White house press secretary repeats the “Hyde Amendment Myth”

The White House has posted the following transcript of an exchange between White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs and CNS News reporter Fred Lucas at the White House press briefing today (October 7):

---

Q Thanks, Robert. It's a question on health care, actually; two questions. First, in a letter to senators last week, the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops said that, quoting, "So far the health reform bills considered in the committee, including the new Senate Finance Committee bill, have not met the President's challenge of barring the use of federal dollars for abortion." Is that statement wrong? MR. GIBBS: Well, I don't want to get me in trouble at church, but I would mention there's a law that precludes the use of federal funds for abortion that isn't going to be changed in these health care bills. Q There have been, though, several amendments that would explicitly bar abortions, that would therefore reject it, some of those amendments by Democrats -- MR. GIBBS: Again, there's a fairly well documented federal law that prevents it. Mr. Gibbs' statement was highly misleading. The federal law to which Mr. Gibbs presumably referred, the Hyde Amendment, applies only to funds appropriated through the annual Health and Human Services appropriations bill. But the reporter's question, and the quoted statement from the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, pertained to the health care bills currently under consideration in Congress. Neither the Hyde Amendment nor any other existing restriction will govern the provisions of the pending health care bills that are the focus of the abortion-related concerns. Specifically, the pending bills each contain one or both of the following components: (1) a nationwide government-run insurance program, "the public plan," and (2) premium subsidy programs to help tens of millions of Americans purchase health coverage. None of the funds that would be spent by the public plan, and none of the funds that would be spent by the premium subsidy programs, would be appropriated through the annual appropriations bills. This has been confirmed by analyses issued by the nonpartisan Congressional Research Service. Thus, none of these funds will be covered by the Hyde Amendment. See this memorandum for further documentation: Under the House bill (H.R. 3200), as amended by the Capps Amendment, the public plan would be explicitly authorized to cover elective abortions. The public plan would be a program within the Department of Health and Human Services. This memorandum documents that the public plan could not possibly pay for abortions with anything other than federal funds. To suggest that the public plan could pay for abortions with "private funds" is a myth -- and worse, a political hoax. As a matter of law, all of the funds that would be spent by the public plan, on abortions and everything else, would be federal funds. In other words, the public plan would engage in direct federal funding of elective abortion. In addition, the premium subsidy programs found in both the House bill and the Senate bills would use federal funds to pay part of the cost of the premiums of private health plans that cover elective abortions. This practice would not be permitted if the Hyde Amendment actually covered these funds -- but it would not, because the funds would not flow through the HHS appropriations bill. For further discussion of how the premium subsidy program would be funded, see this memorandum. For discussion on how the premium subsidy program would subsidize abortion coverage in ways inconsistent with current federal policy, see this release. Douglas Johnson Legislative Director National Right to Life Committee 512-10th Street, Northwest Washington, D.C. 20004 202-626-8820

---