War On Women Big Fail

[Disir]

That bureaucracy is about paperwork and the ability to track funding. So, anybody can go in and follow the money.

Otherwise all you got is some conspiracy theory crap going on.

 

[TemplarKormac]

That bureaucracy is about paperwork and the ability to track funding. So, anybody can go in and follow the money.

Otherwise all you got is some conspiracy theory crap going on.

That is a non sequitur. So you can't prove to me that they aren't using taxpayer money to fund abortions, you also cannot likewise prove that Planned Parenthood or the Federal government is not in fact abusing the funds or abiding by the Hyde Amendment.

Calling me a conspiracy theorist only cements my argument. The fact is, government is likely ignoring the Hyde Amendment, so is Planned Parenthood.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

The Hyde Amendment.

Further, abortions account for 3% of total services.

So, roughly a million abortions each year. Given that an abortion can range from $350 to $900, The costs range from $35 million to $300 million. Sorry, your math doesn't jive. And you apparently have no idea how good government lawyers are at circumventing congressional amendments. I doubt you can contend that the government is faithfully abiding by the Hyde Amendment. Thus your argument is rendered defunct.

Actually, my math is perfectly fine.

The Hyde Amendment.

Further, abortions account for 3% of total services.

So, roughly a million abortions each year. Given that an abortion can range from $350 to $900, The costs range from $35 million to $300 million. Sorry, your math doesn't jive. And you apparently have no idea how good government lawyers are at circumventing congressional amendments. I doubt you can contend that the government is faithfully abiding by the Hyde Amendment. Thus your argument is rendered defunct.

No, not even close to "a million".

In 2012, PP performed less than 350,000 abortions.

That's 327,166. At any rate, millions of dollars are spent providing abortions, can you can tell me with confidence that none of that is derived from public funds? Can either of you confirm to me that the government is faithfully abiding by the Hyde amendment? Any numerical misstatements notwithstanding, your arguments still fall flat. Saying the government faithfully abides by congressional acts flies in the face of logic, given that our government can't even enforce it's own immigration laws, or refuses to due to the preferences of the current administration. That is more then likely true with abortion. Therefore you are unable to prove to me that government does not pay for abortions. The bureaucracy involved in government healthcare is so huge that it is hard to, to not abide by the law.

Your move.

Prove it is. Put up or shut up.

Prove it isn't. Put up or shut up.

The burden of proof lies with the positive claim. It's not up us to prove you wrong - it's up to you to prove your own points.

 

[R.C. Christian]

War on drugs, war on terrorism, and now war on women. Sounds like females need some cheap pentagon MRAPS and M4's to combat the insurgency.

 

[TemplarKormac]

The Hyde Amendment.

Further, abortions account for 3% of total services.

So, roughly a million abortions each year. Given that an abortion can range from $350 to $900, The costs range from $35 million to $300 million. Sorry, your math doesn't jive. And you apparently have no idea how good government lawyers are at circumventing congressional amendments. I doubt you can contend that the government is faithfully abiding by the Hyde Amendment. Thus your argument is rendered defunct.

Actually, my math is perfectly fine.

So, roughly a million abortions each year. Given that an abortion can range from $350 to $900, The costs range from $35 million to $300 million. Sorry, your math doesn't jive. And you apparently have no idea how good government lawyers are at circumventing congressional amendments. I doubt you can contend that the government is faithfully abiding by the Hyde Amendment. Thus your argument is rendered defunct.

No, not even close to "a million".

In 2012, PP performed less than 350,000 abortions.

That's 327,166. At any rate, millions of dollars are spent providing abortions, can you can tell me with confidence that none of that is derived from public funds? Can either of you confirm to me that the government is faithfully abiding by the Hyde amendment? Any numerical misstatements notwithstanding, your arguments still fall flat. Saying the government faithfully abides by congressional acts flies in the face of logic, given that our government can't even enforce it's own immigration laws, or refuses to due to the preferences of the current administration. That is more then likely true with abortion. Therefore you are unable to prove to me that government does not pay for abortions. The bureaucracy involved in government healthcare is so huge that it is hard to, to not abide by the law.

