Sincere question: If we had Medicare for All, would we need Planned Parenthood?

[Scuba]

Bernie advocates for Medicare for All and Planned Parenthood endorses his primary opponent. Is there a relationship between these two actions?

[brooklynite]

1. Conspiracy Theories belong in CREATIVE SPECULATION

[JoePhilly]

2. +1

Apparently getting rid of PP is a good thing now for some on the left.

[brooklynite]

3. Add to which...Medicare for all doesn't eliminate health care providers, just payers

The only thing worse than a bad conspiracy theory is a lazy one.

[Scuba]

13. If they same services as provided by PP were paid by Medicare for All, wouldnt' they then be ...

... provided at most hospitals and clinics where PP patient can not now afford to go?

[JoePhilly]

24. Why do you think the GOP would let federal funds be used to pay for abortion?

[Scuba]

26. Please see reply 16 and my reply 18. Thanks.

[synergie]

49. Medicaid/care already pay for PP services. And no hospitals and existing clinics cannot cover the

hole PP would leave behind should you attempt to destroy it over a temper tantrum.

[Scuba]

54. Please explain how I'm attempting to destroy PP and what it is you consider a temper tantrum.

Thanks in advance for your thoughtful and dignified response.

[Hekate]

99. See my post #97 re the Hyde Amendment. Abortion is not covered by a single cent of federal funds.

[Scuba]

100. Thanks. Someone else also educated me about that.

[handmade34]

4. yes

Planned Parenthood is a wonderful organization... no relationship

[Scuba]

5. No question they're a wonderful organization. But would they be needed if we had M. for All?

[LiberalArkie]

35. Medicare doesn't pay for everything. A person still has to have supplemental insurance.

So probably so. It would be little different I would think. Probably to cover the people who could not afford the supplemental policies.

[synergie]

50. PP is a healthcare provider, chaning how you pay for heatlhcare doesn't affect

how healthcare is provided or who provides it. PP is reimbursed through medicare/medicaid for the care they provide. So the answer is NO, medicare would not replace PP.

[LiberalArkie]

53. That makes sense. I thought that they did provide some free services, but I guess those are paid

by other systems like medicaid.

I knew that there would still be a place for PP. Most people think that single payer pays for everything and is all a person needs. But it really doesn't cover every penny and every procedure.

[kath]

81. Well, in most other developed nations, their universal healthcare DOES cover every penny.

Europeans would scream bloody murder if you switched them to Medicare, because the out-of-pocket costs are so friggin' high.

[LiberalArkie]

82. I had a friend in England that did have an insurance plan in England as it paid for

the private hospitals also.

[polly7]

84. The PP centers here

(only affiliated with the Action Canada for Sexual Health & Rights) offer discount birth control, sexual health and rights education and resources, referrals, STI testing and direct communication with nurses and other health providers on a 24-hr. basis, and at some, access to a doctor to provide care (though there is a wait time for this). Action Canada works to bring to attention and advance sexual health and reproductive rights issues to those in our gov't.

All medical costs associated with sexual health and abortions are covered here but bc costs, including STI testing, but these clinics provide an extra added privacy benefit for those who may be afraid or are unable to go to a health clinic or hospital. All cancer screening is covered under our health plan.

Here is the Planned Parent Regina site: http://www.plannedparenthoodregina.com/

http://www.sexualhealthandrights.ca/find-service-provider/#saskatchewan

[Autumn]

112. One pays out of pocket for abortions at PP. Medicaid pays for birth control from PP or a Dr.

[-none]

56. This is the correct answer^^^

Many people assume, incorrectly, that going to a Single Payer system would nationalize health care also. Not so. Providers and how it is paid for are two separate entities.

[synergie]

47. Yes.

Medicare is the program to help with the elderly, and Medicaid is the one to help the poor.

If you're talking about single payer healthcare, a la Candada or the UK, then you're still talking about how we PAY for care, not how we deliver it.

PP is a healthcare provider. Even if we had single payer, we would still need providers like PP, which serve areas in which there is little access to other providers.

So, no destroying PP because you're upset about how their political arm endorsed is not a feasible plan, unless you truly don't give a flying fark about poor women and men and children. These clinics are the places where people go for healthcare, they are reimbursed for the care they provide by programs like medicare and medicaid. Expanding medi-whatever for all, in whichever method you're thinking about would not obviate the need for PP.

[NCTraveler]

6. You busted them. PP is fighting to provide women and families with great services.

We don't have Medicare for all.

