Ningrim · December 14, 2012 at 4:09pm

The Governor of Louisiana makes the case in today's Wall Street Journal:

Let's ask the question: Why do women have to go see a doctor before they buy birth control? There are two answers. First, because big government says they should, even though requiring a doctor visit to get a drug that research shows is safe helps drive up health-care costs. Second, because big pharmaceutical companies benefit from it. They know that prices would be driven down if the companies had to compete in the marketplace once their contraceptives were sold over the counter...

...Over-the-counter contraception would be easier to obtain if not for some unfortunate aspects of President Obama's health-care law. One of the most egregious elements of that law is the hampering of Health Savings Accounts, which have become increasingly popular in recent years because they give Americans choices in how to spend their money on health care. By removing the ability of citizens to use their HSAs to purchase over-the-counter medicine tax-free if they don't have a doctor's prescription, President Obama hurt many middle-class families who counted on using their HSA dollars every flu season to take care of their children. Health Savings Accounts should cover over-the-counter purchases, and those should include contraception.

It's time to put purchasing power back in the hands of consumers—not employers, not pharmaceutical companies, and not bureaucrats in Washington. The great thing about America is that power doesn't come from government, but from people. It's time to reclaim that power. It's time to stop government from dividing people or insulting deeply held religious beliefs, and return the country to the path that has always made it great—one where Americans respect and value their fellow citizens, no matter their creed...

Now this is refreshing. A little political savvy turns these wedge issues back on the Democrats. Make it about personal liberty. It's also provocative and gets the mind-numb mainstream media interested.

Comments:


Barkha Herman
Joined
Jul '11
Barkha Herman

Jindal is very intelligent as well as politically savvy.  If only he can convince the "Asians" that he is an Asian......

Valiuth
Joined
Apr '11
Valiuth
Barkha Herman: Jindal is very intelligent as well as politically savvy.  If only he can convince the "Asians" that he is an Asian...... · 1 minute ago

I thought he was born in the US? 

Barkha Herman
Joined
Jul '11
Barkha Herman

Valiuth

Barkha Herman: Jindal is very intelligent as well as politically savvy.  If only he can convince the "Asians" that he is an Asian...... · 1 minute ago

I thought he was born in the US?  · 8 minutes ago

He was.  Call back to threads on how to reach Asians, the fastest growing group in America - added with a little bitterness over the fact that people of the Indian sub continent are claimed to not be "Asians".  He is of Indian descent.

  I am unwilling to give up the continent of my birth to a sub group.

Fred Cole
Joined
Nov '11
Fred Cole

He's not risen some in my estimation.  Not a lot, but he's not as far in the toilet as I had him an hour ago.

Dietlbomb
Joined
May '10
Dietlbomb

It would have been nice if someone had thought of this before the election.

Tom Meyer
Joined
Jan '11
Tom Meyer
Fred Cole: He's not risen some in my estimation.  Not a lot, but he's not as far in the toilet as I had him an hour ago. · 28 minutes ago

The kind of things Jindal does that make the headlines are very hit and miss for me; this is a pretty strong hit, I'd say.

Mollie Hemingway, Ed.
Dietlbomb: It would have been nice if someone had thought of this before the election. · 7 minutes ago

I can't find it but I'm almost positive we discussed this at Ricochet a few months ago, based on Virginia Postrel's column arguing for same. Or maybe I just meant to link to that column.

SunnyOptimism
Joined
Nov '12
SunnyOptimism

OK, I can't let this one fly without a rebuttal.

Gov Jindal's comments are totally irresponsible from a medical standpoint.  A relation of mine is an OB/GYN and birth control pills ARE NOT aspirin!!!  There are multiple different kinds of birth control pills, IUD, patches, injections, etc, etc.  All of them have varying side affects that can not be predicted a priori and some can have deadly consequences if a patients medical history is not fully taken into account (eg, thrombosis and embolism risks increase in smokers).

For the Gov to make such a medically erroneous statement as he did by  conflating birth control pharmaceuticals with OTC drugs is nothing short of negligent!  Luckily he is not a medical doctor or else, in some states, he could have his license taken away.

Don't get me wrong, I like Jindal, but this is another example of a politician talking about something like they are an expert when they are not.  This is a Todd Akin / Richard Murdoch moment for the Governor....I really wish these pols would just shut up when it comes to subject matter they have no direct knowledge of.

