Twitter
StumbleUpon
Facebook
Delicious
Digg
Newsvine
Google
Yahoo
TechnoratiWomen’s Lives: The Misogynist Football In The Healthcare Debate
One of the very real dangers in the debate on how to fix American healthcare is that women's health will become a bargaining chip, with the GOP and anti-abortion forces trying to frame healthcare reform as an endrun to government ‘interference' in our lives by ‘mandating' abortion and gasp, contraception. Amanda Marcotte has an excellent post here that deconstructs the root of why they are using this tactic and looks at media complicity in fomenting these blatantly misogynist attempts to derail healthcare reform.
But I suspect that anti-choicers latched onto taxpayer-funded abortions, because they can count on a lot of the public to imagine the government funding female licentiousness.
Planned Parenthood has also issued an excellent press release (that should be read in its entirety) debunking the myths about abortion and healthcare reform proposals that are being circulated,
Singling out abortion for exclusion from plans in a health insurance exchange is both discriminatory and harmful to women's health. With the majority of private insurance plans covering abortion today, any attempt to restrict this coverage in the health insurance exchange would constitute an unprecedented restriction on women - taking benefits away that they currently have today.
The unfortunate truth is that women's health is not a priority in the national discussion about the critically ill state of our national healthcare. As Jodi Jacobson writes,
(Obama's) support for a woman's right to choose and for access to the services needed to prevent unintended pregnancy, stem the spread of infections and ensure all women have primary reproductive health care won't be enough to secure passage of a health reform bill that includes these essential health services.
In fact, both Republicans and conservative Democrats are pushing for restrictions in health reform legislation that could result in the loss of current benefits to millions of women.
Jacobson goes on to explain how Republicans may use abortion and contraception denial as a bargaining chip for their support of legislation and the devastating effect this could have on women's health:
In order to ensure all Americans are covered, most health reform proposals include options for "insurance exchanges" and other methods through which the federal government might partially subsidize the costs of insurance coverage for those without employer-based insurance, or those who can not afford to pay out-of-pocket for an insurance policy. What the Republicans and the Democrats opposed to continuing current coverage (including current abortion coverage) for women want to do is to eliminate the possibility of coverage from either subsidized or private plans whether or not the federal government is subsidizing a particular person.
This is sort of like applying the "global gag rule" to private insurance plans because even if you are paying for 90 percent of your policy, the restrictions apply both to the federally funded portion (10 percent) as well as to the 90 percent of the policy you pay for. Moreover, some analysts believe the implication is that even in cases where you pay for 100 percent of the policy you choose, if the federal government is involved in any way in that insurance plan by subsidizing others, your coverage would still be restricted.
Martha Burk also points out that age-rating is also a potential bargaining point that would discriminate against people between the ages of 50-65, and " would particularly affect older single women, already lower on the income scale and less likely to have employer coverage. And as we have noted before, there is a gross inequity in the current system that forces many women to pay far more for health insurance than men do.
During the next few weeks, if not the next few days, the U.S. Congress and President Obama will be making decisions that will impact the health of every person in this country. The bottom line is that while a single-payer plan is undoubtedly the best thing that could happen to our collective health, the political chances of that happening are close to nil. And it is entirely possible that the compromises that will be made to placate Republican and anti-reproductive rights votes as well as the insurance and pharmacy companies that give so generously to politicians on both sides of the aisle will leave us with a healthcare situation that is only marginally better and could even become worse for some, including many women.
The time to take action is now. Call or write to your elected representatives. Or better yet, drop by and visit. Tell them that you want meaningful reform that provides for the health of every American. Tell them how much you spend on health care and health insurance. Tell them about coverage and care that was denied. Make it clear to them that the last election really was a mandate for change and that the American public will not abide by the business as usual that is continually selling us down the river. Our lives depend on it.
----
Addenda: The Urban Institute Health Policy Center has published an excellent analysis of the real financial impact of health care reform which should be read in its entirety. Among the highlights:
- $1.6 trillion is an estimate recently put forth by the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) on the cost of the Senate Finance Committee's health plan.
- While these numbers are indeed somewhat alarming initially, they need to be put in context. One source of confusion is that the $1.6 trillion is a 10-year number. Between 2010 and 2019, the total amount of gross domestic product (GDP) is projected to be $187 trillion, according to CBO.1 Thus, the estimated gross costs of health reform are less than 1 percent of the GDP over that period. And, importantly, the $1.6 trillion is a total or gross estimate. Other government costs would be reduced as a result of expanding coverage so significantly.
