About us Login Get email updates
Research
Print

Fox News falsely suggests Senate bill "allows funding for abortion" inconsistent with Hyde Amendment

December 07, 2009 11:31 am ET — 16 Comments

During a discussion of Sen. Ben Nelson's (D-NE) proposed amendment to the Senate health care reform bill, Fox News on-screen text falsely suggested that the "current bill allows funding for abortion" beyond what is currently allowed under the Hyde Amendment, which forbids the use of federal funds for abortions except in cases of life endangerment, rape or incest. In fact, the Senate bill explicitly prohibits the use of federal funds to provide coverage for abortions that are not allowed under the Hyde Amendment and requires segregation of non-federal funds from federal funds to pay for those procedures -- a practice that is similar to the way that many states cover such abortions under the federally subsidized Medicaid program.

Please upgrade your flash player. The video for this item requires a newer version of Flash Player. If you are unable to install flash you can download a QuickTime version of the video.

EMBED

Fox News caption claims "CURRENT BILL ALLOWS FUNDING FOR ABORTION"

From the December 7 edition of Fox News' Fox & Friends:

 Fox screenshot

Senate bill explicitly prohibits federal funding of abortions not covered under Hyde

Bill requires HHS secretary to ensure that public option uses "no Federal funds" in providing abortion coverage beyond Hyde. Section 1303(a)(1)(C) of the Senate bill, titled "Prohibition on federal funds for abortion services in community health insurance option," explains that the Health and Human Services secretary must ensure that "no Federal funds are used for such coverage" as outlined in Section 1303(a)(1)(B)(i). That section is defined as "Abortion for which public funding is prohibited," and describes abortions for which federal funding is prohibited under the Hyde Amendment.

From Section 1303(a)(1)(C) of the bill:

(C) PROHIBITION ON FEDERAL FUNDS FOR ABORTION SERVICES IN COMMUNITY HEALTH INSURANCE OPTION. --

(i) DETERMINATION BY SECRETARY. -- The Secretary may not determine, in accordance with subparagraph (A)(ii), that the community health insurance option established under section 1323 shall provide coverage of services described in subparagraph (B)(i) as part of benefits for the plan year unless the Secretary-

(I) assures compliance with the requirements of paragraph (2);

(II) assures, in accordance with applicable provisions of generally accepted accounting requirements, circulars on funds management of the Office of Management and Budget, and guidance on accounting of the Government Accountability Office, that no Federal funds are used for such coverage; and

(III) notwithstanding section 1323(e)(1)(C) or any other provision of this title, takes all necessary steps to assure that the United States does not bear the insurance risk for a community health insurance option's coverage of services described in subparagraph (B)(i).

From Section 1303(a)(1)(B) of the Senate bill:

(B) ABORTION SERVICES. --

(i) ABORTIONS FOR WHICH PUBLIC FUNDING IS PROHIBITED. -- The services described in this clause are abortions for which the expenditure of Federal funds appropriated for the Department of Health and Human Services is not permitted, based on the law as in effect as of the date that is 6 months before the beginning of the plan year involved.

Bill requires states to ensure that "no ... Federal funds ... pay or defray the cost of" such coverage. The bill further specifies that states are required to "assure that no funds flowing through or from the community health insurance option, and no other Federal fund, pay or defray the cost of providing coverage of services described in subparagraph (B)(i)."

From Section 1303(a)(1)(C) of the Senate bill:

(C) PROHIBITION ON FEDERAL FUNDS FOR ABORTION SERVICES IN COMMUNITY HEALTH INSURANCE OPTION. --

[...]

(ii) STATE REQUIREMENT.-If a State requires, in addition to the essential health benefits required under section 1323(b)(3)(A), coverage of services described in subparagraph (B)(i) for enrollees of a community health insurance option offered in such State, the State shall assure that no funds flowing through or from the community health insurance option, and no other Federal funds, pay or defray the cost of providing coverage of services described in subparagraph (B)(i). The United States shall not bear the insurance risk for a State's required coverage of services described in subparagraph (B)(i).

