WASHINGTON -- President Barack Obama's health care reform law may bring new benefits and coverage to women. But Obamacare has also unintentionally provoked a slew of new restrictions on insurance coverage of abortion.


Since Obama signed his health care plan into law in 2010, 21 states have enacted laws restricting private insurance companies from covering abortion, and more may follow. The result is that women in 23 states won't be able to go to an Obamacare insurance exchange and buy a health plan that includes coverage of abortion, except under extreme circumstances.


State legislatures from Alabama to Pennsylvania to Wisconsin dusted off the anti-abortion playbook of the 1980s to pass laws that prohibit health insurance companies from including abortion as a covered service, beyond exceptions such as protecting a pregnant woman's life. In some states, women theoretically are permitted to buy separate coverage for abortion, but abortion rights activists say such plans are impossible to find.


The trend that swept state capitals over the past three years has been fanned by an anti-abortion movement reinvigorated by the tea party wave during 2010 elections, when Republicans made huge gains in state legislatures, governors' offices and Congress. These insurance regulations take effect after many states have imposed unprecedented restrictions on access to abortion itself that have closed clinics across America.


"What they're trying to do make abortion more difficult to access and unaffordable for women, and this is one of the ways they can do that," said Gretchen Borchelt, director of state reproductive health policy at the National Women's Law Center in Washington. "It's part and parcel of the larger effort to make abortion harder for women to get."


But the new laws on health insurance wouldn't have happened without the passage of the Affordable Care Act, or ACA, and the intense Republican opposition to the law, advocates on both sides of the abortion issue say.



National Women's Law Center



"As soon as the ink was dry on the ACA, states started passing laws limiting abortion coverage on the exchanges," said Elizabeth Nash, state issues manager at the Guttmacher Institute, a New York-based research and advocacy organization focused on sexual and reproductive health and rights. "You don't have over 20 states passing laws on an issue and not have it be considered a major trend," she said.


"Many of these states were hostile to the Affordable Care Act in general. They are unsupportive of abortion rights. And put those two issues together and it's easy to pass an abortion coverage restriction for the health exchanges," Nash said. "In the language of the ACA, it encouraged states to adopt abortion coverage restrictions in the exchanges, so with that, it made it easier for states to do so."


The Obamacare fight in Congress sparked interest among abortion opponents in regulating health insurance, Mary Harned, staff counsel for the Washington-based anti-abortion group Americans United for Life, told the Huffington Post.


"The 2009-2010 health care reform debate raised awareness among Americans that a large number of private insurance plans -– maybe even their own -– cover abortions," Harned wrote in an email. "Many pro-life Americans, along with state legislators, are now seeking a way to prohibit insurance coverage of most abortions in their states."


The abortion coverage laws fit another pattern: Republican-led states have sought to stymie the implementation of Obamacare in myriad ways, from refusing to expand Medicaid to more poor people to declining to establish health insurance exchanges, to advancing laws seeking to undercut its consumer protections and suppress enrollment.


Abortion-rights advocates were furious when Obama and congressional Democratic leaders made concessions to anti-abortion Democratics, led by then-Rep. Bart Stupak (Mich.) and then-Sen. Ben Nelson (Neb.), to secure their crucial votes for the health care reform bill in 2010. The Affordable Care Act extends previous laws prohibiting federal tax dollars from paying for abortions and spells out that states are permitted to ban private health insurance from covering abortion, either on the law's health insurance exchanges or anywhere else.


States already had that authority. But before the enactment of Obamacare, only five states had laws restricting insurance coverage of abortion: Idaho, Kentucky, Missouri, North Dakota and Oklahoma, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures. "This issue had been dead since the '80s at the state level," Nash said.


Since 2010, Idaho, Missouri and Oklahoma passed additional laws and 18 states enacted new ones. Some states forbid all private health insurance companies from covering abortion, while others limit the rule to health plans sold on insurance exchanges. The exchanges, which begin accepting enrollment Oct. 1, are where people who don't get job-based health benefits and small firms will comparison-shop for coverage and learn whether they qualify for financial assistance.