- The government costs also ignore the private savings to employers and individuals resulting from reform.
- Absent reform, total health care expenditures, public and private, will total $33.0 trillion, over the ten years 2010-2019.3 The $1.2 trillion that we estimate in net new spending will therefore increase expected health costs by only 3.5 percent. The problem that the nation faces is not the small increment necessary to expand coverage to the uninsured, but the high and growing baseline costs of the system. The high system costs must be addressed through payment and delivery system reforms.
- (F)ailing to enact comprehensive reform carries substantial costs as well. We recently analyzed changes in coverage and expenditures for a 10-year period, if reform was not enacted, using different assumptions about economic growth and health care cost increases. We showed that, absent reform, there would be considerable loss of employer coverage, particularly among the middle class, and a substantial increase in the number of uninsured, from an estimated 49 million in 2009 to over 60 million in 2019. The number of nonelderly people enrolled in Medicaid would increase substantially, from 44 million in 2009 to well over 50 million by 2019, increasing state and federal government costs appreciably. Because of the greater number of uninsured, the amount of uncompensated care that hospitals and clinics would provide would also increase dramatically, putting further pressure on government budgets. We estimate that Medicaid spending would increase over the 10 years by about $800 billion without reform and that the costs of uncompensated care by about $250 billion.
- Without health reform, employer costs would also increase substantially, as would costs to individuals and families from higher premiums and out-of-pocket costs.
5 Comments so far
Show Allpopulation considerations needs to be discused. forgive this intrusion.
Good Morning Kindred Spirits, (for those of you that are not Kindred Spirits ((if any exist)) and would like to become one, the door is always open.
A Kindred Spirit is Love ,Compassion, Justice.
Those of you that posted a comment to this article should go to this previous article (many of you have been there).
article appears in commondreams.org
Title of article: “When Will The Recovery Begin ? Never.
Author: Robert Reich
dated : Friday July 10 2009
In my opinion Mr. Reich’s article describes the existing economic reality.
Sioux Rose, did you miss this article ?
Citizen Central is no longer inert, the momentum has begun.
Here are some answers to the comments directed to Citizen Central by posters (I am not aware of all of them sorry).
yours truly’s post July 11 2009 to Mr. Reich’s article is the approach Citizen Central is taking.
Is Citizen Central a forum? No Citizen Central is a direction action citizens lobby.
Will Citizen Central be a web creation? That would be great if C.C. manifests through the internet.
Why don’t you just create a web site or have someone do it ?. That’s a great idea , we need a web site, I don’t know how to do it, nor do I have the resources. That has to come from one of you .I can explain what the web site needs to do.
C.C. needs an administrator, who’s going to be the administrator, you? No the site will need an administrator, one of you.
Who will design the site, and choose the topics for consideration, you ? As of today I am the project manager, if someone wants to be project manager,
make your case. I am the current project manager someone had to do it, the way C.C. works, the members choose a project manager. When C.C. is created if a new project manager is desired we get one . There are no ego’s involved here.
What is the objective of c.c. ? Okay, within our current political system the only way to manifest our collective desires is to have the numbers.
Congress, the senate and the administration is elected by us the citizens. What we need is a majority of votes in each congresspersons, and senators district. That’s what c.c. does, bring together all the like-minded citizens ,but instead of electing a person to represent us, we elect a person to create laws and policy that we the citizens want . If they do not want to do the citizens business then we have an immediate recall and replace that person with a person that will.
If the elected official always did what the majority wanted then there would be no civil rights etc. I understand your point . However considering the situation at hand ,our elected officials are not representing our best interests, we have to change that , THE ONLY WAY TO CHANGE THAT WITHIN OUR POLITICAL SYSTEM IS TO HAVE A MAJORITY OF VOTERS IN EACH DISTRICT.
What we need right now is a way for the people interested in c.c.to be able to communicate with each other. I am going to post c.c. activity in the post section of the first article that appears on commondreams each day . Hopefully we can come up with an alternative soon.
Sioux Rose , you had mentioned that the administrator of commondreams might help us out, any way of checking on that.
Later on today :
We need to get a web site operational .Until that’s done we are limited.
