Updated 02:59 pm.EST, Fri November 20, 2009

Society|Sun, Nov. 08 2009 11:21 AM EDT

House Narrowly Passes Health Care Reform Bill

By Aaron J. Leichman|Christian Post Reporter

The Democratic-controlled House narrowly passed a bill Saturday that aims to expand health care coverage to tens of millions of Americans who lack it.

Though the bill, passed on a 220-215 vote, did not include provisions for the funding of abortion, pro-life leaders received news of its passage with caution, noting that there is no guarantee that the final bill will include an amendment barring the federal funding of abortion.

Furthermore, they point out that the 1,990-page, $1.2 trillion legislation still has many areas of concern.

 "This monstrous bill will ration and deny health care, pay for coercive 'end of life planning,' create multiple bureaucracies that will control Americans' health care, penalize Americans for not buying a product, fine Americans if a government agent decides their health care plan is not 'government approved,' and may force Americans to buy government mandated insurance that funds objectionable procedures," stated Wendy Wright, president of Concerned Women for America.

"This bill will erode the best health care system in the world,” she added. “In exchange for insurance, we'll lose access to proper health care. We'll lose health care providers who will leave the profession.”

Prior to Saturday’s vote on H.R. 3962, America’s Healthy Future Act, an amendment to the bill that maintains the current federal policy of preventing funding of abortion in federal programs was passed by a vote of 240-194.

The vote was widely praised by pro-life conservative groups who have been rallying their supporters to oppose abortion funding in the health care bill. Under the amendment, the new federal government insurance program is prohibited from paying for abortion, except to save the life of the mother, or in cases of rape or incest. It also prohibits the use of the new federal premium subsidies to purchase private insurance plans that cover abortion.

Individuals may only buy supplemental coverage for elective abortions with their own money and only private plans that do not receive government subsidies may cover abortions.

"Democrats and Republicans came together to ensure federal funds would not pay for elective abortions. They corrected a terrible provision in the bill that would force Americans to subsidize abortion, an act that kills unborn children and harms women,” commented CWA’s Wright.

But the conservative leader expressed her concern that the amendment may have been a “ruse” to gain pro-life Democrats vote for H.R. 3962.

Douglas Johnson, legislative director for the National Right to Life Committee, similarly, expects the White House and pro-abortion congressional Democratic leaders to keep trying to enact government funding of abortion.

So while Saturday’s bipartisan House vote is a “sharp blow to the White House's pro-abortion smuggling operation, he said “there is a long battle ahead."

"One victory however does not mean the battle is won," chimed Americans United for Life Action President and CEO Dr. Charmaine Yoest.

“We will remain vigilant in watching the final language of the Senate bill to ensure that pro-life protections remain in the final health care reform bill."

Saturday’s 220-215 vote clears the way for the Senate to begin a long-delayed debate on the issue that has come to overshadow all others in Congress.

President Obama, who went to Capitol Hill earlier on Saturday to lobby wavering Democrats, said in a statement after the vote that “we are just two steps away from achieving health insurance reform in America.”

“Now the United States Senate must follow suit and pass its version of the legislation. I am absolutely confident it will,” he added, “and I look forward to signing comprehensive health insurance reform into law by the end of the year.”

Health care reform has been Obama’s signature domestic priority.

Sort by: Newest | Oldest | Agree | Disagree
All comments on this page are subject to our Terms of Use and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Christian Post or its staff.
  • Mon Nov 16, 2009 1:50 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    There's a story on alternet that says the Ft. Hood shootings are GW Bush's fault!!! It said that if Al Gore had been president in 2001 this wouldn't have happened. NUTS!!!

  • Mon Nov 16, 2009 1:44 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    Hey Mickey...posting atlantic free press and alternet is like if I posted stuff from Focus on the Family!!! Hello....

  • Mon Nov 16, 2009 1:42 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    "The DC government has not told the RC church to do ANYTHING and you know it."

    "It would also require adoption agencies to sponsor children to gay couples if the agency is under contract with the city."

    So, yep...they did tell the church that if they continued to get money that they would HAVE TO sponsor children to gay couples. Do at least go to the Newsweek article....

