An investigation has revealed the identity of the man whose Social Security number (SSN) has been illegally used by Obama: Jean Paul Ludwig , who was born in France in 1890, emigrated to the United States in 1924, and was assigned SS N 042-68-4425 in or about March 1977. Ludwig lived most of his adult life in Connecticut. His SSN begins with the digits 042, which are among several reserved for Connecticut residents. Obama never lived or worked in that state, so there is no reason for his SSN to start with the digits 042.
> Now comes the best part. Ludwig spent the final months of his life in Hawaii , where he died. Conveniently, Obama’s grandmother, Madelyn Payne Dunham , w orked part-time in the Probate Office in the Honolulu Hawaii Courthouse, and therefore had access to the SSNs of deceased individuals. The Social Security Administration was never informed of Ludwig’s death, and because he never received Social Security benefits there were no benefits to stop and no questions were raised. The suspicion, of course, is that Dunham, knowing her grandson was not a U.S. citizen—either because he was born in Kenya or became a citizen of Indonesia upon his adoption by Lolo Soetoro —merely scoured the probate records until she found someone who died who was not receiving Social Security benefits, and “selected” that SSN for Obama.
> Just wait until Trump gets past the birth certificate and onto the issue of Barry O's use of a stolen SSN. You will see leftist heads exploding, because they will have no way of defending Obama. Although many Americans do not understand the meaning of the term "natural born citizen," there are few who do not understand that if you are using someone else's SSN it is a clear indication of fraud.
Eye On Corruption! Exposed The Truth, The Lies
Sunday, May 15, 2011
Friday, May 13, 2011
Obama adviser compared U.S. Christians to al-Qaida Also likened feared terror group to Jewish 'totalitarians' in Israel
ERUSALEM – President Obama's faith adviser, Eboo Patel, compared al-Qaida to what he called Christian "totalitarians" in the U.S. and Jewish "totalitarians" in Israel, WND has learned.
In February 2010, Obama named Patel to his Advisory Council on Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships.
Patel, a Muslim activist from Chicago, is the founder and executive director of Chicago-based Interfaith Youth Core, which says it promotes pluralism by teaming people of different faiths on service projects.
Find out what Islam has planned for you: Get "Muslim Mafia: Inside the Secret Underworld That's Conspiring to Islamize America."
In an October 2009 article in a Newtopia Magazine, a liberal cultural publication, Obama's faith adviser made the controversial comparison. The article was adapted from the text of a speech given by Patel to the Interfaith Education for a Global Society Conference in New York City in January 2002.
Stated Patel: "The problem is that we live in a time when the Muslim totalitarians are dominating. Why? Because they are building powerful institutions that propagate their interpretation of Islam – just as the Christian totalitarians in America have powerful institutions; and the Jewish totalitarians in Israel have powerful institutions; and the Hindu totalitarians in India have powerful institutions.
"What do I mean by institutions?" asked Patel. "Lobbying groups that pass policies, political organizations that get people elected, television and radio and magazines and publishing houses which articulate ideas, schools and universities, youth organizations and women's groups, bodies which raise and distribute money."
Patel then stated, "Al-Qaida is a network of institutions. Schools and mosques which teach 8-year-olds a certain ideology; organizations which lead them to Afghanistan; training camps which make them soldiers; manuals which offer advice on the prayers to whisper while engaging in violence. The religious identity – which is to say, the ways of being, believing and belonging in relation with the transcendent – of too many young Muslims is being shaped by these institutions."
Patel explained his reference to Christian "totalitarianism" stems from a piece by New York Times Foreign Affairs columnist Thomas Friedman who wrote that World War III will be fought against "religious totalitarianism."
"Religious totalitarianism is not just the belief that one religion is right," added Patel, "but also that there is only one correct interpretation of that religion and everyone should practice it or else."
Patel failed to explain that so-called Muslim totalitarians, like al-Qaida, use terrorism to spread their belief system.
American freedom, equality are just 'myths'
The Obama faith adviser recently has made other controversial remarks.
