Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

The so-called healthcare "reform bill" becomes a right-wing anti-abortion bill.

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
Better Believe It Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-07-09 10:19 PM
Original message
The so-called healthcare "reform bill" becomes a right-wing anti-abortion bill.
Edited on Sat Nov-07-09 10:21 PM by Better Believe It
Yet another good reason to support this bill written by the private insurance industry and big Pharma.

218 votes need to pass the anti-abortion rights amendment to this bill.

The anti-abortion amendment vote was 240 to 194 and has passed.

This looks like the kind of vote one saw after the Republicans won control of the House in 1994.
Refresh | 0 Recommendations Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
stray cat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-07-09 10:20 PM
Response to Original message
1. Are insurance companies currently obligated to pay for abortions without restriction now?
Edited on Sat Nov-07-09 10:21 PM by stray cat
Are there any insurance policies currently that pay for abortions without restricitons?
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Better Believe It Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-07-09 10:24 PM
Response to Reply #1
3. Insurance companies may pay for abortions but now won't be allowed to under this amendment.

Is that clear or do you need more information?
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Jennicut Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-07-09 10:25 PM
Response to Reply #1
4. Some states have laws restricting the coverage of abortions by private insurance
Compared with abortion issues that have grabbed significant media and public attention, state requirements governing private insurers’ coverage of abortion have, by and large, remained below the radar screen. A handful of states prohibit private insurers from covering abortion services, except in cases of life endangerment; more extensive coverage may be purchased at an additional charge. Lawsuits challenging these restrictions have had mixed results: In 1986, a federal appeals court invalidated Rhode Island’s requirement that private insurers exclude coverage of most abortions; in 1992, however, a federal district court upheld a similar Missouri statute. More often, states have banned abortion coverage in public employees’ insurance policies or in other cases where public funds are used to insure employees. These policies range from prohibiting coverage for abortion services altogether to offering coverage only when necessary to preserve the woman’s health and life or in cases of rape, incest or fetal abnormality.

5 states restrict insurance coverage of abortion in private insurance plans; 4 limit coverage to cases when the woman’s life is endangered; 1 limits coverage to life endangerment, rape and incest. Additional abortion coverage is permitted only through purchase of an additional rider and payment of an additional premium.

12 states restrict abortion coverage in insurance plans for public employees.

3 of the states provide abortion coverage only when the woman’s life is endangered.

7 of the states, in addition to offering coverage to save the woman’s life, provide coverage to protect the woman’s health or in cases of rape, incest or fetal abnormality.

2 of the states flatly prohibit any insurance coverage of abortion for public employees.
http://www.guttmacher.org/statecenter/spibs/spib_RICA.pdf
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Garam_Masala Donating Member (711 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-08-09 04:21 PM
Response to Reply #1
16. Insurance now pays for any abortion necessary for medical reasons
such as mother's health.

Under the proposed bill, they may be prohibited from paying for
any abortion.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Kurt_and_Hunter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-08-09 04:26 PM
Response to Reply #1
18. They are not currently PENALIZED for offering coverage
That's the point
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Cleita Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-07-09 10:21 PM
Response to Original message
2. Who are the 64 women hating Democrats? n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
vaberella Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-07-09 10:28 PM
Response to Original message
5. Why?! Why?! Why do you continue to ALWAYS be disingenuous?!
I'm not fond of the stupak but this is not the end of the road and your maringalizing everything else the bll does. Ugh, this is frustrating.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Better Believe It Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-07-09 10:39 PM
Response to Reply #5
6. Why, why, why do you constantly use the word disingenuous?!
Edited on Sat Nov-07-09 10:39 PM by Better Believe It
That word was popular among some political people a few years ago but is now passe.

Here's another word you can use. Narrative.

Try to use it in a sentence.

Good luck!

:)

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
vaberella Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-07-09 10:41 PM
Response to Reply #6
7. I would use "lie" but I don't think that's allowed. I could use "exagerate."
But that's boring. It should be your nickname.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
madfloridian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-07-09 10:42 PM
Response to Reply #6
8. Disingenuous is a very good word. Narrative is not similar at all.
dis⋅in⋅gen⋅u⋅ous
  /ˌdɪsɪnˈdʒɛnyuəs/ Show Spelled Pronunciation Show IPA
Use disingenuous in a Sentence
See web results for disingenuous
See images of disingenuous
–adjective
lacking in frankness, candor, or sincerity; falsely or hypocritically ingenuous; insincere: Her excuse was rather disingenuous.
Origin:
1645–55; dis- 1 + ingenuous

Related forms:
dis⋅in⋅gen⋅u⋅ous⋅ly, adverb
dis⋅in⋅gen⋅u⋅ous⋅ness, noun

Your post was weird.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Better Believe It Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-07-09 11:07 PM
Response to Reply #8
10. I apologize for my lack of a college education. But I'm learning new, big words and ....
Edited on Sat Nov-07-09 11:12 PM by Better Believe It
don't find it necessary to flaunt them before an audience.

Anything that you and others can do to improve my English language and grammer skills will be greatly appreciated.

:)

I'm sure that disingenuous is a very good word. I looked it up sometime ago in a dictionary. However, the poster questioned my intentions, views and honest beliefs when she/he used that word. I didn't appreciate that personal attack. And that poster routinely engages in such personal attacks against many DU posters who question any of her views or leaders in the Democratic party she/he believes are beyond criticism.

Now I'll tell you what's really bugging me about the term disingenuous. I think it's being used way too often in the media and by political people. I hear or read it almost everyday from people over and over and over again. It's like some people need to demonstrate their knowledge of a "new" word, like some child, and must perform their mastery of the new big word in front of an audience. How impressive! It's become downright annoying to me! Now I believe there is a word for a term that is overused. I think it's called a cliche. Is that right?

Thanks for your help.

:)




Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Liberal_Stalwart71 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-07-09 10:45 PM
Response to Original message
9. The saddest aspect of this bill is that if the Dems did this to get more Rep votes,
their efforts are in vein. The Reps' strategy is to weaken the bill as much as possible and STILL not vote for it... :puke::puke:
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
boppers Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-07-09 11:14 PM
Response to Reply #9
11. They got.....1.
Seriously.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Liberal_Stalwart71 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-07-09 11:34 PM
Response to Reply #11
12. The dude from LA; Jefferson's old district. He knows better. He represents a majority of
African Americans.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Orangepeel Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-07-09 11:42 PM
Response to Reply #9
13. no, they did it to get more Democratic votes. There are anti-choicers in the party. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Liberal_Stalwart71 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-08-09 12:04 AM
Response to Reply #13
14. I'm well aware of that. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
treestar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-08-09 04:18 PM
Response to Original message
15. Then why didn't the repukes all vote for it?
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Garam_Masala Donating Member (711 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-08-09 04:25 PM
Response to Reply #15
17. New taxes ($$$$$ = Money) outranks prinicples (pro-life)
Edited on Sun Nov-08-09 04:26 PM by Garam_Masala
for the repuglicans.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Aramchek Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-08-09 04:30 PM
Response to Original message
19. quite a steaming cup o' FAIL you brewed there
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
budkin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-08-09 04:34 PM
Response to Original message
20. Wrong.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu May 02nd 2024, 09:46 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC