The House of Representatives have passed H.R. 7, the bill that bans taxpayer funding for abortions, by a vote of 238-183, which fell almost completely on party lines.
Specifically, the bill prohibits federal funding and facilities to be used to perform abortions and prohibits tax credits and subsidies for abortion under Obamacare. A similar measure passed last year, but President Obama vetoed it.
Naturally, the Left is apoplectic over the bill’s passage. Over at Cosmopolitan, Hannah Smothers cites a pro-abortion leader who just can’t seem to understand how, in the wake of last Saturday’s Women’s March, the House seeks to protect the unborn:
Many Democrats who stood to debate against the passage of H.R. 7 cited the Women’s March as proof that women in the country demand access to reproductive health care.
“It’s particularly shameful that politicians in Congress are voting to restrict a woman’s ability to get basic health care services just three days after millions of women, men, and families mobilized and marched for their rights,” Nancy Northup, president and CEO of the Center for Reproductive Rights, said in a statement released Tuesday.
Smothers also claims that low-income women will die by the thousands in botched back-alley abortions because Congress doesn’t want taxpayer money to go toward abortions.
Cate Carrejo at Bustle wants to make clear that millennials will be hurt most by not being allowed to end a pregnancy at taxpayer expense (because, you know, millennials are the only ones who count):
Losing insurance coverage for abortion is an especially scary thought for millennials, the generation most likely to experience unintended pregnancy right now. While most have health insurance, either through the ACA or their job, many are also strapped for cash. Having to pay out of pocket for an abortion, which can cost up to $1500 in the first trimester, could cause devastating financial repercussions and leave them without a safety net for other emergencies. This inability to cover legitimate healthcare needs could leave millions of young women in danger and without a safe and feasible alternative.
Oh, and H.R. 7 makes Carrejo sad and scared too:
This new bill is probably just the first in a series of heartbreaking setbacks for reproductive rights coming over the next few years. It’s difficult to think about how to fight back when the fear of not being able to access healthcare if you need it keeps closing in, but the generations of women coming after this need help.
And Laura Hankin at Romper is all up in arms about the ripple effect that she claims H.R. 7 is likely to have on private insurance plans as well:
Furthermore, under H.R. 7, women who obtain private insurance plans through, say, the Affordable Care Act’s state exchanges wouldn’t be able to get government subsidies for plans that cover abortion, meaning that those plans would be much less affordable, meaning that people would be less likely to choose them, meaning that insurance companies would likely stop offering them, meaning that H.R. 7 could effectively stop private insurance on those exchanges from covering abortions too.
Hankin just can’t seem to understand why the Women’s March didn’t resonate with Congress:
It’s a clear signal from many Republicans in government that they intend to disregard the protest of millions of women across the country, who just days ago came together to rally for women’s rights, including reproductive choice.
It’s funny how a movement predicated on “choice” gets so worried and worked up over women having to take responsibility for their choice without getting taxpayer money involved. It’s just another sign that the Left is in retreat in today’s America.