WND reported last week Patel blasted what he called the "myths" of America – describing them as beliefs that the country is "a land of freedom and equality and justice."
Patel explained how he used the "faith-based movement" to channel his rage at America "in a direction far more compassionate and far more merciful."
Patel further implied that had he grown up in the 1960s, he may have joined the Weather Underground terrorist group led by William Ayers.
Like Obama, Patel is deeply tied to Ayers.
In a 2007 interview with NPR to promote a book he wrote that year, Patel was asked about his "affinity" toward the radicalism of Ayers, as described in the book.
Patel replied that his own life story "is much closer to Bill Ayers," explaining he "grew up in the same hometown" that Ayers did.
Continued Patel: "I was kind of taught the same myths about America, a land of freedom and equality and justice, et cetera, et cetera."
"And then, when I got to college, I saw people eating out of garbage cans for dinner, and I saw Vietnam vets drinking mouthwash for the alcohol, and I thought to myself, this is not the myth that I grew up with. And, in a way, I was so, I think, immature at that time politically, that all I could do was rage."
Patel explained how he used religion to channel his rage toward America.
"And it was a faith-based movement that came into my life that kind of directed that rage in a direction far more compassionate and far more merciful."
Obama's faith adviser went on to say how he may have joined Ayers' terrorist group if he was around as an activist in the 1960s.
"One of the things that I write about in this book is, you know, had it been one of the people involved in the Weather Underground, who were sitting at my kitchen table when I was 18 years old and raging, my life could have been very different," he said.
"That I really thank God that it was a set of people who came into my life with a very clear vision of justice. But a sense of justice emanating from Divine Mercy."
Patel has a much deeper relationship with Ayers than he admitted in the NPR interview.
In 2005, he co-authored a book with Ayers' adopted son, Chesa Boudin.
The book, "Letters from Young Activists: Today's Rebels Speak Out," was co-written by several young radicals, including Ismail Khalidi, the son of Columbia University Professor Rashid Khalidi.
WND was first to report on Obama's close relationship with Khalidi, who has been tied to the Palestinian Liberation Organization and who has described Israel as a "racist" state with an "apartheid" system.
The preface of Patel's 2005 book, meanwhile, was written by Ayers' wife, Weather Underground co-founder Bernardine Dohrn.
Dohrn describes the book as "a clarion call of hope, defiance, critical analysis, humor, irony, and self-conscious insistence that the queer, the Palestinian, the immigrant, the privileged, the children of prisoners and hip-hopsters have arrived."
The back cover of the book boasts an endorsement from Mumia Abu-Jamal, the convicted cop-killer and former member of the Black Panther Party.
On the acknowledgments page, Patel and co-authors thank Ayers himself for "guidance" and "encouragement."
Hamas co-conspirator
Patel is part of the official speaker's bureau of the Islamic Society of North America, an unindicted co-conspirator in a scheme to raise money for Hamas.
From his own comments, Patel apparently is a member of ISNA. Upon the August 2007 election of the group's president, Ingrid Mattson, Patel told USA Today, "I'm proud to have her elected as my president."
Patel also served last year on a panel at ISNA's annual convention in Washington.
He has written columns for the Washington Post and Huffington Post that promote ISNA events.
Ground Zero mosque
Patel is also tied to Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf, the controversial Islamic leader behind the proposed $100 million, 13-story Islamic cultural center and mosque two blocks from the site of the 9/11 attacks.
Rauf wrote the afterword to Patel's 2006 book, "Building the Interfaith Youth Movement: Beyond Dialogue to Action."
Patel is listed as one of 15 "Muslim Leaders of Tomorrow" on the website for the American Society for Muslim Advancement, which is led by Rauf.
In Patel's 2007 book, "Saving Each Other, Saving Ourselves," he recounts discussing with Rauf the future of Islam in the U.S.
Rauf "understood the vision immediately and suggested that I visit him and his wife, Daisy Khan, at their home the following evening," Patel recalled.
Khan founded the society with her husband and has aided him in his plans for the mosque near Ground Zero.