Your move.

Prove it is. Put up or shut up.

Prove it isn't. Put up or shut up.

The burden of proof lies with the positive claim. It's not up us to prove you wrong - it's up to you to prove your own points.

I believe I just did. For a debate to work, both sides need to prove their claims. I provided empirical evidence as well as logical evidence to counter both of your arguments. You and Disir have yet to prove to me that there is no likelihood of PP or the government abiding by or preventing the use of taxpayer money to fund abortions. She reacted by calling me a conspiracy theorist, and you are invoking onus probandi, in lieu of any proof of your claims. I have fulfilled that obligation, now onus probandi falls to you.

However, if the preceding evidence was not satisfactory, here is the crux of my argument:

On March 21, 2010, President Obama announced Executive Order 13535, and signed it three days later. This order was supposedly meant to expand on the Hyde Amendment. However, the order was made following a deal with pro-life Democrat Bart Stupak to get a yes vote for the PPACA, or Obamacare. One red flag there. Political bargaining. So as a result, both the pro-life and pro-choice groups objected to this Amendment, with the pro-life side contending that if such an order was needed to enforce the Hyde Amendment , that there was sufficient evidence to prove that taxpayer money was being used for abortions, via Obamacare. The pro-choice side objected for want of Obama's commitment to pro-choice ideals or lack thereof.

I am inclined to agree that this Executive Order was direct proof that there was and has been abuse of taxpayer funds in the system. Both via Obamacare and Medicaid. You can't honestly tell me that grantor nor recipient are abiding by the law as it is written.

 

[Disir]

Executive Order 13535-- Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act's Consistency with Longstanding Restrictions on the Use of Federal Funds for Abortion
EXECUTIVE ORDER

ENSURING ENFORCEMENT AND IMPLEMENTATION OF ABORTION RESTRICTIONS IN THE PATIENT PROTECTION AND AFFORDABLE CARE ACT

By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, including the "Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act" (Public Law 111-148), I hereby order as follows:

Section. 1. Policy. Following the recent enactment of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (the "Act"), it is necessary to establish an adequate enforcement mechanism to ensure that Federal funds are not used for abortion services (except in cases of rape or incest, or when the life of the woman would be endangered), consistent with a longstanding Federal statutory restriction that is commonly known as the Hyde Amendment. The purpose of this order is to establish a comprehensive, Government-wide set of policies and procedures to achieve this goal and to make certain that all relevant actors -- Federal officials, State officials (including insurance regulators) and health care providers -- are aware of their responsibilities, new and old.

The Act maintains current Hyde Amendment restrictions governing abortion policy and extends those restrictions to the newly created health insurance exchanges. Under the Act, longstanding Federal laws to protect conscience (such as the Church Amendment, 42 U.S.C. 300a-7, and the Weldon Amendment, section 508(d)(1) of Public Law 111-8) remain intact and new protections prohibit discrimination against health care facilities and health care providers because of an unwillingness to provide, pay for, provide coverage of, or refer for abortions.

Numerous executive agencies have a role in ensuring that these restrictions are enforced, including the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), and the Office of Personnel Management.

Sec. 2. Strict Compliance with Prohibitions on Abortion Funding in Health Insurance Exchanges. The Act specifically prohibits the use of tax credits and cost-sharing reduction payments to pay for abortion services (except in cases of rape or incest, or when the life of the woman would be endangered) in the health insurance exchanges that will be operational in 2014. The Act also imposes strict payment and accounting requirements to ensure that Federal funds are not used for abortion services in exchange plans (except in cases of rape or incest, or when the life of the woman would be endangered) and requires State health insurance commissioners to ensure that exchange plan funds are segregated by insurance companies in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles, OMB funds management circulars, and accounting guidance provided by the Government Accountability Office.

