Tuesday, May 02, 2006

Ask your rep to Vote no on S.1955: why? because it's not 1955

as scintillating as wage equity is, here's an alert to protect some basic healthcare coverage for women (and some men). this will matter to you if:
you have a uterus
enjoy having a uterus
enjoy knowing your uterus' needs are covered by your health coverage

...
Click here to write to your senator: http://www.ppaction.org/campaign/benefits

If this current budget making its way through is carried, women in every state will lose benefits. It sounds like a bad joke, but it couldn't be more serious. S. 1955 would allow insurance plans to ignore important state laws that protect patients, directly affecting more than 90 million Americans. Chances are you're one of them.

That's why I'm asking you to write to your senator today anddemand that the federal government protect your health coverage: http://www.ppaction.org/campaign/benefits

You may have heard about this "Lose Your Benefits Bill" before, but now it has passed out of committee and the full Senate will vote on it. It's an insidious attempt by hardline senators to chip away at our basic rights. These lawmakers have tried before to restrict access to birth control and other health care you need. Their latest strategy? Force women to pay for these benefits out of pocket.

We've worked for decades to pass state laws that requireinsurance companies to cover birth control just like other medicines. This bill would trample those laws, but it doesn't stop there. Besides fair coverage for contraception, here are some of the other benefits that women could lose:
<> cancer screenings
<> mammograms
<> maternity care
<> the ability to go straight to your OB/GYN when you have a problem
<> the ability to stay with the same doctor throughout apregnancy
<> infertility treatment
<> osteoporosis screenings

And it's not just women who will be affected - the bill guts state protections for coverage for prostate cancer screenings, ambulatory surgery, emergency services, and more. To make matters worse, it will likely also increase the costs of health insurance for older and sicker people who need health insurance most.

Please take two minutes to speak out against this dangerous bill- the Senate could vote as early as next week. Contact your senator now:http://www.ppaction.org/campaign/benefits

Think of it as an investment - two minutes of activism now vs. hundreds or thousands of dollars in extra health costs for you and your family.

17 comments:

Verlch said...

Forcing women to pay extra, for the extras in their health care that they get, should be mandatory.

Why should everybody else have higher premiums because women have 2 mammograms done every month?

Health insurance should be used for something major, not every cold and flu that runs through somebody.

They have also found female doctors actually cost insurers more, as they will run tests not related to the symptoms, because "Insurance" is paying for it.

Who do female doctors thinks is paying for it in the end, us! $5000 a year, that most people cannot afford as it is.

Do you want a taxathon like Universal Health care? Look at socialist Canada, and their health care. High taxes, so all can get crappy health care.

No thanks, there should be a liberal tax on all progressive liberals and their taxathon programs.

You should get benefits for free.

ding said...

ok, see?

who can take you seriously when you clearly are insane?

or, maybe this is all an elaborate post-modern joke and you're really a goatee-sporting, latte drinking progressive just messing with my head because everything you say is so insane.

you can tell me, verlch. you're really crazy, aren't you?

ding said...

i hope a woman reads this and confirms that, yes, every woman gets 2 mammograms every month. (idiot)

what's not major about cancer, infertility, osteoperosis, prenatal care and women's health?

you idiot.

Anonymous said...

no, no, ding. he has a point. now, if women were actually PEOPLE then there would be more concern about the fact that women are severely underrepresented in biomedical science ("The historical lack of focus on women's health concerns has compromised the quality of health information to women as well as the health care they recieve." U.S. Public Health Service task force).

also, are you saying you don't get 2 mammograms a month? geez. i go in to my gyno as often as possible 'cause it's so fun!

steph

Weeziner said...

Likewise. Sometimes I get three mamms a month. Me and my lady gynocologist have a good laugh at all the white men soaking up the cost.
God gave me breasts and goddamnit, I'm going to use them.

ding said...

actually, you're right.
i *languish* for hours at my doctor's. i can't wait to throw up my legs and get in the stirrups. it's so relaxing!

i laugh with glee at the thought of all the money i'm throwing down the drain simply because i like having my cooter inspected and my boobs smashed.

yeah, i'm all over that.

Anonymous said...