"The living room of their apartment on the Upper West Side was set up like a mosque, with prayer rugs stretched from wall to wall," wrote Patel in his book.
Continued Patel: "I arrived at dusk, prayed the maghrib prayer with Daisy and Imam Feisal and then talked with them about how America, with its unique combination of religious devotion and religious diversity, was the ideal place for a renewal of Islam.
"In the 20th century, Catholicism and Judaism underwent profound transformations in America," Patel observed. "I think, this century, in America, Islam will do the same."
'Critical mass' of Muslims in U.S.
"Islam is a religion that has always been revitalized by its migration," Patel wrote. "America is a nation that has been constantly rejuvenated by immigrants. There is now a critical mass of Muslims in America."
Patel last March wrote a Huffington Post piece referring to Obama's former "green jobs" czar Van Jones as a "faith hero."
"In my last post on Van, I called him an American patriot," wrote Patel. "That is high praise in my book. But watching Van's speech at the NAACP, I have another title for him, one that I reserve for the true giants of history. Van Jones is a faith hero."
Jones resigned in September after it was exposed he founded a communist revolutionary organization and signed a statement that accused the Bush administration of possible involvement in the Sept. 11 attacks. Jones also called for "resistance" against the U.S.
Jones previously stated his advocacy for green jobs was part of a broader movement to destroy the U.S. capitalist system.
WND reported that one day after the Sept. 11 attacks, Jones led a vigil that expressed solidarity with Arab and Muslim Americans as well as with what he called the victims of "U.S. imperialism" around the world.
With research by Brenda J. Elliott
In February 2010, Obama named Patel to his Advisory Council on Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships.
Patel, a Muslim activist from Chicago, is the founder and executive director of Chicago-based Interfaith Youth Core, which says it promotes pluralism by teaming people of different faiths on service projects.
Find out what Islam has planned for you: Get "Muslim Mafia: Inside the Secret Underworld That's Conspiring to Islamize America."
In an October 2009 article in a Newtopia Magazine, a liberal cultural publication, Obama's faith adviser made the controversial comparison. The article was adapted from the text of a speech given by Patel to the Interfaith Education for a Global Society Conference in New York City in January 2002.
Stated Patel: "The problem is that we live in a time when the Muslim totalitarians are dominating. Why? Because they are building powerful institutions that propagate their interpretation of Islam – just as the Christian totalitarians in America have powerful institutions; and the Jewish totalitarians in Israel have powerful institutions; and the Hindu totalitarians in India have powerful institutions.
"What do I mean by institutions?" asked Patel. "Lobbying groups that pass policies, political organizations that get people elected, television and radio and magazines and publishing houses which articulate ideas, schools and universities, youth organizations and women's groups, bodies which raise and distribute money."
Patel then stated, "Al-Qaida is a network of institutions. Schools and mosques which teach 8-year-olds a certain ideology; organizations which lead them to Afghanistan; training camps which make them soldiers; manuals which offer advice on the prayers to whisper while engaging in violence. The religious identity – which is to say, the ways of being, believing and belonging in relation with the transcendent – of too many young Muslims is being shaped by these institutions."
Patel explained his reference to Christian "totalitarianism" stems from a piece by New York Times Foreign Affairs columnist Thomas Friedman who wrote that World War III will be fought against "religious totalitarianism."
"Religious totalitarianism is not just the belief that one religion is right," added Patel, "but also that there is only one correct interpretation of that religion and everyone should practice it or else."
Patel failed to explain that so-called Muslim totalitarians, like al-Qaida, use terrorism to spread their belief system.
American freedom, equality are just 'myths'
The Obama faith adviser recently has made other controversial remarks.
WND reported last week Patel blasted what he called the "myths" of America – describing them as beliefs that the country is "a land of freedom and equality and justice."
Patel explained how he used the "faith-based movement" to channel his rage at America "in a direction far more compassionate and far more merciful."
Patel further implied that had he grown up in the 1960s, he may have joined the Weather Underground terrorist group led by William Ayers.
Like Obama, Patel is deeply tied to Ayers.
