Today, Obama signed the health care bill. And I’m excited, because personally I think that health care should be a right, not a privilege, and it’s about time America made that a reality.
So how will the bill affect women?
Well, women are a part of the general population, and a bill that will provide coverage to 32 million uninsured people is sure to help a lot of women. But some people are saying that the bill will help women in particular, as it will require private insurance companies to pay for preventative care (which includes mammograms). In addition, the bill will help women, who are four times more likely than men to contract an autoimmune disease, by getting rid of lifetime coverage limits. So it seems to be pretty good, right?
But on the other hand, what about abortion? An interesting article by Jodi Jacobson explains that the Nelson Ammendment requires every person to write two healthcare checks if they choose a plan that covers abortions, one for their regular premium and one for the money that could potentially go for abortions. Today more than 85 percent of women with private insurance are enrolled in plans that cover abortions. However, if insurance companies must go through a complicated process to provide people with the option of abortion, they potential cost of doing so will act as a deterrent and probably decrease the number of insurance plans covering abortions. In addition, there is no requirement that in each insurance exchange there must be at least one plan covering abortion, which means that for some women, it may be impossible for them to find a plan with abortion coverage at all.
NARAL Pro-Choice America made the following statement yesterday:
The legislation includes an onerous provision that requires Americans to write two separate checks if the insurance plan they choose includes abortion coverage. This unacceptable bureaucratic stigmatization could cause insurance carriers to drop abortion coverage, even though more than 85 percent of private plans currently cover this care for women. Our message to our allies in Congress and in the White House is clear: We do not accept this bill as the final word on how abortion coverage will be defined in the new health-care system. We are committed to finding opportunities to repeal these unacceptable restrictions as the new system takes shape…At the same time, we recognize that the bill will bring more than 30 million Americans into a system that includes affordable family-planning services, better access to contraception, and maternity care. …We applaud this tremendous progress, but we will continue to work toward a day when these kinds of achievements can be made without undermining women’s access to abortion coverage.
And I think that basically sums up the big problem that pro-choice legislators had to deal with: which is more important, health care expansion or ensured abortion coverage? And I guess at this point in time, health care won out, especially in light of the need for anti-choice support for the bill. So I, at least, am excited to see how much this health care change will do for the US, but also know that looking forward there is still a need for changes to be enacted to ensure that women have the abortion coverage that they deserve.
As someone uninsured, I cannot say “hooray” for this bill, even in theory. The bill hurts women in ways aside from abortion/reproductive rights, and that is (in my opinion) no victory for any one.
The bill, from my understanding, will allow for age-rating, the practice of imposing higher premiums on older people. This practice affects women disproportionately.
The bill also will allow for the continuation of gender-rating, the practice of charging women higher premiums simply because they are women.
Add that to two additional ways, aside from reproductive rights, that women lost (the battle, that is, the fight is NOT over!).
Another issue is that the bill–as it stood when it was passed–imposes harsh restrictions on the ability of immigrants to access health care, such as a 5-year waiting period on permanent, legal residents before they are eligible for assistance such as Medicaid.
But perhaps what it most disgusting to me about the bill, aside from the fact that women were sold out, is that it is almost identical to the plan written by AHIP, the insurance company trade association, in 2009.
I just don’t see this bill as reform or change. It seems to me to be a victory for the insurance companies, and that’s about it.
Actually, the bill bans gender-rating. Here’s a nice summary of the bill from Feministe: http://www.feministing.com/archives/020446.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+Feministing+%28Feministing%29
Either way, what I think is important to note is that the bill is flawed, absolutely. But it’s a step. And I’m not familiar with the plan written by the AHIP, but I do think that this health care plan does have its merits, regardless—things like subsidies for poor people to buy insurance, and banning denial of coverage for people with preexisting conditions. I agree with you that there are flaws, especially for women, but passing a health care bill that requires everyone in the US to have insurance is a huge step towards progressing America.