Now Insurers Must Cover 100% of Birth Control, Other Female Services

[geauxtohell]

And now that the Republicans have seen fit to defund Planned Parenthood, as Rightwinger said, this option is better than abortion (or having an unwanted child).

Planned Parenthood has not been defunded.

You're right. It didn't pass. But they tried hard to, and will revisit the issue again, for sure.

Also, there has never been federal funding for abortion. The proposed cuts to planned parenthood wouldn't affect abortion. They would have affected women's health.

 

[MaggieMae]

Preventive medicine saves money in the long run.

That depends on who you ask.

Preventive care not always cost effective, experts say - CNN

Like that's ^ going to actually happen in a majority of cases. Now you're just struggling to justify a moot point.

Ironically, the elderly woman in your linked story would NOW be able to have counseling by her doctor as to the medical and/or quality of life decisions she might need to discuss with a professional. Of course conservatives attempted to brand THAT as "death panel" decisions.

 

[MaggieMae]

boy are you uniformed. who do you think is gonna pay for them? If they can't afford birth control pills they sure as hell can't afford insurance payments. so that leaves 50% of us again toting the other 50% on our backs.

The tax payer ultimately pays for it anyways. Might as well try and subsidize some health efforts (i.e. screening) that tend to save money in the long run.

What saves money is eradicating the welfare state.

And yet another HUGE mistake conservatives make: Tossing around those words as if they actually mean something. They don't. If you exclude fixed entitlement programs (you do know the difference, I hope), "welfare" accounts for a very small portion of government spending. Someone took the time to break down the facts, using government statistics. Read it.

Newsvine - How Much Does Welfare Cost?

According to The Budget for Fiscal Year 2008, Historical Tables, total outlays for Means Tested Entitlements in 2006 were $354.3 billion. This was 2.7% of GDP and
Includes Medicaid, food stamps, family support assistance (AFDC), supplemental security income (SSI), child nutrition programs, refundable portions of earned income tax credits (EITC and HITC) and child tax credit, welfare contingency fund, child care entitlement to States, temporary assistance to needy families, foster care and adoption assistance, State children's health insurance and veterans pensions.
(from Table 8.1, page 133)

The cost of these programs has increased from 0.8% of GDP in 1962 (before Medicaid) to 2.7% of GDP in 2006, or by 1.9% of GDP. If we exclude Medicaid, health care for children and veterans pensions it is 0.89 % of GDP, or $117 billion. (The numbers for the excluded items are found in Table 8.5, page 142). This represents approximately 7.5% of total non-Social Security receipts to the Federal Government. So, for every one of your tax dollars to the Federal Government, about 7.5 cents goes to these programs. I hate to use averages, but the average taxpayer had a tax rate of 12.45% in 2005 (the latest data available here), so if we multiply things out we see that about 0.93% of the average taxpayer's income went to non-medical "welfare". So, if you made $50,000 and paid $6,225.00 in Federal income tax, approximately $465.00 went to all of these programs x-healthcare and veterans pensions.

Eliminate the fraud and duplicity, and even those numbers will be reduced. But "welfare" as itemized above, will never completely go away. If you think so, then you're delusional.

 

[MaggieMae]

boy are you uniformed. who do you think is gonna pay for them? If they can't afford birth control pills they sure as hell can't afford insurance payments. so that leaves 50% of us again toting the other 50% on our backs.

The tax payer ultimately pays for it anyways. Might as well try and subsidize some health efforts (i.e. screening) that tend to save money in the long run.

that's the problem dude,, the taxpayer is expected to pay for everything, and only 50% of us pay FEDERAL taxes.. the gimmmie gimmmie crowd is now larger than the giver crowd.. we're going down.

And 60% of corporations pay nothing yet THEY'RE able to stuff their pockets. But that's fine and dandy. Got it.

 

[geauxtohell]

Preventive medicine saves money in the long run.

That depends on who you ask.

Preventive care not always cost effective, experts say - CNN

Like that's ^ going to actually happen in a majority of cases. Now you're just struggling to justify a moot point.