    Atlantic Free Press over Newsweek??? You have GOT to be kidding.... LOL

  • Mon Nov 16, 2009 1:41 pm Agree: 2   Disagree: 0

    Here's the latest article about the appalling stance of the RC church in DC.

    http://www.alternet.org/healthwellness/143945/catholic_bishops_put_sex_obsession_ahead_of_mission_to_the_sick_and_the_poor/

  • Mon Nov 16, 2009 12:03 pm Agree: 2   Disagree: 0

    "So, the DC government violated separation of church and state by telling the Catholic Church what doctrine they could and could not practice. The Church simply said..."see ya!". It is the DC GOVERNMENT that has held the poor and the needy hostage to force churches to accept sin."

    Why lie Daniel? The DC government has not told the RC church to do ANYTHING and you know it. The church can do as it pleases as long as it doesn't take government funds. I for one do not want ANY of my tax dollars supporting the RC church. Here's an article that mentions the degenerate way the RC church plan to hold the poor and needy hostage along with all it's other atrocities. Interesting that you support them in this.....

    http://www.atlanticfreepress.com/news/1/12317-corruption-and-the-hurting-of-many-to-deny-equality-to-a-few.html

  • Sun Nov 15, 2009 10:23 pm Agree: 1   Disagree: 0

    "... intheir ... regeme ... NEVER ... leaches ... instutited ... This nation has gone to the dogs & is getting worse daily.."

    Agreed! Stupidity runs rampant and it is getting worse daily.

  • Sun Nov 15, 2009 7:56 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 1

    So, the DC government violated separation of church and state by telling the Catholic Church what doctrine they could and could not practice. The Church simply said..."see ya!". It is the DC GOVERNMENT that has held the poor and the needy hostage to force churches to accept sin.

  • Sun Nov 15, 2009 7:51 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 1

    Hey Mickey...I found a Newsweek article on the subject.

    http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/onfaith/georgetown/2009/11/catholic_charities_gays_and_dcs_poor.html

    "Meanwhile, the City Council for the District of Columbia has decided to enact legislation forbidding discrimination against those in gay marriages. This legislation would not force churches to perform gay marriages or to change their moral doctrines, but it would require any organization with a contract with the District to provide medical benefits to a gay partner just like it provides them to the heterosexual partner in a marriage. It would also require adoption agencies to sponsor children to gay couples if the agency is under contract with the city."

    So, the church withdrew from the contract with the city. This contract would have caused the Church to violate it's doctrine and therefore the arrangement was ended. The church will still provide the same amount of money that it has provided to help the poor and needy. The money they were getting from the city is still in the city budget to be used by other groups.

    In short, they are doing exactly what the foes of "faith based" funding have always wanted...for state monies to not be used by the church. You just can't please some people....

  • Sun Nov 15, 2009 7:39 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 1

    "You mean like the RC church in DC holding the poor and needy hostage because the government won't bend to its will?"

    Source please! This I want to read....

  • Sat Nov 14, 2009 9:59 am Agree: 2   Disagree: 0

    "Yes! people sould help others in need, but it should not be filtered through the government. Churches do a much betteer job of helping those in need that Uncle Sam ever did."

    You mean like the RC church in DC holding the poor and needy hostage because the government won't bend to its will?

  • Fri Nov 13, 2009 9:18 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 1

    As I've posted in the past...our government is only a reflection of it's people. If you don't like what you see in the mirror you have to change what's in front of it.

  • Fri Nov 13, 2009 9:12 pm Agree: 1   Disagree: 1

    Yes! people sould help others in need, but it should not be filtered through the government. Churches do a much betteer job of helping those in need that Uncle Sam ever did. The state even takes a cut of t child support before the kids get any money. They make sure they are paid, even if the kids go without necessities. Someitmes little if anything filters down the these children. How is this right? I know this is true because I ahve divorced family members who testify to it.
    Uncle Sam is not your Daddy. Government is usurping all of our freedoms, rights and money so they can "redistribute" the wealth. Marxist to the core.

  • Fri Nov 13, 2009 9:05 pm Agree: 1   Disagree: 0

    The founding fathers of this once great nation are rolling over intheir graves! Our gov. has run amuck! It is becoming a socialist regeme, not a democracy. Our founders would NEVER have taken control of the lives of the people like has been done over the past 30 years. There would have been no welfare state. The Bible says that if a man won't work he shouldn't eat. We have generations of welfare leaches who think it is owed them. Feds have taken over our state militas. Militas were instutited so that states could protect themselve from an over zealous Fed government. Congress & Senate were to be part time jobs a few months a year & these men were to support themselves with real jobs at home. States were to be the main governing body not the Feds. Fed tax was to be minimal at best. We were to be an independent nation, not aligned with the rest of the world. Abe Lincoln refused monies from the banking industries abroad. He came up with "greenbacks" to finance the Civil War rather than going to Rothschild types. This nation has gone to the dogs & is getting worse daily..

