• Jezebel
  • celebrity
  • sex
  • fashion
  • Profile logout login

#healthnuts#wwwaollatinoblogcom#2008#03#23#quelastimahugosequedaeneltri

Jezebel

Share Cancel
   
Upload an image | Add an image URL
×

logging in
  • FAQ. Include # before tag:
  • #tips,
  • #snapjudgment,
  • #groupthink,
  • etc.

New York, 8:21 PM
Tue Dec 8
71 posts in the last 24 hours

Tip your editors:

Editor-in-Chief:
Anna Holmes
| Twitter

Deputy Editor:
Dodai Stewart
| Twitter

Senior Contributing Editor:
Tracie Egan
| Twitter

Contributing Editors:
Anna North
| Twitter
Sadie Stein
| Twitter

Reporter:
Irin Carmon
| Twitter

Editorial Assistant:
Margaret Hartmann
| Twitter

Contributors:
Rich Juzwiak
Email | Twitter
Latoya Peterson
Email
Jenna Sauers

Lizzie Skurnick

Interns:
Katy Kelleher
Twitter


Weekends/Commenter Moderator:
Hortense
| Twitter

SUBSCRIBE TO Jezebel RSS

New: Breaking news and daily top stories via email
1770 Subscribers
Jezebel
  • Your version of Internet Explorer is not supported. Please upgrade to the most recent version in order to view comments.
    Dsmvwl  Admin  Promote to frontpage Approve user Ban user ×
    Image of Lymed Lymed
    12/07/09

    In reply to "Poisoned Pills:" What IHS Tells Us About Health Care, The Public Option & Abortion
    If we were starting from the beginning of this legislative process, the concept of nonprofit plans could work. But there would need to be major controls to make sure we didn't end up with non-profits that are based on a for-profit model. There would also need to be strict rules not only requiring the non-profits to maintain a sufficient amount of reserves but also limiting the amount of reserves. So that if reserves increase above a certain amount, premiums go down or benefits increase.
     Reply
    Lymed was starred Lymed was unstarred
    Image of BearDownCBears BearDownCBears
    12/07/09

    In reply to "Poisoned Pills:" What IHS Tells Us About Health Care, The Public Option & Abortion
    Vitter's Plan in 3 simple steps:

    -Freedom to wear the same diaper across state lines

    -Stop subsidizing employer-supplied heiney powder

    -Turd reform (better not be afraid to get our hands dirty)
     Reply
    Edited by BearDownCBears at 12/07/09 10:44 AM BearDownCBears was starred BearDownCBears was unstarred
    Image of morninggloria morninggloria
    12/07/09

    In reply to "Poisoned Pills:" What IHS Tells Us About Health Care, The Public Option & Abortion
    So... health care reform may be aborted due to abortion.
     Reply
    morninggloria was starred morninggloria was unstarred
    Image of WashingMyHair WashingMyHair
    12/07/09

    In reply to "Poisoned Pills:" What IHS Tells Us About Health Care, The Public Option & Abortion
    Good thing Dems have a majority. Oh, wait...
     Reply
    WashingMyHair was starred WashingMyHair was unstarred
    Image of funzette funzette
    12/07/09

    In reply to "Poisoned Pills:" What IHS Tells Us About Health Care, The Public Option & Abortion
    Uncle Sam's House

    "Hello?"

    Turns to wife: "It’s Barack! He took out public health insurance! Good for you, son! But in this country, it’s probably too expensive to take out public health insurance…"

    Barack: "Sam, the Canadians pay less than you and they have public insurance… "

    (Mrs. Sam holds up a sign that says, "medical?")

    Uncle Sam: "And you don't need a medical to be insured?"

    Barack: "No! Don't believe what they tell you about death panels either. You'll be fine as long as the wife doesn't need an abortion!"
     Reply
    funzette was starred funzette was unstarred
    Image of curiousgeorgiana curiousgeorgiana
    12/07/09

    In reply to "Poisoned Pills:" What IHS Tells Us About Health Care, The Public Option & Abortion
    "A government-run insurance program, or "public option," is one of the bill's most contentious issues."

