MICRO-MANAGEMENT

The battle for health care insurance reform has moved to the Senate, and not surprisingly, one of its primary struggles is over abortions. A number of senators who otherwise might vote in favor of a reform bill – including a public option – will not say yea until they are assured that no federal funds will be used to subsidize abortions. I’m not sure if they’re opposed to abortions themselves or just afraid of offending voters who are, but one way or the other they have drawn a line in the sand.

I'm wondering, what if one senator were opposed to hip replacements, another to plastic surgery, and a third to alcohol re-hab treatment? Should they be allowed to provide an insurance structure for some ailments while blocking it from others? Are they doctors?

Without diving into the abyss of the abortion argument, it should be pointed out that Roe vs. Wade is still the law of the land, and abortion, regardless of how you may feel about it, is a legal medical procedure. Legislative authority ends at the door to the doctor’s office, and should not be allowed inside.