Ironically, the elderly woman in your linked story would NOW be able to have counseling by her doctor as to the medical and/or quality of life decisions she might need to discuss with a professional. Of course conservatives attempted to brand THAT as "death panel" decisions.

Most of the clips tossed out about medicine are years behind the time. We do know that PSA is no longer a good screen for colon cancer. In fact, it's better medicine to simple do a DRE (digital rectal exam) and much cheaper. However, PSA is a good marker for prostrate cancer recurrence and severity.

That being said, routine colonoscopies at the age of 50 do reduce morbidity and mortality. On my surgery rotation, I followed a patient from clinic and then to the OR and then to the post op period because they had discovered a carcinoid tumor on routine colonoscopy. He was completely asymptomatic (and most people with carcinoid are until it reaches the liver and then it is too late).

 

[MaggieMae]

WASHINGTON (AP) — Health insurance plans must cover birth control as preventive care for women, with no copays, the Obama administration said Monday in a decision with far-reaching implications for health care as well as social mores.

The requirement is part of a broad expansion of coverage for women's preventive care under President Barack Obama's health care law. Also to be covered without copays are breast pumps for nursing mothers, an annual "well-woman" physical, screening for the virus that causes cervical cancer and for diabetes during pregnancy, counseling on domestic violence, and other services.

"These historic guidelines are based on science and existing (medical) literature and will help ensure women get the preventive health benefits they need," said Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius.

Insurers must cover birth control with no copays - Yahoo! News

These increasing mandates on insurers by the government is only going to fuel further increases in insurance costs for all Americans across the board. There is no reason why these listed services need 100% coverage. But hey, if we're going to go that route, why do only women get the benefit? If men are going to have to pay higher insurance costs, why aren't we getting free prostate exams, free condoms, and free "wellness" physicals? Considering that unemployment has hit men harder than women and women now make up the majority of college students isn't it about time the government stop treating them like they are incapable of providing for themselves?

Why does the government think it's their job to tell private businesses what products they must provide and how much they must charge for it?

Because in the long run, unwanted pregnancies cost far more. What's not to get? Hell, in some major cities in Texas (you know, that holier-than-all-the-other-49 states state), public high schools even use state education funds for day care centers to care for the children of unwed teens trying to graduate. Think that isn't costly?

 

[MaggieMae]

Preventive medicine saves money in the long run. I am all for covering birth control. I can't understand how conservatives could ***** about this, unwanted pregnancy, "welfare babies", and abortion.

because it addresses the symptom not the disease...as a budding MD you should appreciate that

So how do you cure the "disease" of having unprotected sex? I'm sure we'd all love to know your answer to that. Short of castration and/or hysterectomy, there is none. (Unless of course you choose to be gay! )

 

[MaggieMae]

What's the disease?

the disease is people like sex. the right hates that.

it's cool to like sex,, you just shouldn't be a whore and make the taxpayer pay for your sex..

There are no right-wing whores. Fact.

Right-wing men never EVER solicit sex in dark alleys. Fact.

Right-wingers always have protected sex when they're off the calendar's "rhythm method" and never, EVER act out of pure instantaneous lust. Fact.

Right-wing men never even masturbate. Fact.

Right-wing women are always ALWAYS married before they have sex. Fact.

There are no right-wing parents who are shocked when their tween gets knocked up. Fact.

Right-wing women never seek abortions; right-wing men would never ask a woman to have an abortion. Fact.


Just ask them.

 

[MaggieMae]

Beats abortion

no it doesn't

If you are "healthy" enough to have sex, you are responsible for birth control.
If you are "healthy" enough to have sex, you are "healthy" enough to have a job and pay for your own insurance/medical costs.

You must be a virgin. Nobody -- NOBODY -- ever thinks "It could happen to me..." NOBODY!!!

And these days, not everyone has a "job," in case you've been asleep for three years.

 

[MaggieMae]

Preventive medicine saves money in the long run. I am all for covering birth control. I can't understand how conservatives could ***** about this, unwanted pregnancy, "welfare babies", and abortion.

How much a year are "you" paying in taxes? Are you willing to pay double that amount to cover people that aren't working at "documented" jobs?