  • Fri Nov 13, 2009 12:53 pm Agree: 2   Disagree: 1

    "The people are actually suppose to get their heads out of their own lives and take care of the people around them. Our founding fathers did not set up America so that we could be selfish, complain about taxes and then expect the government to do everything for us."

    True. Because that was the REAL sin of Sodom.

  • Fri Nov 13, 2009 9:55 am Agree: 2   Disagree: 2

    "The people are actually suppose to get their heads out of their own lives and take care of the people around them. Our founding fathers did not set up America so that we could be selfish, complain about taxes"

    Absolutely! Big hugs and have a great morning DP!

  • Thu Nov 12, 2009 9:49 pm Agree: 3   Disagree: 1

    "It doesn't say that Caesar should; it says that "we the people" should."

    That's the constitution...not the Bible.

    Mat 22:39 "The second is like it, 'YOU SHALL LOVE YOUR NEIGHBOR AS YOURSELF.'

    Now...as for the government... Washington, DC is only a tool of the people. The people are actually suppose to get their heads out of their own lives and take care of the people around them. Our founding fathers did not set up America so that we could be selfish, complain about taxes and then expect the government to do everything for us.

    The Bible nor the constitution says that we should just let the government bureaucracy take care of people. We all know how that doesn't work....

  • Thu Nov 12, 2009 7:10 pm Agree: 2   Disagree: 2

    "What part of the Bible says that Caesar should handle charity rather than the Church?"

    It doesn't say that Caesar should; it says that "we the people" should.

    Now this was the sin of your sister Sodom: She and her daughters were arrogant, overfed and unconcerned; they did not help the poor and needy. - Ezekiel 16: 49

    In the US, we the people are the government, and therefore we have that responsibility.

  • Tue Nov 10, 2009 12:35 pm Agree: 3   Disagree: 1

    "...the way is clear for citing many of these Constitution-breakers as precedents when this current administration decides to trample some more of our constitutional rights. Does anyone else understand this?"

    Oh, you can bet the farm that Eric Holder (and D-ck Cheney, for that matter) understand it perfectly.

  • DRJ »
    Tue Nov 10, 2009 10:44 am Agree: 4   Disagree: 1

    It is always interesting to read these blogs! So few people are thinking outside the "Healthcare Bill Box." Surely you have seen how, within our American legal system, someone can extract a ruling from one case and extend its meaning to another! Once the government is PERMITTED to break its oath to defend the Constitution by over-stepping many amendments, the way is clear for citing many of these Constitution-breakers as precedents when this current administration decides to trample some more of our constitutional rights. Does anyone else understand this?

  • Tue Nov 10, 2009 6:11 am Agree: 2   Disagree: 0

    RH is incorrect, it would appear that from a physics point of view, inflationary theory makes the universe the ultimate free lunch, but that's another matter........

    "A confiscatory tax rate is a rate that reduces economic productivity to yield the same tax revenue that a lower tax rate would achieve with its offsetting economic growth."

    Yes I understand that, in fact its the view Thatch took in the 80's in making taxes as low as possible to provide economic growth by placing more monies in peoples pockets to spend as they saw fit (though she made some major mistakes regarding our industrial base), and its something I agree with. However she saw the importance of a well run health service as a benefit to the nations well being health wise in providing care that would be out of most peoples price range. Employed or un employed.

    And no surprise I bet to you, I'm not a constitutional expert, but I do know you won the WOI because the french saved your bottoms. I bet that's a thought you like to wake up to....Freedom fries all round?

    :-p

    Steve

  • Mon Nov 09, 2009 6:02 pm Agree: 3   Disagree: 2

    steve: "In your book everybody can be protected by the military but not all Americans living in a modern industrialized nation should have access to decent health care"

    Everyone DOES have access to health care in the US. Discrimination is forbidden under our Constitution. Likewise, the Constitution states that the responsibility of the State is to "Provide for the common Defense".

    Can you tell me where in the Constitution of the US of A is the authority to force all citizens to purchase insurance, under the threat of imprisonment?

