Interview with the President: 'This is a Health Care Bill, Not an Abortion Bill'

“Please back up your ascertations with proof and/or sources, please.”

I already did, but you don’t seem to understand.

The 1973 Helms Amendment prohibited, and still prohibits, funding of abortions. Foreign family planning groups could still receive and use US funds for their non-abortion related care and counseling. The Mexico City Policy went much, much further by denying assistance for non-abortion related services if a group also provided abortions or abortion services. All assistance was denied if the group so much as provided advice, counseling, referrals, or any sort of abortion information…even when that advice and information was provided with private funding or non-US aid.

If you still don’t understand, try reading the entire USAID press release “President Obama Rescinds Mexico City Policy” dated January 26, 2009.

One benefit of a single-payer healthcare system is that without separate systems for rich and poor women, excluding poor women from reproductive care wouldn’t be so easy. And when did “not changing the status quo” become “the goal”?

Posted by: Jess Sayen | Nov 10, 2009 2:57:38 PM

Please back up your ascertations with proof and/or sources, please.

The funds DO go to agencies that provide abortions. That is why these laws (Mexico City) were put into place to begin with - to stop that. Otherwise, why bother putting the law into place and/or rescinding it?

“they can provide ‘assistance’ (funds) to groups that DO perform abortions. So yes, federal funds do go to provide abortion overseas.”

They can provide funds to groups that perform abortions, but the funds DO NOT go to provide abortions. Just as Planned Parenthood (which performs abortions in addition to other services) receives federal funding, those funds are not used for abortions.

Posted by: Jess Sayen | Nov 10, 2009 4:23:43 AM

How about the whole story - "The Mexico City Policy, which was first announced by President Ronald Reagan in 1984, directed USAID to withhold family planning assistance from foreign, non-governmental organizations that use non-USAID funds to engage in a wide range of activities, including providing advice, counseling, referrals or information regarding abortion, or lobbying a foreign government to legalize or make abortion available."

While they are "PROHIBITED FROM PROVIDING FUNDS TO PAY FOR THE PERFORMANCE OF ABORTION AS A METHOD OF FAMILY PLANNING OR TO MOTIVATE OR COERCE ANY PERSON TO PRACTICE ABORTION, AS STIPULATED BY THE HELMS AMENDMENT ENACTED IN 1973.", they can provide "assistance" (funds) to groups that DO perform abortions. So yes, federal funds do go to provide abortion overseas.

Would like to see someone at ABC interview the Mason's/Shriners and see how much if any, they are pushing to stop any major health care changes. Free health care for children at their hospitals is a major fundraising cause and a major membership factor I would think? What would be their new cause if everyone had good health insurance.?? Just curious. They are a very large and carry a lot of political clout I would think.

“Why should we believe him when he overturns the Mexico City Policy that reinstated federal funding of abortions overseas?”

Obama isn’t the only President to reverse the Mexico City Policy. One of Bill Clinton’s first acts after taking office was rescinding the policy. And federal funds are NOT used for abortions. Read this excerpt from the USAID press release about Obama’s reversal. Pay special attention to the sentence highlighted in ALL CAPS.

“USAID places high priority on preventing abortions through the use of family planning, saving the lives of women who suffer complications arising from unsafe abortion, and linking those women to voluntary family planning and other reproductive health services that will help prevent subsequent abortions. USAID IS PROHIBITED FROM PROVIDING FUNDS TO PAY FOR THE PERFORMANCE OF ABORTION AS A METHOD OF FAMILY PLANNING OR TO MOTIVATE OR COERCE ANY PERSON TO PRACTICE ABORTION, AS STIPULATED BY THE HELMS AMENDMENT ENACTED IN 1973. This and all other statutory and policy requirements relating to family planning remain in effect.”

Why should we believe him when he overturns the Mexico City Policy that reinstated federal funding of abortions overseas?

