By now the whole world (and several worlds beyond) has heard the news that because of the upset election in Massachusetts yesterday, the Senate Democrats have lost their supermajority.  This is indeed extraordinary news, especially for critics of universal health care.

STATUS QUESTIONIS
As you know, the U.S. Senate on December 24 passed its version of universal health care (H.R. 3590: the “Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act”).  Unfortunately, the bill passed with a robust abortion mandate at its center.  Defenders of the unborn had put their political hopes in ‘pro-life’ Democrat Ben Nelson of Nebraska, who was threatening to oppose the bill unless Senate leadership included a Stupak-like amendment excluding all federal abortion funding.  Under pressure from the White House and Senate leadership, Nelson broke at the eleventh hour and vowed his support for the bill as amended by Harry Reid’s “Manager’s Amendment.”  The bill passed in a perfect party line vote without a single Republican supporting it.

As debate rages over healthcare legislation currently under consideration in Congress and, specifically, whether abortion should be taxpayer-funded under the guise of “healthcare reform,” it would be easy to overlook an important and very inauspicious milestone:  the 20th anniversary of the federal “Freedom of Choice” Act (FOCA).

My apologies for writing again on health care.  There are many other issues worth addressing (e.g., mandatory H1N1 vaccinations, ethical advances and declines in stem cell research, the state of the economy, war in Afghanistan, etc.), but this one is of critical importance at the moment.  The debate will soon be history.  If we lose, which seems increasingly likely, defenders of the unborn will be fighting a fiercer rear-guard battle than ever before.  The President’s party is resolute on pushing through the largest pro-abortion legislative reform in U.S. history (Roe v. Wade was not an act of the legislature).  And it appears it will be successful.  Here’s a brief update to keep you at real-time in the national discussion.

I would like to update CLF readers on the status of the abortion provision in the U.S. health care debate.  President Obama and high ranking Democrats in both Houses (e.g., Rep. Nancy Pelosi [D-CA], Sen. Claire McCaskill [D-MO], Rep. Ron Klein [D-FL], Sen. Arlin Specter [D-PA]) have been recently quoted as stating that no federal tax dollars will be used to fund abortion under universal healthcare.  The most highly publicized statement came from the President in his address to the joint session of congress on Sept. 9th: “One more misunderstanding I want to clear up – under our plan, no federal dollars will be used to fund abortions.”  I felt genuinely optimistic when I heard these words.  It seemed implausible to me that despite the President’s proclivities to stretch the truth he would bold-facedly lie to the American people during an internationally televised speech.  It shortly became clear that the President’s statement was false.  Its falsity however is cleverly disguised.  To remove the disguise, I need to review a couple provisions from the health care bill being debated in the House of Representatives.

Given that Dr. Jack Kevorkian, Karen Anne Quinlan and Terri Schiavo are no longer making daily headlines, it’s a little surprising that the subject of “eugenics” is back in the news. This time, it’s coming to us via the national debate about proposed federal health care legislation, as well as the news of the Obama administration’s “end of life counseling” materials for veterans. Written by an assisted suicide advocate, the booklet at issue includes, in the words of commentator Jim Towey, “guilt-inducing scenarios such as ‘I can no longer contribute to my family's well being,’ ‘I am a severe financial burden on my family’ and my situation ‘causes severe emotional burden for my family.’ ” [1] The booklet seems to suggest, in other words, that illness, disability or financial distress might make life not worth living.

ETHICAL QUESTIONS A CATHOLIC SHOULD ASK

Dear Friends of a Culture of Life,

We think that significant moral questions are raised by the universal health debate and would like to formulate several for you.  Our purpose is not to draw a one-size-fits-all conclusion about the merits of all current health care bills.  These raise complex questions and there are reasons to support and/or oppose various pieces of different bills. 

The Catholic Church has affirmed for some time a right to a minimum of decent, humane and accessible health care.[1]  This does not imply that a nationalized health care system is a good idea, nor its establishment a fundamental right.  But it does imply that Catholics should work for some kind of improvement or reform in the current system on behalf of those who cannot afford adequate care.

You’ve heard details from many sources, including this website, about abortion and current health care reform proposals. You have likely read about what it will do: abolish state limitations on abortion, and trample conscience rights of morally or religiously opposed medical professionals and institutions.  You have also likely learned how it will do it:  the appointment by the executive branch of a type of health care advisory committee composed of abortion advocates who will have decision-making authority about the package of services which will be deemed  “necessary”  health care and  “essential benefits of coverage.”  (See E. Christian Brugger, Urgent Action Alert, culture-of-life.org).