    This sentence pretty much sums up my frustration with the Democratic party. I can't believe the inclusion of a public option is an issue at all. The scope and breadth of a public option--sure. Its mere existence? Not up for debate.
     Reply
    curiousgeorgiana was starred curiousgeorgiana was unstarred
    Image of BearDownCBears BearDownCBears
    12/07/09

    @curiousgeorgiana: Wait until we go after the delivery system. It'll be chaos. I mean, insurance companies make a lot of money, but where we really outstrip other countries in terms of medical spending is in the doctor's office. I don't believe Orszag when he says the cost controls in the senate bill are sufficient. we'll eventually have to go after doctor pay, hospital budgets, and people's livelihoods (or it will be marketed that way). This is a big reason why they didn't try for single payer.
     Reply
    BearDownCBears was starred BearDownCBears was unstarred
    Image of Spaghetti Cat Spaghetti Cat
    12/07/09

    @BearDownCBears: Ok- so why not impose federal cost controls on all procedures across the board? An MRI, if you get here, there or someplace else, costs $1,000 no matter what. Or whatever number they pick. A liver transplant is $10,000, no matter what, no matter where. Why not? Make it reasonable so people can still make a living, without imposing insanely high prices.

    I mean- why not just change the fucking game?
     Reply
    BearDownCBears promoted this comment Spaghetti Cat was starred Spaghetti Cat was unstarred
    Image of BearDownCBears BearDownCBears
    12/07/09

    @Spaghetti Cat: It's easy for us to tappy-type on our computers and say that. It not so easy for politicians to tell their constituents in the medical field to swallow a big pay cut and shut the fuck up. There are competing interests in this thing that aren't all just big scary corporations, but the way different people earn their paycheck, you know? Even if they're worth the sacrifice in the long run for the greater good, they'll still voice their disapproval at the voting booth.
     Reply
    BearDownCBears was starred BearDownCBears was unstarred
    Image of Spaghetti Cat Spaghetti Cat
    12/07/09

    @BearDownCBears: True, true. And don't get me wrong- I feel for those doctors, nurses and other health care providers who may be staring just such a change in the face, depending on how this whole thing shakes out.

    But here's where you've outed me as a fierce critic of our current form of capitalism. I'm mostly on board with the conceit that certain professions are "worth more" than others: see brain surgeon vs. fry cook. But how much more? That's another question entirely.

    I'm of the opinion that we all could learn to get along on a little less, doctors, etc included. The root of the problem runs deep- our concept of what "quality of life" means; our ideas of earning power and potential, and how that should be tied to the market; the idea that we "deserve" what we work for and that others who don't work as hard or who work in different professions "deserve" less; etc etc etc.

    Perhaps if we lived in a society where the sun didn't rise and set on the almighty dollar, these concerns would be easier to address. As it is, fucking money is the hangup for sooooo many things that need taking care of, and I'd really like to think at some point we will evolve far enough to start seeing things in a bit of a different light.

    Let's start with this: what are the most basic, inalienable rights a human being should expect after being spat out on this earth? Now let's figure out a way to provide those to everyone, everywhere, and THEN address the rest of this shit.

    Sadly, I think we're far too far along to go back to square 1... but the more this and other issues that can and do hinge on money and the economy become a problem, that's just what we may have to do.
     Reply
    Spaghetti Cat was starred Spaghetti Cat was unstarred
    Image of HannahBethD HannahBethD
    12/07/09

    In reply to "Poisoned Pills:" What IHS Tells Us About Health Care, The Public Option & Abortion
    I did a quick google search for what groups are supporting reproductive rights for indigenous women and found this: [www.nativeshop.org]
     Reply
    HannahBethD was starred HannahBethD was unstarred
    Image of AndPreciousLittleofThat AndPreciousLittleofThat
    12/03/09

    In reply to Senators Protect Mammograms, Screening Tests for Women
    Great news! But how about we stick it to them where it really hurts?

    We need to tack on a rider defunding hair plugs and Viagra, which (as my wife points out with righteous fury) are currently both covered by most major insurers and can be paid for using flexible spending money.