In a 2007 interview with NPR to promote a book he wrote that year, Patel was asked about his "affinity" toward the radicalism of Ayers, as described in the book.
Patel replied that his own life story "is much closer to Bill Ayers," explaining he "grew up in the same hometown" that Ayers did.
Continued Patel: "I was kind of taught the same myths about America, a land of freedom and equality and justice, et cetera, et cetera."
"And then, when I got to college, I saw people eating out of garbage cans for dinner, and I saw Vietnam vets drinking mouthwash for the alcohol, and I thought to myself, this is not the myth that I grew up with. And, in a way, I was so, I think, immature at that time politically, that all I could do was rage."
Patel explained how he used religion to channel his rage toward America.
"And it was a faith-based movement that came into my life that kind of directed that rage in a direction far more compassionate and far more merciful."
Obama's faith adviser went on to say how he may have joined Ayers' terrorist group if he was around as an activist in the 1960s.
"One of the things that I write about in this book is, you know, had it been one of the people involved in the Weather Underground, who were sitting at my kitchen table when I was 18 years old and raging, my life could have been very different," he said.
"That I really thank God that it was a set of people who came into my life with a very clear vision of justice. But a sense of justice emanating from Divine Mercy."
Patel has a much deeper relationship with Ayers than he admitted in the NPR interview.
In 2005, he co-authored a book with Ayers' adopted son, Chesa Boudin.
The book, "Letters from Young Activists: Today's Rebels Speak Out," was co-written by several young radicals, including Ismail Khalidi, the son of Columbia University Professor Rashid Khalidi.
WND was first to report on Obama's close relationship with Khalidi, who has been tied to the Palestinian Liberation Organization and who has described Israel as a "racist" state with an "apartheid" system.
The preface of Patel's 2005 book, meanwhile, was written by Ayers' wife, Weather Underground co-founder Bernardine Dohrn.
Dohrn describes the book as "a clarion call of hope, defiance, critical analysis, humor, irony, and self-conscious insistence that the queer, the Palestinian, the immigrant, the privileged, the children of prisoners and hip-hopsters have arrived."
The back cover of the book boasts an endorsement from Mumia Abu-Jamal, the convicted cop-killer and former member of the Black Panther Party.
On the acknowledgments page, Patel and co-authors thank Ayers himself for "guidance" and "encouragement."
Hamas co-conspirator
Patel is part of the official speaker's bureau of the Islamic Society of North America, an unindicted co-conspirator in a scheme to raise money for Hamas.
From his own comments, Patel apparently is a member of ISNA. Upon the August 2007 election of the group's president, Ingrid Mattson, Patel told USA Today, "I'm proud to have her elected as my president."
Patel also served last year on a panel at ISNA's annual convention in Washington.
He has written columns for the Washington Post and Huffington Post that promote ISNA events.
Ground Zero mosque
Patel is also tied to Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf, the controversial Islamic leader behind the proposed $100 million, 13-story Islamic cultural center and mosque two blocks from the site of the 9/11 attacks.
Rauf wrote the afterword to Patel's 2006 book, "Building the Interfaith Youth Movement: Beyond Dialogue to Action."
Patel is listed as one of 15 "Muslim Leaders of Tomorrow" on the website for the American Society for Muslim Advancement, which is led by Rauf.
In Patel's 2007 book, "Saving Each Other, Saving Ourselves," he recounts discussing with Rauf the future of Islam in the U.S.
Rauf "understood the vision immediately and suggested that I visit him and his wife, Daisy Khan, at their home the following evening," Patel recalled.
Khan founded the society with her husband and has aided him in his plans for the mosque near Ground Zero.
"The living room of their apartment on the Upper West Side was set up like a mosque, with prayer rugs stretched from wall to wall," wrote Patel in his book.
Continued Patel: "I arrived at dusk, prayed the maghrib prayer with Daisy and Imam Feisal and then talked with them about how America, with its unique combination of religious devotion and religious diversity, was the ideal place for a renewal of Islam.
"In the 20th century, Catholicism and Judaism underwent profound transformations in America," Patel observed. "I think, this century, in America, Islam will do the same."
