by the way, Stupak’s office is having a bad day.
any attempt to ask a question about the amendment is literally met with screams from the woman answering the phone. i know, because it just happened to me. She screamed at me almost as soon as the words "i have a question about the Stupak Amendment" came out of my mouth. And then she tried to shout me down before hanging up on me, and to be honest, i hadn’t even rasied my voice.
So i called back, tried to calm her down, and said that I’d gotten conflicting information. she refused to let me speak to a legislative aide, refused to put me through to voicemail, said she was too busy to answer ym question, and encouraged me to call back "after 5:30″, which is of course when the office is closed.
just to give you an idea of what they’re dealing with, deservedly so, in DC.
I want to make sure that the provision that emerges meets that test -- that we are not in some way sneaking in funding for abortions, but, on the other hand, that we're not restricting women's insurance choices," [Obama] said.
Armored Gorilla on
"I'm a mad god. The Mad God, actually. It's a family title. Gets passed down from me to myself every few thousand years."
0
Options
ElJeffeRoaming the streets, waving his mod gun around.Moderator, ClubPAMod Emeritus
a few hundred dollars cause you elected not to use birth control
Birth control can fail....
My nigh-infertile wife was on the pill and we still got pregnant.
So... yeah.
The various quotes, anecdotes, and pictures of Maddie seem to be evidence that some cosmic entity wanted that child to exist.
Actually, it was the Other One that was unplanned. (It's okay, though - we wanted a second one at some point, and he's totally rad.)
ElJeffe on
I submitted an entry to Lego Ideas, and if 10,000 people support me, it'll be turned into an actual Lego set!If you'd like to see and support my submission, follow this link.
0
Options
ElJeffeRoaming the streets, waving his mod gun around.Moderator, ClubPAMod Emeritus
by the way, Stupak’s office is having a bad day.
any attempt to ask a question about the amendment is literally met with screams from the woman answering the phone. i know, because it just happened to me. She screamed at me almost as soon as the words "i have a question about the Stupak Amendment" came out of my mouth. And then she tried to shout me down before hanging up on me, and to be honest, i hadn’t even rasied my voice.
So i called back, tried to calm her down, and said that I’d gotten conflicting information. she refused to let me speak to a legislative aide, refused to put me through to voicemail, said she was too busy to answer ym question, and encouraged me to call back "after 5:30″, which is of course when the office is closed.
just to give you an idea of what they’re dealing with, deservedly so, in DC.
This makes me happy.
ElJeffe on
I submitted an entry to Lego Ideas, and if 10,000 people support me, it'll be turned into an actual Lego set!If you'd like to see and support my submission, follow this link.
by the way, Stupak’s office is having a bad day.
any attempt to ask a question about the amendment is literally met with screams from the woman answering the phone. i know, because it just happened to me. She screamed at me almost as soon as the words "i have a question about the Stupak Amendment" came out of my mouth. And then she tried to shout me down before hanging up on me, and to be honest, i hadn’t even rasied my voice.
So i called back, tried to calm her down, and said that I’d gotten conflicting information. she refused to let me speak to a legislative aide, refused to put me through to voicemail, said she was too busy to answer ym question, and encouraged me to call back "after 5:30″, which is of course when the office is closed.
just to give you an idea of what they’re dealing with, deservedly so, in DC.
This makes me happy.
It's just too bad the Senator himself doesn't have to deal with near as much grief as the random duders who work for him.
by the way, Stupak’s office is having a bad day.
any attempt to ask a question about the amendment is literally met with screams from the woman answering the phone. i know, because it just happened to me. She screamed at me almost as soon as the words "i have a question about the Stupak Amendment" came out of my mouth. And then she tried to shout me down before hanging up on me, and to be honest, i hadn’t even rasied my voice.
So i called back, tried to calm her down, and said that I’d gotten conflicting information. she refused to let me speak to a legislative aide, refused to put me through to voicemail, said she was too busy to answer ym question, and encouraged me to call back "after 5:30″, which is of course when the office is closed.
just to give you an idea of what they’re dealing with, deservedly so, in DC.
This makes me happy.
