women specific federal heatlh funding to be cut before started

[crafting_change]

US Centric
Within 7 days of the Global Gag rule being overturned low income women in the U.S. are the first cut in 'concessions' to the right wing factions of our country :
House Democrats are likely to jettison family planning funds for the low-income from an $825 billion economic stimulus bill, officials said late Monday, following a personal

Comments

[lavendersparkle]

I'll answer the single payer health care system question first from the perspective of England, which is where I live. I'll give you a bit of the general picture here. In England healthcare is usually free but a bit less luxurious than US healthcare. The vast majority of people rely exclusively on the National Health Service. You have to pay for optical care, but you get a voucher toward it if you're a child, or on a low income, or have a medical or family history of serious eye problems (for example one of my brothers gets a voucher which covers his eye tests and glasses because he's a low income single parent and my mum gets free eye tests because her father had glucoma). You have to pay for dental care but I think you get a discount if you're a child or on low income. If you get a prescription from your doctor you have to pay £7.10 per item, regardless of what it cost. Again it's free if you're child or receiving certain benefits etc

[crafting_change]

That is an interesting fact about the Church of England... having a huge mainstream religious organization back contraception use is a bit different than U.S. history. I could see it having an effect.

[squinting_kitty]

I think there are definitely elements of classism and sexism involved.

Most right-wingers probably don't see family planning as necessary, and a good many likely condemn it outright. There's your sexism.

They may also see it as an "optional" "if you want it, you pay for it" personal luxury and as such do not feel that tax payer dollars should fund it (especially for those poor, lazy folks who don't work, amirite?). There's more sexism and classism

[crafting_change]

If right now with the economy failing people are forgoing the doctor, and they are forgoing medication would possibly these jobs be hurting? Would putting money into these sectors help and prevent further job losses? Would women being able to avoid unwanted pregnancies help them to keep jobs and not take maternity leave (that wasn't planned) and have to figure out ways to make ends meet with a shorter budget.

Like the Pell grants that are being proposed, I think that there are lots of ways to stimulate the economy - and not all of them are going to start a new job tomorrow - but they will help the large amounts of folks who are having to cut back on spending - spending like health care (NOW did a special on how folks who are even insured are now forgoing basic care because they can no longer afford it) and college. If people back out of using these services they too are going to feel economic losses, and jobs will be cut.

[squinting_kitty]

Like the Pell grants that are being proposed, I think that there are lots of ways to stimulate the economy - and not all of them are going to start a new job tomorrow - but they will help the large amounts of folks who are having to cut back on spending - spending like health care (NOW did a special on how folks who are even insured are now forgoing basic care because they can no longer afford it) and college. If people back out of using these services they too are going to feel economic losses, and jobs will be cut.

As someone who is both unemployed and uninsured, I'd favor pure job creation (i.e. infrastructure) over this reproductive health measure being included in this bill. I think the Dems need to fight tooth and nail to reduce the percentage of the bill that goes towards tax cuts that the Republicans want and to promote spending (in infrastructure, renewable energy, etc) in order to create jobs. I want a job more than I want free BC.

[mariallegra]

I think it's very sad that these cuts are being praised in the name of "bipartisanship". I understand the practicalities of not having a chunk of the House philosophically opposed to you as soon as you start out, but it some people seem to hold it up as a virtue in itself, as though it's more important to be "nice" to your co-workers than look out for the electorate's best interests

[catsaurus]

Hang on, I'm confused.

These funds are being removed from the House stimulus bill. That doesn't mean it won't be introduced again as a stand-alone bill or as part of a different piece of legislation, and/or kept in the Senate stimulus bill, and/or reinstated in conference.

I get your point about this being the first to be cut, and I agree that it always seems like this sort of thing is the first to go. But, I don't think it being removed from this particular bill means it's doomed.

[catsaurus]

Thanks! (And, I take it you're referring to the OP in the rest of your post.)

And, thanks for the added details. I think a lot gets lost in hyperbole when it comes to politics and legislation.

[roseofjuly]

The Republicans came out with a whole list of things that they thought was wasteful spending in this economic stimulus bill. Among the things mentioned was funding CDC STD screening, smoking cessation programs, fixing canals and levees among the Mississippi River, investing in alternative energy vehicles in the military as opposed to the gas guzzlers that are currently there, building a headquarters for the Department of Homeland Security, Amtrak, the Smithsonian museums, rural waste disposal, the Washington D.C. sewer system, and the 2010 census.

I mean, the only thing on the list that I agreed with them was $246 million for Hollywood movie producers to buy film and $650 million for digital converter box vouchers. And possibly the $88 million earmarked for the Coast Guard to build a polar icebreaker ship, but I don't know enough about the utility of that to discount it. Still, it makes me mad that there's $246 million for movie producers and yet the reproductive health care to low-income women is what they decided to cut.

[crafting_change]

oh that list had me pissed to no end - their idea that initiatives to lower drug dependency on tribal areas is just flat out racist.