'Critical mass' of Muslims in U.S.
"Islam is a religion that has always been revitalized by its migration," Patel wrote. "America is a nation that has been constantly rejuvenated by immigrants. There is now a critical mass of Muslims in America."
Patel last March wrote a Huffington Post piece referring to Obama's former "green jobs" czar Van Jones as a "faith hero."
"In my last post on Van, I called him an American patriot," wrote Patel. "That is high praise in my book. But watching Van's speech at the NAACP, I have another title for him, one that I reserve for the true giants of history. Van Jones is a faith hero."
Jones resigned in September after it was exposed he founded a communist revolutionary organization and signed a statement that accused the Bush administration of possible involvement in the Sept. 11 attacks. Jones also called for "resistance" against the U.S.
Jones previously stated his advocacy for green jobs was part of a broader movement to destroy the U.S. capitalist system.
WND reported that one day after the Sept. 11 attacks, Jones led a vigil that expressed solidarity with Arab and Muslim Americans as well as with what he called the victims of "U.S. imperialism" around the world.
With research by Brenda J. Elliott
Wednesday, August 5, 2009
Gov't insurance would allow coverage for abortion
Gov't insurance would allow coverage for abortion
WASHINGTON – Health care legislation before Congress would allow a new government-sponsored insurance plan to cover abortions, a decision that would affect millions of women and recast federal policy on the divisive issue.
Federal funds for abortions are now restricted to cases involving rape, incest or danger to the life of the mother. Abortion opponents say those restrictions should carry over to any health insurance sold through a new marketplace envisioned under the legislation, an exchange where people would choose private coverage or the public plan.
Abortion rights supporters say that would have the effect of denying coverage for abortion to millions of women who now have it through workplace insurance and are expected to join the exchange.
Advocates on both sides are preparing for a renewed battle over abortion, which could jeopardize political support for President Barack Obama's health care initiative aimed at covering nearly 50 million uninsured and restraining medical costs. The dispute could come to a head with House and Senate floor votes on abortion this fall, a prospect that many lawmakers would like to avoid.
"We want to see people who have no health insurance get it, but this is a sticking point," said Richard Doerflinger, associate director of pro-life activities for the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops. "We don't want health care reform to be the vehicle for mandating abortion." The church can't accept a public plan that covers abortion, he said.
Donna Crane, policy director for NARAL Pro-Choice America, said abortion opponents "want an abortion ban in private insurance, and that's not neutrality at all — that's a radical departure from current law. They want something far more extreme than where I think the American public is."
A compromise approved by a House committee last week attempted to balance questions of federal funding, personal choice and the conscience rights of clinicians. It would allow the public plan to cover abortion but without using federal funds, only dollars from beneficiary premiums. Likewise, private plans in the new insurance exchange could opt to cover abortion, but no federal subsidies would be used to pay for the procedure.
"It's a sham," said Douglas Johnson, legislative director for National Right to Life. "It's a bookkeeping scheme. The plan pays for abortion, and the government subsidizes the plan."
Rep. Lois Capps, D-Calif., author of the compromise, said she was trying to craft a solution that would accommodate both sides. Her amendment also would allow plans that covered no abortions whatsoever — not even in cases of rape, incest or to save the life of the mother — to be offered through the insurance exchange.
"With all due respect, not everyone adheres to what the Catholic bishops believe," said Capps, who supports abortion rights. "Our country allows for both sides, and our health plan should reflect that as well."
But Senate staffers said Capps' compromise is unacceptable to Republican senators.
For years, abortion rights supporters and abortion opponents have waged the equivalent of trench warfare over restrictions on federal funding. Abortion opponents have largely prevailed, instituting restrictions that bar federal funding for abortion, except in cases of rape and incest or if the mother's life would be endangered.
A law called the Hyde amendment applies the restrictions to Medicaid, forcing states that cover abortion for low-income women to do so with their own money. Separate laws apply the restrictions to the federal employee health plan and military and other programs.
The health overhaul would create a stream of federal funding not covered by the restrictions.
