Abortion is a legal medical procedure and I have grown extremely frustrated that the issue of “public funding” for abortion has resulted in stalling the current health care bills in front of Congress. To me, the arguing over abortion funding as a part of the greater context of health care reform is like getting stuck choosing between various shades of beige for house paint — if choosing one way or the other is inconsequential for the bigger picture, does it really matter?
Beige Option #1: I do not see a reason why abortion shouldn’t be included and paid for as part of medical plans — it’s legal and health related even if it is somewhat elective. There are many issues in this country, moral and otherwise, that people don’t agree with yet public funds goes towards enforcing. Take the death penalty, for example. Not everyone agrees with it, yet there’s nothing holding back public funds from being used to complete prisoner executions. The fact is that we cannot earmark our tax money to go towards the things we want. We accept the legality of many things and our money gets spent on it whether we like it or not.
Beige Option #2: If abortion was not covered, I wouldn’t care either. The reality is that abortion is neither complicated nor expensive and could fall into the category of nose or boob job — it’s medical, yet elective (in most cases). Frankly, we wouldn’t need health care reform if every procedure was as affordable as an abortion. Someone may go into short term debt if they have to spend out-of-pocket money to get an abortion. I have no problem with this. Therefore it would be equally fine with me if abortion was dropped from all medical plans.
I feel as though the abortion issue has already helped to derail the public option and water down the health care bill as it stands. Maybe it wouldn’t have been an issue if 60 votes weren’t necessary to get these bills passed. So perhaps we need to look at the bigger picture and decide whether or not it makes sense to require 60 votes to get anything done anymore.