In the third and final U.S. presidential debate of 2016, candidates Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump discuss their stances regarding the landmark 1973 supreme court case, Roe v. Wade.
The National Review blog post by Alexandra DeSanctis, shortsightedly discredits Hillary Clinton's defense of the supreme court decision in Roe v. Wade, in spite of the fact that the U.S. court system has upheld Roe v. Wade in hundreds and hundreds of legal challenges over the last 43 years. DeSanctis makes the argument that democrats defend a woman's right to make health choices for her own body over the rights of citizens not yet born. She claims the partial birth citizen has more of a right to life than the woman giving birth, whose life may be endangered by the pregnancy. DeSanctis justifies defunding Planned Parenthood (PP) because their clinics might offer this option to women even though, less than 3% of Planned Parenthood funding pays for abortions. The other 97% of PP funding goes to pay for STIs/STDs testing/medication, contraception, cancer screenings and other women's health and family planning services.
Clinton argues women have the right to make their own health care choices in private discussions with their own doctors and families without the government interfering. She appropriately acknowledges these as difficult and highly personal decisions where government has no right to intrude. She also notes that no government funding pays for abortions (see Hyde Amendment).
Although Alexandra DeSanctis is a graduate of Notre Dame and credentials as a journalist for the National Review, she overlooks the second class citizenship of women in the world, while defending the priority rights of unborn fetuses. Imagine if a man who impregnated a woman had to decide if he would risk his life if his unborn child threatened his health and well being, rather than just letting the woman take all the risk. I do not think we would be talking about Planned Parenthood's ability to provide abortions or birth control, we would be talking about enhancing Planned Parenthood's family planning services, which mandated men's inclusion. If men got pregnant instead of women we would be having a completely different discussion now. Abortion would probably be legal everywhere, under all conditions.
DeSanctis, Alexandra. "Hillary's Appalling Defense of Partial-Birth Abortion." Web log post. National Review. N.P., 20 Oct. 2016. Web.
20 October 2016
07 October 2016
ObamaCare$ for the People
The Affordable Care Act (ACA), commonly known as Obamacare, is a law that was enacted by Congress in March of 2010. The act was aimed to increase the availability of health insurance by providing subsidies to lower income families so they could afford to have health insurance. However, there is much controversy on whether it has actually worked or not.
Margot Sanger-Katz is a domestic reporter for the New York Times, who focuses on health policy. She completed a Knight-Bagehot Fellowship in Economics and Business Journalism at Columbia University. She has appeared as a policy analyst on MSNBC, PBS, To The Point and Here and Now, and several articles in the Columbia Journalism Review.
In the New York Times, Margot Sanger-Katz argues that since Obamacare "people have become less likely to have medical debt or to postpone care because of cost." She cites several studies which support her argument, including one recently published by the Journal of American Medical Association. The JAMA study compared Arkansas and Kentucky, which expanded the availability of medicaid health care, with Texas, which did not. Their survey found that people in Arkansas and Kentucky were 5% more likely to feel better about their health. As Sanger-Katz notes, when you ask people about their health, they pretty accurately report the truth.
Sanger-Katz also addressed the financial aspects of health care, historically the leading cause for working class people not to have health care. The JAMA study findings support Sanger-Katz financial argument as well. The study found that the people of Kentucky and Arkansas weren't struggling near as much with medical bills.
Both the U.S. Senate and House of Representatives have introduced multiple bills to abolish the Affordable Care Act during the past few years.
I believe Margot Sanger-Katz makes a compelling argument for the success of the Affordable Care Act aimed at the U.S. Congress as well as the millions of remaining uninsured American people. It seems unacceptable for our elected representatives to insist on eliminating health care legislation (ACA) when it has proven to improve peoples' health. Sanger-Katz argument to this effect is supported by one of the most credible sources, the Journal of the American Medical Association. It seems to me the JAMA knows more about health care than the average congress person. Since the Affordable Care Act has helped regular Americans to seek preventative care and avoid going deeply in debt from catastrophic medical bills, I believe the ACA also helps people access health care before their medical needs become catastrophic.
Sanger-Katz, Margot. "Obamacare Appears to Be Making People Healthier." Web log post. The New York Times. N.p., 9 Aug. 2016. Web.
Margot Sanger-Katz is a domestic reporter for the New York Times, who focuses on health policy. She completed a Knight-Bagehot Fellowship in Economics and Business Journalism at Columbia University. She has appeared as a policy analyst on MSNBC, PBS, To The Point and Here and Now, and several articles in the Columbia Journalism Review.
In the New York Times, Margot Sanger-Katz argues that since Obamacare "people have become less likely to have medical debt or to postpone care because of cost." She cites several studies which support her argument, including one recently published by the Journal of American Medical Association. The JAMA study compared Arkansas and Kentucky, which expanded the availability of medicaid health care, with Texas, which did not. Their survey found that people in Arkansas and Kentucky were 5% more likely to feel better about their health. As Sanger-Katz notes, when you ask people about their health, they pretty accurately report the truth.
Sanger-Katz also addressed the financial aspects of health care, historically the leading cause for working class people not to have health care. The JAMA study findings support Sanger-Katz financial argument as well. The study found that the people of Kentucky and Arkansas weren't struggling near as much with medical bills.
Both the U.S. Senate and House of Representatives have introduced multiple bills to abolish the Affordable Care Act during the past few years.
I believe Margot Sanger-Katz makes a compelling argument for the success of the Affordable Care Act aimed at the U.S. Congress as well as the millions of remaining uninsured American people. It seems unacceptable for our elected representatives to insist on eliminating health care legislation (ACA) when it has proven to improve peoples' health. Sanger-Katz argument to this effect is supported by one of the most credible sources, the Journal of the American Medical Association. It seems to me the JAMA knows more about health care than the average congress person. Since the Affordable Care Act has helped regular Americans to seek preventative care and avoid going deeply in debt from catastrophic medical bills, I believe the ACA also helps people access health care before their medical needs become catastrophic.
Sanger-Katz, Margot. "Obamacare Appears to Be Making People Healthier." Web log post. The New York Times. N.p., 9 Aug. 2016. Web.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)