Legislation watch
2012 House Bill 2330: Concerning health plan coverage for the voluntary termination of a pregnancy
Comments on this legislation Post new comment Text and Analysis Add to Watch List
Previous Next
- Introduced by Rep. Eileen Cody (D) on January 11, 2012, prohibiting a health plan from limiting in any way a woman's access to services related to the voluntary termination of a pregnancy. (Companion Bill: SB 6185).
- Referred to the House Health Care & Wellness Committee on January 11, 2012.
- Substitute offered in the House on January 26, 2012, states the Legislature intends that nothing in the act affects: the statutory right of a religiously sponsored health carrier to refuse to pay for a specific service if it objects to doing so by reason of conscience or religion; or the statutory right of an individual or organization with a religious or moral tenet opposed to a specific service to refuse to purchase coverage for that service if they object to doing so because of conscience or religion.
- Referred to the House Ways & Means Committee on January 31, 2012.
- Referred to the House Rules Committee on February 8, 2012.
- Amendment offered by Rep. Bill Hinkle, (R-Cle Elum) (R) on February 13, 2012, makes the act inapplicable to the extent that its application would result in noncompliance with provisions of federal law prohibiting discrimination based on a health care entity's refusal to provide, pay for, provide coverage of, or refer for abortions. The amendment passed by voice vote in the House on February 13, 2012.
- Referred to the House Health Care & Wellness Committee on January 11, 2012.
- Passed 52 to 46 in the House on February 13, 2012, requires health plans that cover maternity care or services to cover the voluntary termination of pregnancy.
Who Voted "Yes" and Who Voted "No" - Received in the Senate on February 15, 2012.
- Referred to the Senate Health & Long-Term Care Committee on February 15, 2012.
- Referred to the Senate Ways & Means Committee on February 21, 2012.
- Referred to the Senate Rules Committee on February 27, 2012.
- Referred to the House Rules Committee on March 8, 2012.
Comments
1) Re: 2012 House Bill 2330 (Concerning health plan coverage for the voluntary termination of a pregnancy) by petervlipen on May 28, 2012This is a delicate issue and I hope our officials will think twice before adopting this bill. I heard about this Bill when I was in a local shop buying Triluma cream, I could not believe my ears that they are ready to vote for this, one thing is to be forced to make an abortion due to some medical problems, but letting people make abortions because it is "too inconvienent" is not a wise decision.
Even federal income tax payer's of other states will pay for a portion of the implementation of this bill if the state, under OBAMACARE (God, help us!), chooses a federal employee's health insurance plan under the required exchange. How?
Under Obamacare, if a state chooses a federal employee health benefit plan as their Health Exchange Plan (required by Obamacare) and choose to cover voluntary abortions, they have to separate the amount of premiums used for abortions since federal law prohibits funding abortion. Who will pay to have the premiums separated? The federal income tax payer since their taxes will fund the technology required to separate the premiums.
So if the state passes this bill, Washington State residents who are also federal income tax payers will pay TWICE-once for the federal subsidy to fund the technology to separate the premiums, and again through state taxes that will find the OBAMACARE-mandated health exchange.
I agree with you Lainie59. Here we have more government intrusion, more of the liberal agenda crammed down our throats. And we pay for it.
These clowns need to be impeached, I'm so tired of their tactics.
Your new comments should be made in the box below.