“The law Romney signed did not mention abortion coverage. It [abortion] was included by the state exchange, which created plans that mirror private insurance nationwide. And a court decision two decades earlier mandated that the cost of the abortions be included.”
Guys, you don’t need to argue about the past, a couple of weeks ago, Mitt Romney renounced the Republican party pro-life platform, and returned to being openly pro-abortion.
“The law Romney signed did not mention abortion coverage. It [abortion] was included by the state exchange, which created plans that mirror private insurance nationwide. And a court decision two decades earlier mandated that the cost of the abortions be included.”
Why then did Romney not take steps to protect the religious liberty of the Catholic church and Catholics residing in Massachusetts given these developments?
If his plan cut a path for the insurance coverage and public funding of abortion - is that not a terribly flawed plan? Why pass a bill that would grant that enormous power to the state exchanges to make these binding decisions in the first place?