releases: https://sensenbrenner.house.gov/2017/12/senate-republicans-ready-an-abortion-flip-flop-in-obamacare-stability-bill
Data license: MIT · Data source: dwillis/congress-press
This data as json
| url | title | date | year | month | party | chamber | state | member_name | bioguide_id | domain | scraper | source | date_source | text | has_text | collected_at | updated_at |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| https://sensenbrenner.house.gov/2017/12/senate-republicans-ready-an-abortion-flip-flop-in-obamacare-stability-bill | Senate Republicans Ready An Abortion Flip-Flop In Obamacare Stability Bill | 2017-12-19 | 2017 | 2017-12 | Republican | House | WI | F. Sensenbrenner | S000244 | sensenbrenner.house.gov | legacy | By: Christopher Jacobs of the Federalist As Yogi Berra would say, Its dj vu all over again. Once again, Senate Republicans are preparing to flip-flop on taxpayer funding of plans that cover abortion. In June, Idiscussedhow unnamed Senate Republican sourcesclaimedthat their repeal-and-replace legislation would preserve Obamacares restrictions on abortion funding, even though Republicans have spent the past seven years arguing that the law provides taxpayer funding of plans that cover abortion. Those same unnamed sources are now trying to claim that the Obamacare stability bill does not need additional restrictions on abortion funding. AsPoliticoreports: [Senate Republicans are] stressing that Obamacare already has prohibitions on using federal funds for abortions that are not because of rape or incest or to save the mothers life. Anti-abortion groups didnt trust the Obama Administration to enforce those prohibitions. That prohibition could carry more weight now. We have a pro-life Administration that has agreed to more stringently enforce the life protections, a Senate Republican source said. That claim might sound nice now, but its not what Republicans have argued since Obamacare passed, nor is it consistent with the facts. To claim otherwise insults the intelligence of the pro-life community, and voters at large. Lets Go Down Memory Lane In June, Icitedseveral floor speeches during the Obamacare debate where congressional leaders argued that Obamacare includes taxpayer funding of abortions. For instance, heres Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY), as the House prepared to vote on Obamacare: Democrats over in the House want to approve the Senate bill without actually voting on it. These Democrats want to approve a bill that rewrites one-sixth of the economy,forces taxpayers to pay for abortions, raises taxes in the middle of a recession, and slashes Medicare for seniors, without leaving their fingerprints on it (emphasis mine). Astute observers might notice the wording of McConnells remarks. The Senate majority leader did not say that Obamacaremightforce taxpayers to fund abortion coverage, depending upon how the administration implements the law. He did not say that We need to elect a pro-life administration to prevent Obamacare from providing taxpayer funding of abortion coverage. He flatly stated that Obamacare forces taxpayers to pay for abortionsperiod, end of story. The current vice president, Mike Pence, said the same thing. While serving in the House, he delivered a floor speech that unequivocally equated Obamacare with taxpayer funding of abortion coverage: Mr. Speaker, the bill before us tonight doesnt fix anything. It doesnt fix the fact that this is a government takeover of health care thats going to mandate that every American buy health insurance whether they want it or need it or not. It doesnt fix the fact that it includes about $600 billion in job-killing tax increases in the worst economy in 30 years.It doesnt fix the fact this bill provides public funding for elective abortion for the first time in American history(emphasis added). Law Trumps Executive Action McConnell, Pence, and many others had good reason for their statements. As Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-UT)notedin December 2009, Obamacares abortion funding restrictions are significantly weaker than the Hyde Amendmenta provision designed to prevent taxpayer funding of abortion since 1976making them completely unacceptable in Hatchs view, and in the view of most pro-lifers. As to Republican staffers claims that the Trump administration can fix the flawed statutory language through executive orders or more robust enforcement, heres what pro-life Rep. Jim Sensenbrenner (R-WI)had to say about thatin March 2010: This bill expands abortion funding to the greatest extent in history. I have heard that the President is contemplating an executive order to try to limit this. Members should not be fooled. Executive orders cannot override the clear intent of a statute.If an executive order moves the abortion funding in this bill away from where it is now, it will be struck down as unconstitutional because executive orders cannot constitutionally do that. Other House members made the same argument in March 2010, includingDan Lungren(R-CA) andJoe Pitts(R-PA). Their argument applies just as equally to Republican presidents and administrations as it does to Democratic ones. Moreover, conservatives who believe in limited government should not ask President Trump to exceed his executive authority, and a blanket funding on Obamacares abortion coverage would do just that. As Iwrote in January, a Republican Administration should not be tempted to use unilateral actions to achieve conservative ends. Such behavior represents a contradiction in terms. Not only can the Trump administration not stop funding of abortion coverage unilaterally, it should not attempt to try, if doing so would exceed its legal authority. Dont Insult Voters Intelligence Just as the Trump administration should not try to exceed its authority in shutting down federal funding of abortion coverage, Senate Republicans should not attempt to insult voters by pretending that those efforts will succeed legally, or that the completely unacceptable abortion protections Hatch described in 2009 are now sufficient. As Inoted in October, Sen. Lamar Alexander (R-TN) failed even to understand the need for pro-life protections when crafting his stability bill earlier this fall. Leadership claiming pro-life protections are unnecessary when Alexander never bothered to consider them literally adds insult to injury. Senate Republicans have alreadyattempted to claimthat the insurer stability bill will bring benefits to taxpayers, even though the non-partisan Congressional Budget Officebelievesthe bill will give awindfall directly to insurance companies. They should not worsen the spectacle of rationalizing bad policy by attempting to render seven years of arguments they made to the pro-life community meaninglessfor they only beclown themselves in the process. Mr. Jacobs is founder and CEO of Juniper Research Group, a policy consulting firm based in Washington. He is on Twitter:@chrisjacobsHC. | 1 | 2026-03-30T12:14:52Z | 2026-03-30T12:14:52Z |