I hereby direct the Director of the OMB and the Secretary of HHS to develop, within 180 days of the date of this order, a model set of segregation guidelines for State health insurance commissioners to use when determining whether exchange plans are complying with the Act's segregation requirements, established in section 1303 of the Act, for enrollees receiving Federal financial assistance. The guidelines shall also offer technical information that States should follow to conduct independent regular audits of insurance companies that participate in the health insurance exchanges. In developing these model guidelines, the Director of the OMB and the Secretary of HHS shall consult with executive agencies and offices that have relevant expertise in accounting principles, including, but not limited to, the Department of the Treasury, and with the Government Accountability Office. Upon completion of those model guidelines, the Secretary of HHS should promptly initiate a rulemaking to issue regulations, which will have the force of law, to interpret the Act's segregation requirements, and shall provide guidance to State health insurance commissioners on how to comply with the model guidelines.

Sec. 3. Community Health Center Program. The Act establishes a new Community Health Center (CHC) Fund within HHS, which provides additional Federal funds for the community health center program. Existing law prohibits these centers from using Federal funds to provide abortion services (except in cases of rape or incest, or when the life of the woman would be endangered), as a result of both the Hyde Amendment and longstanding regulations containing the Hyde language. Under the Act, the Hyde language shall apply to the authorization and appropriations of funds for Community Health Centers under section 10503 and all other relevant provisions. I hereby direct the Secretary of HHS to ensure that program administrators and recipients of Federal funds are aware of and comply with the limitations on abortion services imposed on CHCs by existing law. Such actions should include, but are not limited to, updating Grant Policy Statements that accompany CHC grants and issuing new interpretive rules.

Sec. 4. General Provisions. (a) Nothing in this order shall be construed to impair or otherwise affect: (i) authority granted by law or Presidential directive to an agency, or the head thereof; or (ii) functions of the Director of the OMB relating to budgetary, administrative, or legislative proposals.

(b) This order shall be implemented consistent with applicable law and subject to the availability of appropriations.

(c) This order is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers, employees or agents, or any other person.

BARACK OBAMA

THE WHITE HOUSE,
March 24, 2010.
Executive Order 13535-- Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act s Consistency with Longstanding Restrictions on the Use of Federal Funds for Abortion The White House

Where?

 

[TemplarKormac]

Executive Order 13535-- Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act's Consistency with Longstanding Restrictions on the Use of Federal Funds for Abortion
EXECUTIVE ORDER

ENSURING ENFORCEMENT AND IMPLEMENTATION OF ABORTION RESTRICTIONS IN THE PATIENT PROTECTION AND AFFORDABLE CARE ACT

By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, including the "Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act" (Public Law 111-148), I hereby order as follows:

Section. 1. Policy. Following the recent enactment of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (the "Act"), it is necessary to establish an adequate enforcement mechanism to ensure that Federal funds are not used for abortion services (except in cases of rape or incest, or when the life of the woman would be endangered), consistent with a longstanding Federal statutory restriction that is commonly known as the Hyde Amendment. The purpose of this order is to establish a comprehensive, Government-wide set of policies and procedures to achieve this goal and to make certain that all relevant actors -- Federal officials, State officials (including insurance regulators) and health care providers -- are aware of their responsibilities, new and old.

The Act maintains current Hyde Amendment restrictions governing abortion policy and extends those restrictions to the newly created health insurance exchanges. Under the Act, longstanding Federal laws to protect conscience (such as the Church Amendment, 42 U.S.C. 300a-7, and the Weldon Amendment, section 508(d)(1) of Public Law 111-8) remain intact and new protections prohibit discrimination against health care facilities and health care providers because of an unwillingness to provide, pay for, provide coverage of, or refer for abortions.

Numerous executive agencies have a role in ensuring that these restrictions are enforced, including the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), and the Office of Personnel Management.

