States and the fate of health reform

 You can purchase insurance in Tennessee that does not cover maternity benefits if you are sure you are not going to be using it but you currently cannot opt out of coverage for abortions. I hope this passes. Obviously being pro life I am not wanting to pay into a coverage that includes abortion but it stands to reason that if I am not needing maternity benefits, I surely am not needing abortions.

 Article in Washington Post by Ezra Klien point out:
Tennessee is at least the second state to take advantage of this provision, advancing legislation that would eliminate abortion coverage from an exchange that does not even go into effect until 2014. The Tennessee House Commerce Committee passed the bill (HB 2681) on a voice vote last week. ... A Missouri Senate committee also approved a bill that would deny insurers the right to offer abortion coverage in any government exchange last month.

These are the kind of restrictions that Bart Stupak and his allies were trying to impose nationally during the reform debate. Though they didn't succeed, the law still leaves the door open for the states to act -- and I'd expect that pro-choice advocates are already working to re-engage their foes and pushing back on the state level.
UPDATE 6:30 P.M.: My Mother Jones colleague Nick Baumann points out that states' ability to restrict abortion coverage is "nothing new" -- they've been able to do so since 1945. He explains: "Health care reform may have made conservative states more likely to prohibit abortion coverage by drawing attention to the issue, but it didn't enhance their powers to do so."