Florida governor Charlie Crist is widely expected to veto HB 1143, which passed both houses of the Republican controlled Florida legislature last week. The bill is essentially a measure that says the state of Florida chooses not to participate in the health care system signed into law by President Obama this year. But, there’s a part of the bill that addresses specific language in the federal health care reform legislation relating to public money for abortions that‘s very interesting. HB 1143 expressly prohibits, “the use of state or federal funds to provide coverage for abortions in an exchange created pursuant to federal law.”

The federal law referenced is section 1303 of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (page 779) which reads, “A state may elect to prohibit abortion coverage in qualified health plans offered through an Exchange in such State, if such State enacts a law to provide for such a prohibition.” That means if state’s don’t pass laws, like HB 1143, expressly prohibiting public money going to pay for abortions, then abortions will be paid for just like any other medical service covered under a plan purchased on the soon to be created health insurance exchange.

The language in the Florida bill is similar to language inserted into other anti-health care bills that are being considered in states from California to Michigan, and it’s not by happy coincidence. It is quite by design. The language in the Florida bill as well as the others are all modeled on the, Abortion-Mandate Opt-Out Act. It’s model legislation drafted by Americans United for Life, a non-profit, super conservative think tank with state directors in Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Mississippi, Missouri, Oklahoma, and Utah, according to its website.

Proponents of the Opt Out Act repeatedly say it frees states from what is described as the “federal abortion mandate” in the new health care bill. One website, LifeSiteNews.com put it this way when writing about an expected veto of HB 1143, saying the governor was, “facing immense pressure to veto a measure that both opts the state out of the federal health law's abortion mandate and requires ultrasounds before abortion.” An article on the Americans United for Life’s website reads, “Saturday, the Mississippi House passed a bill to opt the state out of the abortion mandate in the federal health care bill.”

It begs the question, if Charlie Crist vetoes HB 1143 does that mean abortions in Florida will become mandatory under the new health care law? It seems somewhat disingenuous to suggest that state’s which don’t pass some sort of “opt out” bill would mean lines forming up outside the local Family Planning office with a government agent on hand making sure that days quota of abortions were performed, but that’s the impression given.

Although, it’s clear it has been an effective pitch. Some 28 states are considering or have already taken up bills containing the “opt out” provision. Governor Charlie Crist has about a week left to decide what he’ll do with HB 1143. If, as expected, he vetoes the bill, Floridians can only hope, as it most certainly seems, that the rhetoric the right used to sell this idea to legislators is only hyperbole after all.