Home
Archive
Newsletters
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement

Reproductive Justice and Gender

Access to Birth Control, Under the Next President

By Amanda Marcotte, RH Reality Check. Posted October 21, 2008.


What Obama and McCain's positions on contraception and health services would mean for Americans.
Advertisement
Upcoming AlterNet stories on Digg

It's hard to measure support for access to contraception for two reasons -- "access" and "contraception" both denote very broad categories.  Contraception is everything from condoms to birth control pills to sterilization, and access points range from non-profit distribution to convenience stores to doctor's offices.  Do we consider someone's access more or less limited if they can get birth control pills from Planned Parenthood but the condoms at the grocery store are locked up after 10pm, which is when they discover they need them?  I can't answer that question for you, because it's the very definition of subjective, but I can point out five basic areas where access meets contraception and how the two candidates for President approach them.  As far as I know, both McCain and Obama have not registered an opinion on whether or not it's completely lame of your grocery store to require you to summon a clerk to open the condom display.   

So here's a rundown of five basic questions people ask of themselves when looking to access contraception, and answers Senators McCain and Obama have given through votes and campaign platforms. 

Can I get a prescription from a doctor? 

The chance of getting a prescription from a doctor is 99% based on whether or not you can see one, and that, for most people, depends on if you have insurance that covers this.  Currently, 16% of Americans don't have this basic opportunity.  Both candidates claim they have plans that will get coverage to most Americans and lower costs, but these are claims that bear closer examination.   

The McCain proposal is all about the free market.  The campaign claims that getting people out of employer-provided health care and making them free agents on the market will lower prices.  To reach this goal, they intend to tax employer-provided benefits, with the hope that this encourages people to give up that coverage.  Less people using employer-provided benefits is extremely unlikely to have the results promised by McCain.  We only have so many uninsured people right now because they don't have employer-provided insurance, and therefore can't use their employers' bargaining power to get coverage despite pre-existing conditions.  At best, we will see people just paying more for health care under the McCain plan, but at worst we'll see the number of uninsured go up, meaning that more women will have to turn to non-profits or government programs for birth control access.  Or go without.   

The Obama proposal takes another tack, responding to the fact that most Americans who are uninsured are so because they don't have access to employer-provided health care.  People who already have employer-provided health care don't have to change a thing or pay more for it.  People who aren't able to access that kind of health care will be extended the opportunity to buy into a national health plan that will have guaranteed eligibility, so you won't need to have an employer's power backing you up so you can get insurance.  For people who don't already qualify for Medicaid or SCHIP but still need assistance paying for health insurance, there will be subsidies to help them out. 

By addressing the main cause of insurance gaps---lack of access to employer-provided insurance---the Obama plan will be far likelier to increase the number of Americans who have coverage. 

Can I get contraceptives from non-profits or government programs? 

For people who go to Planned Parenthood or some other non-profits that receive government funds for their health care, this election might also influence their bottom line ability to receive care.  The main thing you're wanting to look at in this department is the voting record on Title X and other family planning programs.  On this issue, the two candidates strongly differ.  McCain attempted to end Title X funding that pays for contraception programs, as well as other women's health care.  Obama is a strong supporter of Title X funding, which causes much consternation amongst anti-choicers.  If you get your contraception---prescribed or over the counter at a discount---or any kind of health care from Planned Parenthood, then this is the funding debate that pertains to you.  