In the remaining states, health insurance plans that cover abortion are likely to be available. Abortion-rights advocates say most health insurance today already covers elective abortion, and a Huffington Post review of the health insurance exchanges suggests that won't change under Obamacare.


Thirty-three percent of women who had abortions in 2008 were uninsured, 30 percent had private health insurance and 31 percent were enrolled in Medicaid, according to a 2010 Guttmacher Institute report. Nevertheless, 57 percent of these women paid for their abortions out of pocket, including 63 percent of those with private insurance. Women with insurance coverage pay for abortions for several reasons, including having plans that won't cover it, not knowing what their insurance benefits are, or wanting to keep an abortion secret from family members, Nash said.


Women in California, Connecticut, the District of Columbia, Hawaii, Maryland, Massachusetts, New York, Rhode Island, Vermont and Washington state will have access to health plans to cover abortion, officials from those states told HuffPost.


The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services is running at least parts of the exchanges in 34 states, including some where abortion coverage is lawful. HHS hasn't yet announced what insurance products will be available on those marketplaces and couldn't say whether abortion will be covered. Likewise, officials in Colorado, and Minnesota couldn't provide the information. A spokesman for the New Mexico Health Insurance Exchange didn't respond to requests for comment.


The health care reform law extends 1977 Hyde Amendment prohibitions against federal dollars being spent on abortions except for limited cases like when a pregnancy is the result of rape or incest or when the woman's life is in jeopardy. These rules also apply to Medicaid, although 17 states have broader exceptions and fund all or most medically necessary abortions, according to the Guttmacher Institute.


Women may still purchase health plans that cover abortion, but there must be an additional charge of at least $1 a month, and a woman can't apply federal tax credits to the abortion benefit. Those credits are available for people earning between the federal poverty level, which is $11,490 for a single person this year, and four times that amount. Insurance companies have to keep the money "segregated" in separate accounts when they collect premiums.


The Affordable Care Act also bans states from designating elective abortion as a guaranteed benefit in insurance sold on the exchanges and requires that at least one insurance product in each state explicitly not cover abortion. The U.S. Office of Personnel Management, which oversees federal employee benefits, is responsible for designating multi-state plans that will be sold in numerous exchanges and must choose one that doesn't cover abortions. The Office of Personnel Management hasn't yet selected the insurance companies.


Anti-abortion advocates weren't satisfied with the law's safeguards against tax money financing abortions and contend that separating tax dollars and individual dollars isn't possible. Moreover, Harned wrote, anti-abortion activists don't want health insurance to cover abortion because they believe it encourages more women to undergo the procedure. "It is an accepted principle of economics and public policy that when you subsidize or pay for a service or product, you increase demand for that service or product," she wrote.


Women who want to make sure abortion is a covered service -- or want to be certain that it isn't -- will have to look at the fine print when choosing a health plan, but won't need to worry about the complex movement of money behind the scenes, Borchelt said.


"It's not wraparound coverage. It's not supplemental coverage. It is just part of the regular, comprehensive plan that's being offered, so it's just the way insurance works now," Borchelt said. "We used to talk about it as being two checks that the consumer would have to write because of the segregation requirements, but that's not the way it's being implemented."


In states like Pennsylvania and Missouri, however, the situation is more complicated. These and other states allow women to buy a "rider," or supplemental insurance plan, solely to cover abortion. The trouble is, abortion-rights advocates say, these insurance products don't seem to exist.


"We haven't been able to ascertain if health plans are actually offering these riders," Borchelt said. "My sense has also been that health plans also don't know that riders are supposed to be offered or available." And women aren't likely to know they should ask, and generally don't consider abortion coverage to be a main determinant of what health insurance they choose.


"Abortion should just be part of the comprehensive plan that women get because they don't necessarily look for that or think, 'Oh, I might need an abortion,'" Borchelt said. "They're not going to ever predict a situation in which they're going to have an unplanned pregnancy or a problem pregnancy or a sexual assault leading to pregnancy. It's not something that you plan for."





Loading Slideshow...



