Supreme Court has voted to overturn abortion rights per draft opinion (Update: Dobbs opinion official) (1 Viewer)

[LovesMusic7360]

Not long ago Kari Lake proclaimed Arizona's abortion law was a great law and wanted it the law of the state.

Now that she has gotten her way, she is lobbying for it to be repealed.

As I have been saying since 2022, the overwhelming vast majority of women aren't going to vote for the man who proudly boasts that he got rid of Roe V. Wade. Nor are those women going to vote for a forced birther politician.

Turns out, republican belief in "pro life" was all just lies to get votes. Who is surprised? I sure am not.

How many forced birthers will do the same about face?

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/other/ka ... r-BB1ltx3I.

Arizona Republican Senate candidate Kari Lake is actively lobbying state lawmakers to overturn a 160-year-old law she once supported that bans abortion in almost all cases, a source with knowledge of her efforts told CNN.

 

[MT15]

I guess that's my point or question. Biden's announcement pertains to Medicare, which pays directly from the feds to the provider. I haven't seen anything similar for Medicaid, which is funneled from the feds to the states to the providers. Did I miss something?

You are correct about the breakdown however.

I think some of the red states haven’t expanded Medicaid? Maybe? And if the money for Medicaid goes to the states to be distributed then it will be harder to control where it goes on the federal level? While with Medicare, like you said, it’s directly from the feds to the hospitals.

 

[GrandAdmiral]

I think some of the red states haven’t expanded Medicaid? Maybe? And if the money for Medicaid goes to the states to be distributed then it will be harder to control where it goes on the federal level? While with Medicare, like you said, it’s directly from the feds to the hospitals.

The feds can definitely control where the money goes. I'm in healthcare admin and deal with LDH and CMS on a daily at times. It's just that there's the lack of rule it seems from a Medicaid standpoint. Unless SCOTUS decides to completely forget their decision a few months ago, they've already ruled that CMS can make such rules regarding federal funds.

 

[superchuck500]

I guess that's my point or question. Biden's announcement pertains to Medicare, which pays directly from the feds to the provider. I haven't seen anything similar for Medicaid, which is funneled from the feds to the states to the providers. Did I miss something?

You are correct about the breakdown however.

I think there might be some oversimplification going on here about what the White House is doing.

The announcement from the White House states the following:

"Ensure Emergency Medical Care. HHS will take steps to ensure all patients – including pregnant women and those experiencing pregnancy loss – have access to the full rights and protections for emergency medical care afforded under the law, including by considering updates to current guidance that clarify physician responsibilities and protections under the Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act (EMTALA)."

It sounds like the EMTALA is the basis for this action, which raises two questions: (1) what tools does EMTALA give the federal government to use against providers that do not comply, and (2) is the president's use of EMTALA here consistent both with EMTALA itself and executive order procedure.

I don't know anything about EMTALA. According to an FAQ page (link below), it is pretty broad:

EMTALA is Section 1867(a) of the Social Security Act, within the section of the U.S. Code which governs Medicare.

EMTALA applies only to "participating hospitals" -- i.e., to hospitals which have entered into "provider agreements" under which they will accept payment from the Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) under the Medicare program for services provided to beneficiaries of that program. In practical terms, this means that it applies to virtually all hospitals in the U.S., with the exception of the Shriners' Hospital for Crippled Children and many military hospitals. Its provisions apply to all patients, and not just to Medicare patients. (See Section 15 below.)

The avowed purpose of the statute is to prevent hospitals from rejecting patients, refusing to treat them, or transferring them to "charity hospitals" or "county hospitals" because they are unable to pay or are covered under the Medicare or Medicaid programs. This purpose, however, does not limit the coverage of its provisions -- see Sections 15 and 16 below.

EMTALA is primarily but not exclusively a non-discrimination statute. One would cover most of its purpose and effect by characterizing it as providing that no patient who presents with an emergency medical condition and who is unable to pay may be treated differently than patients who are covered by health insurance. That is not the entire scope of EMTALA, however; it imposes affirmative obligations which go beyond non-discrimination. See Section 16 below.

If we connect the dots here and presume for this discussion that protection of abortion in emergency situations fits within the EMTALA's coverage, it sounds like CMS can end the provider's "participating" status which allows them access to Medicare, Medicaid, and other CMS-managed programs. If all of that is accurate, it appears a substantial bit of leverage and not just limited to Medicare.

But this is just at first blush.

FAQ on EMTALA

 

[MT15]

Ohio’s AG, Jim Jordan and Fox News have all come out and basically said that the story of the 10 yo rape victim being denied an abortion in OH is fake and even a lie perpetrated by the (female) Indiana MD who provided the procedure. They didn‘t look into it, just called it a lie because they didn’t see any reports of an arrest in OH. The AG said it was fabricated for political purposes. You would expect this out of Fox, because they don’t care about anything but their own narrative. But to have the Attorney General of the state publicly call the MD a liar based on nothing but “I would have heard about it” is completely irresponsible and unprofessional.

And as a chaser: today the county where it happened announced the arrest of the accused perpetrator.

No apology from the AG, as in keeping with the arrogance of these male Rs. Just a one sentence statement to the effect that everyone should be happy when a rapist is taken into custody. Vote all Rs out of office, they’re scum.