The new federal funds would take the form of subsidies for low- and middle-income people buying coverage through the health insurance exchange. Subsidies would be available for people to buy the public plan or private coverage. Making things more complicated, the federal subsidies would be mixed in with contributions from individuals and employers. Eventually, most Americans could end up getting their coverage through the exchange.
The Democratic health care legislation as originally introduced in the House and Senate did not mention abortion. That rang alarm bells for abortion opponents.
Since abortion is a legal medical procedure, experts on both sides say not mentioning it would allow health care plans in the new insurance exchange to provide unrestricted coverage.
It would mirror the private insurance market, where abortion coverage is widely available. A Guttmacher Institute study found that 87 percent of typical employer plans covered abortion in 2002, while a Kaiser Family Foundation survey in 2003 found that 46 percent of workers in employer plans had coverage for abortions. The studies asked different questions, which might help explain the disparity in the results.
In the Senate, the plan passed by the health committee is largely silent on the abortion issue. Staff aides confirmed that the public plan — and private insurance offered in the exchange — would be allowed to cover abortion, without funding restrictions. However, a bipartisan group of Finance Committee senators is discussing the issue and may take a different approach.
As the House and Senate bills stand now, the decision to offer abortion coverage in the public plan would be made by the health and human services secretary.
Abortion opponents are seeking a prohibition against using any federal subsidies to pay for abortions or for any part of any costs of a health plan that offers abortion. Such a proposal was voted down by the House Energy and Commerce Committee, the same panel that approved Capps' amendment. It's not likely to be the end of the story.
Aides to Reps. Bart Stupak, D-Mich., and Joseph Pitts, R-Pa., who sponsored the restrictive proposal that lost in committee, said the pair will press for a separate vote on abortion funding when the health care bill comes before the full House this fall.
Abortion opponents say private plans in the insurance exchange could be allowed to cover abortion, but only if it's offered under a separate, supplemental policy that individuals would have to buy on their own.
"You can have a result where nobody has to pay for other people's abortions," said Doerflinger.
Heidi Hartmann, president of the Institute for Women's Policy Research, said applying the current restrictions for federal employees and low-income women to a program intended for the middle class will provoke a backlash.
"There is a difference between picking off one group of women here and one group there and something that would affect a very large group," Hartmann said. "Everyone would like to avoid that fight."
(This version CORRECTS that federal funds for abortions are now restricted to cases involving rape, incest or danger to the life of the mother instead of danger to the health of the mother.))
By RICARDO ALONSO-ZALDIVAR, Associated Press Writer Ricardo Alonso-zaldivar, Associated Press Writer – 9 mins ago
Finally Good news somewhat.
WASHINGTON – Health care legislation before Congress would allow a new government-sponsored insurance plan to cover abortions, a decision that would affect millions of women and recast federal policy on the divisive issue.
Federal funds for abortions are now restricted to cases involving rape, incest or danger to the life of the mother. Abortion opponents say those restrictions should carry over to any health insurance sold through a new marketplace envisioned under the legislation, an exchange where people would choose private coverage or the public plan.
Abortion rights supporters say that would have the effect of denying coverage for abortion to millions of women who now have it through workplace insurance and are expected to join the exchange.
Advocates on both sides are preparing for a renewed battle over abortion, which could jeopardize political support for President Barack Obama's health care initiative aimed at covering nearly 50 million uninsured and restraining medical costs. The dispute could come to a head with House and Senate floor votes on abortion this fall, a prospect that many lawmakers would like to avoid.
"We want to see people who have no health insurance get it, but this is a sticking point," said Richard Doerflinger, associate director of pro-life activities for the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops. "We don't want health care reform to be the vehicle for mandating abortion." The church can't accept a public plan that covers abortion, he said.
Donna Crane, policy director for NARAL Pro-Choice America, said abortion opponents "want an abortion ban in private insurance, and that's not neutrality at all — that's a radical departure from current law. They want something far more extreme than where I think the American public is."