    Not currently covered by flexible spending: tampons.
     Reply
    AndPreciousLittleofThat was starred AndPreciousLittleofThat was unstarred
    Image of lermanzo lermanzo
    12/03/09

    @AndPreciousLittleofThat: and this, kids, is what is wrong with the american health care system. optional things to boost men's egos are more likely to be funded than things that are necessary for women.

    actually. maybe we should look into having a bleed-in.
     Reply
    lermanzo was starred lermanzo was unstarred
    Image of deeemer deeemer
    12/03/09

    @AndPreciousLittleofThat: Or IUDs. Or lo-dose birth control pills.
     Reply
    deeemer was starred deeemer was unstarred
    Image of morninggloria morninggloria
    12/03/09

    In reply to Senators Protect Mammograms, Screening Tests for Women
    I'm going to get so many fucking bone density screenings that it's going to bankrupt the entire system!
     Reply
    morninggloria was starred morninggloria was unstarred
    Image of CurtCole CurtCole
    12/03/09

    @morninggloria: I'm sorry, would you mind calcifying that statement?
     Reply
    Edited by CurtCole at 12/03/09 1:59 PM CurtCole was starred CurtCole was unstarred
    Image of PilgrimSoul PilgrimSoul
    12/03/09

    In reply to Senators Protect Mammograms, Screening Tests for Women
    A bunch of old dudes were persuaded to support the continued maintenance of tits while still threatening to filibuster if the bill doesn't ACTUALLY limit women's personal sovereignty? Colour me shocked.

    This goes exactly to Ehrenreich's issue yesterday. Now that the dudes have made their gesture to women via the pink ribbon brigade, they can justify their misogyny to themselves. Awful.
     Reply
    PilgrimSoul was starred PilgrimSoul was unstarred
    Image of SarahMC SarahMC
    12/03/09

    @PilgrimSoul: Brillz.
     Reply
    SarahMC was starred SarahMC was unstarred
    Image of Hooplehead Hooplehead
    12/03/09

    @PilgrimSoul: Well you know, boobs come in handy for breast-feeding, I hear. And sexytimes. But we don't want the wimmenz to get carried away and think they can actually conduct their own lives as they see fit or have control over their own health. That would be going overboard.
     Reply
    Hooplehead was starred Hooplehead was unstarred
    Image of pantsless economist...access RESTORED pantsless economist...access RESTORED
    12/03/09

    In reply to Senators Protect Mammograms, Screening Tests for Women
    Let's just hope insurance companies aren't allowed to capriciously and arbitrarily define "preventative."
     Reply
    pantsless economist...access RESTORED was starred pantsless economist...access RESTORED was unstarred
    Image of CurtCole CurtCole
    12/03/09

    @pantsless economist...access RESTORED: I wouldn't be surprised if the insurance companies turned this into a topicality debate, debating the amendment word by word.
     Reply
    Edited by CurtCole at 12/03/09 1:41 PM CurtCole was starred CurtCole was unstarred
    Image of Penny Penny
    12/03/09

    In reply to Senators Protect Mammograms, Screening Tests for Women
    My boobs thank you.

    But my uterus is still being held hostage, so it's a little pissy.
     Reply
    Edited by Penny at 12/03/09 1:37 PM Penny was starred Penny was unstarred
    Image of lalaland13 lalaland13
    12/03/09

    @Penny: Yeah, I read a column in Newsweek about how pro-choicers shouldn't kill health care if Stupak stays in, and I wanted to throw something. I am tired of being a good little girl and compromising.
     Reply
    lalaland13 was starred lalaland13 was unstarred
    Image of Hooplehead Hooplehead
    12/03/09

    @lalaland13: This. Compromise is why we're losing. You don't see the GOP giving any ground, and we should stop ceding ours and fight them for it. I want O and Rahm out there twisting arms and shanking the opposition until they have the votes they need. I elected a Chicago politician, dammit, now I expect to reap the benefits.
     Reply
    Hooplehead was starred Hooplehead was unstarred
    Image of Ratinski Ratinski
    12/03/09