Non sequitur, usually a last ditch effort when the argument is lost.

 

[rightwinger]

no it doesn't

If you are "healthy" enough to have sex, you are responsible for birth control.
If you are "healthy" enough to have sex, you are "healthy" enough to have a job and pay for your own insurance/medical costs.

You must be a virgin. Nobody -- NOBODY -- ever thinks "It could happen to me..." NOBODY!!!

And these days, not everyone has a "job," in case you've been asleep for three years.

Plus, if you don't have a job......what else you going to do all day?

 

[MaggieMae]

oh balderdash! we'll pay for the damn contraceptives, they won't take them and the abortions and un wanted pregnancies will continue who are you trying to kid? Personal responsibility ain't in the retardeddimocrats book of knowledge.

Of course there will still be unwanted pregnancies and abortions. If it lowers the rate of both of those things though, how can that be a bad thing?

If your family is getting hungry and the gov't comes and takes what is left of your food for people that are "worse off than you" how is that a bad thing?

Now you're just grasping at silly straws with barstool idiocy.

 

[MaggieMae]

If you are "healthy" enough to have sex, you are responsible for birth control.
If you are "healthy" enough to have sex, you are "healthy" enough to have a job and pay for your own insurance/medical costs.

Yeah, that's really worked like gangbusters in our recent history, hasn't it?

Are you asking if "welfare" has produced massive quantities of unwanted pregnancies? Are you asking if "welfare" has destroyed the traditional family in many cultural communities? Are you asking if "sex education" has reduced the number of STDs?

Paying people to be uneducated, unmarried and unemployed will not help any children. The unborn are murdered for the convenience. And yet, here you are, telling us to continue this pattern, because "it couldn't hurt". You do know that the Lord lays cowards down with the women and children killed in war (that probably includes all those babies that were aborted, crying non-stop), don't you. If you won't stand up for truth, it is going to be a fitful rest for you, until judgement day. All you are doing is encouraging more people to enter the "handout cycle". They will never have any pride or self worth in their own work. They will never know how much their children could accomplish (many will choose the path of their "parent"). They are indoctrinated in envy, deceit, and theft. What a good life you are wishing on millions.

I agree that much more oversight is needed, but cutting back on "welfare" programs isn't going to help that one iota. The people who are in charge of what nominal oversight already exists are too few and paid too little to do the job adequately. If you cut even more, there will be more fraud and more people able to game the system.

 

[MaggieMae]

How much a year are "you" paying in taxes? Are you willing to pay double that amount to cover people that aren't working at "documented" jobs?

"Double"?

C'mon. Furthermore, you are talking about a separate issue.

Do you think "healthcare" is free? Are you suggesting that doctors and nurses that dedicate themselves to school and discipline should have their pay "set" by government? Do you think they should be "forced" to administer care? Are you okay with "slavery"?

Health care is a basic human necessity. Without it, nothing else matters; nothing else of any magnitude can be accomplished. The more people who GET THAT, we will be on our way to solving the entire problem. Obamacare is a bandaid, just like all the others.

 

[MaggieMae]

The right wing opposes sex education, birth control and abortion

Then they ***** about paying for unwanted babies

I have an issue with sex education being taught to elementary school kids. Such a class should be taught to during the middle school years. Birth control I'm all for and I really don't have a problem with it being covered by insurance. Hell, I wish it was so many years ago when I was on the pill. Abortions ... well that's another story. Personally I could never have one and I wish other women wouldn't but .... that is their choice. I'd prefer potential abortions to go full-term, deliver and put the baby up for adoption.

If sex education isn't taught early, they get it from their peers, often misinformation. Surely you know that. Hell there are stories of eight-year olds raping girls just because they "think" they're suddenly mature because they can get a hard-on. At least kids that young have two sets of information to think about: The truth and the exaggerations heard in the locker room.

 

[MaggieMae]

Is it "free" bones?

How about this: medicaid covers viagra but not birth control.

It must be a state option, because I remember a few years ago there was a big hoopla over that and it was removed from the standard Medicaid guidelines. If states want to pony up for Viagra, I guess they can but I don't think they'd get a waiver or reimbursed.