Attempting to paint PP as shady is on you. No one else. Shitty conspiracy you are putting out there. Really fucking shitty.

"Bernie advocates for Medicare for All and Planned Parenthood endorses his primary opponent. Is there a relationship between these two actions?"

Please provide something to prove the "relationship" you are presenting. Simply saying one would cause the other makes nothing. If you can't get past point one, please consider posting in the proper forum. Creative Speculation.

[seabeyond]

7. Can you believe this? Throw women under the bus. More, feed the war against women, Democratic style.

Damn if I was not just exactly right about my issues with Sanders back in May. And if our supporter don't prove me right, repeatedly.

[Scuba]

14. Wouldn't women be better off with Medicare for All than having to get charity care at PP?

[Fuddnik]

22. The willful blindness is unbelievable.

Medicare for all would be better for EVERYONE. Women, men, children, veterans......

[synergie]

48. They're not gettting "charity care" at PP, they're getting MEDICAL care at PP and if they qualify

for medicaid, SOME of their care is paid for by medicaid or medicare. Women would be better off if people bothered to learn how things worked instead of blindly raging against and trying to destroy their healthcare providers because of their petty anger over politics.

The same holds true regardless of what you're calling yourself, a "true Democrat and Bernie supporter" or an "anti-choice right winger". When you both fail to do your homework, and say things that are remarkable in their ignorance and which do nothing but show how much anger blinds one to how reality works and the consequences for real women, what's the difference between you?


Stop abusing women's healthcare providers in political tantrums.

[Hekate]

101. "Charity care"? Is that what you think it is?

[synergie]

51. To be fair, it's not Bernie that's doing this it's a certain faction of his supporters

who seem to be raging on at anyone who does not agree with them.

[seabeyond]

78. It isn't Bernie. But, you know he knows and he has not stood up for women and PP and told his

supporters to knock it off. Democrats should never trash PP, regardless who they endorse. Endorsements simply is not that big of a deal. Attack on women and PP is a real thing. They should be safe within the Democratic Party.

That is where Sanders is failing in this one, as far as I am concerned. He should be speaking out for PP regardless of not getting endorsement. That is the integrity he is running on. And a speaker for woman he insists makes him a better candidate for women than Clinton.

[synergie]

113. I don't think anyone should be trashing PP, regardless of party, since they serve

everyone. I don't think it's fair to hold him responsible for what his followers do, he has no control over them, but he does need to communicate to his campaign staff to signal a stand down, they're the ones who are fomenting the aggressiveness.

That's kind of the point right, he'll vote to support PP, but he doesn't really get how or why PP is so important, it's kind of why he's not on the aggressive front of trying to stop the attacks on PP, and why he didn't merit their endorsement.

His followers, not all of them, just the whiny ones who literally do not care what PP is and have no clue how it works, or how healthcare works for women are exposing themselves. Take note, it is these men and these hysterical women whose pettiness and shallowness allows these attacks to happen. Just like the spineless Republican women who don't like what their party does on this front but shrug it off and still vote for these idiots.

[seabeyond]

114. Good post

That's kind of the point right, he'll vote to support PP, but he doesn't really get how or why PP is so important, it's kind of why he's not on the aggressive front of trying to stop the attacks on PP, and why he didn't merit their endorsement.

Yes. Though, watching all these months, I am no longer giving him the out that he does not know. He may not. But, I often hear a comment from him that tells me he is either hearing the negative, or he is stroking the negative his supporters are putting out. I do not know who is organizing these things, or if it is just the mentality of the campaign. But, he no longer gets away with another single, ... I didn't know.

I didn't know my staffer apologized to BLM. I didn't know my people were stealing data. Too many "I didn't know's".

And. Oppsie. it is these men and these hysterical women . Societal conditioning, silly hysterical women. No more or less hysterical than men, yet the ones that get the label.

I appreciate your post. I agree.

[Scuba]

9. You avoided the question while impugning my character. Nice attempt at diversion.

I've been a PP supporter forever, but the question is legitimate: If we had Medicare for All, would we need Planned Parenthood or would those services be covered under Medicare for All and therefore available at many hospitals/clinics?

PP leadership wouldn't be the first to try to protect their jobs by keeping the government from providing the same service.

[seabeyond]

11. Impugning your character? Calling you out your attack on PP. As a Democrat, we still do have the

right to stand up for an organization that have save tons of women's lives, dont we? To not participate in the RW attack on PP, right? Don't we have an obligation as Democrats?

