EDITORIAL: Tax dollars and abortions: When politics and scare tactics roil a difficult debate

April 26--You can't count on the Illinois General Assembly to pass a balanced budget. But you can count on lawmakers to pass heater bills that are sure to show up in campaign materials during the next election cycle. And so on Tuesday, House lawmakers passed a bill that would significantly shift long-standing state policy on taxpayer funding of abortions. The bill, now headed to the Senate, would include abortions as covered procedures in the health plans of Medicaid recipients and state workers.

Both groups rely on taxpayers to subsidize their health care. Owing to public disagreement, public funding of abortion coverage has been deliberately left out of their plans except in cases of rape, incest or to protect the life or health of the mother. For elective abortions, members of these two groups have been expected to pay out of pocket.

This bill would change that. But gubernatorial politics and scare tactics are playing big roles in what ought to be a serious statewide policy debate. The chief sponsor, Rep. Sara Feigenholtz, D-Chicago, and other supporters have tried to make the bill a political trap for Gov. Bruce Rauner and a way to exploit fear of President Donald Trump's U.S. Supreme Court picks. But it's really about putting Illinois taxpayers on the hook for more abortions, a nationally unpopular policy.

Illinois' policy limiting tax dollars for abortions has been consistent with federal guidelines under the Hyde Amendment. Named for the late Illinois U.S. Rep. Henry Hyde who championed it, that 1976 change restricted federal funding of abortions after the landmark Roe v. Wade decision. In the decades since, even with a mostly Democrat-controlled General Assembly that has supported and protected abortion rights, allotting taxpayer money for elective abortions was off-limits. Until now.

Tuesday's vote in the Illinois House was a largely partisan 62-55. Five downstate Democrats voted against it: Daniel Beiser of Alton, Jerry Costello II of Belleville, Jay Hoffman of Swansea, Brandon Phelps of Harrisburg and Sue Scherer of Decatur.

Senate President John Cullerton believes he has the votes to send it to Rauner. The governor, who as a candidate endorsed public funding of abortion for Medicaid recipients and state employees, has reversed course -- no doubt to appease conservative voters -- and says he would veto this bill. Part of the Democratic strategy here is to watch Rauner issue his veto, then highlight his flip-flop in the campaign for governor.

Then there's Trump. Some supporters tout the bill as a stopgap to protect abortion rights should the U.S. Supreme Court ever reverse Roe v. Wade. Trump's choice of conservative Justice Neil Gorsuch has stoked concerns about a reversal of the landmark case.

Feigenholtz said her bill reaffirms that "no matter what the federal government does, women should have access to safe, legal and accessible abortion."

But the state's legislative research unit and attorneys on both sides of the issue have said states' rights would be protected if Roe were overturned. What's more, because of privacy protections in the Illinois Constitution, it's unlikely a future General Assembly could outlaw abortion here -- even if federal law were reversed and decisions about the future lawfulness of abortion reverted to the 50 states. And if a future legislature did somehow outlaw abortion, this bill's alleged protections would be moot.

None of that, though, has stopped some supporters from saying Illinois risks a spate of back-alley abortions.

The more forthright case for this bill, which some of its supporters voiced during House debate, is that it would provide access to elective abortion for low-income women on Medicaid, bringing them more in line with two-thirds of privately insured women.

Opponents countered that the bill is not about protecting the status quo but rather about expanding abortion access at the expense of taxpayers. By how much isn't clear. Opponents said the increased number of taxpayer-funded abortions could cost up to $60 million a year. The General Assembly's research unit in 2015 determined that Medicaid paid roughly $2 million for 2,778 abortions between 2005 and 2014. In each case, rape, incest or health or life of the mother was cited as the reason for the abortion.

It stands to reason that also funding elective abortions would raise the cost. But for the opponents, cost has never been the main issue. We haven't seen recent Illinois polling on public funding of abortions; before Rauner and Trump emerged as foils, the issue had been mostly dormant here for many years. Nationally, an October 2016 poll sponsored by Politico and Harvard University found that 58 percent of likely voters, and 77 percent of self-identified Republican voters, opposed the use of taxpayer money for abortion procedures.

As this bill moves to the Senate, we hope citizens and lawmakers understand that this isn't about a 2018 race for governor or an exaggerated threat of federal judges' influence. It's about expanding taxpayer funding of abortions in Illinois.

Become a subscriber today to support editorial writing like this. Start getting full access to our signature journalism for just 99 cents for the first four weeks.

___

(c)2017 the Chicago Tribune

Visit the Chicago Tribune at www.chicagotribune.com

Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.