ADVERTISEMENT
Advertise Here

Spin Control

WA Lege Day 11: Abortion bill a ‘level field’ or ‘infringement to liberty’?

OLYMPIA – Nearly all medical insurance plans in Washington that offer maternity care would be required to cover abortions under a bill supporters described as a minor adjustment to adjust to new federal laws but opponents denounced as an infringement on religious liberties.


HB 2330 has broad support in the House, where it has 33 co-sponsors. But it's also a target of abortion opponents who held their annual rally earlier this week on the Capitol steps.
  

To read the rest of this post, or to comment, click here to go inside the blog.


The proposal would require any health care plan that covers maternity care also cover abortion procedures. Right now, some plans cover both, other plans cover neither, and some cover maternity care but exclude abortion, either because the plan covers a religiously sponsored organization or the employer opts for a plan without abortion coverage.
The change comes into play because the Affordable Care Act, the federal health care reform law which some Republicans call Obamacare, requires all new insurance plans to cover maternity care starting in 2014. If the bill passes, most would also be required to cover abortion; only the exemption for religiously sponsored organizations would continue.
There’s nothing very complicated about the proposal, said Lisa Stone, executive director of Legal Voice, a group that advocates for women’s rights. Washington voters legalized abortion three years before the U.S. Supreme Court’s Roe v. Wade decision and have supported it since then, she said.
Every insurance carrier in Washington has plans that cover abortion, although not all the plans they offer include it, she told the House Health Care and Wellness Committee Thursday. “Essentially, what this will do is level the playing field.”
Rep. Bill Hinkle, R-Cle Elum, disagreed: “We are taking a big step forward to say every plan covers abortion.”
John Geis of the Family Policy Institute said the bill will actually limit the choices for business owners who oppose abortion but don’t have a religious affiliation that would exempt them from paying for that coverage.
“If people believe the insurance for their employees shouldn’t cover abortion, that is their right,” Geis said.
But doesn’t that mean business owners are infringing on the rights of their employees by forcing their beliefs on the workers, Committee Chairwoman Eileen Cody, D-West Seattle, asked.
“We hold dear free enterprise in this state and in this country,” Geis said. “Businesses have the right to choose the different programs they offer for their employees.”
The committee hasn’t yet scheduled a vote on the bill.
  


Please keep it civil. Don't post comments that are obscene, defamatory, threatening, off-topic, an infringement of copyright or an invasion of privacy. Read our forum standards and community guidelines.

You must be logged in to post comments. Please log in here or click the comment box below for options.

comments powered by Disqus
« Back to Spin Control

Get blog updates by email

About this blog

Jim Camden is a veteran political reporter for The Spokesman-Review.


Jonathan Brunt is an enterprise reporter for The Spokesman-Review.


Kip Hill is a general assignments reporter for The Spokesman-Review.

Nick Deshais covers Spokane City Hall for The Spokesman-Review.

Latest comments »

Read all the posts from recent conversations on Spin Control.

Search this blog
Subscribe to this blog
ADVERTISEMENT
Advertise Here