It's just too bad the Senator himself doesn't have to deal with near as much grief as the random duders who work for him.
Representative.
enlightenedbum on
Self-righteousness is incompatible with coalition building.
Need some questions answered, as I've fallen behind on this thread and an American buddy of mine is wondering about the current status of Healthcare reform.
So, what is the current status? In the Senate? Has the public option been stripped out, or still in? What's the chance of this passing in current form? When are they expected to vote?
Need some questions answered, as I've fallen behind on this thread and an American buddy of mine is wondering about the current status of Healthcare reform.
So, what is the current status? In the Senate? Has the public option been stripped out, or still in? What's the chance of this passing in current form? When are they expected to vote?
That about covers it...
The House has passed a bill with an unpleasant abortion amendment (that is likely to continue to cause problems), a public option that's pretty good but needs to negotiate it's own rates, and decent funding. The Senate still is on track to include an equivalent public option to the House, with the addition of some mechanism for states to decide to opt out of offering the plan in their state, though a few people are making noises about scuttling the whole thing on that point including Captain Asshat, Liebermann.
Debate continues in the Senate, with a CBO scoring of the senate bill expected late this week and a vote to bring it to the floor (which needs 60 votes and should be easy enough to clear) due MAYBE early next week. Then likely nothing for Veterans day as everyone goes home, a few weeks of "debate", and well see if the Senate can manage to get it's shit together and vote for it's bill by year end.
by the way, Stupak’s office is having a bad day.
any attempt to ask a question about the amendment is literally met with screams from the woman answering the phone. i know, because it just happened to me. She screamed at me almost as soon as the words "i have a question about the Stupak Amendment" came out of my mouth. And then she tried to shout me down before hanging up on me, and to be honest, i hadn’t even rasied my voice.
So i called back, tried to calm her down, and said that I’d gotten conflicting information. she refused to let me speak to a legislative aide, refused to put me through to voicemail, said she was too busy to answer ym question, and encouraged me to call back "after 5:30″, which is of course when the office is closed.
just to give you an idea of what they’re dealing with, deservedly so, in DC.
This makes me happy.
It's just too bad the Senator himself doesn't have to deal with near as much grief as the random duders who work for him.
Though it's an immensely bad sign when your doorkeeper is loosing their shit. They are (or should be, unless something has gone horribly wrong) chosen for the fact they are completely unflappable. The first time one of them loses their shit and treats a constituent the way that is described here the congressman has a serious issue back home.
by the way, Stupak’s office is having a bad day.
any attempt to ask a question about the amendment is literally met with screams from the woman answering the phone. i know, because it just happened to me. She screamed at me almost as soon as the words "i have a question about the Stupak Amendment" came out of my mouth. And then she tried to shout me down before hanging up on me, and to be honest, i hadn’t even rasied my voice.
So i called back, tried to calm her down, and said that I’d gotten conflicting information. she refused to let me speak to a legislative aide, refused to put me through to voicemail, said she was too busy to answer ym question, and encouraged me to call back "after 5:30″, which is of course when the office is closed.
just to give you an idea of what they’re dealing with, deservedly so, in DC.
This makes me happy.
It's just too bad the Rep himself doesn't have to deal with near as much grief as the random duders who work for him.
Though it's an immensely bad sign when your doorkeeper is loosing their shit. They are (or should be, unless something has gone horribly wrong) chosen for the fact they are completely unflappable. The first time one of them loses their shit and treats a constituent the way that is described here the congressman has a serious issue back home.
Eh, my guess would be that it's an intern rather than a zen master secretary.
by the way, Stupak’s office is having a bad day.
any attempt to ask a question about the amendment is literally met with screams from the woman answering the phone. i know, because it just happened to me. She screamed at me almost as soon as the words "i have a question about the Stupak Amendment" came out of my mouth. And then she tried to shout me down before hanging up on me, and to be honest, i hadn’t even rasied my voice.
So i called back, tried to calm her down, and said that I’d gotten conflicting information. she refused to let me speak to a legislative aide, refused to put me through to voicemail, said she was too busy to answer ym question, and encouraged me to call back "after 5:30″, which is of course when the office is closed.
just to give you an idea of what they’re dealing with, deservedly so, in DC.
