Discussion for article #234640
No mention of reversible vasectomies for men on Medicaid? One might think that the Rep. is a misogynist angry white male.
14 Likes
“surgically implanted contraceptive device,” ??? (It’s a simple office procedure-- not a ‘surgical’ procedure . Republicans seem to need to inject fear into everything)
…or women could just swallow the damned things along with a teeny tiny camera.
Planned ParentHood!?? what a concept!
5 Likes
“contraceptive incentive”
Yeah it’s called Republican men - the ultimate incentive for birth control.
12 Likes
I actually think this is a pretty good idea, but for very different reasons than Hammer. It would allow poor moms to have access to more effective forms of birth control and they could do so for free. I’m sure there are plenty of women who’d much rather have an IUD than other far less expensive, less effective methods. Plus, there are a lot of women who simply can’t take the pill because of the side effects. At the end of the day, imo, anything that expands women’s access to birth control is ultimately a good thing.
ETA: Oh, and how hilarious is it that this guy is so far right that he’s actually advocating for left wing legislation.
11 Likes
Holy Hobby Lobby! Government paying for contraceptives, or encouraging/requiring employers to do so? Expect to see this Rep walk back his suggestion soon.
17 Likes
So far gone that he’s come full circle and now sounds perfectly reasonable.
6 Likes
Wait…so when the Democrats wanted the government to pay for women’s contraceptives it was “the anti-Christ has arisen and we must do whatever we can to stop this from happening!”
But when put in terms of saving taxpayer dollars instead of making life more comfortable for women suddenly the GOP is all for it.
Bunch of whiny hypocrites.
13 Likes
Yes, exactly re your ETA: As I read this, my mouth was agape–surely he knows of the brouhaha over Obamacare’s covering contraceptives deemed by some to be so-called abortefacients (sp?), of which IUDs would certainly qualify in such people’s eyes.
This is beginning-of-life “Death Panel” talk, is what this is.
3 Likes
I agree. I mean, whenever a Republican proposes an idea that makes sense (even if for spurious reasons), it’s a good idea to double and triple check for loopholes and poison pills - yes, if it’s a gift horse from a Republican, you damn well better look in its mouth - but, on the face of it, this seems like it could help a number of poor women who’d like the option of a less onerous contraceptive than abstinence or the pill.
Edited to Add: From a policy perspective, though, I do think it would be better to offer LTRC (Long Term Reversible Contraceptives) to all pre-menopausal women on Medicaid - not just single mothers.
6 Likes
How 'bout we simply cover all contraceptives? No need to probe marital status, # of children, etc. Repubs can’t seem to do the right thing without turning into intrusive control freaks!
13 Likes
The republican soft underbelly… their wallet. While I agree we ought to be looking this gift horse in the mouth this may be the line of argument for other public investments in women’s health care.
2 Likes
Poor little fella can’t make up his mind whether he wants the poor* to be universally sterilized or to force them all to have babies as much as possible to saddle them with economic catastrophe that will make sure they stay in their place.
- Keep in mind that, for the GOP/Teatrolls, “poor” and “minority” are synonymous when speaking in the context of “entitlements”.
8 Likes
A free IUD? Fine, but not exactly an ‘incentive.’ How about giving every female between 13 and 21 a thousand dollars every year they they remain childless?
1 Like
I was thinking the same thing as I read this seeing it from both sides. His is “control of women” ours is affordable, accessible “choice” for women.
7 Likes
That seems to me to be the next logical step. Instead of “let’s keep em from having more babies”, it’ll be “let’s keep em from having that first baby.”
5 Likes
This is a good idea. The problem is that both middle-class women and poor women are equally likely to have sex. Rich women too. But the poor women cannot afford birth control, and have unwanted kids.
The reflexive “Republican ideas suck” make a lot of Democrats look, act, and be stupid. Don’t be stupid. Ask “Is the idea good?”, not “Republican ideas suck”.
Why does that matter? His idea would give willing recipients control over their own fertility. That’s a good thing, right? They don’t have to accept, right?
1 Like
Meinherr would make a good Brownshirt.
Probably more likely that for men on Medicaid he would like NON-reversible vasectomies.
Interesting though – aren’t these the same people that don’t like that the ACA pays for contraception? Now they want to pay for it AND give a bonus to poor women so they won’t have children. Go figure…
1 Like