This was entirely predictable:
Hatch and his Republican colleagues on the Senate Finance Committee are pushing legislation that would require insurers operating within the new Exchange to to deny coverage for abortion services. From Raising Women’s Voices:
The Senate Finance Committee has been writing a health care reform bill and struggling to create legislation that will have bipartisan support. Chairman Max Baucus (pictured left) considered several compromises to win Republican support, so they can claim it is bipartisan legislation. One of these potential compromises comes in the form of an abortion exclusion, which would prevent abortion services from being covered by some or all insurance plans in the Health Insurance Exchange. We fear that members of the Senate Finance Committee are considering such a compromise.
Nineteen House members have also sent a letter to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) stating that they will not vote for health care reform legislation "unless it explicitly excludes abortion funding from the scope of any government-defined or subsidized health insurance plan."
Of course, because if anything can be negotiated away it's women's health.
As Igor Volsky points out:
Should it pass, the Senate Finance version would be the only bill that specifically prohibits — takes away, rations, if you will — a medical service. Approximately one in three American women will have an abortion by age 45 and private insurers typically cover the procedure. In 2002, The Guttmacher Institute found that 86.9 percent of "typical" employment-based health plans "routinely cover" surgical abortion and 86.5 percent "routinely cover" medical abortion. The language under consideration would take away this benefit from women receiving coverage through the Exchange, eliminating the service for millions of American women. [emphasis mine]
The House Tri-Committee bill and the Senate HELP Committee bill both leave the determination of services to be provided under the plans to HHS or to a panel of experts, as it should be. A handful of congress members should not be making that call. That wouldn't be reform. The 19 House members making this demand are inconsequential compared to the 100+ strong coalition of progressives. But the Senate Finance Committee, and Baucus bipartisanship fetish, is a big problem. As Volskey asks, "is denying women abortion the price of bipartisanship?"