The Political Voices of Women

[cross-posted at BlogHer Health and Wellness]

A new report is out about insurance and health care, and it’s not good. If you think the cost of health care is high now, just wait…It’s going to get even higher. Who would have thought that you could have insurance, and still not be able to afford healthcare? How is that possible? Only in America.

A few weeks ago I posted about the rising cost of prescription drugs, now it’s copays and premiums that will be increasing. Even people who have insurance and prescription drug plans, still can’t afford their medications. I thought insurance was suppose to “insure” we have quality and affordable health care? Not so much.

The United States spends more of its income on health care than any nation on earth, nearly $6,000 per person per year, more than 15 percent of our total income. In contrast, the countries of the European Monetary Union spend about $2,500 per person per year, less than 10 percent of their income.

The United States is very rich and we spend the most in the world on health care. We have a right to expect more for our money than a life expectancy outcome that places us thirtieth in the world, behind Singapore, Chile, and Costa Rica as well as Australia, New Zealand, Japan, and every Western European nation.

Our health care system certainly delivers innovations in pharmaceutical and other technologies. It leads the world in Nobel Prizes for medicine and physiology. But it does not deliver medical care equitably to all Americans. Those who can pay have access to the best health care in the world. Those with good insurance plans—a decreasing fraction of the population—get good, life-extending health care. The rest must make do. And the result is that enough people fall through the cracks to place us at the bottom of the rich country life expectancy tables.

Here is some of what other women bloggers are saying about the rising cost of health care.

From Green LA Girl…

Our health care system’s so fucked up that people are getting married — and considering divorce! — simply due to health insurance issues. In the NY Times: “For today’s couples, “in sickness and in health” may seem less a lover’s troth than an actuarial contract. They marry for better or worse, for richer or poorer, for co-pays and deductibles.”

From MOMocrats…

• Under McCain’s Plan, Health Insurance Benefits Would be Taxed For The First Time, Resulting In A $3.6 Trillion Tax Increase On Working Families. McCain’s health care plan would eliminate the payroll deduction on health care benefits, which would have the effect of raising taxes on working families by $3.6 trillion. [New York Times, 5/1/08]
• The Health Care Tax Credit McCain Offers Would Cover Less Than Half The Cost Of An Average Health Care Plan. The McCain health plan would give families a $5,000 tax credit to purchase health insurance. However, in 2007, the average family health insurance plan cost $12,000 – more than double the value of McCain’s health care tax credit. [“Employer Health Benefits 2007 Annual Survey,” Kaiser Family Foundation, 9/11/07; “‘Call To Action’ On Health Care Reform,” John McCain 2008 press release, 4/29/08; Wall Street Journal, 10/11/07]

From Just Random’s presidential wish list…

Universal Health Care (or at least affordable health care) – Why is the United States the only modernized country with out some form of universal health care? I know an argument could be made for the U.S. having the best health care, but why can’t we have both, come on some one smarter than me make it happen. Every child in this country should have access to health care.

From Christian Liberal’s Weblog…

Whatever the case, it’s surprising that so many self-professed Christians, and especially the evangelical type, are so eager to maul, mangle and manipulate those words, those lessons, so that it comes out as “every man for himself”, which of course is the exact opposite of the meaning and spirit of those teachings.

They’ll use phrases like “self-determination” or “market forces”, but it’s really just code words for “you’re on your own” and “don’t expect any help from me.” Likewise, they will use negative words to describe the concept. It’s been found that a majority of Americans favors universal healthcare, but if you change the language to “socialized medicine” the approval rating drops below 50%. And the greed-oriented apologists are quite expert at word-smithing.

The point is, any good-hearted Christian would not begrudge the care given to a needy neighbor.

Are you having trouble affording health care? Are you hoping if Obama is elected, things might get a little better? Are you worried, that if McCain is elected, things will get worse? Let me know what you think in comments.

BlogHer’s Mary Katharine Ham spoke with McCain advisor Nancy Pfotenhauler…

—

Here are a few excerpts from a post at BlogHer by Professor Kim Pearson…

A new report card on the state of the US workforce finds that more of us are struggling to find full-time work, pay for health care and manage our debts. Meanwhile union and business advocates are drawing battle lines over a proposed new law that would change the way workers decide whether to unionize. The new law is so important that one expert says it could “decide the future of organized labor in the United States.”

. . .