This makes me happy.
It's just too bad the Rep himself doesn't have to deal with near as much grief as the random duders who work for him.
Though it's an immensely bad sign when your doorkeeper is loosing their shit. They are (or should be, unless something has gone horribly wrong) chosen for the fact they are completely unflappable. The first time one of them loses their shit and treats a constituent the way that is described here the congressman has a serious issue back home.
Eh, my guess would be that it's an intern rather than a zen master secretary.
Doesn't really matter who it is, if the receptionist is losing their shit either things are going horribly wrong or the place is run idiotically.
a few hundred dollars cause you elected not to use birth control
Birth control can fail....
My nigh-infertile wife was on the pill and we still got pregnant.
So... yeah.
Alright, your call ElJeffe:
Reagan/Berlin Wall Analogies or Jackie Robinson/MLB Colour Barrier Analogies or Valentina Tereshkova/First Women in Space Analogies or Obama/Presidency Colour Barrier Analogies, etc?
Basically, what historical figure do you imagine your sperm being?
Basically, what historical figure do you imagine your sperm being?
Me? Ted Bundy.
Was that the one where Al visited his cousin the shoemaker? Yeah, that was a good episode.
This was sarcasm.
emnmnme on
0
Options
GoslingLooking Up Soccer In Mongolia Right Now, ProbablyWatertown, WIRegistered Userregular
edited November 2009
Oh wow. The secretary is usually going to be the first voice the constituents hear over the phone. The secretary flips her shit and it can cost her boss votes in a hurry.
That kind of reaction, I'm guessing the secretary had spent half the day flipping more shit than a...
...a...
...who flips shit for a living? Is that a thing?
Gosling on
I have a new soccer blog The Minnow Tank. Reading it psychically kicks Sepp Blatter in the bean bag.
Captain "I don't know shit about reproduction but I still somehow feel qualified to run my fool mouth off" above should also bear in mind that Stupak will have a disproportionately evil effect on wanted pregnancies that go bad late in the game. That's not a couple hundred to fix, that can be anything from several thousand up to an emergency hysterectomy and/or an extended stay in an ICU. Forcing someone to wait for insurance coverage until their uterus goes septic (its gotta be "life-threatening", remember!) can't really be described as anything but evil.
Captain "I don't know shit about reproduction but I still somehow feel qualified to run my fool mouth off" above should also bear in mind that Stupak will have a disproportionately evil effect on wanted pregnancies that go bad late in the game. That's not a couple hundred to fix, that can be anything from several thousand up to an emergency hysterectomy and/or an extended stay in an ICU. Forcing someone to wait for insurance coverage until their uterus goes septic (its gotta be "life-threatening", remember!) can't really be described as anything but evil.
If humoring the assholes get enough votes to set up at least some form of affordable government health care, then it's more than worth it. We can always go back later and fix up problems with the particulars of the abortion language a few years later, but the chance to pass this kind of legislation only comes about once in a generation. With the coverage this issue is getting, sometimes I wonder if people really understand how much they have to gain from a public health plan.
Oh wow. The secretary is usually going to be the first voice the constituents hear over the phone. The secretary flips her shit and it can cost her boss votes in a hurry.
That kind of reaction, I'm guessing the secretary had spent half the day flipping more shit than a...
Captain "I don't know shit about reproduction but I still somehow feel qualified to run my fool mouth off" above should also bear in mind that Stupak will have a disproportionately evil effect on wanted pregnancies that go bad late in the game. That's not a couple hundred to fix, that can be anything from several thousand up to an emergency hysterectomy and/or an extended stay in an ICU. Forcing someone to wait for insurance coverage until their uterus goes septic (its gotta be "life-threatening", remember!) can't really be described as anything but evil.
If humoring the assholes get enough votes to set up at least some form of affordable government health care, then it's more than worth it. We can always go back later and fix up problems with the particulars of the abortion language a few years later, but the chance to pass this kind of legislation only comes about once in a generation. With the coverage this issue is getting, sometimes I wonder if people really understand how much they have to gain from a public health plan.
