shit. no public option AND we get this steaming pile of shit on top of an already shitty bill. maybe it will get cleaned up in reconciliation? probably not.
gah, fuck this 60 votes business - remind me why we need filibusters again?
Someone remind me how and why they need 60 votes, and no just a simple majority? I am embarrassed to ask--I took AP History (and was actually, y'know, PRESENT mentally in class, or so I thought, so I feel like this is a bit of relevant information, given the current shitty circumstances).
Also....what about that mandate?
I read about shit like this and feel stupid for voting Democratic at all, like I missed something huge during the campaigns, something, anything, and then I wonder if would matter either way.
@maude_flanders: 60 votes are needed for cloture, which simply means that the filibuster will end and the actual vote on the bill can occur. It's a ridiculous and archaic rule (both cloture and filibustering, actually).
Ugh, this is such, such, such bullshit. Of course, the Hyde amendment, which this bullshit all stems from, is also bullshit. Is it possible to overturn it?
At least this is slightly better than Stupak (who, by the way, is currently working with Republicans to oppose even this compromise).
By the way, guys, isn't the response to this not to give up on voting for Democrats, but to vote in, you know, better Democrats? Or whatever Democrats can get elected?
If we sit out and Republicans take over, that doesn't help us. It sends a message, sure, but at a huge, huge cost. We can make this shit better. Really. If we stop believing that, then whatever's left of democracy in this country has no hope but to fail.
Can I just turn in my America card and move to Canada? This whole process has been extremely disheartening.
I was a poli sci major, I've volunteered on tons of campaigns, I've gotten involved politically on as many levels as I can, until last week I was going door to door canvassing for health care reform, and always call and email my representatives about important legislation. Now though? I just feel so useless and pointless. Who cares what I can do to help this process out when ONE MAN can fuck this up for everyone.
It is so fucking trivially partisan now with no one actually seeming to care about the American people. Just line up all the senators one by one and let me punch them in the face. I'll start with Lieberman, move on to Nelson, go to Reid, sucker-punch Lieberman again, then move on down the line.
I was having this debate just last night with whom I thought were some very progressive men - but they were all in agreement that they would basically pull a "Nelson" for the greater good
I hate when penes think they can make decisions which, ultimately, only affect uteri
* my period button is broken, apologies on lack of punctuation
@Scout: Fuck them. There is no greater good here either. The current bill is horrible. I want it to fail. Passing it as it stands is an insult because it is going to do even more damage long term. Now we HAVE to buy in to horrible insurance plans, and now they are guaranteed to jack rates because they have to take pre existing conditions.
I mean they are basically telling me we are tossing out a women's rights for something we shouldn't want anyways. If you are going to screw over 50+ of the population (and considering it impacts men too not that they would admit that, even more) they could at least be pushing something through that was so spectacular that it didn't feel like a swift kick to the crotch followed by a push down the stairs.
Jezzies I've been calling my senator all week. And I hope you've been doing the same. This bill is a mockery of our rights and Universal Health Care.
We cannot not take it because they say it will help poor people. Nearly all my friends are poor and live below the poverty line. They don't want this fucking bill. They hate this bill. Even with government help they will not have enough money to pay for this 'health care'.
It's a monstrous bill with very few good point and we cannot let it pass. Call, Fight, Protest. Because this is one we cannot let go.
@FotoVerite: agreed it is imperative we that figure out how to reduce the current system's health care costs, make the reformed costs equal across the board (no extreme $ discrepancies for procedures in any given state, for example), remove ridiculous incentive-based physician care, discuss administration costs and make cuts accordingly FIRST!
right now, passing this bill would be akin to building a high rise apartment on a cracked, shoddy foundation poured on top of a sink hole
@ripley: Well, actually, yes. That's not sufficient, and it's no good, but no one is losing preexisting abortion coverage that they had previously under the proposed legislation. People who are receiving new coverage will not be given abortion coverage. That sucks, it's deplorable, but again-- they already don't have it. The choice, given the actual political situation on the ground, is between giving them access to health care without abortion coverage and their continuing to have no coverage of any kind, including not having abortion coverage.