In the face of these challenges, labor advoates are pushing for the Employee Free Choice Act which allows workers to choose a union if a majority of workers sign a petition that is validated by the National Labor Relations board. It strengthens penalties for employers who penalize pro-union workers, and provides for mediatiion and arbitration if a collective bargaining agreement can’t be reached within a specified time period.

. . .

Advocates launched a new TV ad during the Democratic National Convention:

*You can read Kim’s full post at BlogHer*

[Cross-posted at BlogHer Health & Wellness]

This is the thing…Blogging about politics is very stressful.   And, we all know what stress can do to our health.

Do you blog about politics?  Is politics making you stressed?  Is your blood pressure running a bit high?  Are you getting more headaches than usual?  Are you losing sleep because you’re blogging to all hours of the night?  Does the release of poll numbers give you heart palpitations?  Do you ever get the urge to lock yourself in a dark room and not come out until after the election?  If you have answered yes to any of these questions, you may be suffering from Political Blogger Stress Syndrome (or PBSS).

There is no medicine or treatment for PBSS [Although, give the pharmaceutical companies some time, I’m sure they will come up with something…expensive], and many sufferers don’t even realize they have it.  So.  What can we do to combat the symptoms of PBSS?

Read more »

Here is a clip of Erin Kotecki Vest being interviewed live on CNN. GREAT JOB ERIN!

—

Erin Kotecki Vest from BlogHer, did this interview earlier today, with Valerie Jarrett of the Obama campaign…

—

Here is a guest post by Cynthia Samuels at Don’t Gel Too Soon.

[If you would like to be a guest blogger on The Political Voices of Women, just join our community, and start posting.]

This is breaking my heart. Why is it that we Democrats are incapable of NOT shooting ourselves in the foot (feet even)? In my view (and I’m hardly alone in this) this may be the most critical election of my lifetime. I’ve written (are you sick of it yet?) about the parallels to 1968 when the refusal of many anti-war voters to show up at the polls and vote for Hubert Humphrey brought us Richard Nixon and a cascade of disaster. That could and most likely will happen again if we don’t all pull ourselves together.

I heard a commentator quote — I thought Jefferson but can’t find the source — “True democracy means acceptance of defeat by one vote.” Sounds right, doesn’t it? But there is what we wish were true and there is political reality, and the reality this year is that every moment of hesitation by Senator Clinton’s supporters puts another barrier between Senator Obama and the White House. My most-respected friend PunditMom has a very smart analysis of where all this antipathy is coming from. And there’s a survey of much of the conversation in Lisa Stone’s summary at BlogHer.

Read more »

What would you do if your method of birth control (ie: pills, IUD’s), were deemed to be an abortion and no longer available to you?

This is a reproductive rights story that has been covered by bloggers for several weeks now. And, as shocking and crazy as it sounds, it just may become a reality before the end of the Bush administration. If this policy is implemented, it will not be a simple thing to correct, even with a new administration.

On his blog today, Health and Human Services Secretary Michael Leavitt, has attempted to defend his position of redefining contraception as abortion. In his dishonest attempt to clarify this position, he blatantly ignores the main aspect concerning contraception, while also blurring the lines between medical ethics and ideology. Below is an example.

Michael Leavitt…

I want to reiterate. If the Department of Health and Human Services issues a regulation on this matter, it will aim at one thing, protecting the right of conscience of those who practice medicine. From what I’ve read the last few days, there’s a serious need for it.
[read full post by Michael Leavitt here]

Here is video of Hillary Clinton speaking at a Planned Parenthood conference on this serious issue…

From The Huston Chronicle - Redefining Abortion…

The Bush administration has consistently opposed providing funding for international birth control programs, but until now has not tried to limit the use of contraceptives inside the United States. That could change in the president’s final months in office. Health and Human Services officials are considering a draft regulation that would classify most birth control pills, the Plan B emergency contraceptive and intrauterine devices as forms of abortion because they prevent the development of fertilized eggs into fetuses.

The rule, which does not require congressional approval, would allow health care workers who object to abortion on moral or religious grounds to refuse to counsel women on their birth control options or supply contraceptives. It would forbid more than half a million health agencies nationwide that receive federal funds from requiring employees to provide such services. Pharmacists could use the rule as a justification for refusing to fill birth control prescriptions, and insurance companies could cite it as a basis for declining to cover the costs.An existing regulation allows health care providers with objections to abortion to abstain from providing it to patients. By extending the definition of abortion to cover contraceptives, federal officials are attempting to create by administrative fiat what would fail by a wide margin in Congress.