Women's lives matter.

[Fuddnik]

23. There was no attack on PP.

If we had Medicare for all, we wouldn't need charities providing health care.

[synergie]

52. PP isn't a charity. It's a health care provider, and what do you imagine medicare for all means?

Do you honestly not understand the difference between a health care provider (like PP) and how we pay for care (this "medicare for all" nonsense)?

If we had a single payer health care system we still need health care providers like PP.

You guys have been attacking PP since the moment you heard its political committee isn't supporting your guy.

[Hekate]

103. Two words: Hyde Amendment. Damn straight we still need Planned Parenthood.

[DawgHouse]

104. +1

[seabeyond]

115. Thanks all. I am really kinda disgusted with our Dem ability to attack PP and women in general.

I kinda walked away from this thread, but I do take note those that diss, and those that defend.

I do not have a lot, or any experience with PP. I know two women my age. Both lives saved with PP with their newly found breast cancer. One just starting up in the battle. One five years in the battle. PP knows what they are doing, they focus on women. The are so beyond a mere "charitable" group.

I am jump back out of this thread. Thank you

[NCTraveler]

12. "while impugning my character"

I had absolutely no need to do so.

[sufrommich]

8. Well,congrats,this is a new low.nt

[edgineered]

10. Support of the status quo has nothing to do with it. nt

[99Forever]

15. In a single payer system..

... Planned Parenthood could thrive. Simply provide services billed to Medicare like all other providers.

Oh...

... and stay the fuck OUT of politics.

[Scuba]

17. Per their own website, 79% of PP patients are low income. Why would they travel ...

... to PP if their services would be covered locally by Medicare for All?

[JoePhilly]

28. What location do you image the women will go to instead of a PP location?

And why do you think Single Payer would ensure that Federal funds paid for abortions.

You might as well be arguing that the ACA had made PP unnecessary because most insurance plans cover abortion too.

Oh wait, the GOP has fought that tooth and nail. But you think the GOP will magically allow abortion to be paid for using federal funds in a single payer system.

Fucking ridiculous.

[Scuba]

30. Please see reply 16 and my reply 18. Thanks.

[JoePhilly]

31. That does not answer my question about the locations.

PP is a PLACE. A PLACE where women can get a variety of medical services.

Even if you have single payer ... woman still need a PLACE that they'll go to for medical services. Or do you think Walmart will start offering these medical services.

You might as well be suggesting that single payer eliminates the need for what's traditionally been called a "Family Practice", because people don't need that PLACE anymore, they can just go to the hospital under a single payer system.

PP provides medical services in a particular location.

The recent effort around here to go after PP has really been amazing. Its as if some folks have no idea what PP actually is or what it does.

[Scuba]

38. Yeah it does. They'd still go to PP as it would still be needed.

[synergie]

55. Well, unless "medicare for all" or whatever also provides for transporation costs and

doctors and clinics near their home and their work, they would "travel" to the place that's near to them for their routine and reproductive care.

You guys don't really understand the whole health care issue, do you? Or how health care works in this country? People actually have to travel for care, even when they have the best insurance possible, because of the status of health care providers in this country, especially with the how the Catholic hospitals have been taking over community hospitals and keeping women from actually accessing medically necessary care.

Do you truly have no clue what's been going on for the past decade in terms of ACCESS to care?

It's possibly this level of ignorance and complacency about the real issues being faced by women with regard to healthcare and reproductive rights that led to PP endorsing Clinton over Sanders. Being supportive of women's basic rights is nice and all, but when faced with unrelenting attacks, we need people who are willing to actually FIGHT, and Bernie simply hasn't done that.

[Scuba]

58. After 32 years as a hospital administrator, yeah I know how healthcare works. And I also know ...

... that most Americans live a lot closer to a hospital and a clinic than they to a Planned Parenthood clinic.

Apparently you don't know that!

[mythology]

90. And if that hospital is catholic and won't provide abortion services?

There's also the Hyde amendment which bans government funds paying for abortions. There is also the fact that not every provider is willing to put up with the constant harassment, death threats and violence against doctors who provide abortion services.

So no, single payer or other national health care systems, won't mean that Planned Parenthood will become unnecessary.

Frankly this sort of conspiracy theory nonsense should be hidden. They didn't endorse Clinton because Sanders wants medicare for all (especially since that is at best unlikely to pass even if Sanders does win the presidency).