Digg!    Share on facebook   submit to reddit    Bookmark on Delicious   Stumble This  

See more stories tagged with: contraception, obama, mccain, family planning, birth control

Amanda Marcotte co-writes the popular blog Pandagon. She is the author of It's a Jungle Out There: The Feminist Survival Guide to Politically Inhospitable Environments.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from Reproductive Justice and Gender! Sign up now »

Advertisement
Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Feminist
Posted by: pest on Oct 21, 2008 2:00 PM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It is no accident that a male can buy a drug to provide him the opportunity to rape for 48 hours at a time, but women cannot buy any protective drugs to protect themselves. Of course these virile males want nothing to do with a child born as a result of their erect behavior!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The McCain/Palin ticket,
Posted by: Opinionator on Oct 21, 2008 2:18 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
if God forbid that happens, would preach ABSTINENCE. Pandora's Box opened years ago. They do not realize that 2008/2009 is here and Chastity is not likely anymore. Women's health, birth control and Choice are here to stay God willing

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Veeps?
Posted by: Scarabus on Oct 21, 2008 2:28 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
What would the situation be like under a Biden or a Palin administration? Given the nature of the campaign and of McCain's personal and family history of cancer/heart disease, it's especially important now to look at the "B side" or the "B movie."

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Problem with Obama's health plan
Posted by: rickiey on Oct 22, 2008 7:28 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Very simply, Obama promises that people will be able to buy into the same insurance that Congress gets.

But people who can't afford health insurance now, can't afford the congressional insurance package.

That insurance package, is over 2000 per year, AND has a 1500 deductible.

Where are poor people supposed to come up with $3500?

(of course, its better than McCains "no plan" health insurance plan)

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Change emphasis
Posted by: BST on Oct 24, 2008 6:04 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The best insurance plan will be one that is NOT tied to employers -- since this tethers workers to a workplace they no longer like nor respect OR forces them to accept work far from the place they call home.

McCain's plan starts to go there, but I agree that his proposal has problems. So does Obama's. Healthcare is an immensely complicated issue, as Hillary Clinton knows.

This said, BIRTH CONTROL AVAILABILITY rather than abortion should be the emphasis of policies. Roe v Wade was instituted at a time when birth control was either inadequate or unavailable. Now -- in comparison -- it is easy to obtain, but should be made even easier.

Yes, yes, yes I know some insurance does not cover birth control. That must change. But if you aren't using anything, then abstain.

A pregnancy that is a preventable problem is a disservice to everyone involved, including a fetus which some of us -- even some staunch "liberals" -- view as the start of life.

My personal belief is the day abortion is almost non-existent because other methods are fully available and working supremely well, will be a day for rejoicing. So, I tend to agree with this writer.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

A Crazy Idea
Posted by: snick on Oct 27, 2008 10:50 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I want to make a crazy proposal that so far has only drawn sympathetic looks from people who think I've lost it.

How about we make it a felony to impregnate a female without her express written consent?

Enforcement would be difficult, I know, because we can't have fathers locked up in jail instead of providing for their kids (financially, emotionally, spiritually, etc.). But really I think just talking about this proposal will cause people to begin thinking differently about unwanted or unplanned pregnancies. Women often bear the burden of an "accident" as though men had no hand in it. Let's put the ball in the other court for a minute.

My dad has already figured out a way to make money off this proposal - every bartender will be a notary! Next to the condom machine in the gas station restroom will be a legal document dispenser! DNA tests can be run for free, even without Maury Povich! The morning-after pill will come in designer flavors!

It's crazy - but think about it...

PS: Guys, I'm not hating on you. I just want to introduce a new way of thinking about pregnancy prevention. I heart boys.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

all laws restricting women's health care are misogynistic.
Posted by: WyrdSister on Oct 27, 2008 12:35 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
We will not have full access until we get the christo-fascists out of the decision making for this particular area. Christian ideals have no place in making rules or laws regarding birth control or access to it, OR any other MEDICALLY based decision women make. In fact, WHY does there have to be rules and laws in the first place? We have perfectly good, educated medical perfessionals to help us with that information and that decision; the government has no place in it. Shall we then also restrict women's access to cancer treatments?

Women are the only ones being blocked by recent legislation. Legislation allowing physicians and pharmacists out of their oath of patient care in order to cater to their religious beliefs go agaist that oath. Their idealogy says that women are less than men and that discrimination based on gender is sanctified.

We cannot allow another misogynist administration; and yes...i include MS Palin; I think she is a misogynist.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]