Read more »

When news of the John Edwards affair broke yesterday, it was very shocking. I had heard the rumors, but always assumed they were untrue. I didn’t watch the Nightline interview last night, but just in case you wanted to see it, and missed it. Here is the full interview, in two parts, and some of the reaction and commentary from around the web. I hope you’ll let me know what you think about this in comments.

John Edwards interview on ABC…

Part One

—

Part Two




—

Tami Winfrey Harris, contributing editor to The Political Voices of Women, wrote a very personal response to the shocking news about John Edwards…

I Am Disappointed In You, John Edwards…

Long time readers know that I was a supporter of John Edwards’ presidential campaign. I believed in his platform and thought he would make a wonderful president of the United States. You know, I still believe in his platform, but I am woefully disappointed in the man. On the one hand, I don’t think sexual habits have anything to do with the ability to be a leader. The list of unfaithful men who Americans swoon over is long: From Thomas Jefferson to JFK to MLK. And none of my Republican friends better say one word to me about this, as their presidential candidate is married to his former mistress.

But I am disappointed that powerful men, even the ones that seem “better than that” seem always to live down to the public’s lowest expectations of them.

read full post here

There was an interesting comment on a post about Hillary, it’s a look at the John Edwards scandal from another point of view…

Re: Senator Edwards
From all the news coverage tonight I didn’t hear one word on the question of whether Senator Obama wins the nomination if Senator Edward tells the truth last year when the story broke.
Does anyone really believe that Senator Clinton looses the Iowa caucuses if Senator Edwards is not in the race, especially after the landslide of working class voters who supported Senator Clinton after Senator Edwards left the race?
And what of the value of the Edwards endorsement, the timing of which stepped all over an important moment for Senator Clinton.
So all of the above leads to the question of motive. Was it just revenge for perceived slights during the 2004 campaign? Will some one at least try to find out?
And finally, exactly how hard did the media investigate the Edwards story when it mattered.
I find it hard to believe that if the story was reversed, the “What if” questions and investigation of motive would not have been a center point of the story.
Fraud has been committed against the members of the Democratic Party potentially resulting in an illegitimate nominee. But not one word uttered about it.

Denise from BlogHer, wrote a post on The Edwards Affair, that has many comments from the women of BlogHer…

For months we’ve heard John Edwards deny rumors that he had an affair with Rielle Hunter. He’s also denied being the father of Hunter’s baby. Today, he revealed that he did, after all, have an affair with Hunter but continues to deny paternity. The blogosphere is buzzing.

Sister Toldjah says Looks like The Enquirer got it right after all and questions the MSM’s handling of the story.

. . .

Some of us are saying this is not news, this is not a story, this is no big deal… And the blog posts just keep rolling in. The tweets continue to fly.

Are you tweeting it or blogging it? Are you talking about it offline with coworkers, family and friends? IS this news? Does this matter to you?

The MOMocrats also had a strong response to a man they were supporting as president…

Top ten reasons I’m done with this John Edwards affair (and you should be too)

Elizabeth Edwards responds to news of affair

John Edwards hops aboard the bad judgement express

Also See:

Erin Kotecki Vest wrote for The Huffington Post…Edwards Affair: A Hard Lesson For The Left Half of the Blogosphere.

PunditMom wrote Political Rule #1 — If You Want To Be President, Keep It In Your Pants.

The Politico story has almost 1800 comments.

The New York Times - Edwards Admits to Affair in 2006

Well, if you are over your shock (and I’m not quite there yet), please let me know how you feel about the John Edwards affair in comments.

Also…Do you think if voters knew of this before the primaries, that the outcome of the election would have been different?

This is from a post by Joanne Bamberger  for BlogHer - Hillary Clinton - Crafting a New Political Role…

Hillary Clinton is poking her toe back into the political waters, now that she’s taken sometime off to get her head around the fact that she will not be moving back into the White House in January. Seeing Hillary in the news is a good thing. I know there are lots of you who disagree, but as Maureen McGovern once sang, there’s got to be a morning after. And for me, that means making sure we all acknowledge and focus on how momentous this political race has been and where we, as women, go from here.

First, the convention. Should Hillary’s supporters make sure that there is a way to put her name up for a floor vote at the convention as a sign of respect, as was common in the “olden days?”

Read Full Post at BlogHer