We need to get every progressive site on board, as well as the general population.
If this statistic is correct , forty percent of American citizens are functionally illiterate, we need to energize that segment of society, by appealing to individuals that these people might trust for their endorsement i.e. actors, athletes, members of specific ethnic groups, religious leaders etc.
Once the opposition becomes aware of c.c. it will definitely turn into a numbers game. Mainstream media will not be very helpful to our cause, the internet and a field organization is probably the most effective way to go.
See you later today.
The Pope in Rome is calling the tune on this one.
These Patriarchal Misogynist have been in power ever since the Bronze Age when it became easier to kill things than to grow things. Their time has past - bring back the goddess.
I have written many letters to the editor about the need for women's reproductive health care. The people who respond to my letters are usually men. They write as if women are not in the equation of abortion.They do not mention the woman. It is as if, once a girl or woman becomes pregnant, she looses her human dignity and human rights and the only human being of concern is the embryo. They will not acknowledge that educated people have different theories as to when human life, body and soul begins, in the womb or at the first breath and demand that everyone believe their theory of life at conception, which is the antithesis of their concept of a Just God. Women and girls suffer pregnancy complications that may require a choice of birth control or an abortion to save the woman's life.A Just God does not Will that Church or Government authority make that decision for the girl or woman.
genie,
Through the years, I have also written countless letters about this issue -- I, too, believe in a woman's right to choose for herself, when, and if, to have children.
"They (men) write as if women are not in the equation of abortion.They do not mention the woman. It is as if, once a girl or woman becomes pregnant, she loses her human dignity and human rights and the only human being of concern is the embryo."
I have also experienced this same response. Suddenly, the woman is no longer a person, but her life, and body, are subject to the judgment, as well as decisions, of others, and often, men.
When I was going to college, I worked as a nurse aid on a gynecology floor in a Des Moines, Iowa hospital -- in 1969 and 1970. This is where the women ended up after a botched, back-alley, abortion -- that is, if they lived through the emergency room. Many didn't. My eyes were opened wide. When I look back on those two years, I can still see the frightened eyes of the women who lived. I can feel their hands gripping mine, not wanting to let go.
I can't believe that we continue to have to debate this issue, again and again.
I just got a non-response from my senator, Kohl, about my email, asking him to make sure safeguards are in place to keep coverage for all of women's health care needs during this reform process. I specifically asked him to make sure women have access to covered and PAID birthcontrol and abortion no matter the situation or final plan. This is what he sent back:
"Thank you for taking the time to contact me about health care reform. I appreciate hearing from you.
The skyrocketing cost of health care is causing families pain and financial stress, threatening the ability of businesses to stay afloat, and straining the federal budget. In 2007, we spent $2.2 trillion on health care, and that price tag is expected to rise.
We need to make important changes to our system in order to increase access, lower costs, and provide higher quality care. While those who are satisfied with their current health insurance should be allowed to keep it, we must do something about the 70 million uninsured and underinsured. There is no easy solution, but I have heard many good ideas from across the political spectrum. I take this debate very seriously, and I plan to work with my colleagues in Congress to enact real change in the American health care system.
I understand your concerns about the role of abortion in these reforms. I recognize that abortion involves difficult and ultimately personal decisions, and that decisions about abortions should be made by a patient and her doctor. Please know that I respect the deeply held beliefs of Americans on both sides of the issue. I will keep your views in mind as my colleagues and I debate health care reform proposals over the coming months.
Thank you again for taking the time to contact me with your thoughts on this important issue. Please do not hesitate to do so again in the future if I may be of any further assistance.
Sincerely,
Herb Kohl
United States Senator
I kept it my original email short, clear and direct, asking for exactly what I wanted from him." The only reform that will really work is Single Payer Universal.....Any plan must safeguard all aspects of women's health, including reproduction, birthcontrol and abortion both access and affordability." And will he support those items? Notice he didn't directly respond me in any of those items. Blah, blah blah. My response:
"Don't Evade. What are you specifically going to do to make sure the medical decisions, including birth control and abortions, women and their health care providers decide are Covered and PAID FOR by the government plan or government regulated private insurance plans in the new health care reforms Congress is working on?
I expect you to respond with an outline of your steps to protect women's health during this crucial time of reform. That will be meeting the needs of families here and now."
Surprisingly, no response from my other senator,Russ Feingold yet.