The Politics of Women's Health
I am not a Republican or a Democrat. I would hate for Santorum to become president (and I can't believe that's actually an option at this point), but jesus christ, people.
ACCESS =/= FREE
You know what people really need to be productive: EYEGLASSES. I would rank being able to see as pretty crucial to being able to hold a job and interact with society (driving, reading, etc.). Of course, people who are actually blind have undergone special instruction to compensate, but I'm talking about people with bad vision who still rely on their sight.
You know what people really to be healthy: DENTAL CLEANINGS. There are numerous benefits to getting your teeth cleaned, such as reducing your risk of heart disease and stroke. (http://yourlife.usatoday.com/health/story/2011-11-14/Regular-teeth-cleanings-could-cut-heart-attack-risk-Study/51194042/1) Also, your teeth are part of your first impression when you do a job interview or meet someone for the first time. Bad teeth can be a huge class indicator, with all of the ensuing negative consequences.
You know what's really pretty affordable compared to eyeglasses (which can run $300+ for progressive lenses with an anti-glare coating and a good frame) or dental cleanings (my last was $125. Two a year = $250 + x-rays)? Birth control at Walmart for $9/mo. (http://walmartstores.com/pressroom/news/6747.aspx)
Why in order to have "access" to birth control does it have to be free while eyeglasses and dental cleanings can charge whatever they want? Because it satisfies the women's health lobby, which Obama needs to win in November. There is no eye or dental health lobby with the same amount of heft.
The Republicans are assholes too on this topic, don't get me wrong. And I cannot believe people are still listening to Rush Limbaugh. But if the Democrats say "well, I can just regulate things my way," then when the Republicans eventually regain power (whether it be this election or the next, the last thirty years have been pretty regular shifts in presidency), they'll say "you just unilaterally regulated this issue when you had power, so now I'M going to regulate things my way."
A woman's health is not a tug-of-war game, but BOTH sides are awful about using women's health issues to try to score points. (If you don't realize Obama brought up this issue now--instead of a year or two ago--as a deliberate campaign move, you are incredibly naive. I find that almost as disrespectful as the Republicans' answers to it.)
For the real concern about lower income women's access to birth control (who don't usually have employer provided health insurance), an at least semi-bipartisan agreement that will last is necessary. Bringing the issue up the year of presidential election, 2-5 months before the primaries, when EVERYBODY is strutting around showing the most extreme side of their conservative or liberal credentials is not helpful to women. It's just opening yet another front for (mostly male) politicians to try to use women's health to get votes for themselves.
ACCESS =/= FREE
You know what people really need to be productive: EYEGLASSES. I would rank being able to see as pretty crucial to being able to hold a job and interact with society (driving, reading, etc.). Of course, people who are actually blind have undergone special instruction to compensate, but I'm talking about people with bad vision who still rely on their sight.
You know what people really to be healthy: DENTAL CLEANINGS. There are numerous benefits to getting your teeth cleaned, such as reducing your risk of heart disease and stroke. (http://yourlife.usatoday.com/health/story/2011-11-14/Regular-teeth-cleanings-could-cut-heart-attack-risk-Study/51194042/1) Also, your teeth are part of your first impression when you do a job interview or meet someone for the first time. Bad teeth can be a huge class indicator, with all of the ensuing negative consequences.
You know what's really pretty affordable compared to eyeglasses (which can run $300+ for progressive lenses with an anti-glare coating and a good frame) or dental cleanings (my last was $125. Two a year = $250 + x-rays)? Birth control at Walmart for $9/mo. (http://walmartstores.com/pressroom/news/6747.aspx)
Why in order to have "access" to birth control does it have to be free while eyeglasses and dental cleanings can charge whatever they want? Because it satisfies the women's health lobby, which Obama needs to win in November. There is no eye or dental health lobby with the same amount of heft.
The Republicans are assholes too on this topic, don't get me wrong. And I cannot believe people are still listening to Rush Limbaugh. But if the Democrats say "well, I can just regulate things my way," then when the Republicans eventually regain power (whether it be this election or the next, the last thirty years have been pretty regular shifts in presidency), they'll say "you just unilaterally regulated this issue when you had power, so now I'M going to regulate things my way."
A woman's health is not a tug-of-war game, but BOTH sides are awful about using women's health issues to try to score points. (If you don't realize Obama brought up this issue now--instead of a year or two ago--as a deliberate campaign move, you are incredibly naive. I find that almost as disrespectful as the Republicans' answers to it.)
For the real concern about lower income women's access to birth control (who don't usually have employer provided health insurance), an at least semi-bipartisan agreement that will last is necessary. Bringing the issue up the year of presidential election, 2-5 months before the primaries, when EVERYBODY is strutting around showing the most extreme side of their conservative or liberal credentials is not helpful to women. It's just opening yet another front for (mostly male) politicians to try to use women's health to get votes for themselves.