iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
Nancy Keenan

Nancy Keenan

Posted: March 29, 2010 04:50 PM

Anti-Choice Lawmakers Post-Health Care Reform Tack

What's Your Reaction:

As the House of Representatives took up health-care reform legislation, anti-choice lawmakers suddenly claimed the belief that Americans' health-care decisions should be private - despite their own long, stubborn history of attempts to deny women the very same right.

Perhaps in the future they will bring these newfound views to debates about reproductive health... but I won't be holding my breath.

You can view NARAL Pro-Choice America Foundation's comprehensive list online.

"This is unprecedented. It is an unprecedented intrusion of government into one of the most personal areas of our lives." - Rep. Mac Thornberry (R-TX)
  • Rep. Thornberry has cast 113 votes opposing reproductive freedom and privacy during his congressional career.


"The American people have spoken. They do not want the tentacles of the Federal Government reaching into their lives and controlling their personal health care decisions." - Rep. Dave Camp (R-MI)

  • Rep. Camp has cast 142 votes opposing reproductive freedom and privacy during his congressional career.


"Will we choose the path to be in control of our own health, or will we choose to go the way of a European nanny state where government intrusive forces health choices upon us? ...The American people don't desire more oppressive, government in charge of their health. The people want to control their own lives." - Rep. Ted Poe (R-TX)

  • Rep. Poe has cast 13 votes opposing reproductive freedom and privacy during his congressional career.


"Americans have spoken loud and clear. We are saying ``no'' to more government control of our lives." - Rep. Connie Mack (R-FL)

  • Rep. Mack has cast 13 votes opposing reproductive freedom and privacy during his congressional career.


"[This health-care bill] places control in the hands of government bureaucrats rather than letting Americans decide for themselves what is best for their families." - Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-FL)

  • Rep. Ros-Lehtinen has cast 148 votes opposing reproductive freedom and privacy during her congressional career.


"[This legislation] will become a wall of government between [families] and their doctor." -Rep. Shelley Moore Capito (R-WV)

  • Rep. Capito has cast 20 votes opposing reproductive freedom and privacy during her congressional career.


"We don't need some agency to make decisions about our family's health care." - Rep. Adam Putnam (R-FL)

  • Rep. Putnam has cast 30 votes opposing reproductive freedom and privacy during his congressional career.


"[Americans] fear government involvement in their medical decisions." - Rep. Jean Schmidt (R-OH)

  • Rep. Schmidt has cast 8 votes opposing reproductive freedom and privacy during her congressional career.


"Madam Speaker, today's vote defines what kind of America we want to live in. I for one know exactly what that is; it is the America I fought and sacrificed for, and all the freedoms we hold dear... [including] freedom from bureaucrats coming between you and your doctor." - Rep. Sam Johnson (R-TX)

  • Rep. Johnson has cast 156 votes opposing reproductive freedom and privacy during his congressional career.


"Ultimately, this bill is about robbing America of one of its greatest distinctives: freedom of the individual. It's about robbing the American citizen of power, and putting it in the hands of left-wing bureaucrats and elitists who think they know more about running people's lives than the people themselves know." - Rep. Trent Franks (R-AZ)

  • Rep. Franks has cast 19 votes opposing reproductive freedom and privacy during his congressional career.

To view the most-recent edition of NARAL Pro-Choice America's Congressional Record on Choice, please visit our web site.

 

Follow Nancy Keenan on Twitter: www.twitter.com/NARAL

 
 
  • Comments
  • 30
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Recency  | 
Popularity
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
jinxed
starting over at 60
02:32 PM on 03/30/2010
Ever notice the GOP want "freedom of health care choice" but only for those of the male gender? What amazes me the most is how hard the GOPers keep trying to make women second class citizens subject to the whims of men. Maybe its time to elect a majority of women as senators and representatives (Bachmann and her crazy crowd need not apply) and get the testosterone out of government.
09:16 AM on 03/30/2010
If I'm not mistaken, the point of this post is to show that certain "Anti-Choice" law makers want to be able to choose to health care in private, but do not think this "right for choice" and health privacy should be extended to all (women).

What this position ignores is that until this new legislation, choice for most was limited by affordability. One's choice, then, was imaginary; those without the money to pay were relegated to long lines in over taxed ER rooms, for which they had little choice but to wait and wait and wait. One's choice to have a physical, perhaps to catch a condition early enough to be treated minimally, and thus less expensively, was put off by the need for food and shelter.

