Like Countable?

Install the App
TRY NOW

house Bill H.R. 7

No Federal Funding for Abortion Services (With Exceptions)

Argument in favor

This bill would protect the innocent lives of unborn babies and the healthcare providers who do not wish to participate in abortions.

Todd's Opinion
···
02/18/2015
Taxpayers shouldn't be forced to fund legal murder.
Like (21)
Follow
Share
annette's Opinion
···
06/17/2016
No one should be forced to help with killing someone. I don't want my tax dollars going toward killing a child.
Like (8)
Follow
Share
DeanLA's Opinion
···
02/11/2017
Abortion is murder! Protect innocent lives.
Like (6)
Follow
Share

Argument opposed

Tramples women's reproductive freedom and access to healthcare. Disproportionately impacts people in lower socio-economic situations.

SelinaMeyer's Opinion
···
03/04/2015
If men got pregnant, you could get an abortion at an ATM.
Like (68)
Follow
Share
helmsworth's Opinion
···
03/08/2015
This bill would limit the ability of people with low-incomes to get abortions. Everyone should have abortions as an option.
Like (24)
Follow
Share
Sam's Opinion
···
01/24/2017
There is no need to make a second law prohibiting federal funding for abortions. This law only serves to destroy access to insurance. If a woman is willing to pay out of her own finances for an abortion, and her insurance can point her to safe doctor then there is no problem. Denying funding to insurers just because they might refer someone to somewhere that does abortions is insane. This is a waste of congressional time, as this clearly presents an undue burden, and will only result in fewer people having health insurance.
Like (6)
Follow
Share

bill Progress


  • Not enacted
    The President has not signed this bill
  • The senate has not voted
      senate Committees
      Committee on Finance
  • The house Passed January 22nd, 2015
    Roll Call Vote 242 Yea / 179 Nay
      house Committees
      Constitution, Civil Rights, and Civil Liberties
      Committee on Energy and Commerce
      Committee on the Judiciary
      Committee on Ways and Means
      Health
    IntroducedJanuary 21st, 2015

Log in or create an account to see how your Reps voted!

What is House Bill H.R. 7?

This bill would ban taxpayer funding from being used for abortion services. Through changes in the Hyde Amendment, the bill would also ban federal funds from being applied to health coverage plans that include abortion services. 

The bill would require insurance companies to disclose which plans offer abortion coverage. Consequently, businesses that offer their employees health plans with abortion services through the Affordable Care Act would have to pay an additional tax. 

It would also permanently prohibit the District of Columbia from using locally generated tax revenue to offer abortion services to local low-income women.

Federal abortion funding would be authorized for cases of rape, incest, or life-threatening birth complications, but no tax dollars could be used for any other type of abortion.

Impact

Women (especially those below the poverty line) who want the right to affordable abortion services, employers who offer employees health care plans, female employees, insurance companies, Pro and anti-abortion activist organizations, and physicians/medical facilities that offer abortion services.

Cost of House Bill H.R. 7

$0.00
According to a CBO estimate of this bill's counterpart in the 113th Congress, this legislation would have a negligible effect on direct spending over the 2014-2024 period.

More Information

Of Note: The Hyde Amendment — currently not permanent law, but a "rider" usually attached to appropriation bills — already bans federal funds from the Department of Health and Human Services from being used for abortion services, except for in cases of incest and rape.

Political battles over abortion have mostly played out on the state level: Republican state officials have passed 205 statutes restricting abortions over the past three years, including measures that force a woman considering abortion to undergo an ultrasound. That said, many members of Congress have also taken steps to restrict access to abortion services on a national level.

This fight swung in favor of anti-abortion activists when the Supreme Court made its ruling on Burwell v. Hobby Lobby Stores. The court’s decision allows businesses to exclude coverage for contraceptives from employee health insurance if this violates an employer’s religious principles.

Despite these restrictions, abortions are not an uncommon experience for American women — one in three women will have had an abortion by the time they reach age 45. Women who don’t use contraceptives, or who have difficulty accessing contraceptives, account for more than half of all abortions.