  • Defunding Planned Parenthood


    Planned Parenthood has become such a reliable punching bag for social conservatives that it would have been more surprising if former Sen. Rick Santorum (R-Pa.) <em>didn't</em> include defunding the women's health services provider as a staple of his recent three-point plan to revitalize the GOP. “[W]e are going to push Republican congressional leaders to defund the monstrosity that is Planned Parenthood,” Santorum said in an April fundraising plea, <a href="http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2013/04/07/rick-santorums-plan-to-revitalize-the-gop-defund-planned-parenthood/" target="_blank">according to Raw Story</a>. “Too many in the GOP want to ignore the millions of innocent lives that have been extinguished by this vile organization. Defunding Planned Parenthood is a winning issue. The polls prove it.” If threatening Planned Parenthood -- and the pap smears, STI screenings, breast exams and contraceptives that comprise 97 percent of its services -- seems somewhat passé, that's because it kind of is. The biggest state push to strip the organization of funds came from Republicans in 2011 and 2012, and while some laws were passed, most have been found unconstitutional by court rulings. The GOP's demonization of Planned Parenthood <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/07/29/defunding-planned-parenthood-polls_n_913685.html" target="_blank">has been</a> <a href="http://thinkprogress.org/health/2012/03/06/439059/texas-poll-planned-parenthood-defunding/" target="_blank">far more unpopular</a> than Santorum suggests, but that didn't stop congressional Republicans from eagerly continuing their crusade to eliminate its federal funding earlier this year with a <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/01/08/planned-parenthood-funding-_n_2434592.html?1357683076" target="_blank">pair of new bills</a> that haven't moved forward. <BR> <BR>




  • Restricting Abortion Access


    The fight against women's reproductive rights continued this year, as it seemingly does every year, with a new slate of highly restrictive anti-abortion bills. A number of states have so far been successful at pioneering harsh new limits on abortion rights that would leave women who need such services in those states -- as well as their partners -- with few or no options. North Dakota led the charge, ushering through the toughest restrictions in the nation with a bill prohibiting abortions as early as six weeks into a pregnancy. State Republicans <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/03/26/jack-dalrymple-north-dakota_n_2956934.html" target="_blank">have admitted</a> that it will likely set the stage for a bitter court challenge. Arkansas meanwhile <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/07/us/arkansas-adopts-restrictive-abortion-law.html?pagewanted=all&_r=1&" target="_blank">passed a ban</a> on abortions after 12 weeks, and <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/04/06/kansas-abortion_n_3029343.html?utm_hp_ref=politics" target="_blank">Kansas is set to enact a law that has raised concern</a> among abortion rights activists who say the language could lead to an outright abortion ban.<BR> <BR>




  • Implementing New Restrictions For Abortion Clinics, Doctors


    When banning abortions themselves isn't enough, states have also made a point of targeting the doctors and clinics that provide them. Opponents claim the push for harsher restrictions could eliminate abortion access entirely in some states, forcing women in need to face difficult and dangerous choices. Measures in <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/01/26/mississippi-abortion-clinic_n_2558320.html" target="_blank">Mississippi</a> and <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/04/02/north-dakotas-only-abortion-clinic-isnt-going-anywhere/" target="_blank">North Dakota</a> have put the single abortion clinics in each of the states at risk of closing. The new regulations claim to ensure safer standards, requiring anyone performing abortions to be an OB-GYN with hospital admitting privileges. But critics argue that the abundance of caution is unnecessary, as procedures <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2013/04/04/us/alabama-legislature-approves-abortion-clinic-limits.html?_r=0" target="_blank">very rarely lead to medical emergencies</a>. With the stigmatization of abortion in many of these states often leaving only a few medical professionals who provide abortion services in the first place, opponents also argue that the new rules create an onerous if not impossible task that is intended to force clinics to close. New <a href="http://hamptonroads.com/2013/04/decisive-hearing-abortion-clinic-rules-set-today" target="_blank">rules in Virginia</a> are causing similar consternation in the state, and beginning in July, the few clinics serving Alabama will face the same concerns thanks to a <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/04/09/alabama-abortion-bill_n_3046005.html" target="_blank">newly passed law</a>.<BR> <BR>




  • Punishing Rape Victims Who Seek Abortions


    New Mexico state Rep. Cathrynn Brown (R) nearly one-upped <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/08/19/todd-akin-abortion-legitimate-rape_n_1807381.html" target="_blank">Todd Akin</a> earlier this year, when she <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/01/24/new-mexico-abortion-bill_n_2541894.html" target="_blank">proposed legislation</a> seeking to make any rape victim who terminated a pregnancy guilty of "tampering with evidence," a third-degree felony. She later <a href="http://www.salon.com/2013/01/25/cathrynn_brown_wants_to_abort_mission/" target="_blank">attempted to perform damage control</a>, adjusting the language of the bill. It didn't pass.




