Election 2018: Oregon’s Measure 106 would stop tax payer funding of abortions
Oregon is one of the states with a key abortion measure on the November ballot: Measure 106.
The measure to ban state funding for abortions would give Oregon residents a voice on what their tax dollars are used for and add a restriction on abortion in a state which has few to no restrictions. This move would also likely effect the state health plans, which provides coverage for a woman who wants to get an abortion. The Oregon Reproductive Health Equity Act enacted last year also requires all health insurance policies to provide access to reproductive health services and provide access to abortion at no cost to the individual.
photo/ Hannah Edgman
This legislation would amend the constitution to prohibit the state from spending any public money for any abortion, except where it was medically necessary or required by federal law. The medical exceptions where an abortion would be allowed to be funded with state money include rape, incest and any physical illness or injury that would place a woman’s life in danger, including any complications from the pregnancy.
It would also fund abortions for ectopic pregnancies, where a fertilized egg implants outside the uterus and can cause severe damage to the body.
Nicole Bentz, the spokeswoman for Yes on Measure 106, said the measure is not a ban on abortions.
“It opens up (the issue) to a vote so Oregonians have a say in where their tax dollars are going,” she said, explaining the movement for the amendment is from voters who feel that public funds shouldn’t be paying for something as controversial as abortion. It’s a sentiment she says she’s heard from both opponents and advocates of abortion rights.
Lisa Gardner, the president and CEO of Planned Parenthood of Southwest Oregon, disagrees.
“It’s a backdoor ban on abortions,” she said. “It opens the door to restrictions. We are the only state in the county with zero restrictions on reproductive health care, which is as it should be, because health care decisions are personal. They’re between a person and their partner or a person and their doctor.”
Bentz counters the criticism, explaining that this doesn’t place ANY restrictions on getting an abortion, just who’s paying for it….or, in this case, who is NOT.
Gardner said eliminating public funding for abortions would limit the amount of access low-income and minority women have to the procedure.
“The cost of an abortion is in the $500 range or so,” she said. “About 50 percent of American households can’t afford an unexpected bill of $500 or more.”
If women can’t afford a safe abortion, they will turn to unsafe means to end a pregnancy, Gardner said.
Even if the measure passes, you can expect lawsuits from the ACLU, Planned Parenthood and others, Gardner confirmed as much, telling the Register Guard that “her organization would work hard to make sure that its patients have access to the health care they need.”
“I think Oregonians are going to see it clearly,” she said, claiming the Measure is a smoke screen to put more restrictions on abortion in the state,. “I think it’s going to be easy to get a ‘No’ vote on it. I’m not buying it, and I don’t think Oregonians will buy it.”
RELATED…
Study: baby feels pain during the first trimester
Shocking late term abortion stats
Oregon offers FREE abortions via Planned Parenthood
Oregon: aborted fetuses found in medical waste energy plant
Abortion convention: burning aborted babies for energy is ‘bad PR’ but ‘a good idea’