(Yeah, I know the term was declared passe' here a while back. I think we need to keep it for emergencies, and Mr. Nelson just made me break the glass to whip it out.)
My eyes glaze over when I try to read legalese, so can someone answer me this - at least with Stupak, there was a clause for rape/incest/life of mother. If a state opts out under this amendment, is there a similar clause, or is there no federal funding for abortions in those states at all?
Really, once all of this stuff has been sold down the river (and that's assuming that Old Joe isn't going to object to something else, [www.slate.com]) what the hell has been the point of healthcare reform?
So, yet again, the uterus is an organ that doesn't really belong to the individual, but to the public, so it can be judged and deemed acceptable or unacceptable based on whatever "rules" they've currently decided on.
It's just basically a "justify your reproductive decisions' survey. Which gets a big old fuck you from me.
Especially no man has ever been asked to prove that he'll only use his sperm for "good" things.
I would like to know when having a child DOESN'T "... dramatically change a woman's life, or interfere with her job or education?"
Because I've got two awesome (mostly planned) kids, and a stable marriage, and I tell you what -- I was not at all prepared for how much a child would change my life and interefere with my job.
@Lymed: heh, probably true! The second one threw me for a loop -- I thought it would be easy to switch from one to two, and some things were less difficult, but there was still a LOT I hadn't realized about being the parent of two young children.
These ignorant, backwards motherfuckers need to read the HIPAA law. It states clearly that releasing people's private health information is a crime. Much less publishing it. You certainly do not get to make this publishing of their PHI a prerequisite to obtaining a LEGAL MEDICAL PROCEDURE! This would never happen to any aspect of men's healthcare.
Who wants to bet that names and identifying characteristics of the questionnaire completers is "accidentally" leaked and made public as well? The only thing about this that makes me remotely pleased is that if it passes there will no doubt be a massive class action lawsuit and the offending parties will have to pay out the wazoo.
@Hooplehead: I was just thinking that. Since they're trying to make this questionnaire compulsory for a medical procedure, I would think that would make it by definition part of the patient's medical records. Which would make the doctor bound to not release it, right? I'd be curious to hear from the AMA's medical ethics committee on this one.
@JoStockton: Most medical offices know that HIPAA violations are a gigantic no-no. You can get fired for even looking at a chart that you have no business being in. And that's before you disseminate word one about it to anyone.
So I am less concerned with the possibility of doctors releasing it than I am about that happening via whatever government entity is entrusted with collating and publishing the PHI. Since this entire measure seems little more than a thinly veiled attempt to legislate morality and slut-shame every abortion-seeker in the state.
You do raise a good point, though. I wonder what the AMA would do if this were passed?
@Hooplehead: I'm not worried about the doctors' offices that are involved in the procedures, because since they're performing them, they're hopefully not interested in having these details released. I just think that because this is "compulsory", not like a survey that outside bodies usually come in and collect for research, I wonder if doctors could argue that this is against their code of conduct.
I guess it would depend on how the government would go about administering this survey, but it seems to me that they would either have to have a government employee at every practice at all times to administer the survey, because otherwise someone within the medical practice would have to do so.
Since the state wants to make it necessary for a procedure, could a doctor argue that it's part of the procedure, and they're then bound by confidentiality laws?
This just seems to go against everything I've read in medical ethics textbooks (granted that university class was years ago), that it seems to me that this won't actually end up happening. I think it must just be political posturing, because it seems impossible to put into practice.
I love how they act like this is so much more complicated than providing comprehensive sex education in schools, developing quality job opportunities for all people so that they can support their children, providing adequate and inexpensive day care, and supporting child-friendly corporate policies, all of which have been proven to work. I suppose none of those things has quite the same whiff of moral righteousness to it.
12/20/09
gah, fuck this 60 votes business - remind me why we need filibusters again?
12/19/09
Also....what about that mandate?
