Women are mostly left out of the new Senate health care bill.
Credit:Reuters/Brian Snyder
Women have babies. If they didn’t, first the economy would collapse, and then the species would die out.
But because they do, from their late teens to their early forties, women have higher health-care costs than men of the same age. Carrying and birthing a child is a sometimes difficult, dangerous, complicated business, and one that, in America, can be incredibly expensive.
Despite the incontrovertible fact that men are biologically just as responsible as women for a pregnancy happening, before the Affordable Care Act passed in 2010, women in the US paid more for health care and insurance because they are the ones who can get pregnant. Specifically, American women of child-bearing age paid somewhere between 52% and 69% more in out-of-pocket healthcare costs then men.
The Trump administration’s health-care reform bill now in the Senate, and the version that passed the House this May, will force some women to pay more again. Specifically, it strips out hundreds of […]
Ah, but the word “woman” does appear in the bill–three times. However, the words “man” and “men” do not appear _anywhere_ in the document. Should we infer that the plan is anti-male? The proposed health care law may or may not be inadequate, wrong-headed, short-sighted, too expensive, not expensive enough or whatever. But this trivial complaint is just an excuse to take offense.