The Washington Post

Some fear health law could give Congress, staff abortion coverage

The politics of the abortion debate are always tricky for lawmakers. They may soon get personal.

An attempt to fix a problem with the national health-care law has created a situation in which members of Congress and their staffers could gain access to abortion coverage. That’s a benefit currently denied to them and to all federal employees who receive health insurance through the government’s plan.

Abortion opponents say the Obama administration needs to fix the congressional exception; abortion rights supporters say such concerns are overblown.

The abortion complication is another headache for the administration as it tries to shoehorn members of Congress and certain staffers into insurance markets coming later this year under President Obama’s health-care overhaul.

An amendment by Iowa Republican Sen. Charles E. Grassley — who opposes “Obamacare” and abortion — requires lawmakers and their personal staff to get private coverage through the same markets that uninsured Americans will use.

Last week, the Office of Personnel Management said the government would keep paying its share of premiums for lawmakers and affected staffers who must leave the federal-employee health-care system by Jan. 1. That eased a major anxiety for several thousand staffers accustomed to getting the same benefits as other federal employees.

But the proposed regulation did not explicitly address abortion coverage. Under the health-care law, insurance plans in the new markets may cover abortion unless a state passes a law prohibiting them from doing so. Plans offering coverage of abortion, however, may not use federal funds to pay for it. Federal tax credits to help the uninsured afford coverage must be kept apart from premiums collected for abortion coverage.

Abortion opponents say the regulation would circumvent a long-standing law that bars the use of taxpayer funds for “administrative expenses in connection with any health plan under the federal employees health benefits program which provides any benefits or coverage for abortions.” Unlike many private corporate plans, federal-employee plans cover abortion only in cases of rape, incest or to save the life of the mother.

“Under this scheme, (the government) will be paying the administrative costs,” said Rep. Christopher H. Smith (R-N.J.), author of the abortion-funding ban for federal-employee plans. “It’s a radical deviation and departure from current federal law, and it’s not for all federal employees but for a subset: Congress. Us.”

Smith is calling on the Obama administration to specify that lawmakers and staffers must choose a plan that does not cover abortions. The funding ban, in place since the 1980s, is known as the Smith amendment.

The personnel office refused to address the issue on the record. Instead, its media office released a generic statement, saying: “Federal law prohibits the use of federal funds to pay for abortion except in the case of rape, incest or when the life of the woman is endangered. All plans available in the marketplaces will comply with the law.”

Obama, who supports abortion rights, has said previously that he does not want his health-care overhaul to change existing laws on abortion.

An independent expert on the federal-employee plan said abortion opponents appear to have a legitimate question, but the applicable laws are so arcane that it’s hard to tell who is right.

“This goes into a legal thicket the complexity of which I can’t begin to fathom,” said Walton Francis, lead author of an annual guide to federal health benefits. “It would take lawyers hours to decipher the interrelationship between these statutes, and they would probably come to different conclusions.”

Abortion opponents say the long-standing ban on “administrative expenses” related to abortion coverage precludes the personnel office from dealing with health plans that cover abortion.

“To comply with the Smith amendment, they would have to advise members and congressional staff that they can only choose plans that do not cover abortions,” said Douglas Johnson, legislative director of the National Right to Life Committee. “And, of course, they would have to enforce it.”

Abortion remains a legal procedure in most cases, but it’s subject to increasing restrictions in conservative-leaning states. So far, 23 states have barred or restricted abortion coverage by plans in the new health insurance markets. But 27 states and the District have not. Under the health-care law, every state must have at least one plan that does not cover abortion.

Judy Waxman, a leading attorney for the National Women’s Law Center, said the outcry from abortion opponents is overblown.

In the new insurance markets created by Obama’s law, states decide whether abortion coverage can be offered, she explained. If it’s allowed, insurers decide whether they want to offer the coverage. They may not use federal funds to pay for it and must set aside part of the premium collected from enrollees in a separate account to cover abortions.

“No federal money will go to abortion,” she said.

— Associated Press

The Freddie Gray case

Please provide a valid email address.

You’re all set!

Campaign 2016 Email Updates

Please provide a valid email address.

You’re all set!
Comments
Show Comments
The New Hampshire primary is Tuesday. Get caught up on the race.
The Post's Dan Balz says ...
This was supposed to be the strongest Republican presidential field in memory, but cracks are showing. At Saturday night's debate, Marco Rubio withered in the face of unyielding attacks from Chris Christie, drawing attention to the biggest question about his candidacy: Is he ready to be president? How much the debate will affect Rubio's standing Tuesday is anybody's guess. But even if he does well, the question about his readiness to serve as president and to go up against Clinton, if she is the Democratic nominee, will linger.
Listen
Play Video
New Hampshire polling averages
Donald Trump holds a commanding lead in the next state to vote, but Marco Rubio has recently seen a jump in his support, according to polls.
New Hampshire polling averages
A victory in New Hampshire revitalized Hillary Clinton's demoralized campaign in 2008. But this time, she's trailing Bernie Sanders, from neighboring Vermont. She left the state Sunday to go to Flint, Mich., where a cost-saving decision led to poisonous levels of lead in the water of the poor, heavily black, rust-belt city. 
55% 40%
Listen
Play Video
Upcoming debates
Feb. 11: Democratic debate

on PBS, in Wisconsin

Feb 13: GOP debate

on CBS News, in South Carolina

Feb. 25: GOP debate

on CNN, in Houston, Texas

Campaign 2016
State of the race

To keep reading, please enter your email address.

You’ll also receive from The Washington Post:
  • A free 6-week digital subscription
  • Our daily newsletter in your inbox

Please enter a valid email address

I have read and agree to the Terms of Service and Privacy Policy.

Please indicate agreement.

Thank you.

Check your inbox. We’ve sent an email explaining how to set up an account and activate your free digital subscription.