A compromise approved by a House committee last week attempted to balance questions of federal funding, personal choice and the conscience rights of clinicians. It would allow the public plan to cover abortion but without using federal funds, only dollars from beneficiary premiums. Likewise, private plans in the new insurance exchange could opt to cover abortion, but no federal subsidies would be used to pay for the procedure.
"It's a sham," said Douglas Johnson, legislative director for National Right to Life. "It's a bookkeeping scheme. The plan pays for abortion, and the government subsidizes the plan."
Rep. Lois Capps, D-Calif., author of the compromise, said she was trying to craft a solution that would accommodate both sides. Her amendment also would allow plans that covered no abortions whatsoever — not even in cases of rape, incest or to save the life of the mother — to be offered through the insurance exchange.
"With all due respect, not everyone adheres to what the Catholic bishops believe," said Capps, who supports abortion rights. "Our country allows for both sides, and our health plan should reflect that as well."
But Senate staffers said Capps' compromise is unacceptable to Republican senators.
For years, abortion rights supporters and abortion opponents have waged the equivalent of trench warfare over restrictions on federal funding. Abortion opponents have largely prevailed, instituting restrictions that bar federal funding for abortion, except in cases of rape and incest or if the mother's life would be endangered.
A law called the Hyde amendment applies the restrictions to Medicaid, forcing states that cover abortion for low-income women to do so with their own money. Separate laws apply the restrictions to the federal employee health plan and military and other programs.
The health overhaul would create a stream of federal funding not covered by the restrictions.
The new federal funds would take the form of subsidies for low- and middle-income people buying coverage through the health insurance exchange. Subsidies would be available for people to buy the public plan or private coverage. Making things more complicated, the federal subsidies would be mixed in with contributions from individuals and employers. Eventually, most Americans could end up getting their coverage through the exchange.
The Democratic health care legislation as originally introduced in the House and Senate did not mention abortion. That rang alarm bells for abortion opponents.
Since abortion is a legal medical procedure, experts on both sides say not mentioning it would allow health care plans in the new insurance exchange to provide unrestricted coverage.
It would mirror the private insurance market, where abortion coverage is widely available. A Guttmacher Institute study found that 87 percent of typical employer plans covered abortion in 2002, while a Kaiser Family Foundation survey in 2003 found that 46 percent of workers in employer plans had coverage for abortions. The studies asked different questions, which might help explain the disparity in the results.
In the Senate, the plan passed by the health committee is largely silent on the abortion issue. Staff aides confirmed that the public plan — and private insurance offered in the exchange — would be allowed to cover abortion, without funding restrictions. However, a bipartisan group of Finance Committee senators is discussing the issue and may take a different approach.
As the House and Senate bills stand now, the decision to offer abortion coverage in the public plan would be made by the health and human services secretary.
Abortion opponents are seeking a prohibition against using any federal subsidies to pay for abortions or for any part of any costs of a health plan that offers abortion. Such a proposal was voted down by the House Energy and Commerce Committee, the same panel that approved Capps' amendment. It's not likely to be the end of the story.
Aides to Reps. Bart Stupak, D-Mich., and Joseph Pitts, R-Pa., who sponsored the restrictive proposal that lost in committee, said the pair will press for a separate vote on abortion funding when the health care bill comes before the full House this fall.
Abortion opponents say private plans in the insurance exchange could be allowed to cover abortion, but only if it's offered under a separate, supplemental policy that individuals would have to buy on their own.
"You can have a result where nobody has to pay for other people's abortions," said Doerflinger.
Heidi Hartmann, president of the Institute for Women's Policy Research, said applying the current restrictions for federal employees and low-income women to a program intended for the middle class will provoke a backlash.
"There is a difference between picking off one group of women here and one group there and something that would affect a very large group," Hartmann said. "Everyone would like to avoid that fight."
(This version CORRECTS that federal funds for abortions are now restricted to cases involving rape, incest or danger to the life of the mother instead of danger to the health of the mother.))
By RICARDO ALONSO-ZALDIVAR, Associated Press Writer Ricardo Alonso-zaldivar, Associated Press Writer – 9 mins ago
Finally Good news somewhat.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)