"House GOP Wants To Use Tax Code To Curb Abortions"

[mommylamb]

Wrong! We don't want taxpayer money subsidizing abortion. Let's keep the discussion honest.

There is nothing dishonest about it. I think a lot of anti-choice organizations would gladly agree that they are doing their best to discourage insurance companies from covering abortion and this is a good way to do so. They're not stupid. I mean, sure they don't want tax dollars (even the tax dollars received from all of us pro-choice tax payers) used to help provide abortions, but it's a lot more than that. That's just the tip of the iceberg. So, they're trying use the government to influence the decisions of private companies. The right only puts on the libertarian hat when it suits them. Of course, the left is equally hypocritical. I have no problem in admitting that.

[MissyAg94]

How does this bill do that?

"The House Ways and Means Committee scheduled a vote Thursday on legislation that would prevent people from deducting the cost of an abortion from their taxable income. The bill also would prevent small businesses and taxpayers from using tax credits in the new health care law to provide or pay for insurance policies that cover the procedure."

[mommylamb]

How does this bill do that?

I think she was referring to my comment on what the health care reform law did in regards to premiums for insurance companies participating in the exchanges. This bill isn't really related to that.

[JBaxter]

Because she's already saved that money into an account for her use for health services. It doesn't just cost more - its a matter of already having the funds and not being able to get them. You can't take money back out of an HSA, so if this passes even if a woman has a million dollars in an HSA she still has to come up with money from somewhere else to fund her abortion. Many women do not have much, if anything, in savings so getting the money to fund an abortion is difficult. It creates an extra hurdle.

Its unfair a woman has saved her own money in an account for her health needs and now someone else gets to decide if she should be allowed to determine what her health needs are.

Except it has been said there should be no government funding of abortions. The tax money can be viewed as a benefit that SHOULD have gone to the government for income earned. Am I reading it correctly?

[MissyAg94]

There is nothing dishonest about it. I think a lot of anti-choice organizations would gladly agree that they are doing their best to discourage insurance companies from covering abortion and this is a good way to do so. They're not stupid. I mean, sure they don't want tax dollars (even the tax dollars received from all of us pro-choice tax payers) used to help provide abortions, but it's a lot more than that. That's just the tip of the iceberg. So, they're trying use the government to influence the decisions of private companies. The right only puts on the libertarian hat when it suits them. Of course, the left is equally hypocritical. I have no problem in admitting that.

It is against the law to use tax dollars for abortions. This just closes a possible loop hole.

[icunurse]

Personally, I think this is petty and a waste of taxpayer time to pursue (as I question how many abortions are being used from HSA accounts). I wish these same people would put their time and efforts into reforming and improving the foster care system, WIC, healthcare for women and children, and job creation. Give women TRUE choices for getting and maintaining a pregnancy before taking any other options off the table. "Saving" a pregnancy doesn't mean a thing if we subject those born children to a life of real hardship and pain. Let's save the family first. JMHO.

[GaPeach_in_Ca]

Personally, I think this is petty and a waste of taxpayer time to pursue (as I question how many abortions are being used from HSA accounts). I wish these same people would put their time and efforts into reforming and improving the foster care system, WIC, healthcare for women and children, and job creation. Give women TRUE choices for getting and maintaining a pregnancy before taking any other options off the table. "Saving" a pregnancy doesn't mean a thing if we subject those born children to a life of real hardship and pain. Let's save the family first. JMHO.

Wow, I cannot agree with this more. Great post.

[WolfpackMom]

Personally, I think this is petty and a waste of taxpayer time to pursue (as I question how many abortions are being used from HSA accounts). I wish these same people would put their time and efforts into reforming and improving the foster care system, WIC, healthcare for women and children, and job creation. Give women TRUE choices for getting and maintaining a pregnancy before taking any other options off the table. "Saving" a pregnancy doesn't mean a thing if we subject those born children to a life of real hardship and pain. Let's save the family first. JMHO.

Very well said.

[♥ms.pacman♥]

Personally, I think this is petty and a waste of taxpayer time to pursue (as I question how many abortions are being used from HSA accounts). I wish these same people would put their time and efforts into reforming and improving the foster care system, WIC, healthcare for women and children, and job creation. Give women TRUE choices for getting and maintaining a pregnancy before taking any other options off the table. "Saving" a pregnancy doesn't mean a thing if we subject those born children to a life of real hardship and pain. Let's save the family first. JMHO.

wow, so well said, great post.

[MissyAg94]

Personally, I think this is petty and a waste of taxpayer time to pursue (as I question how many abortions are being used from HSA accounts). I wish these same people would put their time and efforts into reforming and improving the foster care system, WIC, healthcare for women and children, and job creation. Give women TRUE choices for getting and maintaining a pregnancy before taking any other options off the table. "Saving" a pregnancy doesn't mean a thing if we subject those born children to a life of real hardship and pain. Let's save the family first. JMHO.

I think MANY of us who are pro-life do both. We oppose federal funding of abortion AND we work hard at helping families who are struggling. The two aren't mutually exclusive.