[Tanuki]

19. Medicare applies to people over age 65, who are not the main consumers of family planning services,

Last edited Mon Jan 11, 2016, 01:20 PM - Edit history (2)

but thanks for Bernsplaining reproductive health to us all.

[99Forever]

29. Take a deep breath.

Is there some part of MEDICARE FOR ALL you fail to understand?

Seems you could really USE some "Bernsplaining."

[Tanuki]

36. I understand it quite well, but that is not the term you used in the post to which I responded.

Meanwhile, as far as "staying the fuck out of politics," perhaps you have not been following the ongoing political attempts at the local, state, national, and international level over the past few decades to overturn Roe v. Wade and otherwise strip women of the right to determine their reproductive health choices. It was not PP's choice to politicize this; I am sure they would have been happy to continue their mission to provide education and health services, but they are in a fight for their life and the women whose futures depend on them. It's been political for a long time, as you have apparently failed to notice. You may be very comfortable just sitting back and taking " a deep breath" when this sort of thing is going on, but I understand the dangers of complacency:

" When Texas Gov. Rick Perry announced his "Initiatives to Protect Life" on Dec. 11 in Houston, he said there was a difference between women's health and protecting the rights of abortion providers. He said state legislators were obligated to make every day of the upcoming 140-day session count toward protecting Texas' "most vulnerable citizens."

"The ideal world is a world without abortion," Perry said, calling for the Supreme Court's decision in Roe v. Wade to be overturned. "Until then, however, we will continue to pass laws to ensure abortions are as rare as possible under existing law."

http://abcnews.go.com/Health/texas-planned-parenthood-defunding-hits-patients-clinics/story?id=18173045

http://www.guttmacher.org/media/nr/2016/01/06/index.html

http://www.missourinet.com/2015/11/30/planned-parenthood-files-lawsuit-to-try-and-continue-offering-abortions-at-columbia-facility/

[99Forever]

43. No. Apparently you don't even have the first clue.

Obvious is obvious

[Tanuki]

46. Right, I don't know wtf I'm talking about. Thanks for Bernsplaining. That really helps women whose

reproductive choices are being stripped away right under your nose by the GOP and anti-choice movement.

[99Forever]

68. Fuck the GOP.

That's some ridiculous tangent you ran off on that absolutely nothing to do with my post.

Take a breath and focus. You have an issue with the Teapublicans, take it up with them. Cuz I sure as fuck don't answer for those assholes.

[Tanuki]

71. Actually, you carry their water, albeit inadvertently, when you urge PP to "stay the fuck

out of politics." They are hardly newcomers to the political process. Did you know that PP had to go to court to overturn state laws against basic birth control, even for married couples, in the 1960s? Are you aware of their involvement in Roe v. Wade, and their constant efforts to defend against GOP and anti-choice efforts to restrict women's choices in the intervening years? Where would we all be if they had taken your advice to "stay the fuck out of politics"? You are not doing your candidate any favors with your persistence in this, no matter how much ignorant profanity you spew. If anything, you are providing more support with each of your posts for PP's decision to endorse HRC, who clearly "gets it." I am not the one who needs to focus, although I sympathize with your apparent confusion when confronted with complex issues. If you want to educate yourself about this, and not just waste time venting your spleen on the internet, you will understand that nothing I wrote above is a "ridiculous tangent." There is plenty of information on the internet; you can start here:

https://www.plannedparenthood.org/files/3013/9611/5870/Abortion_Roe_History.pdf

[99Forever]

74. Bullshit.

Save your pathetic nonsense for the Camp Weathervane crowd. This acual liberal isn't in the market for spinning claptrap.

[Tanuki]

75. Instead of a reasoned rebuttal, all you can do is sputter with insults and cussing.

That is quite telling. You apparently aren't "in the market" for facts, insofar as they conflict with your biases. In an alternate reality in which whoever is more willing to engage in verbal abuse instead of reason is the winner, you win. In the real world, women's lives are at stake. Reproductive rights have been highly politicized by the right wing and require dedicated defenders, and the fight has to take place in the political arena, whether we like it or not. I've suggested that you educate yourself about this and provided a link where you can start, but that doesn't seem to be your goal. Sorry you think this is nothing but "pathetic nonsense" and "claptrap". Again, you aren't doing your candidate any favors with that attitude, which I'm pretty sure he does not share.

[99Forever]

80. "Reasoned rebuttal" to false accusations and personal insults?

Dream on. Bub bye.

