Reply #38: Reid-Nelson language? - No, it is not the Nelson language, it is the Reid language

[karynnj]

and they are showing the same stupidity some chapters showed whan they attacked Senator Kennedy because he endorsed Obama.

The fact is the Senate bill has a provision (it was a Kerry provision and it was added) that ensures that the cost for women equals the cost for men and Obama kept it. So, I assume they are speaking of paying extra for abortion insurance, which men do not have to pay. But, the change to gender parity for the rest of the cost ALONE means the total cost for a woman wanting insurance for women is lower than it was before - because that provision lowers the cost more than paying by a second check for abortion would cost.

The comments on PRIVATE insurance ignore that there is a need for two checks only when the government is paying one of them - the bigger one for everything but abortion. People currently on Medicaid do not have abortion funded and they do not have the option of buying this insurance with their own money. So, this is an improvement. For the people who pay all or part of their insurance, their portion can be one check. The point is that the government can not pay for it. That keeps things exactly where it is now with the Hyde amendment.

When 30 million unisured people, including women and children, get insurance, people can't be excluded due to pre-existing conditions and other improvements that abortion is the first thing they mention. As to the age rating, the status quo in some states has a spread of as much as 34 to 1 - this is an improement. As to those on modest incomes, if they are below a threshold, they get subsidies.