The Affordable Care Act very nearly failed to become law due to an intraparty dispute among Democrats over how to handle the abortion issue. Now a similar argument between Democrats and Republicans is slowing progress on a bill that could help cut soaring premiums and shore up the ACA.
At issue is the extent to which the Hyde Amendment — language commonly used by Congress to prohibit most federal abortion funding — should be incorporated into any new legislation affecting the health law.
Republicans generally want more restrictions on abortion funding. Democrats generally want fewer. Here’s a guide to the history of the current impasse:
What Is The Hyde Amendment?
The Hyde Amendment, named for Rep. Henry Hyde (R-Ill.), an anti-abortion crusader who died in 2007, prohibits federal funding of abortion in Medicaid and several other health programs run by the Department of Health and Human Services. Current exceptions allow for funding in cases of rape, incest or “where a physical condition endangers a woman’s life unless an abortion is performed.”
But the Hyde Amendment is not permanent law. Rather, it has been included every year since 1977 as a “rider” to federal spending bills. Hence, its exact language changes from time to time. The rape and incest exceptions, for example, were not included in the annual HHS spending bill from 1981 to 1993. During that time, the only exception was for abortions required to save a pregnant woman’s life.
Hyde-like language has been added to other annual spending bills over the years, so federal abortion funding is also now forbidden in private health insurance plans for federal employees, women in federal prisons, those in the Peace Corps and women in the military, among others.
Over the years, Democrats have worked, unsuccessfully, to eliminate the Hyde Amendment, charging that it unfairly harms low-income women who cannot afford to pay for abortions. Proposed elimination of the language was included in the Democratic Party’s 2016 platform.
Republicans have tried, also so far unsuccessfully, to write the Hyde funding prohibitions into permanent law. “A ban on taxpayer funding of abortion is the will of the people and ought to be the law of the la
nd,” said then-House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) in 2011.
How Did The Affordable Care Act Deal With Federal Abortion Funding?
Republicans in both the House and Senate unanimously refused to support the Affordable Care Act when it passed Congress in 2010. Even without their backing, abortion remained a huge hurdle.
In order to pass the bill over GOP objections, Democrats needed near unanimity among their ranks. But the Democratic caucus at the time had a significant number of abortion opponents, particularly those representing more conservative districts and states. In order to facilitate the bill’s movement, House and Senate leaders agreed that the health bill should be “abortion-neutral,” meaning it would neither add to nor subtract from existing abortion restrictions.
That proved difficult. So difficult that to this day there is disagreement about whether the law expands or contracts abortion rights.
Democratic sponsors of the bill were buffeted by appeals from women’s groups, who wanted to make sure the bill did not change existing coverage of abortion in private health insurance; and from abortion opponents, led by the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops , who called the bill a major expansion of abortion rights.
The bill passed the House in 2009 only after inclusion of an amendment by Rep. Bart Stupak (D-Mich.), a longtime opponent of abortion. That bill included a government-sponsored health plan and Stupak’s provision would have made the Hyde Amendment a permanent part of that plan. The amendment also banned federal premium subsidies for private health insurance plans that offered abortion as a covered service, although it allowed for plan customers to purchase a rider with non-federal money to cover abortion services.
The Senate bill jettisoned the government-sponsored plan, so no restrictions were necessary on the abortion issue. And it was the Senate plan that went forward to become law. Still, differences remained over how to ensure that subsidies provided by taxpayers did not go to private plans that covered abortions.
In the upper chamber, a compromise was eventually reached by abortion-rights supporter Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) and Sen. Ben Nelson (D-Neb.), who opposed abortion. Nelson was the final holdout on the bill, which needed all 60 Democrats then in the Senate to overcome unanimous GOP opposition. The Boxer-Nelson language was a softening of the Stupak amendment, but still allowed states to prohibit plans in the ACA’s insurance marketplaces from covering abortion.
In addition, President Barack Obama agreed to issue an “executive order” intended to ensure no federal funds were used for abortions.
In the end, both sides remained unhappy. Abortion opponents wanted the Hyde Amendment guarantees in the actual legislation rather than the executive order. Abortion-rights backers said the effort constricted abortion coverage in private health plans.
And both sides are still unhappy. According to the Guttmacher Institute, a reproductive health research group, 26 states have passed legislation restricting abortion coverage in any plan sold through the ACA’s insurance exchanges.
Another 11 states have passed laws restricting abortion coverage in all private insurance sold in the state. Nine of those states allow separate abortion “riders” to be sold, but no carriers offer such coverage in those marketplaces, according to a 2018 analysis by the Kaiser Family Foundation. (Kaiser Health News is an editorially independent program of the foundation.)
Three states — California, New York and Oregon — require nearly all insurance plans to provide abortion coverage, according to the National Women’s Law Center.
What Abortion Provisions Do Republicans Want To Add To The Latest Health Bill?
The issue for 2018 is a bipartisan bill that seeks to “stabilize” the individual insurance market and the ACA’s health insurance exchanges by providing additional federal funding to offset some recent premium increases. Some options include restoring federal subsidies for insurers who cover out-of-pocket costs for very low-income customers and setting up a federal reinsurance pool to help insurers pay for very expensive patients.
But once again, the abortion debate threatens to block a consensus.
Many Republicans are dubious about efforts to shore up the health law. They still hope its failure could lead to a repeal they were unable to accomplish in 2017.
Even some who say they are sympathetic to a legislative remedy want to add the permanent Hyde Amendment language that was left out of the final ACA, although included in Obama’s executive order.
That is “not negotiable for House Republicans,” a spokeswoman for House Speaker Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) told The Hill newspaper. The White House has also endorsed a permanent Hyde Amendment.
But Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wash.), who has been negotiating the insurance bill for the Democrats, calls any additional abortion restrictions “a complete nonstarter” for Democrats.
