The 1973 Supreme Court decision of Roe v. Wade legalized abortion in the United States. Thirty-seven years later abortion is still a controversial issue, more specifically the act of funding it.It is improbable that Roe v. Wade will ever be overturned, but this hasn’t stopped conservative politicians from finding loopholes to make getting an abortion more difficult.
Recently the House of Representatives passed a measure in the healthcare bill that restricts insurance companies from covering abortions with the use of federal subsidies.
According to the Los Angeles Times, President Obama supports the idea that federal money should not be used to subsidize abortion.
This is understandable, but there are many different reasons a woman gets an abortion. These circumstances are why this measure is impractical.
Abortion coverage has to be all or nothing. It doesn’t make sense to say one person can be covered, but another can’t.
It has been proposed in the Senate that abortion coverage can be purchased as a separate plan in addition to health insurance.
Women don’t plan on getting an abortion; it is something decided upon when in certain situations. Therefore, it is unlikely that they would want to pay extra for a service that they never plan on benefiting from.
This proposal is an attempt to lessen the fact that abortion will not be covered.
If the House of Representatives is concerned about saving money, in the long run, funding abortion would be more cost-efficient than paying for an unwanted child that has to be raised in the welfare system for 18 years.
However the pregnancy occurs, ultimately, abortion is a woman’s right to choose. By continuing to cut off federal funding for abortion the government is making it increasingly difficult for a woman to have her choice.
- EDITORIAL: Apologize about the real problem - April 23, 2014
- STATEMENT: District apologizes to Oscar winning alum - April 21, 2014
- EDITORIAL: The Forgotten Students - March 26, 2014