The following summarizes selected womens healthrelated blog entries.

~ “U.S. Catholic Bishops Health Care Bill Funds Abortion,” Dan Gilgoff, U.S. News & World Reports “God & Country” In a letter to House members released on Wednesday, the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops condemned health care reform legislation HR 3200 proposed by House Democrats, claiming that its “purported prohibition on federal funds for abortion is a legal fiction,” Gilgoff writes. While the House bill “may not be the last word on abortion coverage in the federal health care plan,” it is “unlikely that the Democrats … will heed the bishops and other social conservatives call for an outright ban on abortion coverage in health insurance plans that are subsidized with federal funds,” he continues. The issue, “along with mounting Democratic support for the RyanDeLauro bill on abortion and other reproductive health issues, … appears to dim prospects for Obama finding common ground with the American Catholic Church on abortion,” Gilgoff writes, adding that the White House has not yet revealed its “common ground” initiative. However, “abortion coverage in the health care bill may not be a settled matter so its still too early to close the book on the question,” he concludes. Gilgoff also includes an excerpt of USCCBs letter, written by Cardinal Justin Rigali, chair of USCCBs Committee on ProLife Activities (Gilgoff, “God & Country,” U.S. News & World Report, 8/13).

~ “White House Reality Check Site on Health Care Silent on Abortion,” Dan Gilgoff, U.S. News & World Reports “God & Country” Gilgoff writes that he was “struck” that the White Houses new “Reality Check” Web site on health insurance reform “doesnt mention abortion.” The site “aims to counter … rumors and scare tactics and a lot of the outrageous claims floating around regarding the Democrats health care reform proposals,” Gilgoff writes, adding that he was “surprised that the White House is mum on the issue” of abortion. He notes that Democrats say “that one of the biggest myths about those proposals is that theyll use taxpayer money to cover abortions,” adding, “I wonder whats behind the silence on abortion” (Gilgoff, “God & Country,” U.S. News & World Report, 8/11).

~ “A Tale of Two Polls,” Steve Benen, Washington Monthlys “Political Animal” A recently released Gallup poll indicates that the “prolife lead” shown in a similar May poll which “found 51% of Americans calling themselves prolife and 42% prochoice” is “evaporating, dropping from nine points to one, 47% to 46%,” Benen writes. It is “hard to say with certainty” what “prompted the shift,” he writes, adding that “its likely the May poll was just an outlier.” He continues that the May poll “generated a huge amount of media attention,” but “[m]ajor news outlets ignored [the new poll] almost completely.” The May poll “showing strong prolife numbers [is] a huge story, even though the results were dubious,” but the August poll “showing weaker prolife numbers [is] a nonstory, even though the results made sense,” Benen writes, concluding that the “liberal media strikes again” (Benen, “Political Animal,” Washington Monthly, 8/11).

~ “Aborting Health Reform,” Dana Goldstein, American Prospect If Congress “acquiesces to abortion opponents and passes a public plan that does not provide reproductive health services comparable to what Americans can purchase in the private market or obtain through their employer, it will be a weaker plan with a smaller constituency,” Goldstein writes. Reproductive rights “have been under constant assault in the health reform debate,” she writes, adding, “At stake is not only whether a potential public plan covers contraception or abortion but also whether existing private health insurers … will be able to continue to do so once they are operating within the new health insurance exchanges.” The “potential upside” is that “many more women will be able to afford good reproductive health care” through a public plan that expands Medicaid and increases competition among private insurers,” Goldstein writes. However, the “potential downside is stark A politicization of which reproductive health services insurers can cover, meaning that under antichoice administrations, abortion and even contraceptive limitation or bans could become the norm,” she writes (Goldstein, American Prospect, 8/13).

AntiabortionRights Blog

~ “Abortion Coverage Mandates Are Not Health Reform,” Rep. Mary Fallin (ROkla.), The Hills “Congress Blog” “Mandating abortion coverage and forcing taxpayers to foot the bill of this procedure in a public plan option is an affront to millions of prolife Americans,” Fallin writes, adding that if Obama administration officials were “serious about passing health care reform that is focused on improving the health of Americans, abortion coverage mandates would not be included in their proposal.” Abortion services “would most likely be considered a minimum benefit” unless they are “explicitly prohibited by law,” she writes, adding that taxpayers would be “forc[ed] … to foot the bill, employers to extend coverage for this procedure and doctors to carry it out.” Fallin concludes that Obama “should make it clear that his health care plan is focused on improving the lives and good health of our citizens, not on taking the lives of the unborn” (Fallin, “Congress Blog,” The Hill, 8/11).

Reprinted with kind permission from nationalpartnership.org. You can view the entire Daily Womens Health Policy Report, search the archives, or sign up for email delivery here. The Daily Womens Health Policy Report is a free service of the National Partnership for Women & Families, published by The Advisory Board Company.

© 2009 The Advisory Board Company. All rights reserved.