 

[MaggieMae]

lack of self control, will, personal responsibility. and yes society has done their part to contribute to that, mightily, so there is a correlation and a fair amount of causation.

you guys? Oh, I get it

tell you what;

In the meantime, those of us grounded in reality will try and address the problem in a way that actually might have some effect.

nice bedside manner doc.

Strawman? You brought it up.

 

[Care4all]

boy are you uniformed. who do you think is gonna pay for them? If they can't afford birth control pills they sure as hell can't afford insurance payments. so that leaves 50% of us again toting the other 50% on our backs.

The tax payer ultimately pays for it anyways. Might as well try and subsidize some health efforts (i.e. screening) that tend to save money in the long run.

that's the problem dude,, the taxpayer is expected to pay for everything, and only 50% of us pay FEDERAL taxes.. the gimmmie gimmmie crowd is now larger than the giver crowd.. we're going down.

enough with this continued lie of yours willow.

you have been shown MNAY TIMES OVER that you are lying about 50% of working Americans do not pay federal taxes.

lie lie lie lie and lie.

STOP IT....pretty please willow, STOP LYING.

45% of workers do not pay federal INCOME taxes, but ALL OF THEM, every single one of them, do pay FEDERAL TAXES. All workers pay Federal Social security taxes, and ALL of them pay Federal Medicare taxes, and near all of them pay Federal Gasoline taxes, and many of them pay Federal Cigarette taxes......

AND, EVERY Couple paying federal income taxes DO NOT PAY ANY FEDERAL INCOME TAXES on their first 20 k earned, with children...no one pays taxes on the first 25-30k earned....

MOST of these people not owing federal income taxes, are getting NOTHING that all the rest of us don't get with Standard and personal deductions.....

yes, a few get the earned income credit, up to the amount they have paid in to social security tax, and NOT A DIME MORE, but these are few and far between....and these people are still paying in for all the other federal taxes listed above.

Income tax collection and social security tax collection revenues are about equal in our federal revenues collected. And Social security taxes are collected in SURPLUS, and used to fund what income taxes should be paying for....

Plus no one gets away with not paying a portion of every corporation's federal taxes, incorporated in to the price of their products.

So, it is SIMPLY A LIE, that 50% of working Americans do not pay Federal taxes....

Please STOP REGURGITATING THIS LIE.

Care

 

[BDBoop]

Obama

Insurance companies will be required to provide contraception without a copay—and conservative opposition, while predictable, makes no sense. Amanda Marcotte asks: Don’t they want to save money?

/snip

These new contraception regulations will pay for themselves easily in the short term by reducing the insurance payouts that come along with unintended pregnancies, but insurance companies should expect long-term savings. When children are planned, children are cheaper. As the Guttmacher noted (PDF) in its testimony on these proposed regulations, improved contraception use means women space out their pregnancies more, and putting some time in between pregnancies leads to better birth outcomes with lower medical costs. In addition, women who plan their pregnancies tend to get better prenatal care and are more likely to breast-feed, two behaviors that improve children’s health outcomes and reduce overall long-term health-care costs.

merged w/existing thread

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

Obama

Insurance companies will be required to provide contraception without a copay—and conservative opposition, while predictable, makes no sense. Amanda Marcotte asks: Don’t they want to save money?

/snip

These new contraception regulations will pay for themselves easily in the short term by reducing the insurance payouts that come along with unintended pregnancies, but insurance companies should expect long-term savings. When children are planned, children are cheaper. As the Guttmacher noted (PDF) in its testimony on these proposed regulations, improved contraception use means women space out their pregnancies more, and putting some time in between pregnancies leads to better birth outcomes with lower medical costs. In addition, women who plan their pregnancies tend to get better prenatal care and are more likely to breast-feed, two behaviors that improve children’s health outcomes and reduce overall long-term health-care costs.

And the Retard in Chief marches on. Meanwhile, he plunges us trillions of dollars in debt annually, makes a joke of the U.S. on the global stage and dines on Kobe beef.

What a useless shitbag. '12 can't come soon enough... he's gone.