Sec. 2. Strict Compliance with Prohibitions on Abortion Funding in Health Insurance Exchanges. The Act specifically prohibits the use of tax credits and cost-sharing reduction payments to pay for abortion services (except in cases of rape or incest, or when the life of the woman would be endangered) in the health insurance exchanges that will be operational in 2014. The Act also imposes strict payment and accounting requirements to ensure that Federal funds are not used for abortion services in exchange plans (except in cases of rape or incest, or when the life of the woman would be endangered) and requires State health insurance commissioners to ensure that exchange plan funds are segregated by insurance companies in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles, OMB funds management circulars, and accounting guidance provided by the Government Accountability Office.

I hereby direct the Director of the OMB and the Secretary of HHS to develop, within 180 days of the date of this order, a model set of segregation guidelines for State health insurance commissioners to use when determining whether exchange plans are complying with the Act's segregation requirements, established in section 1303 of the Act, for enrollees receiving Federal financial assistance. The guidelines shall also offer technical information that States should follow to conduct independent regular audits of insurance companies that participate in the health insurance exchanges. In developing these model guidelines, the Director of the OMB and the Secretary of HHS shall consult with executive agencies and offices that have relevant expertise in accounting principles, including, but not limited to, the Department of the Treasury, and with the Government Accountability Office. Upon completion of those model guidelines, the Secretary of HHS should promptly initiate a rulemaking to issue regulations, which will have the force of law, to interpret the Act's segregation requirements, and shall provide guidance to State health insurance commissioners on how to comply with the model guidelines.

Sec. 3. Community Health Center Program. The Act establishes a new Community Health Center (CHC) Fund within HHS, which provides additional Federal funds for the community health center program. Existing law prohibits these centers from using Federal funds to provide abortion services (except in cases of rape or incest, or when the life of the woman would be endangered), as a result of both the Hyde Amendment and longstanding regulations containing the Hyde language. Under the Act, the Hyde language shall apply to the authorization and appropriations of funds for Community Health Centers under section 10503 and all other relevant provisions. I hereby direct the Secretary of HHS to ensure that program administrators and recipients of Federal funds are aware of and comply with the limitations on abortion services imposed on CHCs by existing law. Such actions should include, but are not limited to, updating Grant Policy Statements that accompany CHC grants and issuing new interpretive rules.

Sec. 4. General Provisions. (a) Nothing in this order shall be construed to impair or otherwise affect: (i) authority granted by law or Presidential directive to an agency, or the head thereof; or (ii) functions of the Director of the OMB relating to budgetary, administrative, or legislative proposals.

(b) This order shall be implemented consistent with applicable law and subject to the availability of appropriations.

(c) This order is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers, employees or agents, or any other person.

BARACK OBAMA

THE WHITE HOUSE,
March 24, 2010.
Executive Order 13535-- Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act s Consistency with Longstanding Restrictions on the Use of Federal Funds for Abortion The White House

Where?

This Executive Order was superficial at best, simply restating the Hyde language...

As for where, you would need to read Section 1101 of the ACA involving "high risk pools."

http://www.mrmib.ca.gov/mrmib/High_Risk_Pool/Affordable_care_act.pdf

And a CRS report which further calls into question whether or not the EO or the law it amended would prevent the usage of Federal funds for abortion:

http://www.help.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/CRS Report for HELP 07232010.pdf

Read Part 2 and 4.

This is pulled from a blog made by one of Obamacare's architects, Nancy Ann DeParle:

Much has been made of this policy by both sides of the debate. But, in reality, no new ground has been broken. The program’s restriction on abortion coverage is not a precedent for other programs or policies given the unique, temporary nature of the program and the population it serves. It does not restrict private insurance choices and the implementation of the Affordable Care Act will continue to be guided by the law and the President’s Executive Order.

-Nancy Ann DeParle, former Deputy Chief of Staff for Policy in the administration of President Obama, 2011-2013

Insurance for Americans with Pre-Existing Conditions The White House

And quoted directly from 42 U.S.C. 18001(g)(1):

Immediate access to insurance for uninsured individuals with a preexisting condition

42 U.S.C. 18001(g)(1)

(g) Funding; termination of authority
(1) In general
There is appropriated to the Secretary, out of any moneys in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated, $5,000,000,000 to pay claims against (and the administrative costs of) the high risk pool under this section that are in excess of the amount of premiums collected from eligible individuals enrolled in the high risk pool. Such funds shall be available without fiscal year limitation.