[restorefreedom]

94. you just made it

On Mon Jan 11, 2016, 05:32 PM an alert was sent on the following post:

Bullshit.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=994423

REASON FOR ALERT

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.

ALERTER'S COMMENTS

This is just an unnecessarily nasty, insult-ridden post. No need to go off on someone like that.

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Mon Jan 11, 2016, 05:36 PM, and the Jury voted 3-4 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Need to get thicker skin. This is not that bad.
Juror #2 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: We're supposed to be above childish namecalling and callouts.
Juror #3 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: Only because this whole subthread is out of control.
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: This is going off?
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: It was a very close call. Please, poster, use better judgment next time.
Juror #6 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: Everything about this post, and this poster, is over the top and intended to be as caustic and nasty as possible. Definite hide.
Juror #7 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: It was an appropriate response to an insulting tirade. Political kitchens get hot. Posters have to deal with it. This was not in violation of TOS.

Thank you very much for participating in our Jury system, and we hope you will be able to participate again in the future.

[Tanuki]

95. For the record, I wasn't the one who alerted on this. n/t

[Hekate]

107. Thanks, Tanuki. PP's political fight for its life reminds me of a Woody Guthrie song...

As through this world I've rambled,
I've seen lots of funny men
Some'll rob you with a 6-gun
Some with a fountain pen.

Women's very lives are at stake, as are their doctors, nurses, clinic volunteers, and even their children (who are stalked). Meanwhile, anti-choice politicians want to "kill them with a fountain pen" by outlawing and closing clinics.

It's infuriating that we have so many DUers, allegedly Democrats, allegedly pro-women, who are completely blind to this issue.

[synergie]

57. It would seem that you need to calm down because there is a whole lot

you don't seem to understand about the simple difference between a healthcare provider and the various programs there to pay for the care provided. Seems like you could use some explaining since all the "mansplaining" and Berniesplaining has left you quite ignorant about the basic logic and facts involved here.

When you don't understand what medicare is (long term care for the elderly), you shouldn't be explaining anything to anyone, no matter how many condescending enhancements you make to text you clearly have no clue about.

[mcar]

85. Bernsplaining?

Seriously?

[99Forever]

86. Hillarious, huh.

Had to send that one to Ignore.

The smell desperation gets stronger every day.

[Tanuki]

88. He thinks he actually sent me someplace?

"Had to send that one to Ignore."

Bless his little heart!

[img][/img]

[Tanuki]

16. Yes, because there are exclusions of using public funds to cover abortion in most states.

Last edited Mon Jan 11, 2016, 10:19 AM - Edit history (1)

In some states, this still includes even the extreme cases of rape, incest, or danger to the mother's health.
http://kff.org/medicaid/state-indicator/abortion-under-medicaid/

Planned Parenthood would remain the only provider most women would have, even with single payer funding, because most Ob-Gyn providers in the healthcare system are not performing abortions, and are even less likely to do so now than in the past because of targeting for harrassment and death threats. I am a health care provider in a different field and am a strong believer in single payer, both for personal and professional reasons, but do not think the services that PP provides, including counseling and educations services, fit neatly into the billable hours model, and I wonder where you think abortion services would fit in with the "no public funding" carve-outs. Many of these are left at the discretion of the states, btw.

[Scuba]

18. Finally an answer that makes sense. Thank you.

[zazen]

32. that is very helpful, since I too shared the OP's question and didn't understand the attacks

Seemed like a legitimate question to me.

I know I'm dreaming to even think about getting single payer, but in that context, it sounds like PP could really focus then on what is most needed and could continue to play a valuable role.

I suspect there are some major healthcare non-profits that might not be necessary anymore or that might have to really shift focus. Was curious about PP and now you've answered it.

Scuba, sorry to see so many unfounded attacks on you. Thanks for asking the question.

[Scuba]

42. I thought it was pretty funny that I was "throwing women under the bus" because I want M4A.

[synergie]

61. I think it's kind of odd that you chose to take that from what was said.

It's pretty funny how you choose to be attacked when you don't understand what's being said. You asked an honest question from a place of actual ignorance, an unbelievable amount of it, actually. That's fine, when you don't know something, you are ignorant and ignorance is treatable, you were educated. What you were saying was remarkably uninformed, and people have been showing how shallow their commitment to women's health truly is with this endorsement that they didn't like and the true depth of their ignorance about how or why PP works, the job it does and why it's necessary.


You were throwing women under the bus, and how does long term care for the elderly for all help anyone? You still don't understand what you're saying nor do you seem to understand that single payer is NOT the same thing as Medicare for all.