Really, no, you're just making me angry here with the "I'm happy to sacrifice this thing that I have no use for, and really what are women for except suffering" nonsense. Pragmatism aside (and here's hoping the senate develop a clue at least), that kind of mindset should not exist. Ever. You shouldn't have to choose between your healthcare and someone else's, that's the whole point of this bill practically.
I mean really, how many cases of women going through horrific trauma are you ok with if it saves you a few bucks a year? One, ten, a hundred? There's a lot more complicated, tragic pregnancies than that every year in the US, I guarantee you.
I'm wondering whether this is standing still, or a step back for the groups affected.
EDIT: To expand a little, is it the case that those that would be covered by the public option are already without effective insurance, thus meaning that for the specific situation where there is an unwanted pregnancy and no money for an abortion they're equally fucked in either situation? Or are we looking at a situation where people who currently have effective insurance that covers abortion will have the opportunity to move onto the public plan, thus essentially forcing women to use more expensive private insurance if they want reasonable cover?
Either way, creating a public insurance plan with a "fuck women" clause is A Bad Thing, I'm just wondering how bad.
Captain "I don't know shit about reproduction but I still somehow feel qualified to run my fool mouth off" above should also bear in mind that Stupak will have a disproportionately evil effect on wanted pregnancies that go bad late in the game. That's not a couple hundred to fix, that can be anything from several thousand up to an emergency hysterectomy and/or an extended stay in an ICU. Forcing someone to wait for insurance coverage until their uterus goes septic (its gotta be "life-threatening", remember!) can't really be described as anything but evil.
If humoring the assholes get enough votes to set up at least some form of affordable government health care, then it's more than worth it. We can always go back later and fix up problems with the particulars of the abortion language a few years later, but the chance to pass this kind of legislation only comes about once in a generation. With the coverage this issue is getting, sometimes I wonder if people really understand how much they have to gain from a public health plan.
Really, no, you're just making me angry here with the "I'm happy to sacrifice this thing that I have no use for, and really what are women for except suffering" nonsense. Pragmatism aside (and here's hoping the senate develop a clue at least), that kind of mindset should not exist. Ever. You shouldn't have to choose between your healthcare and someone else's, that's the whole point of this bill practically.
I mean really, how many cases of women going through horrific trauma are you ok with if it saves you a few bucks a year? One, ten, a hundred? There's a lot more complicated, tragic pregnancies than that every year in the US, I guarantee you.
The point is that this legislation is going to save thousands of lives by giving the people who need to access to basic medical care. If this legislation dies because of abortion activitists, you're effectively condemning thousands of people to death and more to perpetual poverty. Maybe I'm just a giant asshole, but to me passing legislation that will save lives and provide a stable framework for American health care (of which female reproductive rights will be a part of) is yes, well worth the price of putting some limits on abortion for a few years.
Oh wow. The secretary is usually going to be the first voice the constituents hear over the phone. The secretary flips her shit and it can cost her boss votes in a hurry.
That kind of reaction, I'm guessing the secretary had spent half the day flipping more shit than a...
Captain "I don't know shit about reproduction but I still somehow feel qualified to run my fool mouth off" above should also bear in mind that Stupak will have a disproportionately evil effect on wanted pregnancies that go bad late in the game. That's not a couple hundred to fix, that can be anything from several thousand up to an emergency hysterectomy and/or an extended stay in an ICU. Forcing someone to wait for insurance coverage until their uterus goes septic (its gotta be "life-threatening", remember!) can't really be described as anything but evil.
If humoring the assholes get enough votes to set up at least some form of affordable government health care, then it's more than worth it. We can always go back later and fix up problems with the particulars of the abortion language a few years later, but the chance to pass this kind of legislation only comes about once in a generation. With the coverage this issue is getting, sometimes I wonder if people really understand how much they have to gain from a public health plan.
Really, no, you're just making me angry here with the "I'm happy to sacrifice this thing that I have no use for, and really what are women for except suffering" nonsense. Pragmatism aside (and here's hoping the senate develop a clue at least), that kind of mindset should not exist. Ever. You shouldn't have to choose between your healthcare and someone else's, that's the whole point of this bill practically.
