HR3 and HR358 Updates

Last week I wrote about HR3 which was introduced into the federal House of Representatives and co-sponsored by some of our local congressional representatives, including Rep. Mike Fitzpatrick. It restricted any taxpayer funds, including insurance funds, so that they could only be used for abortion in the case of life of the mother, incest with minors and forcible rape. The word forcible would not include all statutory rape, cases where the woman is unable, due to physical or intellectual impairments, to provide consent. Drugged? Underage? Unless you could prove the rape was "forcible" it wouldn't county. The GOP said the wording would be changed, but it hasn't yet been done. For more details see "'Forcible rape' Language Remains In Bill To Restrict Abortion Funding," by Amanda Terkel, Huffington Post 2/09/11. It also mentions HR 358, which the article describes as:

Another piece of legislation restricting abortion access, H.R. 358, also initially included the forcible-rape language, but Rep. Joe Pitts (R-Pa.) has reintroduced that bill without it. Now, however, it includes a provision that would allow hospitals to refuse to perform an abortion on a woman, even if that refusal threatens her life.

More information from "GOP Backs Massive Tax Increase To Phase Out Abortion Coverage By Private Insurers," by Brian Beutler, TPM,

Here's another one: The GOP's plan to ban tax-payer money from funding abortions includes giant tax hikes for businesses.

More specifically, it would eliminate tax incentives on employer-provided health care benefits if those benefits cover abortion as a medical procedure.

Supporters of the bill say those incentives essentially constitute federal spending on abortion.

"We want to live up to our commitment to make sure that there is no government funding of abortion," said House Majority Leader Eric Cantor. "And the provision that you speak to does have some connect with a government's support and funding of abortion."