Bill prohibits health insurers from using federal subsidies "for the purposes of paying for" abortion services restricted by Hyde. The bill states that if a "qualified health plan" offered under the health insurance exchange provides coverage of abortion services for which public funding is banned, "the issuer of the plan shall not use any amount attributable" to the subsidies created under the bill "for purposes of paying for such services" and must segregate funds for that purpose.

From Section 1303(a)(2) of the Senate bill:

(2) PROHIBITION ON THE USE OF FEDERAL FUNDS. --

(A) IN GENERAL. -- If a qualified health plan provides coverage of services described in paragraph (1)(B)(i), the issuer of the plan shall not use any amount attributable to any of the following for purposes of paying for such services:

(i) The credit under section 36B of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (and the amount (if any) of the advance payment of the credit under section 1412 of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act).

(ii) Any cost-sharing reduction under section 1402 of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (and the amount (if any) of the advance payment of the reduction under section 1412 of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act).

(B) SEGREGATION OF FUNDS. -- In the case of a plan to which subparagraph (A) applies, the issuer of the plan shall, out of amounts not described in subparagraph (A), segregate an amount equal to the actuarial amounts determined under subparagraph (C) for all enrollees from the amounts described in subparagraph(A).

Bill requires HHS secretary to ensure that segregated funds are sufficient to pay for abortion services. The bill states that the HHS secretary "shall estimate the basic per enrollee, per month cost, determined on an average actuarial basis, for including coverage under a qualified health plan of" abortions restricted by the Hyde Amendment. As noted above, insurers must, for all enrollees, out of non-federal funds segregate the actuarial amount estimated by the Secretary for abortion services restricted by the Hyde Amendment from federal funds.

From Section 1303(a)(2)(C):

(C) ACTUARIAL VALUE OF OPTIONAL SERVICE COVERAGE. --

(i) IN GENERAL. -- The Secretary shall estimate the basic per enrollee, per month cost, determined on an average actuarial basis, for including coverage under a qualified health plan of the services described in paragraph (1)(B)(i).

(ii) CONSIDERATIONS.-In making such estimate, the Secretary --

(I) may take into account the impact on overall costs of the inclusion of such coverage, but may not take into account any cost reduction estimated to result from such services, including prenatal care, delivery, or postnatal care;

(II) shall estimate such costs as if such coverage were included for the entire population covered; and

(III) may not estimate such a cost at less than $1 per enrollee, per month.

Current law allows coverage for abortions restricted by Hyde under Medicaid through similar fund segregation

Seventeen states use state funds to cover abortions for Medicaid recipients in circumstances beyond Hyde. According to a December 1 study by the Guttmacher Institute, 17 states provide coverage under Medicaid for "all or most medically necessary abortions," not just abortions in cases of life endangerment, rape, and incest. Those states "us[e] their own funds" -- not federal funds -- "to pay" for the procedures. Therefore, in 17 states, Medicaid, a federally subsidized health care program, covers abortions in circumstances in which federal money is prohibited from being spent on abortion.

Expand All Expand 1st Level Collapse All Add Comment
    • Author by ScienceBuff (December 07, 2009 11:40 am ET)
      2  
      I wonder how difficult it would be to revoke the Hyde amendment.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by Bad News (December 07, 2009 12:10 pm ET)
        1 1
        Revoking the Hyde Amendment wouldn't change what's in some Senators' Hearts.
        You should rather feel pity for Doocy & Kilmeade whom i only think of seriously when my baby Farts.
        Doocy & Kilmeade or should it be Kilmeade & Doocy?
        Now that would make a great Sitcom possibly Surpassing "I Love Lucy"

        Speak truth to power.


        Mr. News
        Report Abuse
        • Author by LarryE (December 07, 2009 2:12 pm ET)
             
          Kilmeade & Doocy

          Sounds like a MadTV spoof of "Cagney and Lacey."
          Report Abuse
          • Author by Bad News (December 07, 2009 3:10 pm ET)
               
            Cagney & Lacey earned their respect by doing their jobs in a Professional Manner.
            Doocy & Klimeade's professionalism ends at the Fox News Banner.
            They both remind me of The Reporter in the 1st Die Hard movie sitting next to the Police Scanner.
            Do anything & Say anything to get ahead "Getter Done" by any Manner.