Verlch is a very lost, hate-filled man. Read his comments over at Vox. He calls women every name in the book...then says "I don't hate women"...yeah right.

ding said...

i let him go for a while until he let loose on another post about how the jews gave us feminism and ruined women. that was it. there was NO way i'd let some anti-semitic mysoginist comment anymore.

i've deleted every single one of his comments because he ramps up my temper and he's gross. i shudder to think what he's saying over at his own place.

Matriarch Verlch said...

"Why should everybody else have higher premiums because women have 2 mammograms done every month?"


This guy is joking right?

ding said...

um, and that guy would be *you*.

(unless there's two of you running around here, in which case i shudder for the fate of the world.)

Verlch said...

I don't hate women

Verlch said...

Ding, spell alittle would you? Missing a letter are we?

I think women should have only women insurance groups. That way you can drive the price up all you want with every alignment that comes your way. Or women should be government subsidized. I shouldn't have to pay higher prices at the pump, because women are sucking up all the resources.

ding said...

1. prove that women drive up insurance premiums. it's not enough to just say it. argue it. and keep to your point. resist the urge to use gender stereotype. we'd all consider your opinions if you could use a little logic.

2. my typos are honest typos rather than egregious spelling mistakes. (or would you rather that 'typoes'? or perhaps, 'feminagges'?)

don't consider this an opportunity to wank off into crazy-dom. either be rational or stay in your basement.

Verlch said...

Women are driving up the cost of insurance. My wife is case in point, she goes to the doctor twice a month, and my son goes twice a month. I haven't been to the doctor in 10 years.

Ok, you go get a physical, that's it. Do some screening, blood tests once a year, call it good.

Female doctors are even worse, they make up for their lack of understanding in their fields, by doing more tests, as long insurance pays for it, the prices will not rise. BS.

At the hospital my mom works at, the insurance companies are having to stop paying the doctors, and renegotiating bills.

This never happened before women started entering the field. With all their affirmative action quota's of 50%, more BS.

Men are required to be at the top of the class, the top 5%. Women are at the top 25% as the cut off. To be able to compete with men.

My cousin used to get at the lab for his Doctorate at 5 in the morning. The girls would stumble in at 7, unprepared, basically 2nd class Dr's. The ones in his class.

Trust me, they make up for their lack of knowledge by doing loads of tests, just as long as the insurance company is paying for it. Sometimes these women are greedy I'm sure and just want some extra $$$$$. I wouldn't put it past them.

ding said...

against my better judgment, i'm leaving your comment, V, just 'cause it's a nice monument to total ignorance.

it's not even worth a response other than this.

Verlch said...

I don't really care about spelling as much as feminags like you use it to try and dismantle the topic you are arguing at the moment.

Like I said before, women go to the doctor more, therefore, they should have higher premiums. They are more likely to need the pill, feminine hygiene lotions, yeast infection medications, breast mammograms, and a host of other tests female doctors do, to make up for their complete lack of knowledge in their field.

If you are a woman, and you make it without the help of affirmative action, or a host of other programs to advance women equal with men, then you did it. That's fine.

http://www.aamc.org/newsroom/pressrel/2003/031104.htm

Women tend to only have to fend for themselves. How is this benefiting the nation where men have to fend for their families, their ex wives and so on.

Orange said...

Of course, if men didn't tend to ignore their symptoms as much as they do, I'll bet they wouldn't die so much sooner than women. Haven't we all seen men who are in denial about their heart disease, diabetes, or pain, and only see a doctor when it becomes unbearable? (I'd cite family members, like Verlch does, except that such anecdotal "evidence" is worthless.)

I vote that we eliminate all coverage for men's problems, like prostate cancer, erectile dysfunction, testicular cancer, and heart disease before age 50 (because women, with their clever estrogen, don't reach men's heart disease levels until after menopause—darn those men and their problematic lack of estrogen!).

If only Grandma Verlch's female parts hadn't been in working order, eh?

Remember when Mel Gibson was hot? There was a Saturday Night Live skit, "Mel Gibson: Dream Gynecologist." His partner, Jon Lovitz, couldn't scrounge up any patients, but the waiting room was full of women coming in for extra breast exams with Dr. Mel. 'Cause you know we're all like that in real life...