Trump administration wants to end abortion coverage through Veterans Affairs
Advertisement
'Veterans have historically faced significant barriers to reproductive health care, and with the current patchwork of abortion bans and restrictions across the country, these barriers are even steeper today,' she said.
Get Starting Point
A guide through the most important stories of the morning, delivered Monday through Friday.
Enter Email
Sign Up
Veterans Affairs, which provides health coverage for veterans and their dependents, did not include abortion in its coverage until 2022. President Joe Biden's administration added it months after the U.S. Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade and state abortion bans began kicking in.
The Biden changed allowed the VA to provide abortion even in states where it was banned. The VA says in its proposal that allowing abortion is legally questionable because Congress has not specifically allowed it. The policy change would also bring the VA's coverage into line with other federal health care plans — including Medicaid and the TriCare coverage for active military members and their families — which exclude abortion in most cases.
Advertisement
The VA said in its filings that about 100 veterans and 40 dependents obtain abortions using the benefits each year — far below the projection the department made in 2022 of a total of 1,000 a year.
The conservative law firm Alliance Defending Freedom called on the VA to drop abortion coverage in a letter last month, saying the cost or providing abortion takes other health resources away from veterans.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hill
20 minutes ago
- The Hill
VFW had a seat at the table. Now they're trying to flip it.
Too many of America's disabled veterans continue to struggle to access the VA disability benefits they've earned. The consequences are stark: 33,000 veterans are homeless, and an average of 17 die by suicide each day. While the Trump administration has made incredible strides in cutting the VA claims backlog by 25 percent since January, Congress must take further action to ensure that our veterans no longer have to fight and claw for the benefits that are often the difference between life and death. That's why I introduced the CHOICE for Veterans Act of 2025 — a bill that protects veterans from fraud and exploitation and ensures they have the right to choose how to navigate the benefits process. My legislation allows veterans to choose help from accredited private claims agents if they prefer, all while keeping in place the full range of free support options — such as those offered by Veterans Service Organizations like the VFW. The CHOICE for Veterans Act includes strong safeguards: no upfront fees, mandatory disclosure of free alternatives, capped fees and no payment unless benefits are secured. This ensures that veterans don't go into debt to file claims. The CHOICE for Veterans Act of 2025 is about trust, transparency and real choice. I spent months in conversation with the major Veterans Service Organizations like the VFW and American Legion. I directly addressed their legitimate concerns about fraud and exploitation. My office invited them in, listened carefully, and incorporated into the bill strong language that addressed every objection they raised. Their input helped shape the final version of the CHOICE for Veterans Act of 2025. That's why the VFW's recent public opposition is so frustrating. They know that the bill doesn't put veterans in debt because they helped shape the very safeguards it includes. The truth is, the CHOICE for Veterans Act contains some of the strongest financial protections ever included in legislation designed to serve our veterans. The bill was crafted to expand access to disability claims services by offering accredited private help without removing any existing options. Veterans can still work with Veterans Service Organizations or file claims on their own — that hasn't changed. This bill simply ensures the right to seek specialized assistance. Nothing in the bill eliminates current options. The claims assistance system remains intact, with the added benefit of giving veterans the choice of specialized assistance. No two disability claims are the same, and they shouldn't be treated as such. The VFW's claims are misleading and directly contradicted by the bill's text. The CHOICE Act clearly requires that veterans are informed of all available free options at every step of the claims process. This includes the VA itself and the Veterans Service Organizations that veterans have always had access to. Veterans deserve honesty about what this bill actually does — and it's time for the VFW to stop misleading them. If a veteran does choose to work with a paid consultant, the rules are strict. No upfront fees are allowed. Veterans cannot be charged one penny until their claim is resolved in their favor. When a claim is resolved, a veteran must be given the option to pay in installments that don't exceed their monthly increase from the VA, and no interest can ever be charged on payment plans. Veterans secure lifetime benefits in exchange for a limited, interest-free fee, paid only to accredited experts. Our goal has always been to expand access to benefits through an all-of-the-above approach that protects disabled veterans from poverty, debt and exploitation. These protections are not hidden, nor are they optional. They are mandated by the bill. What veterans are asking for is simple: faster results and fewer delays. They want someone who can help them navigate a complex process without making it worse. This is a recurring issue I hear from veterans in my district. The political games and false narratives surrounding the CHOICE for Veterans Act must stop. This issue is far too important to be bogged down by mis- and dis-information campaigns. As a proud veteran myself, I look forward to the day when President Trump signs this bill into law, so we can begin to seriously confront the crises facing disabled veterans in America.