  • Cutting Sex Education Funding


    Some people apparently still believe the best sex education is the kind that includes neither sex nor education. In North Dakota, Arkansas and Texas, Republicans extended their vendetta against Planned Parenthood this year, bringing forth proposals to block the organization's effort to offer comprehensive sex education programs to at-risk teenagers. Lawmakers lofted a variety of arguments against the plan, which would have provided counseling and information about contraception, sexually transmitted infections and -- wait for it -- even abstinence. In Texas, <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/03/06/texas-sex-ed-planned-parenthood_n_2819318.html" target="_blank">one supporter claimed</a> that it was impossible to entrust Planned Parenthood with sex education duties, because doing so would constitute a "conflict of interest" considering the group's role as an abortion provider. It was taken as a suggestion that she believed Planned Parenthood might miseducate teens in order to get them pregnant so that the the group could then make money off providing them with abortions. The bill hasn't passed yet. Lawmakers in North Dakota offered similar arguments in favor of their version of a similar measure, while Republicans in Arkansas <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/04/09/arkansas-planned-parenthood-sex-ed_n_3047024.html" target="_blank">pushed through a bill</a> that both defunds Planned Parenthood and effectively kills a comprehensive sex education program in the state's public high schools. The Arkansas bill also ends a state-funded HIV and STI prevention program, also administered by Planned Parenthood. Critics have called this a terrible idea, partially because <a href="http://thinkprogress.org/health/2013/04/10/1844321/arkansas-planned-parenthood-sex-ed/" target="_blank">Arkansas already has some of the highest</a> teen pregnancy and HIV rates in the nation, and partially because, duh.<BR> <BR>




  • Pushing Abstinence-Only Education


    While Republicans in a number of states fought comprehensive sex education, GOP lawmakers in Congress poured it on hot and heavy with an aggressive and ill-fated bill seeking to <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/03/04/abstinence-education-reallocation-act_n_2807356.html" target="_blank">open up more than $550 million in federal grants</a> to programs that teach the "skills and benefits of sexual abstinence as the optimal sexual health behavior for youth." It also encouraged programs that provided an "understanding of how drugs, alcohol, and the irresponsible use of social media can influence sexual decisionmaking and can contribute to risky and often aggressive sexual behavior." Studies have repeatedly shown that this form of education <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/04/13/AR2007041301003.html" target="_blank">doesn't work</a> and, in fact, <a href="http://thinkprogress.org/health/2012/05/14/482665/birth-control-misinformed/" target="_blank">increases risky sexual behavior</a> among young adults. As <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/themoogly/abstinence-education-reallocation-act_n_2807356_234478473.html" target="_blank">one witty HuffPost commenter quipped</a>, "If you gave every teen in America $550 million, they would still have sex."<BR> <BR>




  • Curbing Affordable Contraception


    The GOP offensive to scale back access to affordable birth control also perked up again in 2013, with Republicans taking most intent aim at an Obamacare contraception mandate that they have repeatedly called an attack on religious freedom. The push back against the measure -- which requires most insurance providers and employers to offer free contraception coverage -- <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/01/04/virginia-abortion-contraception_n_2410445.html?1357324409" target="_blank">first</a> <a href="http://blogs.riverfronttimes.com/dailyrft/2013/03/tim_jones_chris_koster_birth_control.php" target="_blank">cropped up</a> on the state level, but in March, a group of House Republicans threw it into the crossfire of budget negotiations when they <a href="http://thehill.com/blogs/healthwatch/abortion/286217-gop-lawmakers-say-spending-bill-should-target-contraception-mandate" target="_blank">tacked a measure</a> to repeal the mandate on to a continuing resolution. It was a non-starter.




