03/21/10 - Ukrainian Catholic Archeparchy of Philadelphia

Health care for life and for allBy Bishop William F. Murphy, Cardinal Daniel DiNardo and Bishop John WesterOriginally published by On Faithat washingtonpost.comFor decades, the UnitedStates Catholic bishopshave actively supporteduniversal health care. TheCatholic Church teachesthat health care is a basichuman right, essential forhuman life and dignity.Our community of faithprovides health care tomillions, purchases healthcare for tens of thousandsand addresses the failingsof our health care systemin our parishes, emergencyrooms and shelters. This iswhy we as bishopscontinue to insist thathealth care reform whichtruly protects the life,dignity, consciences andhealth of all is a moralimperative and urgentnational priority.We are convinced that theSenate legislationpresented to the House ofRepresentatives on a “takeit or leave it” basis sadlyfails this test and ought tobe opposed in its currentform. Why do we take thisposition, when we have along record of support forhealth care reform? Thisjudgment is based on aset of moral principles andlegislative criteria that canbe found on our Website(http://www.usccb.org/healthcare/). But moresimply, our essentialpriorities can beMarch 21, 2010summarized in twosentences:1. Health care reformmust protect life andconscience, notthreaten them. TheSenate bill extendsabortion coverage, allowsfederal funds to pay forelective abortions anddenies adequateconscience protection toindividuals and institutions.Needed health carereform must keep in placethe longstanding andwidely supported federalpolicy that neither electiveabortion nor plans whichinclude elective abortioncan be paid for withfederal funds. Simply put,health care reform oughtto continue to apply bothparts of the Hydeamendment, no more andno less. The Houseadopted this policy by alarge bipartisan majority,establishing the sameprotections that governMedicaid, SCHIP, theFederal Employee HealthBenefits Program andother federal healthprograms. Despite claimsto the contrary, the statusquo prohibits the federalgovernment from fundingor facilitating plans thatinclude elective abortion.The Senate bill violates thisprohibition by providingsubsidies to purchase suchplans. The House billprovides that no one hasto pay for other people’sabortions, while the Senatebill does not. While theSenate provides for oneplan without abortioncoverage in eachexchange, those who selectanother plan in anexchange to better meetthe special needs of theirfamily will be required topay a separate monthlyfee into a fund exclusivelyfor abortions. This newfederal requirement is anattempt to circumvent theHyde amendment. It is afar more direct impositionon the consciences ofthose who do not wish topay for the destruction ofunborn human life thananything currently infederal law.It is not those who requirethat the Hyde Amendmentbe fully applied who areobstructing reform, sincethis is the law of the landand the will of theAmerican people. Rather,those who would expandfederal participation inabortion, require peopleto pay for other people’sabortions, and refuse toincorporate essentialconscience protections(both within and beyondthe abortion context) arethreatening genuinereform. With conscience23protection as with abortionfunding, the goal is topreserve the status quo.2. Universal coverageshould be trulyuniversal. People shouldnever be denied coveragebecause they can’t affordit, because of where theylive or work, or becauseof where they come fromand when they got here.The Senate bill would notonly continue current lawthat denies legalimmigrants access toMedicaid for five years,but also prohibitundocumented immigrantsfrom buying insurance fortheir families in theexchanges using their ownmoney. These provisionscould leave immigrantsand their families worseoff, and at the same timeit would also hurt the publichealth of our nation bymaking hospitalemergency rooms thedoctors’ offices of theuninsured.Now, after a year ofdivisive political combat,members of the House aretold that they can advancehealth care reform only byadopting the Senatelegislation as is, includingthese fundamental flaws.(continued on next page)