  • Mon Nov 09, 2009 5:59 pm Agree: 2   Disagree: 1

    iff. I don't see anything in my post that refers to your questions, so I'll ask you a question or two.

    What part of the Bible says that homosexual activity is blessed by God?

    What part of the Bible says that Caesar should handle charity rather than the Church?

  • Mon Nov 09, 2009 5:55 pm Agree: 1   Disagree: 1

    Steve: TANSTAAFL comes from "The Moon is a Harsh Mistress" by Robert Heinlein. It stands for "There ain't no such thing as a free lunch." Somebody has to pay it, and there is a large percentage (47 percent) of US households that pay no income tax. These people think that their health care will be "free". Unfortunately, those that pay those taxes will demand raises in order to afford the new taxes, raising consumer costs for the people that thought it was all free.

    A confiscatory tax rate is a rate that reduces economic productivity to yield the same tax revenue that a lower tax rate would achieve with its offsetting economic growth.

  • Mon Nov 09, 2009 11:38 am Agree: 2   Disagree: 2

    "TANSTAAFL, my friend."

    I'm sorry I can't read tongues.

    No I think many Americans understand that taxes are used to pay for health care (they don't all watch Faux News) like taxes are paid to run the military, why is one okay and the other not? In your book everybody can be protected by the military but not all Americans living in a modern industrialized nation should have access to decent health care. Why do you want some of your fellow Americans denied this basic human right?

    Sorry don't understand what you mean by "confiscatory tax rate".

    BW

    Steve

  • Mon Nov 09, 2009 9:13 am Agree: 1   Disagree: 3

    blacksho89: I want to know the methodology you use to determine which parts of the Bible we should legislate and which parts should not be legislated. As a country, do we make abortion illegal but not pay for healthcare for mother and child? Do we outlaw same-sex marriage but tell the poor to "kiss off?" How do YOU make that determination?

  • Mon Nov 09, 2009 8:55 am Agree: 4   Disagree: 2

    steve: you stated that this medical care was at "no charge" That is simply not true It is paid for by the confiscatory tax rate in the UK. TANSTAAFL, my friend.
    I know that you understand that, but many here in the States have never bothered to think it through.

    The bill, as passed, also calls for a "tax" to be paid by those who do not purchase insurance, and as we know, failure to pay taxes is punishable by imprisonment.

    Citizens: Ask your Congresscritter what the Constitutional authority is for requiring the purchase of health insurance under threat of prison. Then hold your ears, as the reply will be to insult you, the normal response when someone is asked a question they can't answer.

  • Mon Nov 09, 2009 4:39 am Agree: 4   Disagree: 2

    I don't know about all of the elements of the Bill, but at the very least they prohibited Abortion funding for the Bill! I pray if the senate's Bill passes that they also prohibit the funding of killing babies.

  • Sun Nov 08, 2009 11:40 pm Agree: 2   Disagree: 2

    "It gets back to the key issue. Who do you want to manage your meddical care, doctors and medical experts or bureaucrats and political hacks looking for cost savings?"#

    Very true ab, its quite possible as many seem to be of the opinion here, that in the words of Oscar Wilde, "they know the cost of everything but the value of nothing"...or no one maybe, just as long as they never have to pay one penny more on their taxes, because ohhhhhhh, that would be such a sin,when compared to swathes of the population not having basic health care. Save their souls, but dam their bodies?

    BW as always

    Steve

  • Sun Nov 08, 2009 10:37 pm Agree: 5   Disagree: 1

    H man,
    I respect your hopes for improvement to the system. You stated, This bill promotes two of the most important messages of the ministry of Jesus Christ: Heal the sick, and Love thy neighbor as thyself.

    Ah, Jesus could raise the dead. I worry about those who raise the taxes.

  • Sun Nov 08, 2009 10:35 pm Agree: 3   Disagree: 1

    Only a few as ago, my brother-in-law was hospitalized in Arizona due to a violent reaction to a new medication that he was forced to take because hs medical insurer no longer would pay for his working prescription. The doctors who saved his life decided that this restriction on the insurance provider's part was needless and inconveniantly dangerous.
    It gets back to the key issue. Who do you want to manage your meddical care, doctors and medical experts or bureaucrats and political hacks looking for cost savings?