Tom Meyer
Joined
Jan '11
Tom Meyer

SunnyOptimism:

Gov Jindal's comments are totally irresponsible from a medical standpoint.  A relation of mine is an OB/GYN and birth control pills ARE NOT aspirin!!!  There are multiple different kinds of birth control pills, IUD, patches, injections, etc, etc.  All of them have varying side affects that can not be predicted a priori and some can have deadly consequences if a patients medical history is not fully taken into account (eg, thrombosis and embolism risks increase in smokers)

From Jindal's article:

The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists announced its support last month for selling oral contraceptives over the counter without a prescription in the United States. I agree with this opinion, which if embraced by the federal government would take contraception out of the political arena.

It's my understanding that this is really shorthand for just the mini-pill, which -- again, I've no medical background -- is I gather is exceedingly well-studied and has very few side effects.

Edited on December 14, 2012 at 6:13pm
SunnyOptimism
Joined
Nov '12
SunnyOptimism

Oh, and another thing, contrary to what Bobby Jindal may think, not all doctors and healthcare workers are out to "inflate costs" to line their pockets.  Most doctors are in business not to make money but because they love helping people (in fact, most doctors HATE the business side of medicine which is one reason why so many of them make lousy business decisions within their own practices).  Intentional or not, Jindal's implicit accusation that controlling access to birth control is some nefarious plot to make money is offensive (and not just to liberals).

And, in a broader point, conservatives would do themselves a favor by not reducing every situation down to simplistic economics....sometimes life is a little more complicated than supply and demand and people like to be treated like human beings, not some Buridan's Ass....

Pseudodionysius
Joined
Sep '10
Pseudodionysius

Gov Jindal's comments are totally irresponsible from a medical standpoint.  A relation of mine is an OB/GYN and birth control pills ARE NOT aspirin!!!

I can tell you that in Canada -- where we have all knowing, all seeing, all powerful, all bankrupt, single payer government healthcare -- it is not OB/GYN's doing the prescribing and from the proliferation that I hear about even anecdotally they seem about as prevalent as aspirin.

The other drug I see prescribed in an analogous fashion are anti depressants for patients who report "I feel depressed and have for (insert period of time necessary to elicit a sympathetic response from the doctor)". 

In this regime in place in the Demented Dominion it is to a General Practitioner's financial detriment to get all ethical. Instead, many behave like the civil service clerk that he/she has been demoted to and pez dispense medication like laboratory chickens being rewarded with food pellets by their cage masters.

There is a certain brutal consistency to his hobnobbing with Jindal minds.

Edited on December 14, 2012 at 6:29pm
SunnyOptimism
Joined
Nov '12
SunnyOptimism

Tom Meyer

SunnyOptimism:

It's my understanding that this is really shorthand for justthe mini-pill, which -- again, I've no medical background -- is I gather is exceedingly well-studied and has very few side effects. · 4 minutes ago

Edited 1 minute ago

Again, going back to my OB/GYN relative, that was a very controversial decision by ACOG and not all of the members of ACOG agreed with it.  It was pushed, in part, by trying to reduce barriers to access (social justice / reproductive rights nonsense) as opposed to solely medical grounds of safety and efficacy.

It is one of the oldest types of birth control and therefore does have a lot of history and study behind it.  It is also just one type of hormonal formulation and it is not suitable for all women.  Any doctor will tell you that if you're going to mess with your natural hormone cycle on a long-term basis using pharmaceuticals, you should exercise caution.

My follow on post makes another point about getting away from simplistic economic arguments for what are sometimes complex social issues.

Fred Cole
Joined
Nov '11
Fred Cole

SunnyOptimism: OK, I can't let this one fly without a rebuttal.

Gov Jindal's comments are totally irresponsible from a medical standpoint.  A relation of mine is an OB/GYN and birth control pills ARE NOT aspirin!!!  

They sure aren't.  If I were gonna use an IUD, I'd want to consult with my doctor first.  (For more reasons than one.)  But it's not about not consulting with doctors, it's about requiring permission from someone to get them.

Doctors prescribe plenty of OTC meds (aspirin, for example).  Others legally require a prescription, written permission from a doctor, for a pharmacist to legally dispense.

Jindal is right, this adds to costs.

I think we should extend it to all drugs though, not just birth control.

Edward Smith
Joined
May '12
Edward Smith

Just now, I'm not forming any opinions about anyone who might run in 2016.

