Idaho dissolves maternal mortality review committee

[Concerned American]

Maternal mortality has increased over the past two decades

Sounds like fiscal responsibility to me. It this tax payer supported government entity is not effective, get rid of it. Have you got a suggestion to replace it with something that succeeds or are you just complaining because a democrat supported ineffective committee is being dissolved? BTW, do you live in ID? Your assertion in your OP title is disingenuous. The committee filed its final report because it was legislated with a sunset date. It served its purpose and the legislature was very clear that they saw no reason to have 50 redundant committees across the nation. You also stated that this was "revenue neutral." I didn't read that anywhere in your link. Would you care to link to that info? The committee used tax dollars but did not generate any revenue. It is not revenue neutral. Methinks you harbor an agenda against any legislation that this "red" state chooses for themselves.

 

[Coyote]

Sounds like fiscal responsibility to me. It this tax payer supported government entity is not effective, get rid of it.

It is revenue neutral, so not costing anything.

Is there any evidence it is not effective?

Have you got a suggestion to replace it with something that succeeds or are you just complaining because a democrat supported ineffective committee is being dissolved? BTW, do you live in ID?

Do you have any evidence it has not succeeded?

Or are you just saying it is ineffective because:

• You think it is “leftist” inspired
• You don’t give a crap about maternal mortality
• It’s a commie plot
• your talking points tell you to,oppose it

?

 

[westwall]

No idea, but the legislature labels it as revenue neutral. So it costs nothing.

Why not renew it? I really haven’t any good reason not, and it is a sad reality that we have a much higher maternal death rate (and infant death rate) than comparable countries. We shouldn’t frankly.

Because it does nothing that other agencies already do.

 

[westwall]

It is revenue neutral, so not costing anything.

Is there any evidence it is not effective?




Do you have any evidence it has not succeeded?

Or are you just saying it is ineffective because:

• You think it is “leftist” inspired
• You don’t give a crap about maternal mortality
• It’s a commie plot
• your talking points tell you to,oppose it

?

Yeah, the one suggestion we know of is they recommend more medicaid.

That's not a solution to a problem.

 

[Concerned American]

because it is budget neutral.

It is revenue neutral, so not costing anything.

Please link to the specific place in your OP where that assertion is made. I did not see it.

Is there any evidence it is not effective?

I think it was very clear that nothing the committee has done has reduced maternal mortality rates--indeed they state that those rates have increased in spite of the fact that the committee has been in use. BTW, if the committee was revenue neutral, why would there be a sunset date on the legislation that created the committee in the first place. The article you cite was clear that the gov't saw no benefit to having 50 redundant groups studying the same info across the nation. ID acted fiscally responsibly as the group completed its work, there was no need to spend more on it.

 

[Arlette]

I doubt it was the only recommendation, but it is a perfectly good one consider.




The board doesn’t track mortality, it analyzes each death to see if it was preventable and come up with policy recommendations.



Again, they don’t track it. Others do that.





This board costs nothing, it is non-partisan, and potentially lifesaving. Why oppose that?

Why oppose it? It's their subtle way of saying "fuck you" to women

 

[Concerned American]

Do you have any evidence it has not succeeded?

Did you read your cited article?
Maternal mortality has increased during the committee's existence.

Or are you just saying it is ineffective because:

• You think it is “leftist” inspired
• You don’t give a crap about maternal mortality
• It’s a commie plot
• your talking points tell you to,oppose it

For the third time. Maternal mortality has increased in spite of the committees work.
It is redundant as there are 49 other such committees across every other state.
The final two are your non responsive leftist sarcasm and I won't dignify them with a response.
The committee completed its work by the sunset date that was stated in your article. There was no logical reason to continue to fund further study. You know fiscal responsibility.

 

[Concerned American]

Why oppose it? It's their subtle way of saying "fuck you" to women

Or is it your way of venting because they oppose your stance on fetal murder?

 

[Arlette]

Or is it your way of venting because they oppose your stance on fetal murder?

I was unaware that they had a "stance" one way or another. Can you post their mission statement please

 

[Coyote]

Because it does nothing that other agencies already do.

And you know that…how?

 

[Coyote]

Did you read your cited article?

Yes. Did you?

Maternal mortality has increased during the committee's existence.

It has increased steadily since 1990, increasing sharply in 2020 and 2021. In 2022 it dropped to pre-pandemic levels. What is your point?

For the third time. Maternal mortality has increased in spite of the committees work.

You can say that three times, but it doesn’t make it any less ignorant. Maternal mortality actually went down in 2022. Regardless, this isn’t a problem fixed by an instantaneous magic wand. The committee analyzes the data and makes recommendations. That is all they do. It is then up to politicians and various health agencies create and implement policies that will hopefully improve outcomes. None of that gets done in just a few years.

It is redundant as there are 49 other such committees across every other state.

Each state is different and may have different factors effecting maternal mortality. These panels only look at deaths within their particular state, so there is no redundancy.

The final two are your non responsive leftist sarcasm and I won't dignify them with a response.

Good. Your responses are little more than rightist garbage anyway.

The committee completed its work by the sunset date that was stated in your article. There was no logical reason to continue to fund further study. You know fiscal responsibility.

The work is ongoing as women are still dying, other states are continuing it apparently. And it’s revenue neutral. You know, fiscal responsibility and all that.

 

[Coyote]

Please link to the specific place in your OP where that assertion is made. I did not see it.

