Low-key sober question: Is the Nelson choice language tolerable?

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

I would prefer no anti-abortion anything so I am obviously not happy about there being a compromise at all. Even meaningless dicta would be deeply offensive.

But even within the category "monstrosity" there is better and worse. Stupak would be a deal-breaker for me. Hyde is offensive and maybe even unconstitutional in my strong way of looking at rights issues but it is *tolerable* insofar as I never expected a HCR bill to overturn it.

How are the reviews coming in? I have read the Nelson language but, like Stupak, the meaning of anything like this arises from the intersection of the language with the whole rest of the bill.

And that is a deep sort of policy analysis of the sort where most folks who are not policy professionals (a category of non-expertise that includes me :hi: )will end up relying to some degree on the credibility of analysts and organizations that comment on it.

The state opt-out of allowing abortion coverage implies that the scope of the worst of it would be in states that have already have the most restrictive allowable anti-choice laws. That sucks, but is obviously somewhat better than nation-wide. But there are doubtless no end of subtle ramifications.

So what are folks saying the language really means? Is it "acceptable" like someone spitting on your shoe, or is it in the flying-monster-head category?

(Being a snowbound Saturday throughout the northeast I imagine much reaction will wait for Sunday op-eds and TV chat-fests.)

[madfloridian]

1. I am sure it will be fine.

:shrug:

We women should be thankful they are not banning it altogether. Me? I'm too old to have one anyway.

A little sarcasm? Yes.

[napi21]

2. I don't see it as any more than a redefinition of the Hyde amendment.

Even if a State opts out, a citizen can still buy their ins. from any co. that is not in the exchange. (Depending of course on how their State law is already written.)

[lapfog_1]

3. Uh, there won't BE any company not in the exchange.

That's the hidden "gotcha".

And, more to the point, even if you live in a state that doesn't "opt out", do you really think people are going to purchase a separate rider just for abortion? And pay for it every month with a separate payment?

People never plan for an abortion.

You're a young adult woman, trying to scrape by, can't really afford any "frills", not in a relationship and not planning to be pregnant. However, one night, you meet this guy, and your defenses are down for whatever reason, and your normal birth control method fails...

You don't even know you SHOULD get a pregnancy test until, well 2 months or more go by... you don't have money for an abortion.. and the guy, well, let's say things didn't work out and now you don't know where he is.

Sound far fetched... far from it.

[napi21]

4. I don't think every ins. will be in the exchange. The other thing,

as I understood it, is that it is the ins. co's job to keep the funds separate, not the insured. I don't think you have to buy a rider.

[lapfog_1]

6. Well, here is the managers amendments.

http://democrats.senate.gov/reform/managers-amendment.pdf

Page 41 Line 5:

‘‘(i) collect from each enrollee in the
6 plan (without regard to the enrollee’s age,
7 sex, or family status) a separate payment
8 for each of the following:

Pretty clear, don'tcha think? Separate payment for each of the following:

And you can bet that every insurance company is going to want to be in the exchange... because by 2014, that's where all that government gravy money will be spent.

[Kitsune]

5. That a Democrat even considered inserting such language is offensive.

Nelson needs to read the fucking party platform he ran on.

[MadHound]

7. It is offensive to women and any thinking, caring person

This is essentially limiting the rights of a significant number of women, and the Democrats are essentially willing to throw women and their rights under the bus in order to claim some sort of victory.

This is a vile, inhumane thing to do.

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

8. Update: NOW votes no.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=433x75511