Not even Marco Rubio, who can still learn enough to answer a question like "How old do you believe the Earth is?" in a savvier way than he recently did.

So I like the canniness of what Jindal has suggested.

But since the horse isn't even out of the barn into the trailer, much less in the gate or even running out the first quarter mile the jury is still out for me.

Now, if I thought the Republican Party was starting to get its act together, or that the Conservative Movement was sorting out whether it could move forward without the Republican Party ...  I'd be interested.

That would be like hearing that a Breeder who knows his or her business has been talking with a Trainer who knows theirs ... and that exciting races are ahead.

Fred Cole: He's not risen some in my estimation.  Not a lot, but he's not as far in the toilet as I had him an hour ago. · 1 hour ago
SunnyOptimism
Joined
Nov '12
SunnyOptimism

Fred Cole

Doctors prescribe plenty of OTC meds (aspirin, for example).  Others legally require a prescription, written permission from a doctor, for a pharmacist to legally dispense.

Jindal is right, this adds to costs.

I think we should extend it to all drugs though, not just birth control. · 21 minutes ago

Sorry Fred, I disagree.  The point of requiring a prescription is to make sure that a doctor has approved the use of the drugs and that all of the side affects and persons medical history have been reviewed.  Some drugs are narcotics (T3 - Tylenol + Codeine) and need to be carefully monitored.  Other drugs, if not taken properly or in the correct order, can lead to serious health risks.

I'm sorry, this is just one area that I don't agree with conservatives/libertarians about.  The government has a vested interest in regulating and limiting the use of certain pharmaceutical products that goes well beyond simplistic economic arguments of price points and supply & demand.  The argument that, "i'm responsible enough to make my own darn decisions" just doesn't fly in the case of medicines.  

Fred Cole
Joined
Nov '11
Fred Cole

SunnyOptimism

 The argument that, "i'm responsible enough to make my own darn decisions" just doesn't fly in the case of medicines. 

Why do you think it doesn't?

Fred Cole
Joined
Nov '11
Fred Cole

Mollie Hemingway, Ed.

Dietlbomb: It would have been nice if someone had thought of this before the election. · 7 minutes ago

I can't find it but I'm almost positive we discussed this at Ricochet a few months ago, based on Virginia Postrel's column arguing for same. Or maybe I just meant to link to that column. · 1 hour ago

You mean either we talked about it or you thought about linking to a column months ago and never did?

Vald the Misspeller
Joined
Nov '12
Vald the Misspeller
Salamandyr:
But if we cannot have a middle ground of some kind, I think I prefer freedom to keeping them prescription only.  · 1 hour ago

Actually, I'd prefer the "you buys your ticket and takes your chances" approach to the middle ground. But, mirabile dictu, my preferences have no effect on current US regulatory policy. (They're equally useless in influencing the outcome of NFL games, but that's for another thread.) So, I like your idea of walking back some of the dumber and more irritating strictures - like having to sign off to buy Sudafed.But even if I could get my way, and drugs were unregulated, I doubt the carnage would be that extensive. Let's face it, self-medication is a national past time, and there are already "1000 Ways to Die!" with stuff you can get without a prescription. I have some personal experience here: both parents went to the hospital with internal bleeding caused by NSAIDs, dad's were prescription, mom's , OTC. In such a medicinal free market, a pharmacy might reasonably require you receive a tutorial and sigh a release. 

Todd
Joined
Oct '10
Todd

Rob Long: Yes!  I have a suspicion that Jindal is going to surprise us all.  I certainly hope so.

And I especially agree with this:  "A little political savviness, turn these wedge issues back on the Dems. Make it about personal liberty. It's also provocative and gets the mind-numb MSM interested." · 11 hours ago

Or to paraphrase Richard Epstein, expose them for the authoritarians that they are. 

Rob Long
bagodonuts: Jindal is now officially this social conservative's current favorite in 2016. This is genius. · 4 hours ago

Mine too.  And, um, as might have been revealed earlier, I'm a RINO squish.


Would you like to comment on this Conversation?

Become a Member for $3.67 a month.

Join the Conversation
Already a member? Sign In
Loading

Start your shopping here!

Help support Ricochet by making your purchases through our Amazon links.

Welcome Visitor!
Join  or  Sign In

Become a Member to enjoy the full benefits of Ricochet:

Ricochet: The Right People, The Right Tone, The Right Place.  Join today!

Already a Member? Sign In