I mean really, how many cases of women going through horrific trauma are you ok with if it saves you a few bucks a year? One, ten, a hundred? There's a lot more complicated, tragic pregnancies than that every year in the US, I guarantee you.
The point is that this legislation is going to save thousands of lives by giving the people who need to access to basic medical care. If this legislation dies because of abortion activitists, you're effectively condemning thousands of people to death and more to perpetual poverty. Maybe I'm just a giant asshole, but to me passing legislation that will save lives and provide a stable framework for American health care (of which female reproductive rights will be a part of) is yes, well worth the price of putting some limits on abortion for a few years.
Its not going to die because of people who care about women's health, and the fact that you're even presenting that as the only possible alternative to passing the bill as-is is really fucking infuriating. Stop with the false dichotomy.
I'm wondering whether this is standing still, or a step back for the groups affected.
EDIT: To expand a little, is it the case that those that would be covered by the public option are already without effective insurance, thus meaning that for the specific situation where there is an unwanted pregnancy and no money for an abortion they're equally fucked in either situation? Or are we looking at a situation where people who currently have effective insurance that covers abortion will have the opportunity to move onto the public plan, thus essentially forcing women to use more expensive private insurance if they want reasonable cover?
Either way, creating a public insurance plan with a "fuck women" clause is A Bad Thing, I'm just wondering how bad.
About half the insurance plans in the US at present already cover it (although women are understandably leery about making a claim since their employer would find out), and Stupak will make that effectively illegal (no plans involved with the exchange program could cover it, which effectively means all of them). Its basically a massive extension of Hyde into a realm it wasn't intended to go to. So, Bad Enough.
And in an environment where a lot of insurers have been slowly rolling back coverage for annoyingly expensive things like the pill and pap smears, its a much more worrying problem - part of a trend away from covering female reproductive health properly or at all.
I'm wondering whether this is standing still, or a step back for the groups affected.
EDIT: To expand a little, is it the case that those that would be covered by the public option are already without effective insurance, thus meaning that for the specific situation where there is an unwanted pregnancy and no money for an abortion they're equally fucked in either situation? Or are we looking at a situation where people who currently have effective insurance that covers abortion will have the opportunity to move onto the public plan, thus essentially forcing women to use more expensive private insurance if they want reasonable cover?
Either way, creating a public insurance plan with a "fuck women" clause is A Bad Thing, I'm just wondering how bad.
About half the insurance plans in the US at present already cover it (although women are understandably leery about making a claim since their employer would find out), and Stupak will make that effectively illegal (no plans involved with the exchange program could cover it, which effectively means all of them). Its basically a massive extension of Hyde into a realm it wasn't intended to go to. So, Bad Enough.
And in an environment where a lot of insurers have been slowly rolling back coverage for annoyingly expensive things like the pill and pap smears, its a much more worrying problem - part of a trend away from covering female reproductive health properly or at all.
It's simply unacceptable for anyone who believes that women should be afforded more legal status than an incubator.
So I stopped following this out of the depression induced by how it was going but watching Colbert it says it was passed? What happened? What was the result?
So I stopped following this out of the depression induced by how it was going but watching Colbert it says it was passed? What happened? What was the result?
It boils down to Public Option in the House.
Oh! Women would be, nationally, second-class citizens. This is instead of only being second-class citizens in the Bible-belt and South.
So I stopped following this out of the depression induced by how it was going but watching Colbert it says it was passed? What happened? What was the result?
So I stopped following this out of the depression induced by how it was going but watching Colbert it says it was passed? What happened? What was the result?
Are people still arguing against government health care?
Cause I've had some great fucking experience with American government health care recently and I'm not sure what the problem is.
I, on the other hand, have had some terrible experiences with American government health care...both on the uniformed and VA side.
Just sayin'.
Like, a "mildly debilitating for the rest of your life" experience, for one.
And based on my experience with the private system, these would not have happened there.
And yet, I still favor a public option because I've also experienced the joy of not being able to afford any access to health care (other than the ER) and that sucked more.
