do a lot of good, and have helped me tremendously.

Sebelius has most recently come from being Governor of Kansas, one of the strongest right to life states in the country. Do not disparage her character with outrageous accusations. To say she has no credibility is sheer ignorance. Ask her constituents in Kansas.

The Right to Life vs. The Right to Choose. A continuing attempt by MEN (and the church)to control and shackle women, forcing them to bend to their will. Well folks, the jury’s in – it’s Unconstiutional. You can’t beat me, you can’t rape me, and you can’t force me to carry your child. The gig is up. Get used to it.

“watch what they do, not what they say”
Man. words were never spoken that so drive to the heart of republican’s today and yesterday. They have become the party of the words, “Do as I say, Not as I do”.

I think a realitycheck needs a reality check! You did get it right when you said “child”. I’ll give you that. So lets all go support the killing of a child because realitycheck says it against the law to make her carry your “child”.

WestCoastMessenger: By stating the facts, the NRLC very eloquently pointed out how the President, his staff, and his congressional allies are misleading the public in this debate. I would hardly call that whining. In fact, we need more of this type of civil discussion to clarify what is really going on in this complicated legislation, rather than the mindless name-calling and demonization of anyone who opposes you people on the left.

Obama is a con man.

Conservatives caught the Whine flu. LOL!!! How true!

Legal medical procedures, including, but not limited to abortion, should be part of the public option plan.
Trying to outlaw it is tatamount to intering into medical decisions between doctors, patients nad their families.

The issue isn’t about outlawing abortions. It’s about using public funds for abortions, which most people oppose.

There was an election folks: The “huge ground swell of backlash” that you referred to was clearly demonstrated at this summer’s town hall meetings, and I don’t think it’s going your way. Increasing numbers of people are beginning to see how deceptive this Administration really is. I would much rather be a “whiner” as you call us, rather than defending an Administration that has to lie in order to get public acceptance of its social programs. If “catching the whine flu” means exposing the truth, then so be it! Yes, I too am waiting for the next election cycle. That will be an interesting election.

Well so much for trying to come to an agreement with close minded people. Let’s fully fund abortion.

As legislative director for the NRLC, allow me to address a few questions that were posed by different commenters above.
RealityCheck0057, you observed that Kansas is a prolife state. Nevertheless, Kathleen Sebelius has a very strongly pro-abortion record on public policy issues, perhaps exceeding that of any other person who has ever been confirmed as secretary of Health and Human Services. You also questioned whether Barack Obama’s 2007 promise to the Planned Parenthood Action Fund, to cover “reproductive care” and “reproductive services” in his health bill and in his public plan, really meant abortions. It did, as the Obama campaign confirmed publicly at the time.
Malloy, you wrote, “97% of Planned Parenthood’s work involves non-abortion services.” I would advise: Follow the money. PPFA has a big stake in abortion — it is the nation’s largest abortion provider. In 2007, PPFA-affiliated clinics performed 305,310 abortions. Abortions account for around one-third of all the income taken in at PPFA-affiliated clinics.
PhoenixLady, if you really want an answer as to what motivated Barack Obama to oppose the Born-Alive Infants Protection Act (BAIPA), you should look at what he said back when he was opposing it in the Illinois Senate — not the reasons he made up years later, when he was running for president. The history is explained here (with links to primary source documents):
http://www.nrlc.org/ObamaBAIPA/WhitePaperAugust282008.html
Sara, you are correct that the federal Medicaid program does not currently pay for elective abortions. That is because a restriction, called the Hyde Amendment, is annually attached to the appropriations bill that funds the federal Medicaid program. But the Hyde Amendment would not apply to the new programs that the Democrats’ health care bill would create (the public plan, and the premium subsidy program). That’s why the pro-life side has been pushing for an amendment (the Stupak-Pitts Amendment) to the bill to prohibit federal funds from being spent on abortion or on insurnace plans that cover elective abortion. So far, however, this amendment has been blocked by the congressional Democratic leadership, with the help of the White House.
Legislative Director
National Right to Life
http://www.nrlc.org

The Hyde ammendment is attached to the medicaid program, however, it is not attached to the new health care proposal, that I am aware. This ammendment will not allow public funds to be used for abortions.
I also understand that we are now paying for abortions in Mexico? under the new Freedom of Choice Act that the President signed when he first became President. This Act allows abortions up to the very end of pregnancy, a full term baby is partially delivered then murdured, then the delivery is completed. HOW AWEFUL is THAT? I think this is barbaric and a true Christian would not have signed or backed this kind of legislation.
Personally, I do not want to fund abortions with money that I pay in taxes. If somebody wants an abortion, they should pay for it themselves and not include the nation in their decision to murder.