BERGEN COUNTY RIGHT TO LIFE

Garrett weighs in on nat. health care leg.

Dear Friends of NJRTL:

Below is an email from Congressman Scott Garrett about national health care reform legislation and his concerns about the inclusion of abortion in the legislation. If you wish to sign up for more information from Congressman Garrett on this matter, or would like to call to thank him for his steadfast support to protect the sanctity of human life, please read the email below which contains his contact information and website.

Please go to the NJRTL Legislative Action Center here to email your Members of Congress and two U.S. Senators on this matter.

Thank you,

Marie Tasy

Executive Director

New Jersey Right to Life

www.njrtl.org

For the latest updates please sign up to receive the Garrett Gazette at http://garrett.house.gov/

Dear Friends,

Knowing of your interest in my work here in Washington, I wanted to report to you about a troubling issue that is currently developing in Congress.

Recently, several Senate and House committees began considering healthcare reform legislation. I have examined some of the proposals and have concerns about the potential for taxpayer dollars being used to fund abortions.

Following the rules set out for House Member communication, I submitted a draft of a letter that I planned to mail to residents of the Fifth District of New Jersey. (The text of the letter is below.) However, the House Franking Commission has refused to approve my letter, essentially blocking my ability to communicate with many constituents. To make matters worse, they also banned letters that were submitted by other Members of Congress.

While I am troubled by this situation, I am most appalled by the fact that the United States Congress may soon consider legislation that would allow taxpayer dollars to fund abortions. In the weeks ahead, you can count on me to continue to advocate for the life of the unborn, as well as open communication, increased transparency, and responsible government spending.

Please help me spread this information by forwarding the letter below onto your family and friends

Sincerely,

Scott Garrett

Member of Congress

This January marked the 36th anniversary of the landmark Supreme Court decision in Roe v. Wade, a decision that overturned state laws against abortion and sent millions of unborn children to premature deaths. Since that fateful day, many Members of Congress have fought to restrict the murder of innocent infants by preventing taxpayer-funded abortions.

Unfortunately, some of the current healthcare reform proposals being considered in Congress would allow U.S. tax dollars to subsidize abortions on demand in America for the first time since 1976. Those who support abortion point out that the word "abortion" isn`t in the current House and Senate drafts of healthcare reform legislation. Yet unless abortion is clearly prohibited, it could be included under the guise of funding "family planning," "pregnant women services," or another euphemism.

Historically, we know that taxpayer funding of abortion must be specifically restricted. Since 1976, Congress has repeatedly passed the Hyde Amendment, which prohibits the funding of abortion under Medicaid. However, a federal Circuit Court clearly stated that abortion would be included as a covered medical service if Congress did not restrict funding it. The Court stated:

"Although state participation in Medicaid is purely voluntary, a state participating receives federal funds and must comply with the requirements of the program. Under Medicaid, certain categories of medical care are mandatory and therefore must be provided by participating states when a physician certifies that the care is medically necessary to the patient. Because abortion fits within many of the mandatory care categories, including "family planning," "outpatient services," "inpatient services," and "physicians` services," Medicaid covered medically necessary abortions between 1973 and 1976" (emphasis added).

Another compelling example of funding abortion, without explicitly mentioning "abortion," involves the Clinton-Mitchell Health Care Reform plan of 1993, S.1757. This bill guaranteed "voluntary family planning services" and "services for pregnant women." The bill also provided for surgical services. Those terms would very well have included abortion without any exclusion.

The Congressional Caucus on Women`s Issues at the time stated: "The health plan summary made available to Members of Congress includes `pregnancy-related services` (which are generally understood to include prenatal care, childbirth, postnatal care and abortion)." Even President Bill Clinton admitted at a town hall meeting in Florida in 1993 that pregnancy-related services and surgical procedures were covered, and that they would include abortion.

As Senator Jesse Helms explained, "Every American will pay for abortion coverage regardless of whether he or she wants it, or needs the coverage... it means that people who recognize that abortion is the deliberate destruction of innocent human life will nonetheless pay for abortion coverage and have no choice about it. In short, this is the backdoor repeal of the Hyde amendment."

The current health care plans being discussed would approach the issue of abortion in a way similar to how it was addressed in the 1993 proposal. On the Planned Parenthood website, Cecile Richards says: "Planned Parenthood is part of the solution in fixing America`s broken health care system." In a "wish list" sent to the White House Transition Team, Planned Parenthood Federation of America stated: "Comprehensive benefits must include access to the full range of reproductive health services, including contraception, maternity care, and abortion care."

Clearly, abortion on demand would be funded in the healthcare reform proposals currently being discussed, even if the term "abortion" is not mentioned. On April 22, 2009, during a House Foreign Affairs Committee hearing, Secretary Clinton responded to a question posed by my colleague from New Jersey, Rep. Chris Smith:

Rep. Chris Smith: "So we can have total transparency, as you know as a former lawmaker we always had definition pages as we write legislation, definitions do matter. Does the United States` definition of the term reproductive health, or reproductive services or reproductive rights, include abortion?"

Secretary Hillary Clinton: "We happen to think that family planning is an important part of women`s health. And reproductive health includes access to abortion that I believe should be safe, legal, and rare" (emphasis added).

Recently, Peter Orzag, the White House budget director, was asked whether or not he could say that "no taxpayer money will to pay for abortions." He answered: "I am not prepared to say explicitly that right now. It`s obviously a controversial issue, and it`s one of the questions that is playing out in this debate."

Sadly, the current plans being debated would affect not only the public health insurance plan that Democrats want to create, but also private insurers, who would receive tens of billions of dollars of federal subsidies to cover people with low and moderate incomes.

Rest assured that I share your steadfast commitment to life and will oppose any proposals that allow U.S. tax dollars to fund the destruction of human life.

Thank you for taking time to listen to my concerns with this legislation. I have set up a special email account so that you can share your thoughts and concerns about health care reform at: healthcarehotline@mail.house.gov.

Should you have any further questions or comments about this or any legislative issue, please do not hesitate to contact me in my Washington, D.C. office at (202) 225-4465. Also, please visit my website at www.house.gov/garrett to sign up for my e-newsletter with the latest updates.