Note that this provision does not ban Federal funds from being used for abortion. The Executive Order does nothing to address this. In fact, it does not address funds being allocated under this part of the law. See the CRS Report Part 2 for reiteration. This means that it does in fact leave the possibility open that funds have or will be used to pay for abortions.

And in this part of the law 42 U.S.C 254(b)(i)(1):

42 U.S. Code § 254b - Health centers

42 U.S.C 254(b)(i)(1)

(b) Definitions
For purposes of this section:

(i) basic health services which, for purposes of this section, shall consist of—
(I) health services related to family medicine, internal medicine, pediatrics, obstetrics, or gynecology that are furnished by physicians and where appropriate, physician assistants, nurse practitioners, and nurse midwives

Note here how it is noticeably vague on what types of obstetric or gynecologic care can be provided.

That executive order never changed these parts of the PPACA. So, to put it mildly, it is though fiat of law, allowing abortions to be funded by taxpayer dollars.

Then there is this:

In plans that do provide non-excepted [elective] abortion coverage, a separate payment for non-excepted [elective] abortion services must be made by the policyholder to the insurer, and the insurer must deposit those payments in a separate allocation account that consists solely of those payments; the insurer must use only the amounts in that account to pay for non-excepted [elective] abortion services. ACA, § 1303(b)(2)(B),(C). Insurers are prohibited
from using funds attributable to premium tax credits or [federal] cost-sharing reductions ...
to pay for non-excepted [elective] abortion services. ACA § 1303(b)(2)(A).

Liberty University v. Geithner, 753 F. Supp. 2d 611, 643 (W.D. Va. 2010).

This refers to the "separate payments" made from personal funds or payroll deduction to an account, which basically means that other taxpayers may be unwittingly or otherwise are being forced into paying for elective abortions under Section 1303 of the PPACA. If the PPACA makes exceptions in funding for abortion with taxpayer money, then it is easy to conclude that such exceptions occur in funding to Planned Parenthood.

Disir, this took me 3 hours to research. I went through applicable regulations and case law, objective sources, and a faux pas by Nancy Ann DeParle, and both the Code of Federal Regulations and the United States Code itself to explain the error in your argument. You would do well not to call me a liar again.

 

[Disir]

Let's not cherry pick.
Let's put the blog entry into perspective:

Starting September 23, the new law makes it illegal for insurance companies to discriminate against children under 19 with preexisting conditions. In 2014, discriminating against anyone with a pre-existing condition will be illegal, but we know Americans need relief now. That’s why the new law created the Pre-Existing Condition Insurance Plan. This plan offers coverage to uninsured Americans who have been uninsured for at least six months and unable to obtain health coverage because of a pre-existing health condition like cancer, diabetes or lupus.

Coverage will be available at the same rate as it is for an average person who does not have such a condition and the program is entirely funded by the federal government. The program is temporary and will last until 2014 when discriminating against anyone with a pre-existing condition will be illegal. If you’re interested in joining the program, you can click here to learn more about the program in your state.

Today, HHS issued an interim final regulation laying out the rules for the PCIP program. The regulation describes the options for determining who has a pre-existing condition, how to verify citizenship, and how an individual can appeal a PCIP decision. It also details how Federal funding will be allocated, ways to prevent “dumping” of already-insured people into the program, and strategies for preventing fraud.

The regulation also lists the benefits that can and can’t be covered under this temporary federal program. Covered benefits include hospitalization, outpatient care, maternity care, and, hospice, and home health care.

The list of services not covered parallels that of the Federal Employees Health Benefit Plan (FEHBP), which serves government workers and their families, including Members of Congress. And like this program, PCIP prohibits the use of federal funds for abortion services, except in cases of rape or incest, or where the life of the woman would be endangered. This policy meets the President’s commitment throughout the health reform debate to neither expand nor scale back current restrictions on federal funding for abortion and ensures that no federal funds will be used to cover abortion services other than the exceptions mentioned above

The temporary relief program is what? Temporary.

