Abortion Backers in Washington State Push for Forced Abortion Coverage
by
Lauren Enriquez
Washington State, which already boasts widespread access to abortion,
recently proposed legislation to ensure that this access is not
mitigated when federal insurance changes take place next year. The bill,
EHB1044, the “Reproductive Parity Act,” would amend existing
legislation to ensure that insurance carriers do not limit or remove
abortion coverage in the face of possible hurdles accompanying new
federal legislation that takes effect in 2014.
The bill even received
criticism from pro-abortion legislators who believed that it may be
counter-productive to protecting abortion laws since it could jeopardize
the implementation of federal laws. However, the measure contains language that
would salvage the bill in the face of federal challenges. Although some
legislators believe the bill is superfluous to already-broad abortion
laws, many backed the push to ensure the protection of abortion and
contraception in Washington.
According to an Associated Press article carried by KATU.com,
chairwoman of the Health Care Committee, Republican Sen. Randi Becker
“is skeptical of the measure’s utility… She declined to speculate on its
prospects of clearing her committee, which is made up mostly of
Republicans.”
The bill has since passed in the House, and is awaiting a Senate
hearing, which is scheduled for April 1st. Pro-lifers in the state hold
that the legislation is incongruous with conscience protection, which is
essentially nonexistent in the bill. Dan Kennedy, CEO of Washington
state’s Right to Life affiliate, Human Life of Washington, says that
even the name of the bill, the “Reproductive Parity Act,” is an
“Orwellian obfuscation at its worst.” Before the bill came up for a
vote, Kennedy outlined exactly why EHB1044 would be so problematic,
saying: “Americans will be forced by their government
to pay for the taking of human life in violation of conscience for the
first time in the history of our nation.”
In fact, the legislation requires complete removal of maternity care
as the only method of removing abortion coverage, and complete removal
of prescription coverage in order to avoid covering birth control.
Kennedy argues that requiring the removal of maternal and prescription
coverage is not the answer to sidestepping the coverage of abortion and
birth control, and says that the legislation ”[forces] employers to pay
for abortions through the insurance plans they purchase for their
employees if maternity care is included.” “Parity,” he says, “implies
that healthy moms with healthy babies delivered into the world, are the
same as aborted unborn children.”
If you live in Washington, you can help to prevent forced abortion
and hormonal birth control coverage by supporting your local Right to
Life affiliate through Human Life of Washington, and calling on your senators to vote for conscience protections before the measure comes up for a senate vote on April 1.
Lauren Enriquez has been involved in the Pro-Life movement since childhood, and has worked for great organizations like Texas Right to Life (where she is currently a Legislative Associate) and Students for Life of America.
No comments:
Post a Comment