            Speak truth to power.


            Mr. News
            Report Abuse
      • Author by Don Hussein Fabuloso (December 07, 2009 1:35 pm ET)
           
        It does seem pretty unconstitutional. I guess the Republicans just insist on thumbing their nose at that document any chance they get.
        Report Abuse
        • Author by allen672 (December 07, 2009 1:55 pm ET)
             
          Do U ever post the opposing viewpoint?
          Report Abuse
        • Author by dexteritas0071418 (December 07, 2009 2:50 pm ET)
            1
          Isn't this a good example of why the current bills exert too much control over our insurance options? Remember that the GOP is capable of winning Congress/POTUS and that if your insurance options are completely regulated and controlled, it could get worse than this.
          Report Abuse
          • Author by Don Hussein Fabuloso (December 07, 2009 3:00 pm ET)
            1  
            I'm not sure what you're saying, Dex. What I meant was that good health care reform would provide more options, and restrictions on abortion services (mainly the pet area of Republicans) seem to be clear violations of the establishment clause.
            Report Abuse
            • Author by dexteritas0071418 (December 07, 2009 3:32 pm ET)
                 
              How do you think? It's extremely gray area because it isn't as if healthcare regulation and a public option exist in the Constitution. Is it a violation because something like Viagra would be covered in some options?
              Report Abuse
              • Author by Don Hussein Fabuloso (December 07, 2009 3:37 pm ET)
                2  
                The Constitution doesn't give us permission to do things, it outlines some limitations on the government restricting our freedom.

                We have every right as Americans to reform health care, but the First Amendment clearly forbids the government making laws according to religious beliefs.
                Report Abuse
    • Author by Diosnomeama (December 07, 2009 2:13 pm ET)
         
      Watching these guys grasping at the same old straws is a little like watching Wile E. Coyote failing to catch the roadrunner over and over and over.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by YellowDogDemocrat (December 07, 2009 3:11 pm ET)
      1  
      The Hyde Amendment forbids the use of federal funds for abortions except in cases of life endangerment, rape or incest

      See, this is what is so illogical about the anti-abortion crowd. If they really believe a fetus is a person and should be treated as such under the law, then what do the circumstances of its conception have to do with it? In other words, if they really believe that an abortion is murder, then why should a woman who is raped or the victim of incest be allowed to resort to it?

      They can't have it both ways. Clearly, they really DON'T believe a fetus is a person. So why do they insist on this line of illogic?
      Report Abuse
      • Author by dexteritas0071418 (December 07, 2009 3:33 pm ET)
           
        Because it has a better chance. Do you really think that if, given a choice, the anti-abortion crowd would go for pro-choice instead of anti-abortion, including rape and incest?
        Report Abuse
      • Author by Ruby (December 07, 2009 5:12 pm ET)
           
        That's why I think that the more extreme end of the pro-life movement is just very disingenuous.

        If you really and truly believe that abortion is murder, then you would necessarily have to believe that the United States government is complicit in not just mass murder, but genocide. And I just don't think that many pro-lifers actually believe that truly. I don't think they've actually thought it out that far.

        I certainly think that there are pro-life people out there who aren't willing to say that abortion is murder, but I think that the ones who do make that statement are being disingenuous. It's clearly just rhetoric and not something they really believe.
        Report Abuse
        • Author by YellowDogDemocrat (December 07, 2009 8:53 pm ET)
             
          Thank you. That's exactly what I was trying to say. I realize, dexteritas, that the platform the anti-abortion crowd officially espouses has a "better chance", but I was trying to point out how illogical their reasoning was. As Ruby say, many haven't actually thought it out that far.
          Report Abuse

my.MediaMatters.org

Login  Sign Up

Push Back

Phone calls, emails and letters from the public do make a difference. Remember that to be effective you must be polite, and professional. Express your specific concerns regarding that particular news report or commentary, and indicate what you would like the media outlet to do differently in the future.