I read about shit like this and feel stupid for voting Democratic at all, like I missed something huge during the campaigns, something, anything, and then I wonder if would matter either way.
12/19/09
12/19/09
At least this is slightly better than Stupak (who, by the way, is currently working with Republicans to oppose even this compromise).
By the way, guys, isn't the response to this not to give up on voting for Democrats, but to vote in, you know, better Democrats? Or whatever Democrats can get elected?
If we sit out and Republicans take over, that doesn't help us. It sends a message, sure, but at a huge, huge cost. We can make this shit better. Really. If we stop believing that, then whatever's left of democracy in this country has no hope but to fail.
12/19/09
I was a poli sci major, I've volunteered on tons of campaigns, I've gotten involved politically on as many levels as I can, until last week I was going door to door canvassing for health care reform, and always call and email my representatives about important legislation. Now though? I just feel so useless and pointless. Who cares what I can do to help this process out when ONE MAN can fuck this up for everyone.
It is so fucking trivially partisan now with no one actually seeming to care about the American people. Just line up all the senators one by one and let me punch them in the face. I'll start with Lieberman, move on to Nelson, go to Reid, sucker-punch Lieberman again, then move on down the line.
12/19/09
I hate when penes think they can make decisions which, ultimately, only affect uteri
* my period button is broken, apologies on lack of punctuation
12/19/09
12/19/09
12/19/09
I mean they are basically telling me we are tossing out a women's rights for something we shouldn't want anyways. If you are going to screw over 50+ of the population (and considering it impacts men too not that they would admit that, even more) they could at least be pushing something through that was so spectacular that it didn't feel like a swift kick to the crotch followed by a push down the stairs.
12/19/09
12/19/09
We cannot not take it because they say it will help poor people. Nearly all my friends are poor and live below the poverty line. They don't want this fucking bill. They hate this bill. Even with government help they will not have enough money to pay for this 'health care'.
It's a monstrous bill with very few good point and we cannot let it pass. Call, Fight, Protest. Because this is one we cannot let go.
12/19/09
right now, passing this bill would be akin to building a high rise apartment on a cracked, shoddy foundation poured on top of a sink hole
12/19/09
12/19/09
12/19/09
12/19/09
(Yeah, I know the term was declared passe' here a while back. I think we need to keep it for emergencies, and Mr. Nelson just made me break the glass to whip it out.)
12/19/09
It's not passe in dire circumstances. You have used it well.
12/19/09
12/19/09
12/19/09
12/19/09
12/19/09
12/19/09
12/19/09
12/18/09
It's just basically a "justify your reproductive decisions' survey. Which gets a big old fuck you from me.
Especially no man has ever been asked to prove that he'll only use his sperm for "good" things.
12/18/09
Because I've got two awesome (mostly planned) kids, and a stable marriage, and I tell you what -- I was not at all prepared for how much a child would change my life and interefere with my job.
12/18/09
12/18/09
12/18/09
12/18/09
12/18/09
Who wants to bet that names and identifying characteristics of the questionnaire completers is "accidentally" leaked and made public as well? The only thing about this that makes me remotely pleased is that if it passes there will no doubt be a massive class action lawsuit and the offending parties will have to pay out the wazoo.
12/18/09
12/18/09
So I am less concerned with the possibility of doctors releasing it than I am about that happening via whatever government entity is entrusted with collating and publishing the PHI. Since this entire measure seems little more than a thinly veiled attempt to legislate morality and slut-shame every abortion-seeker in the state.
You do raise a good point, though. I wonder what the AMA would do if this were passed?
12/18/09
I guess it would depend on how the government would go about administering this survey, but it seems to me that they would either have to have a government employee at every practice at all times to administer the survey, because otherwise someone within the medical practice would have to do so.
Since the state wants to make it necessary for a procedure, could a doctor argue that it's part of the procedure, and they're then bound by confidentiality laws?
This just seems to go against everything I've read in medical ethics textbooks (granted that university class was years ago), that it seems to me that this won't actually end up happening. I think it must just be political posturing, because it seems impossible to put into practice.
12/18/09