I'm wondering whether this is standing still, or a step back for the groups affected.
EDIT: To expand a little, is it the case that those that would be covered by the public option are already without effective insurance, thus meaning that for the specific situation where there is an unwanted pregnancy and no money for an abortion they're equally fucked in either situation? Or are we looking at a situation where people who currently have effective insurance that covers abortion will have the opportunity to move onto the public plan, thus essentially forcing women to use more expensive private insurance if they want reasonable cover?
Either way, creating a public insurance plan with a "fuck women" clause is A Bad Thing, I'm just wondering how bad.
About half the insurance plans in the US at present already cover it (although women are understandably leery about making a claim since their employer would find out), and Stupak will make that effectively illegal (no plans involved with the exchange program could cover it, which effectively means all of them). Its basically a massive extension of Hyde into a realm it wasn't intended to go to. So, Bad Enough.
And in an environment where a lot of insurers have been slowly rolling back coverage for annoyingly expensive things like the pill and pap smears, its a much more worrying problem - part of a trend away from covering female reproductive health properly or at all.
I didn't know they were rolling back on things like the pill and pap smears. That's pretty dirty on the insurers part, considering it's something that should be provided to women. It kinda reminds me of how my girlfriend exclaims "why the fuck aren't these offered for free" every time she goes to the tampon isle. Kinda sucks to have to buy a product because of your biology when the alternative is...well...
SkyGheNe on
0
Options
Deebaseron my way to work in a suit and a tieAhhhh...come on fucking guyRegistered Userregular
I'm wondering whether this is standing still, or a step back for the groups affected.
EDIT: To expand a little, is it the case that those that would be covered by the public option are already without effective insurance, thus meaning that for the specific situation where there is an unwanted pregnancy and no money for an abortion they're equally fucked in either situation? Or are we looking at a situation where people who currently have effective insurance that covers abortion will have the opportunity to move onto the public plan, thus essentially forcing women to use more expensive private insurance if they want reasonable cover?
Either way, creating a public insurance plan with a "fuck women" clause is A Bad Thing, I'm just wondering how bad.
About half the insurance plans in the US at present already cover it (although women are understandably leery about making a claim since their employer would find out), and Stupak will make that effectively illegal (no plans involved with the exchange program could cover it, which effectively means all of them). Its basically a massive extension of Hyde into a realm it wasn't intended to go to. So, Bad Enough.
And in an environment where a lot of insurers have been slowly rolling back coverage for annoyingly expensive things like the pill and pap smears, its a much more worrying problem - part of a trend away from covering female reproductive health properly or at all.
This is false. Your insurer is prohibited from telling your employer about your medical conditions. Even in cases where employers choose to self-insure, they use a third party administrator that is similarly restricted.
Why can't we just be satisfied with the damn bill?
Christ
If you are so god damn poor you can't afford 350 bucks for an abortion then don't fucking have sex
And even if you DO get preggers somehow, you will probably NOT die from having to pay for a damn abortion. No one is that fucking poor.
If people really feel so strongly about this then just scrap the entire fucking thing and start over, hell, maybe we'll get an even shittier bill the next time around.
Why can't we just be satisfied with the damn bill?
Christ
If you are so god damn poor you can't afford 350 bucks for an abortion then don't fucking have sex
And even if you DO get preggers somehow, you will probably NOT die from having to pay for a damn abortion. No one is that fucking poor.
If people really feel so strongly about this then just scrap the entire fucking thing and start over, hell, maybe we'll get an even shittier bill the next time around.
I understand that you are exacerbated, but people are that poor, and $350 isn't chump change to a lot of people. If it was, more people would have playstation 3s. You're not going to stop people from having sex in the same way that you aren't going to stop people from drinking alcohol, so it's about setting up a support system to give people the choice as to how to manage their bodies and the consequence of their actions.
If you're going to put up an argument like that about abortion, we potentially could do the same thing for lung cancer. If you can't afford the cancer treatments, then don't smoke.
SkyGheNe on
0
Options
Deebaseron my way to work in a suit and a tieAhhhh...come on fucking guyRegistered Userregular
I'm wondering whether this is standing still, or a step back for the groups affected.