    @lalaland13: Because we aren't actually compromising. Compromise involves give and take on both sides; we give all the fucking time, and it's never time for us to take.
     Reply
    Ratinski was starred Ratinski was unstarred
    Image of lermanzo lermanzo
    12/03/09

    In reply to Senators Protect Mammograms, Screening Tests for Women
    now if only someone will propose an amendment to protect my IVIG that i need to live... i would be very happy.
     Reply
    lermanzo was starred lermanzo was unstarred
    Image of girlscoutcookie is back from hiatus girlscoutcookie is back from hiatus
    12/03/09

    In reply to Senators Protect Mammograms, Screening Tests for Women
    It has seemed lately that because of how little I understand about the health care debate, every time I see a headline that seems like a good thing it turns out to be a bad thing in disguise...

    ...but I can give this an unqualified YAY!, right?
     Reply
    girlscoutcookie is back from hiatus was starred girlscoutcookie is back from hiatus was unstarred
    Image of LucilleMcGillicuddy LucilleMcGillicuddy
    12/03/09

    @girlscoutcookie is back from hiatus: god, I hope so. I could use a yay.
     Reply
    LucilleMcGillicuddy was starred LucilleMcGillicuddy was unstarred
    Image of mordicai mordicai
    11/23/09

    In reply to Miles To Go Before They Sleep: Saturday Vote Is Just The Start
    I have no problem with Catholics lobbying-- I just think they should lose their tax exempt status & be treated the same as any other lobby group.

    This is also why I say it is JUST FINE to discriminate based on "creed." Creed is what people think, & if people think, for instance, that magic faeries sprinkle souldust on a sperm & an egg & that masturbation is murder-- or if they think that special invisible guys make souls appear when the sperm & the egg touch & that women should be kept in cages as incubators....well then that is a great reason not to vote for them.
     Reply
    stacyinbean promoted this comment mordicai was starred mordicai was unstarred
    Image of lizdexia lizdexia
    11/23/09

    @mordicai: This isn't how tax exemption works. Planned Parenthood is a 501(c)(3) and has a lobbying arm, and it hasn't compromised their tax exemption. Or Komen's. Or the United Way's. Either all not-for-profits that engage in lobbying should be taxed, or none should be. It can't just apply to organizations who lobby for things we don't like.
     Reply
    cate3710 promoted this comment lizdexia was starred lizdexia was unstarred
    Image of maude_flanders maude_flanders
    11/23/09

    @mordicai: You got it, and you said it all more civilly than I usually do when I feel compelled to comment.

    Cuomo got it right too. The Church is refusing to give Catholic pro-choice Dems Communion because they acknowledge that their voters may not comply with Church dogma (self-identified believers and non-believers alike.) Great! If they have a stake in politics, you're right, they should lose their tax exempt status.

    I would also add--it pisses me off even more when I think that American bishops were so quick to campaign for Bush and other "family values" Republicans (Catholic or otherwise) who also are fiscally conservative or support the war. For the most part, beyond abortion (and occasionally, immigration), the Church backs off (whether their perspective is a reasonable one or not). Why doesn't a social service budget deserve the same scrutiny as abortion (especially considering that anti-choice politicians seem to love having their cake and eating it too...screw the social costs of forcing a woman who doesn't want to a child to bear it and screw the endless benefits of sexual health awareness and family planning would have for the average citizen.) The bishops know why--their voice would be unwelcome, THAT'S why! People resent religion butting in then, so why does it fly here?! (Not that I can't think of a few answers that make me nauseous and angry. If only men could get knocked up...I wonder if they'd be labeled "baby-eaters" for protesting.)

    The Church is rewarded for supporting hypocrisy when we give them a special voice. The irony....if there's something in the Constitution or public law against lobbyists or PACS, is it as well-known as the principle of separation between church and state? Why, how the hell is it that they can can away with this? Because pollers tell us that Americans see this as a "Christian" nation, despite the fact that half of those who identify as such have no fucking idea what they're talking about?