 

[Disir]

Let's cut to the chase.. Here is what the too doo is all about:
http://images.politico.com/global/2014/09/15/embargoed_gao_report.html

Look at the note 8 on page number 3.

From the website:

What GAO Found
Under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA), insurance plans offered in health insurance exchanges—known as qualified health plans (QHP)—may cover abortion services as a benefit consistent with federal and state law. Federal law applicable to QHPs for the 2014 benefit year prohibits the use of federal funds made available to offset the cost of QHP coverage to pay for abortion services except where the pregnancy is the result of rape or incest, or the life of the pregnant woman would be endangered unless an abortion is performed. QHPs may cover abortion services that do not meet that exception (referred to as non-excepted abortion services), but state law may restrict the circumstances under which coverage can be provided. For the 2014 benefit year, 17 states do not allow QHPs to provide non-excepted abortion services, and 6 states permit the coverage of such services only in certain limited circumstances. Among the remaining 28 states (including the District of Columbia) with no such laws, in 5 states all QHPs cover non-excepted abortion services; in 15 states some QHPs cover non-excepted abortion services; and in 8 states no QHPs cover non-excepted abortion services. Nationally, 1,036 QHPs in these 28 states cover non-excepted abortion services and 1,062 QHPs do not.

Of the 18 issuers from which GAO obtained information—which offered nearly one-quarter of the QHPs covering non-excepted abortion services in the 28 states—all but three issuers indicated that the benefit is not subject to any restrictions, limitations, or exclusions. All 18 issuers also indicated that their abortion services benefit is subject to the same requirements as other benefits, such as enrollee out-of-pocket costs—including deductibles, copayments, and coinsurance—and prior authorization requirements, all of which can vary depending on the location where the service is provided. To estimate the cost of the coverage of non-excepted abortion services, issuers indicated that they generally reviewed historical costs for these procedures. All but one of the issuers from which GAO obtained information estimated the cost of coverage of non-excepted abortion services to be less than $1 per enrollee per month—the minimum amount required to be estimated under PPACA for these services, and all but two of these issuers rounded the amount up to $1 to comply with PPACA. The highest cost estimated by the issuers GAO collected information from was $1.10 per enrollee per month. Fifteen issuers and a state-based exchange which bills enrollees on behalf of issuers did not itemize the premium amount associated with non-excepted abortion services coverage on enrollees’ bills nor indicate that they sent a separate bill for that premium amount. Six issuers GAO contacted indicated that they provided information about coverage for abortion services to consumers before they enrolled in QHPs, while others indicated that consumers shopping for QHPs would need to call the issuer to obtain such information.

Why GAO Did This Study
PPACA requires QHPs to cover a package of essential health benefits. While this package does not include abortion services, QHPs may cover those services, consistent with federal and state law. GAO was asked to provide a list of QHPs that do and that do not cover abortion services and for additional information on issues related to that coverage. This report describes whether non-excepted abortion services are covered by QHPs within the 28 states with no laws restricting such coverage for the 2014 benefit year and provides additional information—such as the scope and the cost of non-excepted abortion services coverage—for selected QHPs that cover such services.

To obtain the information presented here, GAO contacted every state to determine whether states had laws restricting the circumstances under which abortion services may be provided as a covered benefit by QHPs for 2014. Based on a review of those laws and relevant federal requirements, GAO determined that 23 states have laws restricting the circumstances under which non-excepted abortion services may be provided as a covered benefit by QHPs for the 2014 benefit year. In order to report on whether non-excepted abortion services are covered by QHPs within the 28 states with no laws restricting such coverage in 2014, GAO obtained data on QHPs’ coverage of non-excepted abortion services from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), within the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), the agency responsible for overseeing the establishment of health insurance exchanges; private issuers of QHPs; state departments of insurance and state exchange organizations; and from officials at the Office of Personnel Management. To provide additional information regarding non-excepted abortion services for selected QHPs that cover such services, GAO interviewed and collected documentation from a non-probability sample of 18 issuers about the QHPs they offer in 10 states; while not generalizable, this sample covers almost a quarter of the QHPs covering non-excepted abortion services in these states.

