From the Schedule of Benefits posted by CC:
Of course various copays are required.Prescription Drugs: $5,000 per policy
year maximum per Insured person.
My question, would she be satisfied if birth control was covered as any other drug (of which there is NO coverage for in the base plan - there are three tiers, btw) - or does birth control have its own category; covered no matter what. Otherwise, someone taking an allergy med, plus an anti-depressant, could very well run up against that $5000 cap, and still have no coverage for birth control.
I don't know, but what would make y'all happy?
Suit yourself. Sounds like a 30 year old activist who chose to go to a law school that didn't offer contraceptive coverage.
No one is disputing that.
Stay on point for once.
I'm not following any point, and if you just want to declare yourself the "winner" of whatever debate you are trying to have then feel free. I really don't give a .
I have been selling/representing insurance carriers, and, in fact, designing, implementing and processing benefit claims for nearly twenty years, for literally, tens of thousands of individuals.
I have NEVER ONCE had anyone question what the coverage was for birth control (other than a few guys who thought condoms ought to be paid for if "the pill" was).
That does make Ms. Fluke exceptional in my eyes. What CC is trying to get at, and what does not excuse what Limbaugh said (though it does temper it, IMO) is that this lady was trying to pick a fight. Usually when someone wants a fight, they can find it. For whatever reason is does make her a less sympathetic figure to me (don't know that I can explain it; may just be a bias against feminists - being honest).
Then, take Santorum's doctrinaire view on contraception being trumpeted far and wide as "crazy", along with the administration's (what was once) indelicate handling of the issue vis a vis the Catholic Church - and we have a perfect storm of making a non issue, an issue. And, of course, Democrats are going to milk this for all its worth; because, frankly, Santorum and Rush are not likable figures; keep it in the news (media very willing to oblige); and no one is talking about the crazy price of gas, or that, for some reason, I couldn't find a gallon of milk for less than $4 yesterday at the grocery store.
As for the Federal Govt. dictating whether an insurance plan must cover this? WTF does it matter? The Fed dictates a OF A LOT more onerous crap than this related to healthcare!
Least of all your ownYou made an assertion.and if you just want to declare yourself the "winner" of whatever debate you are trying to have then feel free. I really don't give a .
You didn't back it up at all.
You failed miserably at proving your assertion.
I didn't win. I didn't even try. You lost on your own.
Think of all the thwarted sperm!
Won't someone think of the sperm?!!!?
How about just not excluding contraception from coverage? Let me decide if I want to use my coverage for contraception or allergy pills or anti-depressants? If I can't have it all, I understand, but let me make the decision. That would make me happy
look, they just had a congressional hearing on womens healthcare, and women weren't included.How about just not excluding contraception from coverage? Let me decide if I want to use my coverage for contraception or allergy pills or anti-depressants? If I can't have it all, I understand, but let me make the decision. That would make me happy
so just butt out.
Generally "professional" implies she was paid for her advocacy.
The best it seems was shown was that she has advocated in the past for contraceptive coverage, but not that she was paid by anybody to do so.
In this, Chump appears to have a point. You have not shown she was paid for her appearance or does this for a living.
Even *if* she was paid, you seemed to defend his remarks (pooh poohing the severity of the remarks).
Nobody deserves to be talked about like that for their point of view, paid or not, in my opinion.
It wasn't about women's health care, silly. It was about religious doctrine.
Women still weren't included in that either, it seems.
Coincidence?
I think not.
sure sure, doctrine my ass. preserve religious freedom bla bla bla.
unless its about a mosque in NY.
But wait, that was the woman we heard. You know, the third year law student complaining about birth control coverage at Georgetown?
I see zero evidence presented that Fluke was deceptive about anything in what you posted.
So she's a political activist. You're a politics subforum troll who doesn't like her. What's the big freaking deal? A legal advocate in training with an ax to grind?
That, in my opinion, gives any commentator the right to publicly call her out. The reference to being a was uncalled for, but you can find relevance in calling her a pros ute... wanting other peoples money to pay for contraceptives! Afterall, that does tie money to sex, and that was his point. If you wish to stay with , that would mean having to say she also has multiple partners.
You're an idiot.
Multiply that by about 20 for my income taxes.
Yes, which will raise the price of student insurance by a notable degree.
Do you expect insurance companies not to make a profit?
After requiring this, why not then advocate for all insurance companies to have this madated?
What about the Buffalo NY teachers healthcare benefits which costs the tax payers so many extra millions for zero deductible cosmetic surgery? Should it be mandated that all insurance companies cover cosmetic surgery?
How much?
Hard to say. If the cost of these contraceptives are $600 annual, then it would probably be around $400 annual with my dartboard guess. Student insurance is cheap for most because of their age. For the current low cost, I think you would agree it would price some out of insurance.
Don't forget. Once the students aren't directly paying contraceptives by themselves, the cost is irrelevant to them, so they will select the best, most expensive birth control.
i'd just like to say that i'd be happy to pay for your contraceptives.
give me her name and address.
You're saying premiums are going to go up that much a year for each student?
The birth control itself isn't the only cost. More frequent visits, and I will assume they will separate costs between male and female, or is the males also pay more, that $400 annual guess could be $200 more per student.
I gave it a best guess. How about you. How much more do you think the cost would be over a $0 increase? I seriously doubt you will claim it will not increase the price of insurance.
I'd like to see the numbers you used to make your calculations.
Thanks.
I didn't.
Do you understand the definition of "guess" and my reference to throwing a dart?
Doesn't that indicate to you that this is a pretty loose number?
Again, I gave you a figure. What do you think the cost would be?
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
