It's a No-Conscience Clause

Because it's not about the budget; it's about imposing freakazoid, conservatard control on the nation.

Scott Lemiuex at Lawyers, Guns and Money:

Like Atrios, I’m so old I remember when the hot proposition among centrist pundits was a “Grand Bargain” in which pro-choicers would agree that abortion was gross and should be made arbitrarily less accessible to poor women in exchange for greater access to contraception. In addition to the first part being a terrible idea, the crucial flaw in the plan has always been that most actually existing American anti-choicers care about regulating female sexuality, not protecting fetal life. You can’t get anything by trading someone something they don’t want and greater access to contraception for women is emphatically something most American proponents of criminalizing abortion don’t want.

And don’t call it a “conscience clause.” It’s a “denial of healthcare people are legally entitled to” clause and an “imposing one’s religious beliefs on others” clause.