I made the assertion in my OP. Read it.

If you are asking for a source, here is one:

Idaho Disbands Maternal Mortality Review Committee Amid National Surge in Deaths

Idaho is now the only state without a process for reviewing and attempting to prevent pregnancy-related deaths.

truthout.org

The MMRC was funded by the federal Title V Maternal and Child Health Block Grant program, aimed at improving the health of mothers, infants, and children. Idaho has received more than $3 million annually in Title V funds in recent years, according to statistics cited by Huntsberger.

The MMRC, whose members say annual operation costs stand at about $15,000, was deemed budget-neutral, running at no cost to the state.

I think it was very clear that nothing the committee has done has reduced maternal mortality rates--indeed they state that those rates have increased in spite of the fact that the committee has been in use.

Deaths decreased in 2022. The committee doesn’t make policy. All it can do is make recommdations. Then it is up to politicians to decide whether or not implement any. Did they?

BTW, if the committee was revenue neutral, why would there be a sunset date on the legislation that created the committee in the first place.

Sunset dates aren’t tied to whether or not legislation is budget neutral.

The article you cite was clear that the gov't saw no benefit to having 50 redundant groups studying the same info across the nation. ID acted fiscally responsibly as the group completed its work, there was no need to spend more on it.

Except they weren’t 50 redundant groups. Each examined data for only one state.

 

[Coyote]

Sounds like fiscal responsibility to me. It this tax payer supported government entity is not effective, get rid of it. Have you got a suggestion to replace it with something that succeeds or are you just complaining because a democrat supported ineffective committee is being dissolved? BTW, do you live in ID? Your assertion in your OP title is disingenuous. The committee filed its final report because it was legislated with a sunset date. It served its purpose and the legislature was very clear that they saw no reason to have 50 redundant committees across the nation. You also stated that this was "revenue neutral." I didn't read that anywhere in your link. Would you care to link to that info? The committee used tax dollars but did not generate any revenue. It is not revenue neutral. Methinks you harbor an agenda against any legislation that this "red" state chooses for themselves.

Methinks you harbor an animus when it comes to the government doing anything to decrease maternal deaths.

 

[Zincwarrior]

Sounds like fiscal responsibility to me. It this tax payer supported government entity is not effective, get rid of it. Have you got a suggestion to replace it with something that succeeds or are you just complaining because a democrat supported ineffective committee is being dissolved? BTW, do you live in ID? Your assertion in your OP title is disingenuous. The committee filed its final report because it was legislated with a sunset date. It served its purpose and the legislature was very clear that they saw no reason to have 50 redundant committees across the nation. You also stated that this was "revenue neutral." I didn't read that anywhere in your link. Would you care to link to that info? The committee used tax dollars but did not generate any revenue. It is not revenue neutral. Methinks you harbor an agenda against any legislation that this "red" state chooses for themselves.

Its always fiscal responsibility when it screws everyone but the wealthy class.

 

[Concerned American]

may have different factors

This is your speculation and contrary to what was reported in your article.

The committee analyzes the data and makes recommendations.

In other words it is a toothless waste of money. The funding, whether it is from the state or the feds, is from taxpayers. To say it costs nothing is disingenuous. And to that point, I haven't seen one word in either of the articles that you posted to support your assertion. and please calm down, you're sounding like an hysterical old woman.

The work is ongoing as women are still dying,

Supporting my stance that the committee is ineffective and a redundant attempt that has shown to be useless throughout the country as maternal mortality is increasing in spite of these efforts.

whose members say annual operation costs stand at about $15,000, was deemed budget-neutral, running at no cost to the state.

The members say--what are the actual numbers. BTW, $15K is from the tax coffers and shouldn't be spent on what your own source shows to be an ineffective program.

Did they?

Good question, don't you think you should answer it before launching yourself into hysteria.

Except they weren’t 50 redundant groups. Each examined data for only one state.

Exactly, Redundant programs in each state--which was clearly pointed out in your source.

 

[Robert W]

Idaho us now the only state without such a committee. #fuckdawimminz

If 49 states have this covered, it was fine for Idaho to quit the nonsense.

 

[Robert W]

Its always fiscal responsibility when it screws everyone but the wealthy class.

How can YOU screw the wealthy class?

 

[surada]

Exactly. The expansion of government should be nipped at the bud before it blossoms. Gradually work your way down to the roots. Then pour concrete over the soil. We want as little government as possible. Particularly the federal government.



What do you mean by unwilling pregnant women? Were they all raped?

And, no, government shouldn't be involved unless said unwilling pregnant woman was the victim of a crime; in this case I assume it would be rape.

How else would it be considered ''unwilling'' if one voluntarily exposes oneself to and participates in the fundamentals of human reproduction?




You don't need to expand government for that.

Unwilling to have a baby doesn't mean the woman was raped. Do you have a lot of children?

 

[Robert W]

Unwilling to have a baby doesn't mean the woman was raped. Do you have a lot of children?

Kinda of nosy about another person it looks like to me.
Unwilling is a state of mind. If a woman is unwilling to get pregnant, best she not engage in sex at that time. Alternatively she can get on the pill. She can tell him hell no, she does not want to get pregnant.

 

[surada]

Kinda of nosy about another person it looks like to me.
Unwilling is a state of mind. If a woman is unwilling to get pregnant, best she not engage in sex at that time. Alternatively she can get on the pill. She can tell him hell no, she does not want to get pregnant.

You're 84? Good advice.