A new government study shows that the vast majority of insurance companies do not itemize abortions on medical bills and charge for them separately, meaning taxpayer dollars are paying for abortions through the Affordable Care Act.
The study by the Government Accountability Office, or GAO, found that 17 of 18 insurers it studied did not itemize elective abortions on the medical bills for Americans enrolled in plans through the health-care reforms, also known as Obamacare.
The report explicitly states it did not review whether federal subsidies were used to pay for the abortions, but pro-life activists say there's no other conclusion to reach.
"Absolutely, taxpayers are funding abortions," said former Rep. Marilyn Musgrave, R-Colo., who is now vice president for government affairs at the Susan B. Anthony List. The group is dedicated to electing pro-life women to public office.
"This report is very damning," she said. "It shows that when the president said there wouldn't be abortion coverage in this, that taxpayers wouldn't be funding it, that wasn't true."
The Associated Press reports that in response to the GAO findings, the Department of Health and Human Services issued a statement saying it "acknowledges that additional clarification may be needed" on the law.
Musgrave said clarity has been elusive on this part of the law from the very beginning.
"This is the administration that said, 'We're going to be the most transparent administration in history,'" she said. "Here we are now. People, whether they're pro-life or pro-abortion, can't figure out if abortion on demand is included in their coverage."
Listen to the WND/Radio America interview with former Rep. Marilyn Musgrave, R-Colo.:
Taxpayer funding of abortion has been hotly debated ever since the Supreme Court's 1973 decisions legalizing abortion. In the late 1970s, then-Illinois Rep. Henry Hyde successfully pushed for a change in federal law to ban taxpayer dollars from being used to pay for abortions. It soon became known simply as the Hyde Rule.
The law remained that way until the passage of the Affordable Care Act in 2010. The resolution's language convinced pro-life lawmakers on both sides of the aisle that it would legalize taxpayer-funded abortions.
President Obama and other Democrats insisted that wasn't the case.
The final bill only passed the House after Obama promised to sign an executive order clarifying that the Hyde Rule was still in effect.
"At the last minute, this administration cut a deal with pro-life Democrats, who said they were pro-life but they voted for Obamacare that violates the Hyde Amendment," Musgrave explained. "Supposedly, this little accounting gimmick was going to take care of that. Now this report from a nonpartisan government watchdog says taxpayers are funding abortion."
According to Musgrave, no one should be surprised the executive order was meaningless, and the GAO report is another reminder that the law never should have been passed in the first place.
"Obamacare could have been stopped if pro-life legislators had held," she said. "Look at where we are now. My mom told me never to say, 'I told you so,' but here we are."
Musgrave said the GAO study is not the first sign of taxpayer-funded abortions resulting from Obamacare. It's simply the latest evidence.
She said administration officials have ducked the question for years.
"When then-Secretary of Health and Human Services Kathleen Sebelius was testifying, there were members of Congress that asked for this information on transparency and questions about the surcharge. She said she would get that information to them. Evidently, the information is still not available," said Musgrave
In addition, she says even pro-life Democrats know the executive order didn't stop taxpayer-funded abortions.
"It took individuals like (former Michigan Rep.) Bart Stupak a little while to be surprised that the executive order was worthless," she said. "Now, even he acknowledges that. He was the leader of the so-called pro-life Democrats that could have stopped Obamacare."
While hindsight may be instructive, what options do pro-life activists and the large majority of Americans who opposes taxpayer-funded abortions have in trying to reverse this part of the new law?
"The only way to ensure that we have a remedy for this is the immediate passage of the No Taxpayer Funding of Abortion Act. Right now, it's being blocked in the Senate by Harry Reid. You have to realize the Obama administration has had years to deal with this problem. They've refused to do it," said Musgrave, who believes the right election results could move the bill at least one step closer to becoming law.
"After November, it is very likely that we will see a Senate that will be willing to do that and take up this legislation and then give it to the president," she said. "We'll see if he's going to stay true to what he said years ago."
First, she said, we need a Republican majority in the Senate.
"There are key races that will determine which party controls the United States Senate and whether legislation like the Unborn Child Pain Capable Act will be heard that are really at play in this," Musgrave said.
Susan B. Anthony List is heavily targeting incumbent Democratic Sens. Mary Landrieu of Louisiana, Mark Pryor of Arkansas and Kay Hagan of North Carolina. Musgrave said regardless of their rhetoric, all of them consciously voted for taxpayer-funded abortions.
With Louisiana being the most pro-life state in the U.S. and Arkansas second, she said abortion in the context of Obamacare could be a major issue in those races. Musgrave also said the group is targeting Sen. Mark Udall, D-Colo., for his Obamacare vote and for even being opposed to a partial-birth abortion ban.
Despite the many challenges in policy and politics, Musgrave said she is very bullish that the pro-life cause will ultimately win this debate.
"It's a great time to be pro-life," she said. "Science is on our side. People are starting to understand issues like the unborn child being capable of feeling pain. They don't want their tax dollars going for abortion. They recoil at the thought of sex-selection abortion. So these senators in many of these states are out of touch."
Â