Please go do your homework and stop laughing when your called out for doing what you actually did, even if you don't have an understanding of what it was you were advocating.

[Scuba]

63. Sarah Palin would be proud of that word salad.

[BlueCaliDem]

87. You give her WAY too much credit. She wouldn't get by the first two words before walking away,

mumbling something incoherent.

[ismnotwasm]

20. Are you serious?

Yes, I suppose you are. Good Lord

[Scuba]

21. Pleaser see reply #16 and my reply #18.

[ismnotwasm]

25. Perhaps I've been following what PP does a bit closer that what is considered usual

As well as paying very close attention to national politics when it come to reproductive rights as well as health care access for women. In that context, the question stunned me.

I apologize.

[Scuba]

27. No problem.

[dsc]

33. single payer would almost certainly benefit them

they could bill for many of their services (they currently do on a sliding scale) and thus would actually benefit from people who they are currently giving care to being able to pay. Also there is the little issue of no way, no how, would the feds pay for abortion.

[randome]

34. You have selected #2. Please confirm.

1. The MSM is conspiring against Sanders.
2. Planned Parenthood is conspiring against Sanders.
3. The DNC is conspiring against Sanders.
4. Debbie Wasserman-Schultz is conspiring against Sanders.
5. The IT company that works for the DNC is conspiring against Sanders.
6. The polling companies are conspiring against Sanders.
7. And, of course, those of us on DU who support the eventual nominee (Clinton or Sanders) are conspiring against Sanders.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]A ton of bricks, a ton of feathers, it's still gonna hurt.[/center][/font][hr]

[zazen]

37. so if 16/18 are true, then PP should issue release talking about their role in Single Payer

If PP actually took Bernie Sanders' candidacy and agenda seriously, then they might issue a statement discussing their continued role even under Single Payer.

It would actually be a decent opportunity to get coverage (big orgs need to look for ways to get press every week) by issuing a statement about how they'd fare if the agendas of different candidates were realized.

Of course they could talk about

1) the immense threat posed by Republicans--Cruz most of all, I suspect--

2) their unequivocal support by a stalwart reproductive rights advocate as Clinton (for which I always give her props), in the context of the Affordable Care Act

3) their role under Single Payer were Bernie's agenda to come to fruition, in which they could laser in on the services most vital to women

Free press and it'd do a service to the Democrats. Maybe a PP member is reading and will issue such a press release.

[JudyM]

39. +1. Nt

[synergie]

60. They did, they found that he wasn't the best advocate for them. They don't need

to issue any such statement, because those who actually understand how health care and health insurance and single payer work, understand already and those of you who do not, well it's hard to know how to address the ignorance.

I don't think you even understand the silliness of what you're expecting.

Single payer would be great for PP, since they would actually reimburse them for the care they provide, but given how unlikely that Bernie would immediately and magically wave a magic wand and pass single payer, what would be the point?

Also, unless you've somehow figured out a way to force the GOP and the Democrats who support the Hyde nonsense, how would that affect PP?

Do you even understand the complexity of the issue here?

Free press? For what exactly? To educate people staunchly refuse to do their homework and whose anger blinds them to anything that's said if they can imagine it to be an attack of their candidate?

Go do your homework as to how poor people access care and try to figure out how and why things like transportation, time off work, and the Catholic hospitals affect the way people receive necessary care. It's not PP's job to explain to you how reality works.

[Bad Dog]

40. In the UK

We have Universal Health Care, (the NHS) and Marie Stopes Clinics. We need both.

[joshcryer]

41. No, we'd do away with clinics altogether.

People would be served by ghosts in their houses by invitation.

Jesus, does this question need asking? PP provides several fucking million women with services. Do you just think they go away? They are a non-profit, under single payer they'd be more effective and more efficient at providing the same services that private industries provide.

They'd grow and expand under single payer.

It's preposterous to think PP would be hurt by single payer. Utterly insane.

[Le Taz Hot]

44. Yes, because of the Hyde Act

no federal monies can be used for abortion. Funny the Christian misogynist fundamentalists can pick and choose where their taxpayer dollars go but the rest of us don't have the ability to prohibit our tax dollars going to murder brown people on the other side of the globe.

[Scuba]

45. Thanks for this useful answer.

[shraby]

64. Scuba, there are no stupid questions, only stupid answers.

You've been here long enough for others to know that you would in no manner, shape or form do away with PP unless through Medicare for all their services were no longer needed because women could afford to go to a primary care physician, a hospital or other clinic.
As I see it, your question was a legitimate one and not meant to demean anyone.