As Congress considers a bipartisan bill to keep premium prices down on the Affordable Care Act's marketplaces, a long-standing fight over abortion reappears.
(Image credit: Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)
Five people tackle the taboo of periods, simply by talking about them out in the open.
(Image credit: NPR)
Roger Severino created a new division in the Department of Health And Human Services to guard the religious rights of health care workers. That worries some advocates for women and LGBTQ people.
(Image credit: Jacquelyn Martin/AP)
When a health care reporter asked patients about their experience getting blood tests at a Walgreens in Palo Alto, Calif., the interactions with Theranos representatives became strained.
(Image credit: Paul Sakuma/AP)
Beyond annual flu shots, federal health officials say older adults need protection against shingles, pneumonia, tetanus, diphtheria and pertussis. But many grown-ups aren't getting vaccinated.
(Image credit: Andrew Brookes/Getty Images/Cultura RF)
Federal officials have recommended a new vaccine that is more effective than an earlier version at protecting older adults against the painful rash called shingles. But persuading many adults to get this and other recommended vaccines continues to be an uphill battle, physicians and vaccine experts say.
“I’m healthy, I’ll get that when I’m older,” is what adult patients often tell Dr. Michael Munger when he brings up an annual flu shot or a tetanus-diphtheria booster or the new shingles vaccine. Sometimes they put him off by questioning a vaccine’s effectiveness.
“This is not the case with childhood vaccines,” said Munger, a family physician in Overland Park, Kan., who is president of the American Academy of Family Physicians. “As parents, we want to make sure our kids are protected. But as adults, we act as if we’re invincible.”
The new schedule for adult vaccines for people age 19 and older was published in February following a recommendation last October by the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices and subsequent approval by the director of the CDC. The most significant change was to recommend the shingles vaccine that was approved by the Food and Drug Administration last fall, over an older version of the vaccine.
The new vaccine, Shingrix, should be given in two doses between two and six months apart to adults who are at least 50 years old. The older vaccine, Zostavax, can still be given to adults who are 60 or older, but Shingrix is preferred, according to the CDC. In clinical trials, Shingrix was 96.6 percent effective in adults ages 50 to 59, while Zostavax was 70 percent effective. The differences were even more marked with age: Effectiveness in adults 70 and older was 91.3 percent for Shingrix, compared with 38 percent for Zostavax. Shingrix also provided longer-lasting protection than Zostavax, whose effectiveness waned after the first year.
The guidelines suggest that people who already had the Zostavax shot be revaccinated with Shingrix.
The two-shot series of Shingrix costs about $280, while Zostavax runs $213.
“What’s remarkable [about the new vaccine] is that the high level of immunity persists even in the very old,” said Dr. Anne Louise Oaklander, a neurologist who is an expert on shingles. “It’s pretty hard to get the immune system of older people excited about anything.”
Shingles is caused by the same varicella-zoster virus that causes chickenpox. The virus can re-emerge decades after someone recovers from chickenpox, often causing a painful rash that may burn or itch for weeks before it subsides. About 1 in 3 Americans will get shingles during their lifetime; there are roughly 1 million cases every year. People are more likely to develop shingles as they age, as well as develop complications like postherpetic neuralgia, which can cause severe, long-standing pain after the shingles rash has disappeared. In rare cases, shingles can lead to blindness, hearing loss or death.
Although shingles vaccination rates have inched upward in recent years, only a third of adults who were 60 or older received the Zostavax vaccine in 2016.
In contrast, by the time children are 3 years old, typically more than 80 percent of kids, and frequently more than 90 percent, have received their recommended vaccines.
What gives? Cost can be a big deterrent for adult vaccines. The federal Vaccines for Children program helps parents whose kids are eligible for Medicaid or are uninsured cover the cost of vaccines up to age 19.
Adults with private insurance who get vaccines recommended by the CDC also are sheltered from high costs because the shots must be covered by most commercial plans without charging consumers anything out-of-pocket, under a provision of the Affordable Care Act. Patients, however, should confirm their coverage before requesting the new shingles vaccine, because insurers typically add new vaccines gradually to their formularies after they have been added to the recommended list, and consumers may need to wait a little while for coverage.
But vaccine coverage under the Medicare program for people age 65 and older is much less comprehensive. Vaccines to prevent influenza and pneumonia are covered without a copayment under Medicare Part B, which covers outpatient care.
Other vaccines, including the shingles vaccine, are typically covered under Part D drug plans, which may leave some beneficiaries on the hook for all or part of the cost of the two-shot series.
That can pose a significant problem for patients. “Not every Medicare beneficiary elects Part D, and even if you do, some have deductibles and copayments,” said Dr. William Schaffner, an infectious-diseases specialist at Vanderbilt University School of Medicine.
Even if adults want to get recommended vaccines, they sometimes lose track of which they have received and when. Pediatricians routinely report the vaccines they provide to state or city vaccination registries that electronically collect and consolidate the information. But the registries are not widely used for adults, who are more likely to get vaccines at various locations, such as a pharmacy or at work, for example.
“I’m always asking patients, ‘Did you get all the doses in the series?’ ‘Where did you get them?’” said Dr. Laura Riley, vice chair of obstetrics at Boston’s Massachusetts General Hospital who is a member of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices. “It can be very challenging to track.”
An estimated 64,000 people died from drug overdoses in the United States in 2016 — the vast majority of those were from heroin or synthetic opioids. New Hampshire is one of the states hardest hit by the epidemic and on Monday President Trump unveiled his plan to fight the crisis.
Research suggests that African-American and Latino children with autism are diagnosed later in life because of bias on the part of healthcare providers or lack of access among families, among others.
(Image credit: Shannon Wright for NPR)