Topeka — A battle over abortion is brewing concerning a bill that is scheduled for a public hearing today before the House Insurance Committee.
State Rep. Virgil Peck, R-Tyro, said House Bill 2564 would require people who want health insurance that covers abortion to pay extra for that and get a separate rider for their policy.
He said this is needed so people who are opposed to abortion aren’t paying for coverage for services that they find objectionable.
Kari Ann Rinker, lobbyist for the Kansas chapter of the National Organization for Women, said the bill represents bad public policy.
“Does this mean that we should enact state mandates to address all morally opposed activities with which our money may be mingled?” she asked. “Once this door is opened it may be difficult to shut.”
Comments
LJWorld.com doesn’t necessarily condone the comments here, nor does it review every post. Read our full policy. Also, read about banned accounts and harassing comments.
madcow (anonymous) says…
What a horrible idea.
tolawdjk (anonymous) says…
Why can't the insurance providers decide if they want to cover it, then the consumer decides if they wants to purchase from that provider? Let the markets decide!
Becky (anonymous) says…
Well I demand that I don't have to pay for your Viagra! Oh wait women are still waiting for insurance to cover birth control pills too. What a surprise only a man would think of this! How about you mind your own business when it comes to another persons health.
Eride (anonymous) says…
I don't like paying for people to go buy soda pop and chips with my tax dollars (food stamps).
I don't like my tax dollars being used to fund a bus system used by a tiny fraction of the community at a huge waste to us all.
Etc.
Waa, Waa.
What an awful waste of time by our state legislative branch... again.
kimmydarling (anonymous) says…
I don't like paying the salary of old men who want to waste time and state money fighting to make legal health care choices difficult and expensive to obtain!
Maybe I should propose a bill...
Agnostick (anonymous) says…
I don't like partisan politics, so I don't want my tax dollars paying the salary of any legislator, executive, or judge that is a member of any political party.
I'd like to propose a bill that would allow me to exempt my tax dollars from paying those salaries.
somedude20 (anonymous) says…
I object to men who have to use meds for ED. ED is natures (gods) way of telling you that "weeman" wants to go night night.
I also object to people who are so old that they take 30-60 pills a day to stay alive (that is Yahweh calling you home)
MyName (anonymous) says…
Awesome, let's waste time having "hearings" and a "fight" over a bill that the governor is going to veto anyways. Especially since this is Kansas and he can even line item it back to the statehouse.
These Culture Warriors need to find a hobby that doesn't involve wasting taxpayer's time and money.
yankeelady (anonymous) says…
The only surprise is that it took this long for abortion to come up. What a joke---I don't want my premiums to cover smokers, alcoholics, and men with ED. Let's just move along folks.
Liberty275 (anonymous) says…
"I object to men who have to use meds for ED. ED is natures (gods) way of telling you that “weeman” wants to go night night. "
That's like saying "you women that need fertility drugs to conceive shouldn't get them because mother nature has decided you don't deserve to be a mother. Goose, gander, etc.
leedavid (anonymous) says…
I think it is a great idea. Why should people with moral objections pay for another persons abortion? People with moral objections don't serve in the military. There is legal footing for moral objections. People want to abort babies, put it on your health insurance. Don't have health insurance...don't have unprotected sex, your not a grown up yet. In the cases of rape, incest....different story.
frittata65 (anonymous) says…
Leedavid, people with moral objections to the war shouldn't have to PAY for the war with their tax dollars if you're trying to make a parallel argument.
lawrenceguy40 (anonymous) says…
Excellent idea.
Opt in taxes have much merit too. People pay for services they want. We'd soon see which government services people really value!
leedavid (anonymous) says…
Frittata65: Not so. I am making the case there is a legal stance for moral objections in our legal system and it is being used as the legal foundation in this law. People with moral objections should not be forced to pay for another persons selective abortion.
kimmydarling (anonymous) says…
So leedavid, you're essentially saying that 50% of the population of Kansas should have to pay extra just on the off chance they might end up needing a termination at some point in the future?
God yes, increasing insurance premiums is a wonderful and well received idea. It's not already hard enough to GET insurance but now? We unfortunate uterus owners should get to pay MORE for the honor of coverage of elective procedures... We already pay through the nose for the birth control we have to take because some nice man was kind enough to decide it didn't need to be covered because we don't HAVE to take it... strangely, viagra is covered. hunh..
leedavid (anonymous) says…
Yes Kimmy that is exactly what I am saying. You uterus folks that either can't control yourself or protect yourself should have to get insurance. And I who don't believe in abortion should not have to pay one dime. You have complete understanding of my point. Viagra is a drug that corrects a medical conditon regarding the flow of blood. That is not an elective abortion.
davidsmom (anonymous) says…
I am opposed to abortion, but I understand that we all pay for plenty of things with our tax dollars that we oppose. We cannot individually pick and choose what we will pay for with our tax dollars...that kind of system would NEVER work. I work hard to stay fit and my tax dollars pay for healthcare covering the consequences of others' poor habits...that's just the way it is.
jayhawklawrence (anonymous) says…
Sounds like a political stunt.
A Republican playing politics with the abortion issue in order to get votes? Same old story.
I don't like abortion, but we need to get it out of politics.
leedavid (anonymous) says…
What is the big deal? A person getting insurance at work decides if they want family, or individual, dental and or vision. This bill passes they can chose abortion or not. I assume employers will probably opt out of paying any portion of that insurance.
deathpenaltyliberal (anonymous) says…
I morallly object to and don't want to pay for fat people's health problems.
I morally object to and don't want to pay for smokers health problems.
I morally object to and don't want to pay for some guys ED problems.
I morally object to and don't want to pay for...
Slippery. Slope.
somedude20 (anonymous) says…
Liberty275 (Anonymous) says…
"That's like saying “you women that need fertility drugs to conceive shouldn't get them because mother nature has decided you don't deserve to be a mother. Goose, gander, etc"
Hey, I want to be a great b-ball player but I am just 5'9. the way the cookie crumbles...get over it chief
hey, while we are at it, lets pay to have ugly people get plastic surgery
sciencegeek (anonymous) says…
Give it a rest, guys--in two years, Saint Sam will be governor, and the word "abortion" will no longer be allowed in the state of Kansas anyway.
Go and work on something critical, like the b-u-d-g-e-t.
situveux1 (anonymous) says…
Morally agree with the idea, but it's not the gov't responsibility. Let the market's decide. If you don't like it that your policy covers abortion, don't buy it.
leedavid (anonymous) says…
Apparently some of us do not know the meaning to morally object and conditions for it to be used in law....
kimmydarling (anonymous) says…
well no, Lee... most of us just aren't tolerant of misogyny and the legislation of religious morality on a population consisting of a diverse group of people. Of course, there's also the inherent slut shaming that seems to come of the argument "hurrrr should have kept it closed!" or I did LOVE the "save up before you start having sex!" well..guys? you putting money away? it's not just MY responsibility if I need to pay for that. Yeah, I didn't think so. Know how much an uncovered elective early term termination is? In 2005 it was 450 dollars. It's gone up. Better start filling those piggy banks
Don't like that Blue Cross (for example) covers abortion? Pay someone else, special snowflake. You do not have the *right* to not be offended nor do you have the right to elect what your tax dollars will and will not cover simply based on your personal moral objection. There of plenty of things I don't agree with and yet Kansas takes my money for them. I suck it up because it's part of being a citizen of a nation and not an individual only out to help themselves.
For so many people who are opposed to abortion due to Christianity, not many of you are willing to be very Christlike...