By Emily Geiger
Just when I thought the Register couldn’t get any lower, I get proven wrong yet again. Here’s the headline from the Register’s latest editorial.
Okay, that caught my attention. Now let’s see what they have to say.
First, the Register says that pro-life groups are lying when they say the proposed public option health plan “pays for abortion.”
Next, we’re told, “The public option would be managed by the government. None of the benefits is directly funded with tax dollars, in contrast with the way Medicare and Medicaid are funded.”
Then, literally six words later, we read, “Low- and middle-income people would receive publicly funded subsidies to buy an insurance plan in the exchange.”
Wait a second… did I just hear “publicly funded subsidy?” Isn’t a publicly funded subsidy by definition something that is “directly funded with tax dollars?”
Now the Register tries to tell us that a federally funded subsidy really isn’t that different from many reforms that Republicans have supported in the past. Specifically, the Register claims the Republicans have supported “tax breaks” (a rather unspecific description) “to help people purchase coverage in the private sector.”
True. The difference is that the proposals advanced by Republicans (such as tax exempt medical savings accounts and tax deductions for medical premiums and other medical expenses) allow individuals to keep more of their own money to pay for their own healthcare. The “publicly funded subsidies” described above, which would be part of the Obama-backed plan, take some people’s tax money and give it to someone else, who could choose to put it toward a plan (including a public option plan) that would pay for abortions.
Long story short, that means your tax dollars will be paying for other people’s abortions.
But it’s just religious anti-abortion fanatics spreading this rumor, right?
“Health care legislation before Congress would allow a new government-sponsored insurance plan to cover abortions, a decision that would affect millions of women and recast federal policy on the divisive issue.” – Associated Press via MSNBC.com
“An Obama administration official refused Sunday to rule out the possibility that federal tax money might be used to pay for abortions under proposed health care legislation.” – New York Times
Not to mention all the pro-life groups who have found that the proposed “government option” will lead to taxpayer funded abortion, but I’m sure those people’s opinions don’t count in the eyes of the Register’s editorial board.
Apparently the truth doesn’t matter much to the Register’s editorial board either.
blog comments powered by Disqus