Now you see why I post very little anymore. For some reason, it's damned if you do around here.

[Scuba]

66. It's primary season, and emotions run hot. I tend to excuse that.

[Le Taz Hot]

83. I've no idea what the above exchange was about.

I thought it was a direct question and I gave a direct answer. I'm confused (not an unusual state for me these days).

[Scuba]

89. My original reply to you was meant as a sincere complement. Your answer was useful...

Sorry if in my haste my reply left that question open.

I suspect shraby's reply below mine was not particularly germaine to your reply, but to the tone of the thread in general.


I consider both of you allies in the good fight and among DU's best.

[Le Taz Hot]

91. You're reply was OK,

it was the exchange after that that was confusing. Ah well, sometimes communication on message boards loses something in the translation. Thanks.

[gwheezie]

59. When I had mcaid I preferred pp

PP covered many of my healthcare needs since as a young woman who was healthy, women's healthcare wellness was what I needed most. I thought the level of care was excellent.

[MineralMan]

62. It seems unlikely that Medicare for all or any single payer

system will be in place anytime soon. Regardless of who is elected as President, the challenge of making that major move is enormous. It is unlikely that we will have a Democratic majority in the House, and we may not have a filibuster-proof majority in the Senate, either. Nothing as sweeping as a single-payer healthcare system is likely to happen until Democrats are in control of both the White House and both houses of Congress.

The services Planned Parenthood provides are under attack, still, in many, many states, and their legislatures are dominated by Republicans. Single-payer is a goal we all share, but it is not simply going to happen because a Democratic President is elected.

That means that PP still plays a critically important role in women's reproductive help, and will be playing it for quite some time into the future. That organization still needs, and deserves, all the help and support we can muster. Their decision to endorse Hillary Clinton is their decision, but their mission remains exactly the same and is something that we all need to support.

[Sunlei]

65. yes, we would need non-profit charities like pp for persons with no insurance or medicare.

.

[Scuba]

67. So for undocumented immigrants. That makes sense.

[Sunlei]

69. a lot of 'citizens' make below the poverty lvl, don't have* to have insurance & are younger/healthy

*obamacare insurance required by law/income level.

[Scuba]

70. If we had Medicare for All, all citizens would be covered. That's the premise of my OP.

[Sunlei]

72. charities like PP 'organize/Admin.' for example, breast exams, prenatal healthcare,

PP is reimbursed with Federal Funds for many costs, very similar to todays Federal money given to PP.

Even if we had "Medicare for All", We would still need PP to organize and Admin. those healthcare procedures. Their Federal/State reimbursement would go up

Only thing today (by law) is Federal Funds can not be given to PP for abortions.

Abortions are legal in America. Like them or not, Federal/State Funds should pay for that procedure too.

[Scuba]

73. I agree that federal monies should cover abortion and would like that included in Medicare for All.

[bigwillq]

76. Probably (nt)

[polly7]

77. Here is the Planned Parenthood site nearest me, in Regina, SK.

http://www.plannedparenthoodregina.com/

and the services they provide:

http://www.plannedparenthoodregina.com/

Though they call themselves PP, they're not a part of the network of health centers that Planned Parenthood Federation of America oversees, but are directly associated with the Canadian Federation for Sexual Health (CFSH). http://mindyourmind.ca/help/weblinks/canadian-federation-sexual-health

http://www.sexualhealthandrights.ca/

[Android3.14]

79. Now that is a good question

[ieoeja]

92. Bernie fully supports PP. Hillary has only qualified support for PP.

Add to that her famous rankings of individuals and organizations, and I think you have all you need to know about PP's endorsement. Bernie will support them regardless of the endorsement. If they don't endorse Hillary, PP ends up on her shit list which is a bad place to be if Hillary happens to win.

So it is a win-win endorsement for PP.

Remember, Rahm did not make Hillary's "dead to me" list because he endorsed Obama. He made that list because he chose not to make an endorsement being stuck between the home team and his past team. It does not take much to piss off the Clintons.

[Bernin4U]

93. Forget the paradigms. Bernie wants Not For Profit Health Care.

How we get there is of course the big question. But the goal is much more than "Medicare for All".

[Karma13612]

96. Yes, because Planned Parenthood is considered a provider.

they provide services.

Medicare is the government agency which 'finances' the services.

