A8
State
Blue Mountain Eagle
Wednesday, January 25, 2017
Bill expands insurance mandate to cover abortions, other services
By Paris Achen
Capital Bureau
Oregon is joining several
other states that are seeking to
protect no-cost birth control
in case the federal mandate is
rolled back as part of a poten-
tial repeal of the Affordable
Care Act.
Most legislation in other
states has focused on preserv-
ing mandatory insurance cov-
erage of hormonal contracep-
tives without a patient copay,
with some other moderate
expansions on the federal act.
Oregon’s legislation, however,
reaches far beyond the federal
law, to include abortions, va-
sectomies and other services.
Oregon’s legislation — the
Reproductive Health Equity
Act — was in the works well
before New York billionaire
Donald Trump won the No-
vember presidential election.
However, Trump’s vow to
repeal and replace President
Obama’s landmark health
care law, popularly dubbed
Obamacare, could intensify
pressure to pass the bill. Repub-
licans have made the repeal a
first order of business this year.
The bill is intended to rein-
force and fill in gaps in repro-
ductive health care coverage
under Obamacare and to ex-
pand those who are eligible
for the benefits, said Laurel
Swerdlow, advocacy director of
Planned Parenthood Advocates
of Oregon.
“We remain deeply con-
cerned with what is happening
on the national level,” Swerd-
low said in a phone interview
Wednesday. “This legislation
is in no way to be a remedy for
political attacks on the Afford-
able Care Act. This is legisla-
tion to establish coverage for
reproductive health care for all
Oregonians.”
For instance, abortion and
vasectomies, services ex-
cluded from the Affordable
Care Act mandate, would be
covered under Oregon’s leg-
The bill is intended to reinforce and fill in
gaps in reproductive health care coverage
under Obamacare and to expand those
who are eligible for the benefits.
islation. Men, transgender in-
dividuals and undocumented
immigrants would be eligible
for the coverage.
“All Oregonians need ac-
cess to full reproductive health
coverage for families to thrive,
for a healthier state and for a
stronger economy,” Swerdlow
said. “Working families are
under so much strain today,
and oftentimes, they have a
hard time making ends meet.
“What this legislation does
is it recognizes that a right
without access is not a right at
all,” she added, referring to the
right to terminate pregnancies.
“What we really want is to
make sure that all persons have
access to the full spectrum of
reproductive health care that
they need. We don’t always
know a person’s circumstanc-
es. We aren’t in their shoes.”
Planned Parenthood Ad-
vocates of Oregon was one
of several advocacy groups
that worked on the legisla-
tion, sponsored by Sen. Laurie
Monnes Anderson, D-Gresh-
am, and Rep. Phil Barker,
D-Aloha. Others were the
ACLU of Oregon, Asian-Pa-
cific American Network of Or-
egon, Family Forward Oregon,
NARAL Pro Choice Oregon,
Oregon Latino Health Coali-
tion and Western States Cen-
ter, Swerdlow said.
Sen. Monnes Anderson in-
troduced similar legislation in
2015, though it did not include
coverage for men, transgender
individuals and undocumented
immigrants. Bipartisan oppo-
sition in the Senate, however,
kept her bill from progressing
to a vote, she said.
Some senators felt cover-
ing abortions could be too con-
troversial, Monnes Anderson
said.
Gayle Atteberry, executive
director of Oregon Right to
Life, said the anti-abortion or-
ganization would oppose the
new legislation.
“While Oregon Right to
Life takes no position on true
contraceptives, we, of course,
are opposed to abortion, which
always takes the life of an in-
nocent unborn child,” Atteber-
ry said in an email. “Because
of the abortion component,
ORTL is opposed to (the bill).”
Atteberry’s comment raises
the question of whether includ-
ing abortion could sink the bill
and doom other benefits such
as coverage of birth control
without a copayment.
“I believe that this year
there will be much more pres-
sure to pass this important
bill,” said Sen. Michael Dem-
brow, D-Portland. “I believe
that events at the national level
will add to that pressure.”
The bill’s proponents, in-
cluding Rep. Barker, said they
believe a majority of Orego-
nians will support coverage of
abortion. The Legislature also
has a Democratic majority.
“This is a bill sponsored by
two Democrats, and Demo-
crats are in charge” noted Rep.
Sherrie Stenger, R-Scio, who
sponsored an unsuccessful bill
last year to ban sex-selective
abortions. “That is probably
the most salient point in this
conversation.”
Lawmakers will consider
the proposal during their ses-
sion, which kicks off Feb. 1.