Dear Friends,

I was one of 36 thousand pro-lifers last evening who tuned into a live webcast sponsored by a dozen or so pro-life organizations highlighting a MAJOR flaw in the Obama-backed Health Care bill racing through Congress.  In light of what I learned, I want to summarize for you a few urgent points.  I will do it as concisely as possible.

1.    Abortion is presently not mentioned in the bill.

2.    The bill does not specify what will and will not be covered.

3.    The bill mandates that a Health Care Advisory Committee has the authority to define the “essential benefits of coverage” (i.e., what will and will not be covered)

4.    The Health Advisory Committee will be a team of unelected bureaucrats appointed by the Obama Administration, most likely by Kathleen Sebelius, Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services.

5.    President Obama during his campaign stated clearly and forcefully that he believed “reproductive care” is a form of “essential” and “basic” health care and assured that it would be included in his health care plan.

6.    As Governor of Kansas, Kathleen Sebelius vetoed every piece of pro-life legislation that crossed her desk.  She is an uncompromising defender of abortion rights.

7.    Obama and Sebelius will be CERTAIN to appoint an advisory committee that supports abortion coverage in universal health care.  Therefore,

8.    FEDERALLY FUNDED ABORTION WILL ALMOST CERTAINLY BECOME A MANDATED FORM OF “ESSENTIAL HEALTH CARE” IF THE BILL PASSES IN ITS PRESENT FORM. 

9.    Every tax payer will be forced to fund abortions.

10.    Presently enacted restrictions on abortion at the State level will be overridden.

11.    Hospitals and providers will be coerced into cooperating with abortions.

12.    FOCA won’t need to be passed because its cornerstones will be included in our nationalized health care.

Most Americans know that this year marks the 36th anniversary of Roe v Wade, the controversial U.S. Supreme Court decision legalizing abortion.  However, 2009 is also the 36th anniversary of important federal protections for healthcare providers:  the Church Amendments.  For more than three decades, these Amendments have provided a much-needed foundation for protecting the moral and ethical freedoms of healthcare providers.

Today, these protections are increasingly important as abortion proponents seek to weaken and, ultimately, remove common-sense abortion laws such as informed consent and parental involvement, as well as federal and state laws and regulations protecting healthcare providers who do not wish to participate in abortions or other conflict-ridden procedures.  Moreover, these protections are also implicated as Congress and the Administration debate a government take-over of America’s healthcare industry.

PRO-CHOICE NOT TO PARTICIPATE IN ABORTIONS

Take Action
Most are aware that the Obama administration has taken aim at conscience regulations passed in the waning days of the Bush administration protecting health care workers from participating in abortions and sterilizations.  Some however might be confused as to the precise nature of the new administration’s initiative.  I want to clarify the salient points of that initiative and invite everyone who reads this brief to contact the White House and urge it to defend and not weaken conscience laws in the U.S.

Initiative 1000 in Washington State would legalize assisted suicide, permitting a doctor to give a lethal overdose to a
patient if the doctor feels that the patient is likely to die within six months.

 
“[T]he first thing I will do as President is sign the Freedom of Choice Act.”
Senator and Presidential Candidate Barack Obama
July 17, 2007, Address to the Planned Parenthood Action Fund

Just over a year ago, the public debate over abortion was irrevocably altered.  In the landmark Gonzales v. Carhart decision, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld the federal ban on partial-birth abortion and, more importantly, abdicated, at least in part, its role as the “National Abortion Control Board.”

Denise M. Burke is the Vice President & Legal Director, Americans United for Life

Over the last few decades, abortion advocates and others have launched a concerted campaign to force hospitals, healthcare institutions, health insurers, and individual healthcare providers to provide, refer for, or pay for elective abortions, abortifacient drugs, contraceptives, assisted reproductive procedures such as in vitro fertilization, and sterilizations.  Their determined effort to eviscerate the concept of individual conscience and the freedom to follow one’s religious, moral or ethical beliefs from the medical profession has resulted in the following:

Apparently responding to Catholic bishops who spoke out in 2004 about the obligations of Catholics in public life to oppose legal abortion, 55 Catholic Democratic members of Congress have released a "Statement of Principles." Though the letter attempts to declare the signatories strong support for the dignity of life the document refuses to call for outlawing abortion and instead declares that "we acknowledge and accept the tension that comes with being in disagreement with the Church in some areas."