He can convince us that it's not part of his health reform bill when it has no federal funding for abortion coverage - ever. Not slipped in later, not later stating oops we didn't mean to, or oops, we "violated the constitution" (even though nowhere in the constitution do we see a woman can kill her child); then, if it passes, and only then in its final form when there is no coverage for abortion will I believe him.

tierra,are you saying that there are no Medicare cuts in the health reform bill? Is that a smear or is it a fact?
__________________________________

I don't think I said anything about Medicare.

"It is a tragedy the Bush administration overspent an average of $500 BILLION dollars EVERY year they were in office - and then left office with the economy in virtual free fall, and losing 700,000 jobs per month, stock market crashed, housing market gutted, bankruptcies out of this world.

"If Bush hadn't increased the national debt by so much, we would have been a much healthier state to handle the economic collapse he handed over.

"As it is, we are doing what every other industrialized western nation has done to try to hold things together during this disaster - stimulus spending, tax cuts and deficit financing."

tierra,are you saying that there are no Medicare cuts in the health reform bill? Is that a smear or is it a fact?

"Most of us have mothers and fathers and to cut their medicare that they paid for for years is the sneakiest bad government action I can think of."
earl | Nov 9, 2009 6:30:27 PM

So now the Right is insisting that Medicare (which they viciously attacked as a socialist take over of health care when it was created - sound familiar?) is not only a scared right and duty, but also it has absolutely ZERO waste. No room to find $40 billion/yr in savings by cutting out the portion of the program that was trying out a private sector insurance middle man.

Republicans are now the party of big government (homeland security), big spending(record deficits every year in power), big brother (Patriot Bill), and Medicare (pharmaceutical giveaway and now slavish protection of waste). Pretty sad.
_____________________________________

It is a tragedy the Bush administration overspent an average of $500 BILLION dollars EVERY year they were in office - and then left office with the economy in virtual free fall, and losing 700,000 jobs per month, stock market crashed, housing market gutted, bankruptcies out of this world.

If Bush hadn't increased the national debt by so much, we would have been a much healthier state to handle the economic collapse he handed over.

As it is, we are doing what every other industrialized western nation has done to try to hold things together during this disaster - stimulus spending, tax cuts and deficit financing.

jhw539, and obama isn't outspending the repub something like 3x? Come on, do you even realize how much of a hypicrote you sound like talking about big spending when all you ever do is defend this admin's spending? Get a clue buddy. Obama is the master spender and he is going to spend us into a 2 class nation. He is getting ready to single handedly wipe out the middle class he professes to care so much about. If your not for him your against him and watch out. He is vengeful, spiteful and hateful yet he is your hero. Of course I have a feeling if he goes, so goes your job.

what? this only squeaked through the House because of these protections, and Mr. Pres. wants them scrapped? and that will still pass the senate? unlikely. well done, Tapper & abc. the man must have been tired.

"Most of us have mothers and fathers and to cut their medicare that they paid for for years is the sneakiest bad government action I can think of."
earl | Nov 9, 2009 6:30:27 PM

So now the Right is insisting that Medicare (which they viciously attacked as a socialist take over of health care when it was created - sound familiar?) is not only a scared right and duty, but also it has absolutely ZERO waste. No room to find $40 billion/yr in savings by cutting out the portion of the program that was trying out a private sector insurance middle man.

Republicans are now the party of big government (homeland security), big spending(record deficits every year in power), big brother (Patriot Bill), and Medicare (pharmaceutical giveaway and now slavish protection of waste). Pretty sad.

I wish we had this much debate about the failed Trillion dollar bailout bill.

"Unless it be some godless motherless fatherless person..."

Aw, just say it.

Obama does NOT understand.

Most of us have mothers and fathers and to cut their medicare that they paid for for years is the sneakiest bad government action I can think of. Why would anyone want to break that promise of security when they retire. Unless it be some godless motherless fatherless person that does not understand that one of our freedoms is not to have to have the financial burden of elderly care. Even though we will do it out of love for our parents. BAD LEGISLATION.