EDIT: To expand a little, is it the case that those that would be covered by the public option are already without effective insurance, thus meaning that for the specific situation where there is an unwanted pregnancy and no money for an abortion they're equally fucked in either situation? Or are we looking at a situation where people who currently have effective insurance that covers abortion will have the opportunity to move onto the public plan, thus essentially forcing women to use more expensive private insurance if they want reasonable cover?
Either way, creating a public insurance plan with a "fuck women" clause is A Bad Thing, I'm just wondering how bad.
It passed in the house with a 'no federal funds for killing teh babies!' amendment very similar to the Hyde amendment which prevents employees of the federal government from getting coverage for abortions.
This should not be a poison pill. Fuck it. I'll write a check for $1000 to planned parenthood if this passes the Senate and survives conference.
We need Health Insurance reform now. We cannot allow ourselves to get hung up on the one MMRRGGLLLGRRRGLLL procedure that isn't being covered for a lot of people right now anyway.
Posts
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/abc-news-exclusive-obama-jobs-health-care-ft/story?id=9033559
Actually, it was the Other One that was unplanned. (It's okay, though - we wanted a second one at some point, and he's totally rad.)
This makes me happy.
It's just too bad the Senator himself doesn't have to deal with near as much grief as the random duders who work for him.
Representative.
Someone (possibly way back in this thread) referred to the Senate as the place where good ideas go to die. That sounds about right.
PSN/Steam/NNID: SyphonBlue | BNet: SyphonBlue#1126
Optional subtitle: "I am her single-payer."
So, what is the current status? In the Senate? Has the public option been stripped out, or still in? What's the chance of this passing in current form? When are they expected to vote?
That about covers it...
Ask and you shall receive.
The House has passed a bill with an unpleasant abortion amendment (that is likely to continue to cause problems), a public option that's pretty good but needs to negotiate it's own rates, and decent funding. The Senate still is on track to include an equivalent public option to the House, with the addition of some mechanism for states to decide to opt out of offering the plan in their state, though a few people are making noises about scuttling the whole thing on that point including Captain Asshat, Liebermann.
Debate continues in the Senate, with a CBO scoring of the senate bill expected late this week and a vote to bring it to the floor (which needs 60 votes and should be easy enough to clear) due MAYBE early next week. Then likely nothing for Veterans day as everyone goes home, a few weeks of "debate", and well see if the Senate can manage to get it's shit together and vote for it's bill by year end.
Cause I've had some great fucking experience with American government health care recently and I'm not sure what the problem is.
Eh, my guess would be that it's an intern rather than a zen master secretary.
Doesn't really matter who it is, if the receptionist is losing their shit either things are going horribly wrong or the place is run idiotically.
Alright, your call ElJeffe:
Reagan/Berlin Wall Analogies or Jackie Robinson/MLB Colour Barrier Analogies or Valentina Tereshkova/First Women in Space Analogies or Obama/Presidency Colour Barrier Analogies, etc?
Basically, what historical figure do you imagine your sperm being?
Me? Ted Bundy.
Was that the one where Al visited his cousin the shoemaker? Yeah, that was a good episode.
That kind of reaction, I'm guessing the secretary had spent half the day flipping more shit than a...
...a...
...who flips shit for a living? Is that a thing?
If humoring the assholes get enough votes to set up at least some form of affordable government health care, then it's more than worth it. We can always go back later and fix up problems with the particulars of the abortion language a few years later, but the chance to pass this kind of legislation only comes about once in a generation. With the coverage this issue is getting, sometimes I wonder if people really understand how much they have to gain from a public health plan.
"I'm lovin' it"
"Have it your way"
Any of that ringing a bell?
Really, no, you're just making me angry here with the "I'm happy to sacrifice this thing that I have no use for, and really what are women for except suffering" nonsense. Pragmatism aside (and here's hoping the senate develop a clue at least), that kind of mindset should not exist. Ever. You shouldn't have to choose between your healthcare and someone else's, that's the whole point of this bill practically.