And then there are those who had to "choose" to accept bankruptcy so that they could live with a chronic illness or survive a critical one. How is this a choice?

In the US money is everything, which effects one's ability to choose! Prior to this change in H C policy, if you don't have the money, you couldn't fully choose your care.

How ridiculous this idea of choice has been, when it only applies to those who have the money and connections to choose? About as ridiculous as a man feeling he has any right to legislate limitations on woman's right to make her private choice for a situation he will never physically find himself in.
09:38 AM on 03/30/2010
Gov't involvement in the current system plays a large role in the rising costs of care. It is not profits that increase price. Demand increases price. The gov't has long been an artificial source of demand and continus to be so with this bill.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
Irmanator
CARRIED INTEREST should be taxed as income
10:11 AM on 03/30/2010
Rising profit margins in the health insurance industry do contribute to the rise in price of health care. According to W Potter, payout rates used to be above 90% for each dollar of premiums paid. Now they are less than 80%.
12:09 PM on 03/30/2010
Typos aside...
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
kerewin21
12:53 AM on 03/30/2010
Prenatal care isn't health care (being pregnant isn't a disease, right?). If prenatal care becomes medically necessary, there are very few that have a problem with insurance plans or the government paying for them.

But if you just want to be pregnant... you and some guy got yourselves into this. You can buck up yourself and take care of the problem.

How does it look on the other side?
08:21 AM on 03/30/2010
http://www.womenshealth.gov/faq/prenatal-care.cfm#i

"Where can I go to get free or reduced-cost prenatal care?

Women in every state can get help to pay for medical care during their pregnancies. This prenatal care can help you have a healthy baby. Every state in the United States has a program to help. Programs give medical care, information, advice, and other services important for a healthy pregnancy.

To find out about the program in your state:
- Call 1-800-311-BABY (1-800-311-2229). This toll-free telephone number will connect you to the Health Department in your area code.
- For information in Spanish, call 1-800-504-7081.
- Contact your local Health Department. "

P.S. If you’re replying to an existing comment, please hit “reply” at the bottom of their comment. Sorry, it’s a peeve of mine.
02:27 PM on 03/30/2010
"Health Care" covers more than just "disease". It covers all aspects of your health. After all, breaking a leg isn't technically a "disease"--so under you definition, it shouldn't be covered, right?

If anything shouldn't be covered, it's Viagra.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
jinxed
starting over at 60
02:39 PM on 03/30/2010
Ever notice that insurance plans cover Viagra but not birth control?
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
12:29 AM on 03/30/2010
Elective abortion isn't health care.

If an abortion becomes medically necessary, there are very few that have a problem with insurance plans or the government paying for them.

But if you just don't want to be pregnant....you and some guy got yourselves into this.....you can buck up yourself and take care of the problem.
been2there
Facts have a liberal bias.
02:42 AM on 03/30/2010
Okay, so the woman is now duly punished for having the audacity to get pregnant. What about the unwanted child? Do you fail to realize that a lifetime of knowing that one was never wanted is a fate far worse than death? How much suffering does a woman have to endure before you decide an abortion is "medically necessary?" What about other children in the family?
That kind of neo-con talk ignores the innocent bystanders, but they are part of the picture.
08:07 AM on 03/30/2010
Being unwanted is “far worse than death?” Really? In that case, why stop at birth? Let’s put a 30 day satisfaction guarantee on babies:

We’re so sure you’ll love your new baby that we’ll let you try it in your home for 30 nights. With our no-risk, satisfaction guarantee, you can return your child for any reason – we’ll even pay for shipping. If your baby has a birth defect: send it back. If she cries too much – send her back. If you don’t get a full, restful night sleep – send him back.

Why subscribe to other philosophies that force you to take responsibility for the life you’ve created? They make you commit to your child for 18 years. That’s a long time. Become pro-choice and spare yourself and your child the pain and suffering caused by his existence.
08:56 AM on 03/30/2010
isn't the aborted baby an "innocent bystander" of the first order?
10:55 PM on 03/29/2010
I'm surprised post 7-week abortions have lasted this long. seems like it'd be easy to beat in court if you had a half-decent lawyer.
05:08 PM on 03/29/2010
I am thrilled that they support medical marijuana, too.