Yahoo
37 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Kansas insurance commissioner delivers pitch to voters in race for governor
TOPEKA (KSNT) – A new candidate is taking a stab at claiming the governor's seat in Kansas next year. On this episode of Inside Kansas Politics, co-host Rob Hughes sat down for a one-on-one with Kansas Insurance Commissioner Vicki Schmidt. She shares her thoughts on the biggest problems facing Kansas and a message for voters ahead of Election Day. Inside Kansas Politics has also interviewed the following gubernatorial candidates for the 2026 race: Ty Masterson Martin Tuley Charlotte O'Hara Cindy Holscher Stacy Rogers Jeff Colyer and Doug Billings Scott Schwab Who is running for governor in Kansas for 2026? Also in the show, Tim Carpenter sat down with Rebekah Chung and Rob Hughes. He weighs in on THC drinks and Kansas Governor Laura Kelly's decision to leave the National Governors Association. Carpenter also talked about the role taxes, Medicaid, marijuana, and the Department of Governmental Efficiency will play in the upcoming election. You can watch Inside Kansas Politics at 10:30 a.m. on Sunday mornings only on KSNT (check your local listings). To get the latest news on Inside Kansas Politics, check out our X account, or follow us on Facebook. If you have a story you think we should cover, email us at ikp@ 'I'm going to defund this board': Kansas lawmakers are unsatisfied with Board of Nursing For more Capitol Bureau news, click here. Keep up with the latest breaking news in northeast Kansas by downloading our mobile app and signing up for our news email alerts. Get the latest in weather alerts by downloading our Storm Track Weather App. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. Solve the daily Crossword
Los Angeles Times
an hour ago
- Los Angeles Times
Nebraska Republican is shouted down by hostile crowd at a town hall on Trump's tax cuts
LINCOLN, Neb. — Rep. Mike Flood has gotten an earful during a public meeting in Lincoln aimed at discussing his support for the massive tax breaks and spending cuts bill that passed Congress and was signed into law by President Trump. Flood, a second-term Republican who represents the GOP-leaning district that includes the University of Nebraska, on Monday braved the ire of a college town audience dominated by hundreds of people intent on expressing their displeasure chiefly with cuts to Medicaid benefits and tax reductions tilted toward the wealthy. He described the law as less than perfect but stood firm on its Medicaid and tax provisions, fueling a 90-minute barrage of jeers and chants in a scenario House Republican leaders have specifically advised GOP members to avoid. 'More than anything I truly believe this bill protects Medicaid for the future,' Flood said, setting off a shower of boos from the audience of roughly 700 in the University of Nebraska's Kimball Recital Hall. 'We protected Medicaid.' How voters receive the law, passed with no Democratic support in the narrowly GOP-controlled House and Senate, could go a long way to determine whether Republicans keep power in next year's midterm elections. Flood was resolute on his position but engaged with the audience at times. During his repeated discussions of Medicaid, he asked if people in the audience thought able-bodied Americans should be required to work. When many shouted their opposition, he replied, 'I don't think a majority of Nebraskans agree with that.' Dozens formed a line to the microphone to speak to Flood, most asking pointed questions about the law, but many others questioning moves by the Trump administration on immigration enforcement, education spending and layoffs within the federal bureaucracy. Some came prepared to confront him. 'You said in Seward you were not a fascist,' one man stood in line to say. 'Your complicity suggests otherwise.' Flood shot back, 'Fascists don't hold town halls with open question-and-answer sessions.' Asked if he would block the release of files related to the sex trafficking case involving the late Jeffrey Epstein, Flood said he supports their release as a co-sponsor of a nonbinding resolution calling for their publication. Flood also said he supports requiring a deposition from Epstein's convicted co-conspirator, Ghislaine Maxwell, who argues she was wrongfully prosecuted. Flood's audience was gathering more than an hour before the doors opened. And as people lined up in the warm August air, he sauntered by, introducing himself, shaking hands and thanking people, including retired Lincoln teacher and school administrator Mary Ells, for attending. 'I believe Congressman Flood listened in a socially appropriate way,' Ells said after expressing concerns to Flood about her grandchildren's future. 'I do not believe he listens in a responsive, action-oriented way for citizens in Nebraska that do not agree with the national playbook written elsewhere but being implemented here.' Inside the hall, much of that decorum vanished. During Flood's discussion of his support of the law's tax provisions, which he argued would benefit the middle class, the audience exploded in a deafening chant of 'Tax the rich.' Other refrains included 'Vote him out!' and 'Free Palestine!' Hecklers often drowned out Flood, creating a rolling cacophony with only occasional pauses. Republican lawmakers' town halls have been few and far between since the bill passed early last month, in part because their leaders have advised them against it. Trump and others say the law will give the economy a jolt, but Democrats feel they've connected with criticism of many of its provisions, especially its cuts to Medicaid and tax cuts tilted toward the wealthy. Flood later downplayed the confrontation as 'spirited' but 'part of the process' during an impromptu press conference. 'It doesn't mean you can make everybody happy,' he said. 'But, you know, if you feel strongly about what you're doing in Congress, stand in the town square, tell them why you voted that way, listen to their questions, treat them with respect and invite them to continue to communicate.' Unlike dozens of other Republicans in competitive districts, Flood hardly has to worry, as Republicans brace for a challenge to their razor-thin majority in the House next year. Elected in 2022, Flood was reelected to the seat last year by winning 60% of the vote in a district that includes Lincoln in Democratic-leaning Lancaster County but also vast Republican-heavy rural tracts in 11 counties that ring the Omaha metropolitan area. Beaumont writes for the Associated Press.
