Kyl: "I Don't Need Maternity Care" So Employers Shouldn't Be Required To Provide It (VIDEO)

As the Senate Finance Committee moved into its fourth day of deliberations over the health care bill, tensions continued to rise.

Sen. Jon Kyl (R-Ariz.), broke new ground defending an amendment he'd proposed that struck language from the bill defining which benefits employers are required to cover -- in this case, basic maternity care.

"I don't need maternity care," Kyl said. "So requiring that on my insurance policy is something that I don't need and will make the policy more expensive."

Sen. Debbie Stabenow (D-Mich.), interrupted Kyl: "I think your mom probably did."

The amendment was defeated, nine to 14.

Comments

[clueless JD]

Kyl's health care rant is different from his vote on the Franken bill--the only thing in common is the label "women's issues".

It is not reasonable to ask if it's fair for men and women to pay the same premiums for health coverage. Risk and use varies by gender. If you don't use risk to assess premiums, don't call it insurance.

It is unreasonable and outrageous to object to managing government contracts in a way that does not chill women from suing contractors in court for sexual assault.

Kyl may in fact not like women, but the issues are distinguishable on a basis other than an up or down on women.

[lafayette2009]

While the amendment was proposed by Kyl, look at the vote that defeated it. 14-9 against his amendment.

Now remember the make-up of that Finance Committee. 13 Democrats and 10 Republicans, one of whom was a woman - Snowe, who I am sure was the one republican who voted against it.

Therefore all the Republican men on that committee voted Yes for his amendment!! Based on my health insurance, it is already an option so I am not sure what he was trying to achieve.

I am sure Kyl was one of the NAY's on the amendment Al Franken had passed.

[Zelyony1750]

Mr. Kyl is in big trouble with the ladies! I wonder how his wife's reactions were? In a nutshell, he is saying that whatever women's issues are, they are not important to him. I would not want to be in his shoes! He is proving just how insensitive he is to the women of this nation! Dumb Bell!

[jallands]

I signed up on this site JUST so I could make this comment: Trying to say that men shouldn't pay for maternity care has NO LOGICAL VALIDITY WHATSOEVER. Why? Because everyone benefits from it - you may not be a foetus anymore, but when you were, your mother's health determined your own. That is to say:

IF YOU WERE BORN, YOU NEEDED MATERNITY CARE. And uh, if you're reading this, I think it's pretty safe to say that you were born.

This is separate from the counter argument that, if Kyl's thinking was logically continued, women shouldn't have to pay for prostate exams.

Aside from that, I just plain ethically disagree that people should pay more for services based on their genetics.

[STX]

Well, I won't be needing prostate surgery or Viagra, but I certainly wouldn't want to deny you the pleasure, you sexist pig!

[JSquercia]

Yes it is an outrage that the Insurance companies will pay for men's Viagra and deny women Birth Control pills .

[Rapier]

Joshua Frank's article on " .. the man behind healthcare" tells a lot about where these guys are coming from.
http://ofthisandthat.org/Commentary.html

[cybersense]

Well, all I have to say is "be glad you don't have to go through that labor".

Look, I don't have certain parts either. It would be nice for employers to have some selective insurance room on different policies, but then who keep track of it all? That would be some amount of paper, eh?

[Mildmannered]

Health Care Lessons From France --

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=92419273

[Lisa Correa-Denoncourt]

This whole disscussion is crazy. We have friends and family in Europe who think this whole insurance issue has turned insane. We should all have insurance, it should not be a luxury it should be a right.

[Startreklivz]

if maternity care is not to be covered, then, to be fair, neither should prostate cancer nor Viagra .....

[converdb]

"homo homini lupus"

with all due respect people. Right now you're the shame of the civilized world.
selfishness and greed flooding the land.
Those guys who think poor people are losers who missed the train of the american dream are simply inhuman.

this makes me want to start a riot.

[lwilkerson50]

Does he not have a wife?
Can we just get health care reform first and then make it so that things that men only have are on the list and the same for women.

Which it really doesn't make that much of a difference.

Plus, he has government insurance plan which he pays only a certain percentage.

If we start making it tailored to fit individuals, that is where we are going to run into problems. He needs to tell us what percentage of a policy is for women or men.

Also, most policies are a one-size fits all and are still fairly cheap.

WTF is he talking about? Oh, adding another obstacle.

[jphillips021370]

What I want to know is who were the other 8 who were in favor of this amendment.

[PennsyLiberal]

Gee, I'm female. I don't have a prostate gland. Therefore, I shouldn't have to pay for the men who have prostate trouble. Duh

[BannedFromCommenting]

Easy, the other 8 Repugs on the comittee. The 10th one, who sided with Dems, was the female. (Snowe)

[akw]

Sen. Kyle was simply proposing that maternity care be an option on some plans, not that insurance companies not be required to offer plans that cover maternity!!! He is trying to find ways to make plans more affordable, and what he says makes sense. Employers could offer some plans that don't cover women's maternity health issues and some that do. This is no different than offering catastrophic plans so that younger people who require much less medical care are covered for unforeseen major medical expenses. Medicare doesn't cover maternity care, either.

[MoeB]

Well, people on medicare tend to be well beyond child-bearing age...so it makes sense.

[MJinCanada]

That's dense. Women usually pay more for medical insurance precisely because they have women's health issues like pregnancy, cysts, etc.

[lwilkerson50]

And even if you are making a co-pay, a woman usually pays more out of pocket expense.

It doesn't cost that much more, and if you don't have it in a policy and a woman (even around 50) can pop up pregnant.

The same with cancers, is that going to be the next target.

Like even men are starting to get Breast cancer, if we did that years ago, then a man would not be covered.

[Principaldad]

That does not make sense at all. Show me an insurance company that allows you to customize based on whether a particular procedure is applicable. This is not about higher deductible plans or other such things. This is getting into specific coverages.

If you start excluding based on applicability, all you get is huge mountains of paperwork and beauracracy. What Kyl is talking about is essentially creating multiple plans. Such plans are extremely expensive to administer.

It will also be impossible for doctors to keep up. Today, if you have a specific plan that is common to an area, the doctors know what is covered. Start introducing this type of unnecessary beauracracy and nobody will be able to keep it straight.

The whole point of group care is to average costs out for all persons in the group. What Kyl is asking is for is the advantage of risk based pricing for a single condition. If you are going to allow the exclusion of maternity care then you have to charge men far more because diseases like prostate cancer are exclusive only to men and heart disease is much more common among men. Kyl cannot have it both ways.

Medicare, by the way, is designed ONLY for people who are past childbearing age. Since it is not applicable to ANY person in the group, that point is moot.

[DubiousVoter]

That is ridiculous. Health insurance should pay for ANY procedure that is prescribed by your doctor... period, the end, no excuses.

One price, one policy... everyone pays the same and everyone gets full coverage. The insurance company should have NO SAY in what is allowed; they are not doctors and they have a HUGE conflict of interests.

Why should a bean-counter in an office somewhere be able to second guess my doctor? Why should they have the power to delay a decision until it is too late? There are your de@th panel members... accountants and insurance adjusters.

[brandis78]

Why give an employer the option to discriminate! Maternity should be covered.. I actually work for a company who's plans only offer maternity as a separate rider. I was told by my employer I have to pay the entire premium myself. Is it fair that I have to pay more because I am a woman who happens to be able to bare children? Men are just so lucky to not have that issue...that is the only reason it has ever become a question in the first place. Medical coverage regardless of your gender should be a right, picking and choosing between what ailments a individual has an insane way to lower medical costs.

[stayinsouth1981]

I suppose he supports Higher Infant Mortality rates?

For shame.