Conservative Activists Split on Dangerous Abortion Bill


Cross-posted from the National Women’s Law Center’s publication, Womenstake.

For months, we’ve been saying that the misleadingly named No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion Act (H.R. 3), which manipulates the tax code to penalize women with insurance plans that cover abortion, would raise taxes on individuals, families, and small businesses if their insurance plans include coverage of abortion.

A funny thing happened. It looks like none other than Grover Norquist agrees with us. Norquist, President of Americans for Tax Reform and architect of a no-tax-increases pledge signed by 237 members of Congress and 41 Senator, today expressed concern that this dangerous intrusion in women’s lives would increase taxes. According to reports, Norquist has concerns that penalizing abortion coverage through the tax code may “mask a net tax increase.”

What would H.R. 3 mean for a real family?  Take an assembly lineman with a wife and two kids who loses his job when his manufacturing plant closes. Right now, he’s eligible for the Health Coverage Tax Credit to help with the costs of his $13,770 premium. But, because his insurance plan included coverage of abortion, H.R. 3 would suddenly make him ineligible for the benefit and would cost him $9,129.

Raising taxes to penalize women and families with insurance plans that cover abortion is an absurd overreach and an affront to good sense. Glad to see that Norquist – sort of – agrees.  

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

  • socorro-sultan

    Why would somebody kill an innocent? instead put them in jail..let us all be responsible..

  • beenthere72

    Put who in jail?   Women who have abortions?  

  • arekushieru

    And is your first sentence related to your last?  If not, who are you calling innocent?  Not fetuses, I hope.  Because they don’t have the capacity to be innocent or guilty.  

    Secondly, you’re already putting women in jail for a biological process that is entirely beyond their control, by forcing them to gestate.  How is that being responsible?  And, isn’t entrapment illegal?  Also, I would say the fetus is certainly being jailed for non-criminal activity, when you do the same, because, not only is a woman’s body certainly a smaller place to reside in than that which is normally perceived as what the term ‘jail’ described, but it is done without fetal consent (barring the fact that we know that the fetus is unABLE to give consent).