President Obama’s health care law, ObamaCare, takes the federal government’s relationship with Planned Parenthood to a whole new level. On August 15, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) announced that Planned Parenthood affiliates in Iowa, Montana, and New Hampshire will be funded to serve as ObamaCare “Navigators.” Their combined funding will total over $655,000.
By choosing these Planned Parenthood affiliates to be Navigators in the federally facilitated Exchanges, these Planned Parenthood affiliates will now have the seal of approval of the federal government as an entity that consumers can contact for help in applying for coverage.
Moreover, HHS plans to list the Navigators (e.g., Planned Parenthood) in each federally facilitated Exchange on HHS’ official government website as a resource to help consumers. [78 Fed. Reg. 42848].
As Navigators, they will help Americans select an Exchange health care plan and complete their applications. And they will help consumers determine if they qualify for federal assistance, such as Medicaid, or the federal premium subsidies.
Planned Parenthood is the largest provider of abortions in America today. And now, under ObamaCare, some Americans may end up going to a Planned Parenthood center to get the help they need to purchase health insurance. How ironic is that? That our federal government would direct families to affiliates of America’s largest abortion provider for help in purchasing insurance to cover life-preserving treatments?
But Planned Parenthood affiliates will not only serve as ObamaCare “Navigators.” A state that operates its own Exchange, or that partners with the federal government, may choose to fund other health care consumer assistance personnel that are not Navigators, but rather “in-person assisters.” For instance, on August 23, the Minnesota Exchange announced that it had chosen the state Planned Parenthood affiliate to be a recipient of a grant to assist in enrollment.
And then there are the ObamaCare “certified application counselor organizations.” What are certified application counselor organizations, you might ask? You won’t find the term anywhere in the massive ObamaCare law.
The federally facilitated Exchanges will designate certain organizations – community health centers, health care providers, social service agencies, etc. – to be certified application counselor organizations. (A state Exchange can do so also). These organizations will in turn certify their staff members, as well as their volunteers, to be counselors who will assist applicants in completing their applications for health insurance and for federal assistance programs. The organizations and counselors are not expected to be paid by the Exchanges.
Unlike Navigators, who are required to “[p]rovide information and services in a fair, accurate and impartial manner,” certified application counselors are required “to act in the best interest of the applicants assisted.” [78 Fed. Reg. 42826].
Organizations are currently in the process of applying for this designation within federally facilitated Exchanges. Those chosen for the 34 federally facilitated Exchanges will also be listed on HHS’ official website. Which means that if Planned Parenthood clinics apply and are chosen, then this will be an additional means by which HHS will promote Planned Parenthood on its official website.
This is all just one more reason why ObamaCare needs to be repealed.
The implementation of the Affordable Care Act (ACA), commonly known as ObamaCare, has significantly impacted various aspects of healthcare in the United States. One of the most contentious and debated impacts has been its effect on organizations like Planned Parenthood, which provides a range of reproductive health services, including abortions. Critics argue that ObamaCare has elevated Planned Parenthood’s influence and funding to unprecedented levels, raising ethical and policy concerns among pro-life advocates.
Overview of Planned Parenthood’s Role in Reproductive Health
Planned Parenthood is a nonprofit organization that offers a variety of reproductive health services, including birth control, cancer screenings, sexually transmitted infection (STI) testing and treatment, and abortions. It operates hundreds of health centers across the United States, providing services to millions of individuals each year.
Funding and Services
A significant portion of Planned Parenthood’s funding comes from government sources, including Medicaid reimbursements and Title X family planning grants. These funds are crucial for the organization to offer low-cost or free services to low-income individuals.
Impact of ObamaCare on Planned Parenthood
The ACA has played a pivotal role in shaping the landscape of reproductive health services in the U.S., with several specific impacts on Planned Parenthood.
Increased Access to Health Insurance
ObamaCare’s expansion of Medicaid and the creation of health insurance exchanges have increased access to health insurance for millions of Americans. This expansion has allowed more individuals to seek reproductive health services, many of which are provided by Planned Parenthood. The organization has seen a rise in the number of insured patients, which translates to more reimbursement from government programs like Medicaid.
Preventive Services Mandate
The ACA requires insurance plans to cover a range of preventive services without cost-sharing, including contraceptives and reproductive health services. This mandate has further integrated Planned Parenthood into the healthcare system, as they are a primary provider of these services. The organization’s ability to offer these services without cost to the patient has likely increased demand and utilization.
Criticism from Pro-Life Advocates
The bolstering of Planned Parenthood through ObamaCare has drawn significant criticism from pro-life advocates, who argue that it indirectly supports and funds abortion services, despite legal restrictions on direct federal funding for abortions.
Indirect Funding Concerns
Critics contend that while federal funds are not used directly for abortions, the financial support Planned Parenthood receives for other services frees up resources that can be used to subsidize abortion services. They argue that this financial flexibility enhances the organization’s capacity to perform abortions, contrary to the intent of many taxpayers.
Ethical and Moral Opposition
Pro-life advocates also raise ethical and moral objections to government support for an organization that performs abortions. They argue that taxpayer dollars should not support any aspect of an organization involved in practices they find morally reprehensible.
Legislative and Policy Responses
In response to these concerns, there have been various legislative and policy efforts aimed at reducing Planned Parenthood’s funding and influence.
Defunding Efforts
Numerous attempts have been made at both the federal and state levels to defund Planned Parenthood. These efforts typically involve redirecting funds to other healthcare providers that do not perform abortions, such as community health centers. However, such measures have faced significant legal and political challenges.
The Women’s Public Health and Safety Act
One notable legislative effort is the Women’s Public Health and Safety Act (H.R. 3495), which seeks to grant states the authority to exclude abortion providers from Medicaid. The National Right to Life Committee (NRLC) has strongly advocated for this bill, arguing that it would allow states to direct Medicaid funds to healthcare providers that align with pro-life values.
Broader Implications for Reproductive Health Policy
The relationship between ObamaCare and Planned Parenthood exemplifies the broader debate over reproductive health policy in the United States. This debate involves fundamental questions about the role of government in healthcare, the balance between access to comprehensive reproductive health services and respect for diverse moral perspectives, and the allocation of public funds.
Access vs. Ethical Concerns
The ACA’s expansion of healthcare access has undoubtedly benefited many individuals, particularly those from low-income backgrounds. However, the inclusion of reproductive health services, including those provided by Planned Parenthood, highlights the ongoing tension between improving healthcare access and addressing ethical concerns related to abortion.
Future Policy Directions
The future of reproductive health policy under the ACA will likely continue to evolve, shaped by ongoing political, legal, and societal debates. Key considerations will include how to balance comprehensive healthcare coverage with respect for conscience rights and ethical diversity, and how to ensure that public funds are used in ways that reflect the values of the broader population.
Conclusion
The implementation of ObamaCare has significantly elevated the role and influence of Planned Parenthood in the U.S. healthcare system. While this has improved access to essential reproductive health services for many, it has also sparked substantial controversy and opposition from pro-life advocates. As the debate over reproductive health policy continues, finding a balance that respects both access to care and ethical considerations will remain a critical challenge for policymakers and advocates on all sides of the issue.
Chelsea Garcia is a political writer with a special interest in international relations and social issues. Events surrounding the war in Ukraine and the war in Israel are a major focus for political journalists. But as a former local reporter, she is also interested in national politics.
Chelsea Garcia studied media, communication and political science in Texas, USA, and learned the journalistic trade during an internship at a daily newspaper. In addition to her political writing, she is pursuing a master's degree in multimedia and writing at Texas.
