Congreswoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz: Anti-Abortion Bills “Nothing But Tax Hike”

The Republican Party is the champions of taxpayers, small businesses, and the common man.  Except of course for when they create policies that actually hurt taxpayers, most small businesses, and the common woman.  So it comes as no surprise that in trying to pass the “Super Hyde” bill that is the “No Taxpayer Funded Abortions” section of H.R. 3, it in fact so restricts insurance coverage that it actually will raise taxes.  What is surprising is that it took so long for someone in congress to attack the GOP for it.

Luckily, Florida Congresswoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz is speaking up.

Via Think Progress:

WASSERMAN SCHULTZ: This is nothing short of a tax increase, I mean we have to call it exactly what it is. The Republicans are proposing a tax increase on all women because in their anti-women legislation H.R.3, they would take away the tax benefit from all small businesses if their health insurance offers abortion coverage which 87 percent of them do. So essentially they are saying if you are a small business owner and you offer your employees insurance and that policy covers abortion, then you will not be able to benefit from the tax credits that the Affordable Care Act allows you and also that you can already take by offering insurance to your employees.

It’s outrageous. The Republicans are maintaining and proponents of this legislation are maintaining that all they are doing is codifying the status quo and prohibiting federal funding of abortions. This legislation goes much further. It reaches deep into the personal lives of all American women, of all small business owners and twists the Republican nose into the business of people who need insurance and also small business owners who want to provide coverage for their employees.

Apparently when the GOP says they don’t want to raise taxes, they just mean taxes for men.  Being female has now gone from being a pre-existing condition under the old health care system to being a taxable condition under the new regime.

Like this story? Your $10 tax-deductible contribution helps support our research, reporting, and analysis.

For more information or to schedule an interview with contact

Follow Robin Marty on twitter: @robinmarty

  • stjohnspatriot

    Ms. W-S has it partly right.  The proponents of HR3 are exactly about prohibiting the use of federal funds for abortion and protecting the rights of the unborn – nothing more.  Further, they are protecting the rights of Americans who as a matter of conscience object to the use of their tax dollars to subsidize the wholesale slaughter of innocents.  Abortion is not “health care”.  It is infanticide pure and simple. 

  • forced-birth-rape

    ~ Forced pregnancy is sexual sadomasochistic terrorism. Forced birth is sexual torture. Pro-lifers are sadomasochistic sexual tortures of women and little girls, using fetuses as a sexual torture instrument on women and little girls.~

    ~ This is what I learned from rape.

    Nothing and no one has the right to be in my body against my will, use my body against my will, terrorize me for months with dread of having extreme unwanted vaginal pain against my will, nothing and no one has the right to cause me extreme unwanted vaginal pain against my will, nothing and no one has the right to be in my vagina at any time or place against my will. ~

    But you liars are all about killing fetuses along with their mothers for oil. But then it is republican christian men doing that and the men need to go to war to prove their manhoods.

  • plume-assassine

    Bullshit. Your “conscientious objection” is nothing but a FRONT for woman-hating, and hating women in poverty at that. Newsflash: I’m a taxpayer too and I support my tax dollars going to fund abortions for women who can’t afford them… even though, get this, taxes aren’t being used for this now nor has it ever happened. It’s a fabrication on your part, plain and simple. Oh, and I object to my tax dollars being used to fund WAR for empire (which IS happening now and is the REAL “wholesale slaughter of innocents”)… but there’s nothing I can do about it!

    1 in 3 American women have abortions and they are not murderers. They are normal women controlling their fertility and sexuality, they are everywhere, and they are probably in your own family. GET OVER IT!

  • ldan

    So are your charitable donations to Christian charities considered federal funds? You can take them as a deduction on your taxes, right? (for those who itemize deductions, the answer is yes, by the way). Given the separation of church and state, I really don’t think federal money should be supporting religious causes. A bill that strips the rights to deduct charitable donations to religiously-oriented charities, medical expenses at Catholic hospitals, and money you might be able to deduct for education expenses at religiously affiliated schools seems to be in order, doesn’t it?


    I mean really, it isn’t even just my personal preference here. We have some very strong rules about the government involvement in religion and vice-versa.


    This makes as much sense as HR3 trying to disallow deductions for health plans that cover abortions, disallow me from using my own health savings plan money for an abortion. These are not *your* tax dollars, they are *mine*.


    Oddly enough, the bill doesn’t go after charitable donations to abortion-related causes. Why are those deductions not federal dollars, while abortion-related health care deductions are?


    You see, while the proponents of HR3 *say* they are about prohibiting the use of federal funds for abortion (something that is already prohibited, by the way), what they’re really pushing here is a bill that can be used to improve their ratings with the fringe voters that are now their base since they have nothing to appeal to voting blocs that are actually growing (Hispanic voters, in particular). They need to not only make sure their shrinking base is solid, but that they show up at the voting booth…so they gin up this nonesense and try to redefine what counts as federal money. They don’t care that this shit would bite them in the ass if it passed and created the precedent for examining deductions for anything that shouldn’t be getting federal money; they don’t expect the bill to actually pass the Senate or Presidential veto. They are simply pushing as hard as they can to keep getting re-elected by flashing this sort of circus in front of voters like you.