Democrats pledge support for wide access to abortion

[Tender Branson]

Elizabeth Edwards said Tuesday that her husband's health-care plan would provide insurance coverage of abortion.

Edwards was joined by Democratic candidates Sens. Hillary Clinton (D-N.Y.) and Barack Obama (D-Ill.) at the group's political organizing conference in addressing issues at the core of the political clash between cultural liberals and conservatives, including abortion rights, access to contraception and sex education.

Obama, who earlier gained the endorsement of Washington, D.C., Mayor Adrian Fenty, offered the group a vision of equal opportunity for women, tying a call for improved access to contraceptives for low-income women with a call for an "updated social contract" that includes paid maternity leave and expanded school hours.

Asked about his proposal for expanded access to health insurance, Obama said it would cover "reproductive-health services." Contacted afterward, an Obama spokesman said that included abortions.

Clinton has not yet released her health-care proposal. She provided a bruising critique of Bush administration policies and Republican conservatives on abortion rights and contraception policy.

She criticized cuts in contraception services for low-income women, lengthy delays in approving over-the-counter sales of the "morning-after" contraceptive pill and redirection of sex education funds to abstinence-only programs that do not include information on contraceptive use or condoms toto prevent the spread of AIDS.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/politics/chi-dems18jul18,0,6812317.story

[Tender Branson]

This is interesting because I´m not really sure how rural/conservative America will handle this. Abortion costs covered by health insurance ? Talking how to avoid an upcoming "culture war" and proposing abortions covered by health insurance may turn out to be a walk on the tight rope next year. They are giving anti-abortion groups new ammunition with this, after trying to avoid that controversy. Does anyone know what John Kerry´s stance on that issue was ? If he was in favor of abortions paid by health insurance companies in 2004 it wouldn´t have much an impact on the Democrats in 2008 either.

This issue was even brought up here in Austria a few months ago by Green MP Eva Glawischnig and she was heavily critizized for that. In Austria the national compulsory health insurance funds are not allowed to pay for abortions, compared to lots of other European countries.

So I wonder: If it´s heavily critizized in Austria, why should the (more conservative) US voters accept that ?

BTW: I´m assuming a conservative Republican is the nominee in this scenario, not Rudy Giuliani ...

[Inmate Trump]

Democrats supporting genocide in the way of abortion is nothing news worthy.  Everybody already knows this.

Now, a Democrat supporting life....that'd be a story.

[Rob]

So I wonder: If it´s heavily critizized in Austria, why should the (more conservative) US voters accept that ?

Why are you assuming that Americans are "more conservative" on the issue of choice? Pro-life referenda routinely fail even in states like South Dakota.

[poughies]

Its an interesting issue..... If u are for abortion and for health care covered by the government, then you gotta be for it.... I'm for one not sure about other.... i'm really kinda on the fence on the issue.

[Umengus]

So I wonder: If it´s heavily critizized in Austria, why should the (more conservative) US voters accept that ?

Why are you assuming that Americans are "more conservative" on the issue of choice? Pro-life referenda routinely fail even in states like South Dakota.

a referundum banning abortion (with exceptions in cases of danger for the life of the mother, incest or rape) would pass without problems in lots of states.

[Alcon]

So I wonder: If it´s heavily critizized in Austria, why should the (more conservative) US voters accept that ?

Why are you assuming that Americans are "more conservative" on the issue of choice? Pro-life referenda routinely fail even in states like South Dakota.

a referundum banning abortion (with exceptions in cases of danger for the life of the mother, incest or rape) would pass without problems in lots of states.

Eh, not many, and all of them would be rather small.

You'd be surprised by how many staunchly Republican areas will kill partial birth abortion bans (although some Dem areas will also flip over, the balance is overwhelmingly more pro-choice).

[Tender Branson]

The poll I created may help out here.

+ can anyone answer my question, because I didn´t find much:

What was John Kerry´s position in 2004 on abortions covered by universal health care ?

Did he even include it in his plan ?

[© tweed]

it's not worth fighting for because it'd kill any chance of universal health care passing.

[bullmoose88]

Undecided.

I could see, in a Universal system, there seems to be a need for it to cover medically necessary abortions...but for the ones that just come about as a a late form of birth control I'd probably oppose on two grounds 1) that seems more like a cosmetic proceedure than a medically necessary one, 2) I personally would be very uncomfortable with such a plan.

[DanielX]

Unless said abortion is a strictly medical procedure performed to save the life of the mother, than it would be utterly horrible. I find the idea of my tax dollars funding convenience abortions to be sickening. Universal health care is bad enough, and abortion is bad enough, but together? Ugh....<runs to toilet>

Edwards and Obama will NEVER have my vote, and I'll bet Clinton will be joining this bandwagon too.....

[Nym90]

Undecided.

I could see, in a Universal system, there seems to be a need for it to cover medically necessary abortions...but for the ones that just come about as a a late form of birth control I'd probably oppose on two grounds 1) that seems more like a cosmetic proceedure than a medically necessary one, 2) I personally would be very uncomfortable with such a plan.

I agree with this position. Abortions to protect the life or health of the mother should be covered by health insurance, but otherwise, definitely not.

[Eraserhead]

Support. Abortions are great.

[Ebowed]

Support.  Abortion access for low-income women is an integral part of equality.

[NDN]

Only if they actually needed the abortion for health/life-saving reasons. If not, then no tax payer's should not pick up the tab for a lifestyle choice.

[Umengus]

I think that the majority of US voters would refuse to see their taxes used for abortions. Good amunition for a conservative candidate.

[Umengus]

So I wonder: If it´s heavily critizized in Austria, why should the (more conservative) US voters accept that ?

Why are you assuming that Americans are "more conservative" on the issue of choice? Pro-life referenda routinely fail even in states like South Dakota.

a referundum banning abortion (with exceptions in cases of danger for the life of the mother, incest or rape) would pass without problems in lots of states.

Eh, not many, and all of them would be rather small.

You'd be surprised by how many staunchly Republican areas will kill partial birth abortion bans (although some Dem areas will also flip over, the balance is overwhelmingly more pro-choice).

I disagree. The opinion of the majority of US (and majority of states) is "pro-life with exceptions" (or "pro choice with strong restrictions")

[Gabu]

I disagree. The opinion of the majority of US (and majority of states) is "pro-life with exceptions" (or "pro choice with strong restrictions")

How can you disagree with a fact?  Poll after poll have shown the majority of Americans responding as "pro-choice", or supporting "abortion legal with/without exceptions".

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

I disagree. The opinion of the majority of US (and majority of states) is "pro-life with exceptions" (or "pro choice with strong restrictions")

A majority of California voters don't even support parental notification for minors. Not permission, notification.