Stupak is as Stupak Does

I was under the impression that abortion, both therapeutic, and elective, is legal in the United States. As a recognized medical procedure that is legal why would a publicly funded health plan not, by law, have to pay for it? Right to lifer’s and pro choicer’s opinions aside, the Stupak amendment is probably unconstitutional, aside from being an obvious pander to the radical right to get the health care bill passed.

I wonder, by the way, if those opposed to public funding for a legal operation are prepared to drop their current health care providers if they already pay for abortion procedures? Although some specific plans may exclude abortion, every insurance company does provide coverage for abortions. Therefore, whether your specific plan covers abortions or not, the company you currently are insured with does pay for people to have abortions. That means your premiums help pay for abortions already. If I was strongly against abortions, I would cancel my insurance immediately. That would send a message to health insurance companies. If one thing will get their attention it is the threat of losing some money.

If the Stupak amended health care bill were to remain unchanged, and be passed by the Senate, the public option will actually be the only insurance available that does not pay for any abortions, under any circumstances. I would imagine the hard core right to lifer’s would be opting out of their current plans and lining up for the new public option. That would be odd, as many on the right who are also right to lifer’s are actually opposed to any public insurance plan. I suppose those folks, after canceling their current abortion providing health care providers, and being committed against public insurance will become the new uninsured. Talk about ironic.