    Dogma and "faith"--easily distinguishable from empathy, stewardship, or a number of other moral values that exist apart from institutionalized religion-- deserve no place in policymaking, PERIOD. It infuriates me. What entitles lobbying bishops or religious policymakers to impose the fables a select minority have accepted on everyone else? Fuck that.
     Reply
    maude_flanders was starred maude_flanders was unstarred
    Image of mordicai mordicai
    11/23/09

    @lizdexia: Dang it with your...reasonable response! Fine, okay good. Actually that makes me feel a little less irate.

    Then I guess the right answer is: stop taking communion. If that is the way they want to play it-- then fine, agree with them. Stop taking communion & paying tithes.
     Reply
    mordicai was starred mordicai was unstarred
    Image of cate3710 cate3710
    11/23/09

    @lizdexia: I think the lobbying/political portions of those organizations are somewhat separate and NOT tax-exempt, however. That's not the case with religious groups, it seems.
     Reply
    cate3710 was starred cate3710 was unstarred
    Image of lizdexia lizdexia
    11/23/09

    @mordicai: I don't really know what the answer is. As a deeply conflicted Catholic, I'm never sure whether I can do more good by voting with my feet or agitating from within. I do donate to my parish, but for specific things like the parish grade school, or funds for repairs. I don't even donate to Catholic Charities so much anymore because I'm not sure what they do with their funds. I split my contributions btw the Coalition to Prevent Teen Pregnancy and the Adoptive and Foster Care Coalition. Unlike the bishops who insist on running my Church from an ivory tower unrelated to reality, I prefer to try and effect change in a way that will make people's lives better. I do take communipon though because I believe in primacy of conscience above all. I have a clear conscience about my convictions, and I will not let a priest or bishop with a selective definition of pro-life act as a gatekeeper between me and a sacrament I hold sacred.
    My local bishop does regularly get an earful from me when the USCCB gets riled up about abortion and remains silent on other life issues. Jesus had far more to say about social justice and equality for the poor than he ever did about the occupancy of my uterus.

    #tips
     Reply
    lizdexia was starred lizdexia was unstarred
    Image of lizdexia lizdexia
    11/23/09

    @cate3710: According to the IRS, churches can engage in lobbying, as long as it is not a "substanital part" of their activities. If it's determined they've done too much, they can be subject to a 5% tax on lobbying expenditures. My guess would be that the sheer size of the RCC allows it to engage in a fair amount of lobbying. Even if all the USCCB did was lobby congress, if you compare that to all the man hours of employees in Catholic institutions - including churches, schools, hospitals and charities, plus the man hours of religious orders, lobbying activities are a drop in the bucket.

    [www.irs.gov]

    This issue actually really burns me up from a PR perspective. The RCC does so much good work, in terms of advocating for and providing for the poor and running quality schools and hospitals. Interjecting themselves in the healthcare debate has really overshadowed all the good work they do. To the outside observer, it probably appears the Bishops do nothing but meddle with women's health, when in reality the Church does a tremendous amount of good.

    PR geniuses, they're not.

    #tips
     Reply
    lizdexia was starred lizdexia was unstarred
    Earlier discussions Other discussions Show all discussions Show featured discussions only Start a new discussion

Login

Enter your username and password.

Please enter a username.
Please enter your password.
logging in
Login via Facebook | Sign Up | Forgot Password?

Reset Password

Please enter your email address to have your password reset.

Please enter your email address.
Please enter a valid email address.
requesting password reset

Register

Registering will give you a user profile and the ability to add other users as friends. To become a commenter, however, you need to audition.

Want to know more? Consult the Comment FAQ and legal terms.

Please enter a username.
Please enter a password.
Please confirm your password.
Passwords are not identical.
Please enter a valid email address.
registration sent, waiting for reply

Submit Your Comment

You don't need to login to comment. Just enter your email address below.

See how your address will be displayed in the Comment FAQ.

Please enter a valid email address.
Please enter a valid email address.
logging in

Login with your Facebook or Jezebel account.

Sign up here.



  • Archives
  • About
  • Advertising
  • Legal
  • Help
  • Report a Bug
  • FAQ
Original material is licensed under a Creative Commons License permitting non-commercial sharing with attribution.