I mean really, how many cases of women going through horrific trauma are you ok with if it saves you a few bucks a year? One, ten, a hundred? There's a lot more complicated, tragic pregnancies than that every year in the US, I guarantee you.
I'm wondering whether this is standing still, or a step back for the groups affected.
EDIT: To expand a little, is it the case that those that would be covered by the public option are already without effective insurance, thus meaning that for the specific situation where there is an unwanted pregnancy and no money for an abortion they're equally fucked in either situation? Or are we looking at a situation where people who currently have effective insurance that covers abortion will have the opportunity to move onto the public plan, thus essentially forcing women to use more expensive private insurance if they want reasonable cover?
Either way, creating a public insurance plan with a "fuck women" clause is A Bad Thing, I'm just wondering how bad.
The point is that this legislation is going to save thousands of lives by giving the people who need to access to basic medical care. If this legislation dies because of abortion activitists, you're effectively condemning thousands of people to death and more to perpetual poverty. Maybe I'm just a giant asshole, but to me passing legislation that will save lives and provide a stable framework for American health care (of which female reproductive rights will be a part of) is yes, well worth the price of putting some limits on abortion for a few years.
A stablehand?
Its not going to die because of people who care about women's health, and the fact that you're even presenting that as the only possible alternative to passing the bill as-is is really fucking infuriating. Stop with the false dichotomy.
About half the insurance plans in the US at present already cover it (although women are understandably leery about making a claim since their employer would find out), and Stupak will make that effectively illegal (no plans involved with the exchange program could cover it, which effectively means all of them). Its basically a massive extension of Hyde into a realm it wasn't intended to go to. So, Bad Enough.
And in an environment where a lot of insurers have been slowly rolling back coverage for annoyingly expensive things like the pill and pap smears, its a much more worrying problem - part of a trend away from covering female reproductive health properly or at all.
It's simply unacceptable for anyone who believes that women should be afforded more legal status than an incubator.
It boils down to Public Option in the House.
Oh! Women would be, nationally, second-class citizens. This is instead of only being second-class citizens in the Bible-belt and South.
Is that a good thing? The good public option?
Depends on your stance.
I, on the other hand, have had some terrible experiences with American government health care...both on the uniformed and VA side.
Just sayin'.
Like, a "mildly debilitating for the rest of your life" experience, for one.
And based on my experience with the private system, these would not have happened there.
And yet, I still favor a public option because I've also experienced the joy of not being able to afford any access to health care (other than the ER) and that sucked more.
I didn't know they were rolling back on things like the pill and pap smears. That's pretty dirty on the insurers part, considering it's something that should be provided to women. It kinda reminds me of how my girlfriend exclaims "why the fuck aren't these offered for free" every time she goes to the tampon isle. Kinda sucks to have to buy a product because of your biology when the alternative is...well...
This is false. Your insurer is prohibited from telling your employer about your medical conditions. Even in cases where employers choose to self-insure, they use a third party administrator that is similarly restricted.
Christ
If you are so god damn poor you can't afford 350 bucks for an abortion then don't fucking have sex
And even if you DO get preggers somehow, you will probably NOT die from having to pay for a damn abortion. No one is that fucking poor.
If people really feel so strongly about this then just scrap the entire fucking thing and start over, hell, maybe we'll get an even shittier bill the next time around.
I understand that you are exacerbated, but people are that poor, and $350 isn't chump change to a lot of people. If it was, more people would have playstation 3s. You're not going to stop people from having sex in the same way that you aren't going to stop people from drinking alcohol, so it's about setting up a support system to give people the choice as to how to manage their bodies and the consequence of their actions.
If you're going to put up an argument like that about abortion, we potentially could do the same thing for lung cancer. If you can't afford the cancer treatments, then don't smoke.
It passed in the house with a 'no federal funds for killing teh babies!' amendment very similar to the Hyde amendment which prevents employees of the federal government from getting coverage for abortions.
This should not be a poison pill. Fuck it. I'll write a check for $1000 to planned parenthood if this passes the Senate and survives conference.
We need Health Insurance reform now. We cannot allow ourselves to get hung up on the one MMRRGGLLLGRRRGLLL procedure that isn't being covered for a lot of people right now anyway.