As with providers like Hospitals and doctors offices, and labs, etc, the provider has to file claims with Medicare for reimbursement.

It would be the same with Planned Parenthood.

[Hekate]

97. Two words: Hyde Amendment. Damn straight we still need Planned Parenthood.

This country is so screwed up when it comes to ABORTION that it is willing to throw out BIRTH CONTROL and CONTRACEPTION to "save the babies."

WHY hasn't Bernie managed to get the Hyde Amendment out of our legal structure in all the time he's been in Washington, DC? What's more, it has been written into the ACA.

For your reading and information pleasure, the Hyde Amendment -- and the references go on for pages:

http://www.fundabortionnow.org/learn/hyde

What is the Hyde Amendment?

The lady at the Medicaid office said that I would be covered for prenatal care but not for an abortion. I told her, I just sold my car to pay the heating bill last month and since I was laid off, my kids and I have been living with my brother’s family and there isn’t much room. I definitely can’t afford to have another child.

Medicaid is the federal health care program for low-income people living in the United States.

When abortion first became legal in 1973, virtually all women had the ability to obtain an abortion. The Medicaid program, which covers health care for low-income people in the U.S., covered abortion just as it did other medical procedures.

But in 1976, Congress passed the Hyde Amendment, which banned Medicaid coverage of abortion. This is the only medical procedure that has ever been banned from Medicaid. What's more, Medicaid covers other reproductive health care needs, including birth control and sterilization. And the vast majority of private insurance plans cover abortion, too.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
https://www.plannedparenthoodaction.org/issues/abortion-access/hyde-amendment/


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

http://rhrealitycheck.org/article/2015/09/30/hyde-amendment-beyond-conservative-attack-reproductive-health-care-just-wont-quit/

The Hyde Amendment and Beyond: The Conservative Attack on Reproductive Health Care That Just Won’t Quit
This week marks the 39th anniversary of the Hyde Amendment, the federal appropriations ban on Medicaid reimbursement for most abortions. This summer will also mark the 35th anniversary of Harris v. McRae, the Supreme Court decision that ruled the Hyde Amendment’s restrictions constitutional, enshrining into law the idea that it is completely permissible for Congress to discriminate against poor people when it comes to reproductive health-care access.

The Hyde Amendment singles out low-income people for unequal treatment under the law. In order to come to the conclusion that it is constitutional, conservatives on the Supreme Court in 1980 advanced what has become a familiar mantra in opposition to reproductive rights: Just because a federal right to abortion exists doesn’t mean the government is obligated to pay for it. It’s a catchy quip, and one that persists today. But it is also an inherently dishonest way to think of how our fundamental rights work—one that depends on ignoring the realities of structural inequality.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

[Agschmid]

98. Yes.

[randys1]

102. I think the people who run PP actually do hope for the day when they are unnecessary.

[RandySF]

105. That depends

If you assume it covers everything, maybe not. But we'll always have someone trying to defund it and we can't assume we'll never get another Republican POTUS and Congress.

[Hiraeth]

106. Medicare is geared to serve the older populations who usually don't get pregnant therefore need no

abortions.

What we want/need is Tricare for all. This is the military version and is geared more toward serving all ages.

Abortions are legal.

Republicans need to learn what the word legal means and get over it.

Tricare
Tricare (styled TRICARE), formerly known as the Civilian Health and Medical Program of the Uniformed Services (CHAMPUS), is a health care program of the United States Department of Defense Military Health System.[1] Tricare provides civilian health benefits for military personnel, military retirees, and their dependents, including some members of the Reserve Component. The Tricare program was managed by Tricare Management Activity (TMA) under the authority of the Assistant Secretary of Defense (Health Affairs). Tricare is the civilian care component of the Military Health System, although historically it also included health care delivered in the military medical treatment facilities.

On 1 October 2013 TMA disestablished and Tricare responsibility was transferred to the Defense Health Agency (DHA) which was established on the same day.[2]

more at links:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tricare

http://tricare.mil/

[Scuba]

108. Thank you for this excellent addition to the thread!!!

[Hiraeth]

110. yw

[Warren Stupidity]

109. No. We never should have needed planned parenthood.

The fact that NGOs have to step in to provide healthcare services in the supposedly biggest bestest most exceptional nation in the universe is fucking pathetic.

[Hiraeth]

111. FUCKING PATHETIC. AMEN.

[Freddie Stubbs]

116. No. People will just go to the Medicare Office to get their abortions