Georgia Department of Community Health Circumvents Legislature to Cut Abortion Insurance Coverage


The Georgia Department of Community Health voted 5 to 3, with one abstention, at a meeting last Thursday to approve a new benefit plan that eliminates abortion coverage from the insurance plans of over 650,000 state employees, bypassing a legislature that refused to pass a similar measure during the 2013 legislative session.

According to the Atlanta Journal-Constitution, under the plan, abortion coverage will be eliminated for all State Health Benefit Plan members except in cases when the pregnant person’s life is in danger; this is more restrictive than federal law, which allows exceptions for rape and incest. The new plan is slated to go into effect in January 2014.

The plan reportedly did not elicit significant discussion among board members at the meeting.

The Associated Press reported that after the vote, Republican Georgia Gov. Nathan Deal commended the board, saying the new plan ensures “state taxpayers aren’t paying for a procedure that many find morally objectionable.”

In fiscal year 2011, 366 people sought abortions using the state insurance plan, resulting in $213,000 in payments, the AP noted, down from two years earlier, state insurance payments for abortions totaled $343,000.

Using medical boards and internal policy committees to implement reproductive health-care restrictions that do not make it through the legislature is a growing trend in a number of states. Most recently, the board of medicine in Iowa has been reviewing, and may end, the state’s telemedicine abortion program, after numerous abortion restrictions failed to pass in the state legislature during the 2013 session.

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

Follow Robin Marty on twitter: @robinmarty

  • fiona64

    If you find abortion “morally objectionable,” don’t get one. There. Isn’t that simple?

    The women who are now being denied coverage pay for a share of their benefits via payroll deduction. These legislators are denying them the opportunity to do so.

    Once again, politicians are practicing medicine without a license.

    • R0chambeau

      If it’s not covered under the plan, then no, they aren’t paying for it with payroll deduction.

      Just like I’m not paying for dental or vision coverage for my insurance plan – because my insurance doesn’t cover those things. If I want those, I get a separate plan, or I pay out of pocket.

      • fiona64

        You don’t read too well, do you? They are paying a share of the plan as state employees — and now part of their coverage is being taken away. Do you imagine that their payroll deduction will decrease as a result? Think again.

        • R0chambeau

          ” Do you imagine that their payroll deduction will decrease as a result?”

          That’s up for a actuary to determine. But it doesn’t change the fact that if the plan doesn’t offer something (abortions, dental, vision, backrubs, elective boob jobs, homeopathic remedies or whatever) then they are not paying for it.

          • fiona64

            The plan is currently covering something … which means they are losing coverage that ::wait for it:: they are paying for.

            Were you homeschooled or something?

          • R0chambeau

            Plans change. They aren’t paying for the coverage because it’s not covered.

            Just like I’m not paying for vision coverage because my plan doesn’t cover vision anymore.

            I know. Hard concept to grasp. Take your time.

  • ElRay

    When will people understand that their mythological beliefs have no bearing on somebody receiving proper medical care? When will people understand that their mythological beliefs have no bearing on reality, science, logic?

    • fiona64

      It’s about one thing, and one thing only: controlling women. Religious beliefs and whines about “murdering babies” are just smoke screens.

      • HeilMary1

        Because we know the antis hate the babies once they’re born, especially if the babies are non-white, disabled or gay.

        • R0chambeau

          Over 90% of pregnancies that are known to be Downs syndrome are aborted. It would seem that the ones that hate disabled babies are the pro-abortion crowd.

          • Ella Warnock

            And women should NOT be the ones to decide whether they’ll carry a Downs pregnancy to term because ___________?

          • R0chambeau

            Sure, I suppose you have that right. I just hope that when you meet people with Downs that you tell them how you really feel – that you think they are worthless and a burden to society.

          • Jennifer Starr

            That’s not at all what she said, and you know it.

          • R0chambeau

            Oh really? Explain to me then why you would decide to about a Down Syndrome baby.

          • Jennifer Starr

            I don’t believe in making other women’s childbearing decisions for them. That’s the job of the woman who’s actually pregnant. Only she can decide.

          • Ella Warnock

            And why would I do that?

          • R0chambeau

            And what choice did the mothers make? Was it, like you said? That you don’t think Down Syndrome babies are worthless or a burden? Or is it not that?

            Statistics show that over 90% think you’re full of shit. Most people think Down’s babies are worthless and a burden – that’s why they are aborted at a +90% rate.

            But, hey, you like abortion. That’s cool. Eugenics is cool. Thinning out the heard of undesirables is cool.

          • Ella Warnock

            Well, I guess you’ve got it all figured out, then. Good for you.

          • R0chambeau

            Hey, don’t be mad because you want to kill all Down Syndrome people. That’s your right to be a murderous bastard.

          • Ella Warnock

            Why is your posting history private, little brat? What you got to hide?

          • Ella Warnock

            That’s the best you’ve got, eh, histrionics and hyperbole? Oh my, color me intimidated!

          • R0chambeau

            You seem angry. I’m glad I don’t have Down Syndrome because you might want to kill me.

          • fiona64

            Oh, there it is … the “tone argument.”

            She’s not angry, sweetie. I see it more like a cat playing with its prey right before the final bite.

          • Valde

            Wow.

            Could you sound any more stupid?

          • fiona64

            Statistics show that over 90% think you’re full of shit

            Kindly share the study that examined how many people think that Ella Warnock is full of shit. I am hopeful that this is in a peer-reviewed journal, with information on sampling method, etc.

          • fiona64

            And I suppose that one day you will make a post that does not contain a straw man.

            I also suppose that there’ll be pork in the treetops come morning.*

            * – Lion in Winter reference

  • R0chambeau

    Are you really that uninformed and/or don’t know how to use google?

    • fiona64

      When you make the assertion, sweetie, it’s up to you to provide the backup.

      Or didn’t your mommy tell you not to expect others to do your homework for you?