What GAO Recommends
GAO is not making any recommendations. HHS stated that CMS will use the report to address issues of concern to help ensure that stakeholders understand the laws and regulations governing non-excepted abortion services coverage.

U.S. GAO - Health Insurance Exchanges Coverage of Non-excepted Abortion Services by Qualified Health Plans

I am quite aware of whom I am dealing with. You are the same individual that insisted there was no war on women because of .........FGM in the Middle East.

 

[LogikAndReazon]

Feminists must keep up the fight !!! Lol

 

[Seawytch]

"Today, his approval rating among women is 41 percent, with 51 percent disapproving."

YOUNG Obama s teetering presidency - Washington Times

I have to say this surprises me. Women are smarter than I thought.

It could be that they are now already stumping for Hillary who is desperately trying to distance herself from Obama.

What say you....

I wonder what the Republicans' approval rate is among women.

Oh, you don't have to wonder. The whole country thinks the GOP is below cockroaches and gonorrhea in approval ratings.

72% of Americans disapprove of Republicans in Congress.

 

[Camp]

nytimes.com/2014/09/16/us/arizona-republican-official-resigns-after-remarks-about-medicaid-recipients.html?_r=0

But, but, but, there is no Republican war on women. It's all a delusion. Forcing them to have life changing surgery to remove their reproductive organs isn't part of the war on women.

 

[Misty]

A radio host here had a program where he offered 200 to drug addicts if they got tubal ligations or vesctomies and it was hugely successful. Aren't these the people liberals don't want reproducing.

Anything for money drug money. It was voluntary. And a bunch of crack heads are now not giving birth to crack addicted babies. Crack heads don't tend to have abortions because they are too fucked up.

Reality is a bitch but voluntary sterilization worked.

Maybe the war isn't on women maybe the war is on unborn babies.

nytimes.com/2014/09/16/us/arizona-republican-official-resigns-after-remarks-about-medicaid-recipients.html?_r=0

But, but, but, there is no Republican war on women. It's all a delusion. Forcing them to have life changing surgery to remove their reproductive organs isn't part of the war on women.

 

[Misty]

Democrats in congress aren't doing so well either.

"PRINCETON, NJ -- Thirty-four percent of Americans approve of the job the Democrats in Congress are doing and 26% approve of the job the Republicans in Congress are doing. Both approval ratings are on the lower end of what Gallup has measured for each party, beginning in 1999."

Americans Rate Republicans Democrats in Congress Poorly

"Today, his approval rating among women is 41 percent, with 51 percent disapproving."

YOUNG Obama s teetering presidency - Washington Times

I have to say this surprises me. Women are smarter than I thought.

It could be that they are now already stumping for Hillary who is desperately trying to distance herself from Obama.

What say you....

I wonder what the Republicans' approval rate is among women.

Oh, you don't have to wonder. The whole country thinks the GOP is below cockroaches and gonorrhea in approval ratings.

72% of Americans disapprove of Republicans in Congress.

 

[hadit]

Any woman can have as many abortions as she wants.

What is the war on women in America?

The War on Women predates Obama. Whether you choose to acknowledge it or not. Further, Obama is not up for reelection and the Republicans still don't have a plan and since they are the ones that are a part of the problem then it doesn't look good for them either.

Abortion. first, last and only.

Exactly. That's why the whole "war on women" is so stupid. They're fighting battles that are long over.

 

[hadit]

Men’s Sexual Health Services at Planned Parenthood
Services offered at Planned Parenthood health centers vary by location. Some of the services include

• checkups for reproductive or sexual health problems
• colon, prostate, and testicular cancer screenings
• condoms and vasectomy
• erectile dysfunction and premature ejaculation services, including education, exams, treatment, and referral
• general health care and routine physical exams
• jock itch exam and treatment
• male infertility screening and referral
• STD testing and treatment
• urinary tract infections testing and treatment

Men s Sexual Health

When are they going to start demanding that men don't totally lose their reproductive freedom the moment a woman gets pregnant?