Although abortion is still a polarizing topic, polls show that at least half of Americans think abortions should be legal under certain circumstances, and 28 percent believe they should be legal under any circumstances.

Pro-choice activists claim that the Hyde Amendment and other anti-abortion measures disproportionately affect women of color and immigrants who rely almost entirely on public funding for abortion services.


Media:

(Photo Credit: Wikipedia)

AKA

No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion and Abortion Insurance Full Disclosure Act of 2015

Official Title

To prohibit taxpayer funded abortions.

    Taxpayers shouldn't be forced to fund legal murder.
    Like (21)
    Follow
    Share
    If men got pregnant, you could get an abortion at an ATM.
    Like (68)
    Follow
    Share
    This bill would limit the ability of people with low-incomes to get abortions. Everyone should have abortions as an option.
    Like (24)
    Follow
    Share
    As a former fetus, I oppose abortion.
    Like (14)
    Follow
    Share
    Y'all know I'm hella pro-choice.
    Like (9)
    Follow
    Share
    No one should be forced to help with killing someone. I don't want my tax dollars going toward killing a child.
    Like (8)
    Follow
    Share
    Taxpayers should not have to pay for other people's reproductive choices.
    Like (6)
    Follow
    Share
    Abortion is murder! Protect innocent lives.
    Like (6)
    Follow
    Share
    Our tax dollars should not go to killing babies. Simple as that.
    Like (6)
    Follow
    Share
    There is no need to make a second law prohibiting federal funding for abortions. This law only serves to destroy access to insurance. If a woman is willing to pay out of her own finances for an abortion, and her insurance can point her to safe doctor then there is no problem. Denying funding to insurers just because they might refer someone to somewhere that does abortions is insane. This is a waste of congressional time, as this clearly presents an undue burden, and will only result in fewer people having health insurance.
    Like (6)
    Follow
    Share
    I believe federal funding has become a crippling problem and all budgeting should be analyzed for worth. (Special note: as libertarian leaning, I take no heed of a government instructing what people should or should not do to their bodies)
    Like (5)
    Follow
    Share
    Abortion is wrong and should not be federally supported
    Like (5)
    Follow
    Share
    As a former fetus, I oppose abortion.
    Like (3)
    Follow
    Share
    I voted "nay" because I believe women have a right to make decisions about their body in all cases, and the personal feelings of individuals should get between a woman and her health.
    Like (3)
    Follow
    Share
    If I could remove the exceptions, I would. I think there should be no federal funding for abortion services at all.
    Like (3)
    Follow
    Share
    I believe abortion is murder. I am not ok with money I worked for going to fund murder of any kind, especially the unborn and innocent. I work for the betterment of my family and society, not for the destruction of life and the moral fabric of society. For the record, despite my feelings against abortion, I do believe in the woman's right to choose. God gave us free will, after all. What I am against is MY MONEY being used to pay for THIER CHOICE to kill a child.
    Like (3)
    Follow
    Share
    This is unfair to the right of women to do what they want with their bodies!
    Like (2)
    Follow
    Share
    Federal funding only goes towards abortions in the most severe of cases. Defunding what minuscule amount of federal funds actually go towards severe case abortions is just irresponsible.
    Like (2)
    Follow
    Share
    No exceptions!
    Like (2)
    Follow
    Share
    Women have the right to decide what happens to their bodies. Plain and simple. The way I view this issue is this: if you do not believe in abortion, no is forcing you to get one. But it needs to be an option for those who are at a point in their life where they are incapable of carrying and raising a child. Accidental pregnancies occur all the time, some even due to rape. We federally fund way less important issues so do not tell me this is a way to conserve the budget. If you want to cut federal spending, reduce the 17 billion dollars we spend on space exploration annually. Giving women around our beautiful nation a say in how they wish to live their lives should not be frowned upon any longer.
    Like (2)
    Follow
    Share
    MORE