  • Reinstating Anti-Sodomy Laws


    In the midst of a campaign for governor, Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli (R) <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/04/03/ken-cuccinelli-sodomy_n_3007731.html" target="_blank">made an effort</a> to reinstate a state anti-sodomy law that had recently been struck down by the courts. Cuccinelli hoped to use the law -- which <a href="http://www.motherjones.com/mojo/2013/04/cuccinelli-wants-rehearing-virginias-anti-sodomy-law" target="_blank">technically banned</a> consensual anal and oral sex, for <em>both gay and straight people</em>, despite the Supreme Court's 2003 <em>Lawrence v. Texas</em> ruling that found such bans unconstitutional -- in order to prosecute an earlier case. Cucinelli's appeal <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/04/10/ken-cuccinelli-sodomy_n_3051758.html" target="_blank">ultimately failed</a>, but only after his campaign <a href="http://www.motherjones.com/mojo/2013/04/ken-cuccinelli-crimes-against-nature-prison-capacity" target="_blank">refused to confirm or deny</a> if he himself had committed any of the "crimes against nature" that the law supposedly protected against.




  • Voting To Keep Gay Sex Illegal


    A law determining that sex between gay people is illegal has been on the books in Montana for almost 40 years, despite the fact that it can no longer be enforced due to a state Supreme Court ruling and <em>Lawrence v. Texas</em>. When state lawmakers undertook an effort to repeal the obsolete measure in April, however, not all were willing to take the symbolic step in favor of gay rights. In fact, a total of 38 Republicans voted against the measure, a stand that drew a <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/04/09/amanda-curtis-montana_n_3046636.html" target="_blank">pointed response</a> from their Democratic colleague, state Rep. Amanda Curtis (D). Curtis even said she was quite tempted to punch one of her Republican colleagues, but it looks like that didn't happen. Watch her explain why she didn't in the video to the left, starting at around the 2:10 mark. And <a href="https://www.facebook.com/amanda.curtis.56614?fref=ts" target="_blank">follow her on Facebook here</a>. Despite their resistance, state lawmakers <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/huff-wires/20130411/us-montana-gay-sex/?utm_hp_ref=politics&ir=politics" target="_blank">ultimately passed the measure</a>, meaning a bunch of "felons" in the state are about to lose some serious street cred.<BR><BR>




  • Keeping Gay Teens Scared Of Jail Time


    When the Texas state Senate <a href="http://www.statesman.com/news/news/state-regional-govt-politics/rare-gay-rights-bill-passes-senate-committee/nXHRt/" target="_blank">made a rare, yet small move</a> to help enhance legal protections for sexually active gay teens in April, one Republican, state Sen. Charles Schwertner (R-Georgetown), voted against the measure. In voting no, Schwertner rejected an effort to extend the <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/04/10/texas-romeo-and-juliet-law_n_3054471.html" target="_blank">state's "Romeo and Juliet" law</a> -- which protects teens engaged in consensual sex from being prosecuted for sex crimes -- to gay teens as well. Currently, gay teens who have sex with one another risk felony charges of sexual indecency with a child. A similar law is on the books in Nevada, where the ACLU <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/04/04/crime-against-nature-statute-nevada-aclu_n_3015565.html" target="_blank">has announced</a> it is joining a fight against the statute.<BR><BR>




  • Canceling 'Sex Week'


    In March, a <a href="http://sexweekut.org/schedule/" target="_blank">weeklong, student-produced series of events</a> dedicated to sexual safety and awareness at the University of Tennessee emerged as a nemesis of state Republicans. After some griping, they successfully stripped state tax dollars from the "Sex Week" budget, thereby eliminating sex from the entire campus for a week. Wait, no. In fact, despite all the conservative bluster, "Sex Week" <a href="http://www.wate.com/story/21906010/uts-sex-week-gets-underway" target="_blank">kicked off as planned</a> in April, with help from some independent donors who presumably understood that because every week at college is sex week, <a href="http://sexweekut.org/schedule/" target="_blank">it's ok to discuss</a> everything "From a Rocky Bottom to a <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rocky_Top" target="_blank">Rocky Top</a>." Well played, Sex Week UT.<BR><BR>