 

[DJ1BigTymer]

Ohio’s AG, Jim Jordan and Fox News have all come out and basically said that the story of the 10 yo rape victim being denied an abortion in OH is fake and even a lie perpetrated by the (female) Indiana MD who provided the procedure. They didn‘t look into it, just called it a lie because they didn’t see any reports of an arrest in OH. The AG said it was fabricated for political purposes. You would expect this out of Fox, because they don’t care about anything but their own narrative. But to have the Attorney General of the state publicly call the MD a liar based on nothing but “I would have heard about it” is completely irresponsible and unprofessional.

And as a chaser: today the county where it happened announced the arrest of the accused perpetrator.

No apology from the AG, as in keeping with the arrogance of these male Rs. Just a one sentence statement to the effect that everyone should be happy when a rapist is taken into custody. Vote all Rs out of office, they’re scum.

Again, the party of NO INTEGRITY!!!

 

[GrandAdmiral]

Ohio’s AG, Jim Jordan and Fox News have all come out and basically said that the story of the 10 yo rape victim being denied an abortion in OH is fake and even a lie perpetrated by the (female) Indiana MD who provided the procedure. They didn‘t look into it, just called it a lie because they didn’t see any reports of an arrest in OH. The AG said it was fabricated for political purposes. You would expect this out of Fox, because they don’t care about anything but their own narrative. But to have the Attorney General of the state publicly call the MD a liar based on nothing but “I would have heard about it” is completely irresponsible and unprofessional.

And as a chaser: today the county where it happened announced the arrest of the accused perpetrator.

No apology from the AG, as in keeping with the arrogance of these male Rs. Just a one sentence statement to the effect that everyone should be happy when a rapist is taken into custody. Vote all Rs out of office, they’re scum.

 

[cuddlemonkey]

Ohio’s AG, Jim Jordan and Fox News have all come out and basically said that the story of the 10 yo rape victim being denied an abortion in OH is fake and even a lie perpetrated by the (female) Indiana MD who provided the procedure. They didn‘t look into it, just called it a lie because they didn’t see any reports of an arrest in OH. The AG said it was fabricated for political purposes. You would expect this out of Fox, because they don’t care about anything but their own narrative. But to have the Attorney General of the state publicly call the MD a liar based on nothing but “I would have heard about it” is completely irresponsible and unprofessional.

And as a chaser: today the county where it happened announced the arrest of the accused perpetrator.

No apology from the AG, as in keeping with the arrogance of these male Rs. Just a one sentence statement to the effect that everyone should be happy when a rapist is taken into custody. Vote all Rs out of office, they’re scum.

It's even worse. I read somewhere (I will see if I can find it again) that the AG's office was notified of the facts of this case- including the positive pregnancy test- 2 days before the Dobbs ruling was issued. His office knew about this, ignored it then rushed to put their ban in place as soon as Dobbs overturned Roe.

Edit: I stand corrected. It was the Columbus Police. Either way, there was a police report with a positive pregnancy test that had been referred by Franklin County Children Services before Roe was overturned.

 

[MT15]

WSJ editorial page has been increasingly sloppy and getting more radical. The WSJ reporting is still top notch, but the editorial page sucks now.

 

[SaulGoodmanEsq]

WSJ's Editorial Department, despite denouncing the insanity of Trump, is still far-right.

 

[MT15]

WSJ's Editorial Department, despite denouncing the insanity of Trump, is still far-right.

Not just that - they’ve had a couple of instances in the last year or so where they had their facts wrong in their editorials. Far-right is one thing, spreading or appearing to give credence to false reporting is another. I’ll try to remember the other times.

 

[superchuck500]

 

[MT15]

Now the radical right is saying oh, she could have got an abortion in OH. But there’s no exception for rape or incest and a hard stop at six weeks, which is before a lot of victims will know they are pregnant. They are just lying.

 

[MT15]

I pretty much agree with this take. That these supposed Christians are perfectly fine with saying that this case would have been okay, knowing that this case could just as easily been prosecuted on the whim of the DA is just the height of hypocrisy. Craven morally bankrupt toadies.

 

[MT15]

Who are these people? The term for terminating a pregnancy is abortion. What kind of evil gaslighting is this?

 

[Incumbent]

Who are these people? The term for terminating a pregnancy is abortion. What kind of evil gaslighting is this?

I’ve been convinced for awhile that a significant portion of people actually really don’t have a comprehensive understanding of abortion, because for them, it’s been dumbed down to mean “murdering babies”. No careful consideration of circumstances, privacy, or understanding of the procedure as a healthcare necessity.

 

[Optimus Prime]

Republican Senators blocked legislation by Democrats on Thursday that would have allowed for people to travel across state lines to seek an abortion.

The legislation was proposed by Senators Catherine Cortez Masto of Nevada and Patty Murray of Washington State and came amid news stories of a 10-year-old girl who was raped in Ohio and traveled to Indiana, where abortion is still legal, to seek a pregnancy termination.

“Because there are states right now that are limiting or trying to criminalizing it or turning it into a civil action against women who are trying to seek the services and criminalized and or civil penalties against providers in states where the services are being provided”, Ms Cortez Masto, who is up for reelection in Nevada, said.

It also came in response to lawmakers in places like Missouri have sought to pass legislation that would prohibit the ability to travel to seek an abortion in states with fewer restrictions on abortion……

Republican senators block legislation to allow travel across state lines for abortion

’This seems to be trying to inflame, to raise the ‘what-ifs’, Republican Senator James Lankford of Oklahoma says

www.independent.co.uk

 

[MT15]

This just keeps getting worse.

 

[MT15]

Shot:



Chaser: