House GOP Proposes ‘Abortion Insurance Disclosure Act’


Click here for all our coverage of the health insurance exchange rollout as part of the Affordable Care Act.

This week, rather than working on a solution to the government shutdown and looming debt ceiling crisis, House Republicans proposed a measure that requires any health insurance plan offered through Affordable Care Act (ACA) insurance exchanges to disclose whether it provides abortion coverage.

According to Rep. Chris Smith (R-NJ), HR 3279, the Abortion Insurance Disclosure Act, is necessary because a surcharge for abortion coverage will be hidden in the fine print of many plans. “Americans have a right to know upfront and with full transparency when they are purchasing a plan that subsidizes the killing of unborn children,” he said. “Even the most ardent advocate of abortion should embrace full disclosure.”

Smith, a co-chair of the House Pro-Life Caucus, repeated claims by anti-choice advocates that Obamacare appears to be subsidizing health plans that offer abortion coverage. Under the proposal, any abortion coverage provided by any health plan through ACA insurance exchanges would have to be “disclosed to enrollees at the time of enrollment in the plan and shall be prominently displayed in any marketing or advertising materials.”

Proposing disclosure of abortion insurance coverage while simultaneously arguing to defund the federal health-care law altogether could signal House Republicans know their defunding mission is failing.

The bill has only one Democratic sponsor, Rep. Daniel Lipinski of Illinois. Lipinski co-chairs the Pro-Life Caucus with Smith and argues that Obamacare amounts to taxpayer funding for abortion. “There is a longstanding principle in our country that the federal government does not subsidize abortions,” he said. “Yet under Obamacare, taxpayer money under the guise of federal subsidies will be paying for insurance that covers elective abortion. This needs to stop.”

Currently, 23 states have laws that prohibit insurance plans on state exchanges from providing coverage for abortion services. Eight of those states—Idaho, Kansas, Kentucky, Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota, Oklahoma, and Utah—passed comprehensive abortion coverage bans restricting coverage offered through, and outside of, the exchanges.

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

Follow Jessica Mason Pieklo on twitter: @hegemommy

  • fiona64

    This is crap. What part of “The Hyde Amendment precludes this” is beyond these imbeciles?

    • fiona64

      To Pro-Plan, in moderation:

      The argument being put forth is that the Federal government is providing the insurance (it isn’t). The Hyde Amendment *precludes* Federal dollars being expended for abortion, regardless of circumstance.

      People are essentially being told that they should not be allowed to *spend their own money* on private insurance that covers abortions.

      I hope that this makes my position more clear.

  • doglog18 .

    I Like it….Lets make sure people know what they are buying.

    • cjvg

      Then why are pregnancy crisis centers so hell bent on NOT having to disclose that they are not real health-care providers, do not fall under HIPAA , and do not provided full spectrum services other then have the kid somewhere else and let us adopt it out?

      • fiona64

        GMTA.

        • cjvg

          Sorry, i’m not very good with acronyms or word jokes for that matter.

          I had to look this up and after I got past some really strange ones (General Motors Technical Academy as well as Genetically Modified Total Annihilation) I came to great minds think alike?

          If so, thanks I have always enjoyed the complexity of some of your more elaborate answers, and thankfully we have plenty of company here.

          • fiona64

            Great minds think alike is what I was going for. :-)

          • cjvg

            Pfh, what a relief.
            I must be getting better at acronyms after 20 years of living here

    • fiona64

      So, you’re good with CPCs being made to disclose that they have no medical staff, dispense no accurate medical information, and exist solely to coerce the right* kind of woman into surrendering an infant to the right** kind of family?

      After all, fair’s fair.

      * Caucasian
      ** Christian

    • HeilMary1

      I’d love to see forced-birther centers be forced to show pictures of mothers with obstetric fistulas, fetus-caused face and breast cancers, sepsis limb amputations. and kids with grotesque birth defects or molestation complaints against pedophile priests.

    • http://www.facebook.com/pearlbrady Pearl Equality Brady

      I might be able to see your point if Rep. Smith’s bill also required disclosure on all promotional materials on whether said insurance policy covered things like Viagra. If he’s going to claim this is only to provide information, not for political posturing, then he needs to widen his net.

      • HeilMary1

        Smith tried to get a Capitol Hill job for my ex-boyfriend / sex tourist to Bangkok. Ex bragged about running into Neil Bush at the SAME CHILD BROTHEL. Smith’s mother-killing ban on safe sex for women fuels the child sex trafficking atrocity that he pretends to oppose. Smith would never insult his buddy priests and GOP pedophiles by banning Viagra.

        • pitbullgirl1965

          Ex bragged about running into Neil Bush at the SAME CHILD BROTHEL
          What the…. What did you say? Holy sh*t you must have been shocked.

          • HeilMary1

            Yes, and I made a pest of myself complaining to anyone and everyone I could think of in law enforcement, NGOs and the media about my ex and the Bushes. I even briefly spoke to an assistant of Brian Ross and to Mr. Ross himself and to some parties involved with Neil’s divorce. Initially, I thought George W. was the perp that my ex ran into during that Congressional junket in Bangkok in the early 1990s, but later divorce revelations about Neil and his business dealings in Southeast Asia pinpointed him as the perp. The unlimited availability of impoverished underage girls for sex tourism puts a sinister spin on Bush family opposition to reproductive choice.

    • RethinkThePink

      Since when does any insurance consumer know what s/he is buying? Do you know everything that is and isn’t covered in yours?

  • Karen Teegarden

    All fear mongering. The Hyde Amendment does not allow federal dollars to pay for abortions.

    • CT14

      Hyde should be repealed.

  • Mike Rubin

    More shenanigans from the Forced Birthers — “right to lifers” is such
    a crock — who love nothing more than inflicting unwanted children
    — who they never will feed, clothe, house, medicate, or educate on
    their dimes — on women who dare have non-procreational sex. It’s born
    of the same obsession as their wars on sex education and contraception
    and has nothing whatsoever to do with “saving innocent babies.” They don’t give a damn about “innocent babies.” The
    ONLY value those “innocent babies” have to these Forced Birthers is that
    they CAN be inflicted as punishment for enjoying sexual pleasure.
    Because it’s the unwanted children who suffer the most when they are
    used to punish those who don’t want them, there’s a special corner of
    hell reserved for these folks. Their sexual pathology needs treatment on the therapist’s couch, not incorporation into American public policy. Scum.

    • Ella Warnock

      They constantly and consistently expose the tell – babies are “consequences.” Way to effectively communicate that babies are always blessings. They can’t convince themselves; how can they possibly hope to convince anyone else?

  • cary0

    Since all plans should offer the birth control and abortion coverage, the question is moot.

  • CT14

    And when you discover your child is nonviable and threatens your own life and health…you shouldn’t have insurance for it?

    Isn’t that the point of insurance? Paying for a safety net in case something bad happens?

    It’s a legal, necessary medical procedure. Not only should every policy cover it, Hyde should be scrapped entirely.

    • colleen2

      “And when you discover your child is nonviable and threatens your own life and health.”

      The religious right has been quite clear on this point. They want you to die.