 

[Disir]

Oh......so now recognizing that there are issues leads to redefining issues. That's nice.

 

[candycorn]

What I don't understand is people who believe we subsidize WalMart's payroll because some WalMart employees receive government assistance while WalMart gets tax breaks, but we don't subsidize abortions by PP, just their other procedures. The WM argument is the "one big pot" theory. Why is "one big pot" not applicable to PP.

This is only referencing those who believe we subsidize WalMart so they don't have to pay a fair wage but don't believe we subsidize PP so they can perform free or reduced cost abortions.

The employees have to apply for aid for specific purposes. Food stamps pay for food.
PP applies for grants (aid) for specific purposes. Grants for patient education go for patient education.

You're simply wrong.

 

[Disir]

Men’s Sexual Health Services at Planned Parenthood
Services offered at Planned Parenthood health centers vary by location. Some of the services include

• checkups for reproductive or sexual health problems
• colon, prostate, and testicular cancer screenings
• condoms and vasectomy
• erectile dysfunction and premature ejaculation services, including education, exams, treatment, and referral
• general health care and routine physical exams
• jock itch exam and treatment
• male infertility screening and referral
• STD testing and treatment
• urinary tract infections testing and treatment

Men s Sexual Health

When are they going to start demanding that men don't totally lose their reproductive freedom the moment a woman gets pregnant?

Say again. In English, please.

 

[Misty]

The women actually have to get the abortion and what you don't seem to know is that many are too addicted to drugs to go get an abortion or too lazy or wasted. The baby is born all messed up.

Will liberals go into the homes if these drug addicts and drive them to the PP and help them get their abortion while they are wasted on drugs? Is that what you want?

nytimes.com/2014/09/16/us/arizona-republican-official-resigns-after-remarks-about-medicaid-recipients.html?_r=0

But, but, but, there is no Republican war on women. It's all a delusion. Forcing them to have life changing surgery to remove their reproductive organs isn't part of the war on women.

Let's not cherry pick.
Let's put the blog entry into perspective:

Starting September 23, the new law makes it illegal for insurance companies to discriminate against children under 19 with preexisting conditions. In 2014, discriminating against anyone with a pre-existing condition will be illegal, but we know Americans need relief now. That’s why the new law created the Pre-Existing Condition Insurance Plan. This plan offers coverage to uninsured Americans who have been uninsured for at least six months and unable to obtain health coverage because of a pre-existing health condition like cancer, diabetes or lupus.

Coverage will be available at the same rate as it is for an average person who does not have such a condition and the program is entirely funded by the federal government. The program is temporary and will last until 2014 when discriminating against anyone with a pre-existing condition will be illegal. If you’re interested in joining the program, you can click here to learn more about the program in your state.

Today, HHS issued an interim final regulation laying out the rules for the PCIP program. The regulation describes the options for determining who has a pre-existing condition, how to verify citizenship, and how an individual can appeal a PCIP decision. It also details how Federal funding will be allocated, ways to prevent “dumping” of already-insured people into the program, and strategies for preventing fraud.

The regulation also lists the benefits that can and can’t be covered under this temporary federal program. Covered benefits include hospitalization, outpatient care, maternity care, and, hospice, and home health care.

The list of services not covered parallels that of the Federal Employees Health Benefit Plan (FEHBP), which serves government workers and their families, including Members of Congress. And like this program, PCIP prohibits the use of federal funds for abortion services, except in cases of rape or incest, or where the life of the woman would be endangered. This policy meets the President’s commitment throughout the health reform debate to neither expand nor scale back current restrictions on federal funding for abortion and ensures that no federal funds will be used to cover abortion services other than the exceptions mentioned above

The temporary relief program is what? Temporary.