Since 2014, California, Il-
linois, Maryland and Vermont
have passed laws adopting the
Affordable Care Act’s man-
date to cover contraceptives
without a patient copayment
and expanded on the federal
law’s provisions.
Lawmakers’ spending framework includes cuts, no new taxes
By Claire Withycombe
Capital Bureau
SALEM — The co-chairs of the
Legislature’s joint budget-writing
committee Thursday presented a
spending plan that included cuts in
services to reflect the state’s expect-
ed $1.8 billion shortfall for the next
two-year budget cycle.
The $20.265 billion budget
outline presented by Sen. Richard
Devlin, D-Tualatin, and Rep. Nan-
cy Nathanson, D-Eugene, reflects
that shortfall and describes potential
cuts to general program areas such
as health care, education and public
safety.
Devlin and Nathanson said the
framework makes large cuts to key
state services.
“To be clear, we do not believe
the resources as allocated in this
document are sufficient,” Devlin
said in remarks during a press con-
ference at the Oregon State Capitol.
Senate Majority Leader Ginny
Burdick said in a statement that the
framework demonstrated a need for
revenue reform.
The state’s Republicans, mean-
while, presented the framework as
an opportunity to cut state spending.
Both parties stressed maintaining
“critical” services; the framework,
if implemented, could mean chang-
es ranging from higher college tui-
tion costs to cuts in dental care for
low-income people.
Gov. Kate Brown’s $20.8 billion
recommended budget released Dec.
1, was put together assuming $897
million in new revenue gathered
through new taxes and the closing
two tax loopholes.
By contrast, under the frame-
work presented by Devlin and Na-
thanson does not assume the new
revenue Brown proposed.
Under the plan, the Oregon
Health Authority spending would
be 27.5 percent less than needed
to maintain current service levels,
while the Department of Human
Services would receive 8.7 percent
less.
Proposed cuts vary in size be-
tween K-12, higher education and
other state education programs that
don’t fall into those two categories,
such as career technical education.
The co-chairs were also quick to
note that cuts to some state services
mean cuts to matching funds from
the federal government.
It’s also unclear whether any di-
rect cuts to federal funding may be
coming down the pike under the new
administration.
Much of the $1.8 billion shortfall
comes from the loss of federal subsi-
dies for health care costs for low-in-
come Oregonians, and the mounting
costs of the state’s public pension
system, which faces $22 billion in
unfunded liability.
This year, the state must now also
pick up some of the tab for insuring
additional Oregonians under the Or-
egon Health Plan, as a result of the
Legislature’s decision to expand
coverage in 2014 under the Afford-
able Care Act — a decision Devlin
and Nathanson said they stood by
Thursday. The federal government
covered the initial costs of imple-
mentation.
Devlin and Nathanson attributed
the deficit to a “fundamental imbal-
ance” caused by these and other pol-
icies enacted in Oregon’s past.
Measure 5 in 1990, for example,
reduced property taxes and required
local public schools to be funded by
the state’s general fund rather than
by local taxes.
Senate Majority Leader Gin-
ny Burdick, D-Portland, called the
framework a “call to action.”
“The fact that we face such a defi-
cit during a booming economic peri-
od in our state demonstrates the need
for comprehensive revenue reform,”
Burdick said.
She said legislators were look-
ing for ways to maximize the state’s
dollars but reiterated the need “to
reform our revenue system to make
sure it is fair to all Oregonians.”
House Majority Leader Jennifer
Williamson, D-Portland, said the
state couldn’t “afford to move back-
ward.”
“We can’t afford to move back-
ward in our investments in educa-
tion, health care and critical services
for struggling families,” Williamson
said in a statement. “We shouldn’t
shortchange our economic future by
making it harder for students to get a
good education. And I don’t believe
that any Oregonian wants us to make
these painful cuts.”
Jim Green, the head of the Or-
egon School Boards Association,
called for both revenue and PERS
reform in a statement Thursday.
“Our students need leadership on
these two issues from the governor
and our legislative leaders,” Green
said.
Republicans, however, generally
praised the framework.
In a statement, Sen. Jackie Win-
ters, R-Salem, also called the budget
a “starting point.”
“Now the work begins,” Winters
said. “We have our work cut out for
us to craft a sound, sustainable bud-
get (that) benefits Oregonians, urban
and rural alike.”
Sen. Minority Leader Ted Ferrio-
li, R-John Day, said the budget the
co-chairs presented was “based in
reality.”