  • Sun Nov 08, 2009 9:27 pm Agree: 3   Disagree: 3

    Having lived in Holland where they have this type of healthcare, the only thing I can say to the working class in America is watch your wallets because someone has to pay for this and while in Holland they were paying taxes on everything to include the kitchen sink. They had tax assessors come to their homes to count how many televisions and radios and how much furniture they had and they were taxed accordingly. Plus, does anyone find it odd that the major health insurance companies are totally behind this. And I just heard from a friend in Upstate New York that even though inflation is almost non-existent his health insurance rates are going up 22% next year.

  • Sun Nov 08, 2009 7:29 pm Agree: 4   Disagree: 0

    "obey the fist" !!! ? !

    Now *that*'s a "Christian" name! :D :D :D

  • Sun Nov 08, 2009 5:44 pm Agree: 3   Disagree: 2

    Steve, America is funny about what it considers a right and what it doesn't. Clearly, some of its citizens are willing to vote on their rights and evidenced by the gay marriage issues.

  • Sun Nov 08, 2009 4:28 pm Agree: 5   Disagree: 0

    Mike, just to add one more thing. Charles Colson is on the front page at the moment writing about human rights, how can basic health care for all, not be a basic human right, and how can America, a great country, deny some of its citizens this right.

  • Sun Nov 08, 2009 4:05 pm Agree: 6   Disagree: 0

    Hi Mike

    Yeah I have plenty of experience of national health care a few that come to mind are..

    Both children born by cesarean section-no charge
    My wife having an emergency operation last year due to pancreatitus-no charge
    My daughter having her appendix out followed by being moved to another hospital (with a specialist gynecologic ward) two days later due to a large cyst they discovered on the ovary-no charge.

    Is it perfect, of course not, are mistakes made, of course, could it do with some reform after 50 years, yes. But it sure is better than what (some of you) had to put up with. Everybody regardless of their personal circumstances is covered, what sort of civilized nation would not have that..

    BW

    Steve

  • Sun Nov 08, 2009 3:14 pm Agree: 1   Disagree: 3

    Oh good, they found a way to bait Christians into politicizing the healthcare debate. A surely reasonable debate would otherwise have followed. Can't have that!

  • Sun Nov 08, 2009 1:57 pm Agree: 4   Disagree: 0

    Steve, you're from the UK, right? Have you experienced any issues with national healthcare? Obviously no one has time to read almost 2,000 pages of legislation, but the big problem is that some are saying its awful, some are saying its necessary. I do think allowing people to die because they can't afford health care is unconscionable.

  • Sun Nov 08, 2009 1:46 pm Agree: 7   Disagree: 2

    This is great news for everyone, especially for Christians.

    This bill promotes two of the most important messages of the ministry of Jesus Christ: Heal the sick, and Love thy neighbor as thyself.

  • GMG »
    Sun Nov 08, 2009 1:36 pm Agree: 4   Disagree: 6

    Welcoma America to much higher taxes, much increased deficits, and rationed health care.

    Want health care reform? Make all premiums and all out of pocket medical expenses fully deductible under the 1040 form (no itemized deductions required). Better yet, make some of it an actual tax credit.. Much cheaper for the government, much more consumer friendly.

  • Sun Nov 08, 2009 1:12 pm Agree: 9   Disagree: 3

    Welcome America to the modern capitalistic industrial world were civilized nations have health care for" all" their citizens, rich or poor, employed or unemployed.

Please help us to monitor our message boards by flagging comments that are unlawful, harmful, threatening, abusive, harassing, defamatory, vulgar, obscene, libelous, hateful, or racially, ethnically or otherwise objectionable.
Contact Us if you have any questions, comments, or concerns.
Comment on this story
ID Password

Don't have a Christian Post ID? Signing up is easy. Click Here

  • icon1
  • icon2
  • icon3
  • icon4
  • icon5
The Christian Post reserves the right to terminate the account of any User who violates our Terms of Use.
Advertisement
Advertisement
CP Shopping
  • Jewelry
  • Health
  • Gifts
  • Music
  • Coins

Bracelets | Chains | Crosses | Earrings | Gemstone |

Featured contents & Giveaways
Joolwe :
Cross-pendant necklace
Zondervan

Struggling to succeed in the Nashville music scene, talented singer/songwriter Parker James finds the competition fierce even deadly. A young woman's murder, industry corruption, a

Featured Advertiser Links