DFL urges contraceptive coverage

  • Article by: JENNIFER BROOKS , Star Tribune
  • Updated: March 6, 2012 - 9:33 PM

National controversy prompts lawmakers to call for insurance coverage with no co-pays, with exceptions for faith-based institutions.

  • 19
  • Comments

  • Results per page:
minn12Mar. 7, 1212:42 AM

What a silly waste of time and taxpayer money. This is nothing but a poor publicity stunt. It has zero chance of passing, yet they waste time and effort on it anyway.

19
10
rickbmnMar. 7, 12 7:21 AM

This is NOT about contraception. It is a ploy. Women CAN get free contraception from any Planned Parenthood or many other clinics. Why not free condoms? What will be the next freebie they demand? This is about the government forcing a company (whether it's insurance or otherwise) to provide a product. Nothing is free. Therefore, when these freeloaders demand something for free (at no cost...yeah, right) you and I --the people who work and pay taxes-- end up footing the bill. How would it impact your business, or the company you work for, if the government demanded you provide something "at no cost?" This is no different. Government is force. These politicians need to stay out of our lives. Balance a budget. Secure the borders. Keep us safe. And LEAVE US ALONE!

14
12
niftyfiftiesMar. 7, 12 7:31 AM

Thanks for introducing this bill. It won't pass, but my Republican legislators will at least have to go on record as "no" votes, and explain to me at their fall town hall meetings why they voted no. I look forward to this discussion being part of 2012 election.

13
14
hmoguruMar. 7, 12 8:23 AM

Hopefully, someone will inform the DFL that over 50 % of employers' in MN are either partially or fully self insured. The employer determines coverage, not the insurer! I am sure the business community is shaking their heads at this poorly thought out proposal!

9
7
rockoftruthMar. 7, 12 9:12 AM

The Government should monitor business's to insure they operate in a legal enviornmentally responsible manner, they (the government) should not be dictating what insurance companies should and should not cover.

8
6
Thenry8999Mar. 7, 12 9:44 AM

"As a working mother, I pay health insurance premiums and I pay taxes. I should have the opportunity to have those dollars go to health care that is relevant to me and important to my family.".....Hey Jessica what the heck does paying taxes have to do with private health insurance. I suspect your employer pays a large percentage of your health plan's premiums, so it is at their discretion what they want to pay for. I am sure if you didn't want to use their plan they would be more then happy to let you go find an alternative plan that covers the things that are so important to you. You wouldn't want to do that though, would you, as then you would have to pay the full cost of your health insurance? This entitlement attitude that people have in this country has got to go or we are in for a rude awakening.

6
4
marathongirlMar. 7, 1210:28 AM

"Assistant Senate Majority Leader David Hann, R-Eden Prairie, said Minnesota already requires insurers to cover 68 drugs, procedures and conditions, including mandatory coverage for hair transplants." -- If there is mandatory coverage for hair transplants, then birth control should absolutely be covered. Considering it actually is used for health related things (ovarian cysts, dibilatating cramps, acne to name a few). I've never said it should be without co-pay, that's maybe a bit of an extreme push, but it should be covered at a reasonable cost on all insurance plans.

5
4
marathongirlMar. 7, 1210:31 AM

"Murphy said that by shouldering the estimated $1,200-a-year cost of birth control, insurance companies would save on the considerable expense of unintended pregnancies. Some 28 states mandate contraceptive coverage, starting with New Hampshire a dozen years ago." -- Maybe cut the mandatory hair transplant coverage then. I'm sure those cost a lot more than $1200 (it can be as low as $108, that's what I pay a year with no drug coverage on my plan at all so it wouldn't put that much extra on the insurance plans). How many of those plans cover viagra and other ED drugs that can actually cause health issues?

4
2
taxpayer09Mar. 7, 1210:39 AM

Just another example of why health insurance needs to be divorced entirely from employment. Everyone should buy their own private health insurance, just like they do car insurance. Then everyone can get a plan that includes what they want or need, and pay premiums accordingly.

5
4
marathongirlMar. 7, 1210:40 AM

"rickbmn - Nothing is free. Therefore, when these freeloaders demand something for free (at no cost...yeah, right) you and I --the people who work and pay taxes-- end up footing the bill." -- Your argument is flawed. PP we do foot the bill for. There are some tax dollars that do provide the free contraception and exams (and yes, free condoms). However on an insurance plan, unless you are on the same plan as the, you ARE NOT footing the bill. It's not tax dollars until we are on a one payer system. Birth control pills are inexpensive (I pay $108 a year) compared to the alternative that we'd all be footing the bill for (and if they are poor and can't afford BC you KNOW they can't afford the kid so that we would definitely be paying for). However, again, this is about the insurance, that they are paying some of in their premiums each month. No, it's not free, they just want a little something for the money they are paying in.

3
4

Comment on this story   |  

ADVERTISEMENT

Connect with twitterConnect with facebookConnect with Google+Connect with PinterestConnect with PinterestConnect with RssfeedConnect with email newsletters

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT