Skip to content

Democrat Health Care Bill is Sexist and Anti-Mom | RedState Post

March 25, 2010

My latest at RedState:

When Nancy Pelosi uttered the ridiculous comment the other day that “being a woman will no longer be considered a pre-existing medical condition”, I chalked it up to simply being the further rantings of an out of touch Stepford Feminist, always walking in lockstep with some perceived victim mentality. I thought to myself “No, Speaker, being a woman was never a pre-existing condition. It is, however, awesome, even though you and your Feminist buddies have tried to diminish just how special it is, for years.”

Turns out, it wasn’t just her usual blathering. Instead, she was projecting, once again. You see, under the new Democrat health care bill, being a woman now does become a pre-existing condition, for which we are to be taxed punitively. The Democrat health care bill punishes women. For being women. It is also decidedly not For The Children ™.

Speaker Pelosi herself informed us that they’d have to pass the bill, so that we can see what’s in the bill. Well, now we can see it and there’s a little something called sexism showing up. The Mommy taxes, including the tampon tax (that’s right. A Ko-tax) is back. When such a tax was first proposed, it was back when people, you know, were allowed to see bills before they were passed. As such, a back-lash occurred and rightly so. The proposed tax was then amended to only be applied to Class II items that are at a price point of $100 or higher. That was still a major tax increase on a large number of items and procedures, but was more of a “hidden tax” on fewer people that would be passed on indirectly by their health care providers. Bad enough, yes.

But all that has changed yet again.

One of the shady deals made by the Democrats in order to garner votes for the bill was a reduction in the new excise tax on medical devices from 2.9 percent to 2.3 percent. However, this new tax will now be applied to more items. From HR 4872, Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010, As Passed By The House:

“SEC. 4191. MEDICAL DEVICES. (a) IN GENERAL.—There is hereby imposed on the sale of any taxable medical device by the manufacturer, producer, or importer a tax equal to 2.3 percent of the price for which so sold. (b) TAXABLE MEDICAL DEVICE.—For purposes of this section— (1) IN GENERAL.—The term ‘taxable medical device’ means any device (as defined in section 201(h) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act) intended for humans. (2) EXEMPTIONS.—Such term shall not include— (A) eyeglasses, (B) contact lenses, (C) hearing aids, and (D) any other medical device determined by the Secretary to be of a type which is generally purchased by the general public at retail for individual use.’’

Jim Geraghty, at NRO’s Campaign Spot, explains:

So unless Secretary Sebelius declares otherwise, any medical device is now 2.3 percent more expensive.

Brad Ellsworth: Because the Senate needs the architect of the National Tampon Tax.

Baron Hill: Because your breast pump will help manage our spending crisis.

Scott Murphy: Every time you use a suppository, think of his health-care vote.

Those three Congressmen proposed the changes; Representatives Baron Hill (D-IN) and Brad Ellsworth (D-IN, and soon to be Democratic Senate nominee) and Representative Scott Murphy, Democrat from New York. And Nancy Pelosi twisted arms to garner the votes for it. Nice going, Pelosi. You need to turn in your For the Women card, even if it was a fake one to begin with.

Because a quick search of the product classification database shows just how much women, and particularly Moms, will be punitively taxed. Tampons will be taxed; we are hereby punished not just by our monthly visitor, but because of it. Breast pumps will be taxed.  Those of us who are “punished by a baby”,  will now truly be punished monetarily by Congress for choosing (so much for choice!) to breast feed our children. What happened to wanting women to have it all? You are punishing women who work and need to pump to provide the best possible sustenance to their infants. It’s organic; I thought y’all liked that? Or is that just another thing to which you merely pay lip service for political expediency and “cool” points?

Birth control will now be more expensive as well, including diaphragms and condoms. Condoms, hmm, what shall we call that one? The roll-down tax? I suppose they figure who cares if people can’t afford condoms. Who needs personal responsibility? Pesky pregnancies won’t be a problem; abortions will be fully funded! That’s feminism for you. You’ve come a long way, baby! They should probably change that phrase, since they don’t seem to care much for actual babies.

The tax also applies to band-aids, once again harming Mommies and their children. While our kisses do fix boo-boos, they aren’t actually magic. Band-aids and bandages are required with children. Often.

Compression stockings – taxed! A Mom with varicose veins? You’ll now have to pay more to get some relief. And if you have a baby with croup? Not only will you be up all night, but your vaporizer, needed to relieve your child’s congestion, will cost you more now, too.

Perhaps the worst one of all; your epidurals will now be more expensive. That’s right; they are taxed too. This should most certainly be exempt as a necessity. Ladies, this is what happens when Obama type bureaucrats are in charge of your medical decisions.

We already knew that Democrats hate apple pie (I’m sure it’s a fake causative factor in their whole Obesity Crisis deal). They’ve now made it quite clear that they also, in fact, hate Moms.

10 Comments leave one →
  1. Dell permalink
    March 25, 2010 1:31 pm

    What’s your problem, Woman! Thanks to the libs you now have total access to the “morning after” pill, so you don’t need no stinkin’ condoms! And so what if you get an STD; you’ve got all this free health care just waiting to tangle with your genital issues. Just like Nanny, you’re a second class citizen. Lose the body parts and start living like a man! /sarc off

  2. absolutelyspeechless permalink
    March 25, 2010 3:05 pm

    Un-freaking-believable.
    I’m *sure* that this will be widely known.

  3. TJS permalink
    March 25, 2010 4:30 pm

    Has anybody thought about using Roe Vs. Wade against this bill. Isn’t it our right to choose what can be done to our bodies, and the government can’t say anything about it. But this bill says what the government can and can’t do to our body. Wouldn’t that be the ultimate just desserts that the ulimate liberal decision is what kills this awful bill.

  4. March 26, 2010 8:49 pm

    Not only does it discriminate against women, it also forces the sick and injured to pay proportionally more than healthy people! The more medical devices you need, presumably because of the seriousness of your illness or injury, the more you have to pay!

    What a country!

  5. March 27, 2010 1:51 pm

    Dell, “lost the parts”.. hahahahahahaa

    Come on Lori, you can’t expect to get a free-for-all bumper sticker just because Obama says its so? Someone has to pay for the subsidies. You being a rich, white, conservative-leaning woman who speaks her mind is EXPECTED to pay your share so those who are not like you can have what you can purchase. It is all about fairness, you know.

    And by the way, this gives us guys just another reason to not buy these “girly goods” for you women. If we did, we would create a scene at the grocery store by exclaiming, “You want me to pay how much for that?!?!?!” And you know, we never want to draw attention to ourselves when we buy those “girly goods”.
    🙂

  6. March 28, 2010 12:50 am

    Believe me, I’m all for ripping this health bill to shreds. It sucks, big time. But, under the exemptions list is item D, as quoted by you above…

    (D) any other medical device determined by the Secretary to be of a type which is generally purchased by the general public at retail for individual use.

    Wouldn’t Band-Aids, tampons, and condoms fall under this description? I can have any of these items in my hands within 15 minutes. Band-Aids and tampons are certainly for individual use (maybe one could make the argument that condom’s general use includes two individuals).

    I’m not accusing, I’m asking – why wouldn’t these items fall under exemption D?

    • Lori Ziganto permalink*
      March 28, 2010 12:52 am

      That’s the point .. determined by the Secretary. It is up to Sebelius to decide. As of now, they are all OPTED IN. She has to specifically opt them out. And, why would she? They can’t finance this as it is. Why would they ever give UP taxing something?

Trackbacks

  1. uberVU - social comments

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: