Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
OTC Contraceptives: The Best Solution For All
Yesterday, my Facebook feed was filled with talk about the Hobby Lobby decision, with conservatives shouting hallelujahs and liberals wailing and rending their garments. I tried commenting on existing threads, but — this being Facebook and not Ricochet — the conversation predictably got nasty and stupid. Many of my conservative friends thought this incredibly narrow decision was a great victory for religious liberty and freedom of conscience (which is vastly overblown), while my lefty friends acted as if we had just re-passed the Comstock Laws (which is patently absurd).
This morning, I took a different tack and started my own thread. I posted a link to an excellent article on The Federalist that argued that making some forms of contraceptives available over-the-counter (OTC) is the best solution for all. I summarized the article in a way that (I hoped) would appeal widely:
To my amazement, the reaction was incredibly positive: some questions aside, everyone who commented thought this was a good idea, including my lefty friends. Conversation was civil, with none of the War On Women accusations that had characterized earlier threads.
This is an idea whose time may have come. Making oral progestin pills OTC has been suggested multiple times by libertarians, but also enjoys support from (conservative, Catholic) Gov. Bobby Jindal and even — as the Federalist article pointed out — from Vox, Ezra Klein’s new webzine. It solves the contentious issues surrounding access and conscience, without doing anyone harm.
Democrats are determined to keep pushing the War On Women meme, partly because they believe it, partly because it’s really good politics for them. This is a smart way to counterattack.
Published in General
And also, employers get a tax break for offering insurance. This has become something of my personal obsession on healthcare.
I have nothing at all against my employer, and nothing against the insurance they provide. But I would so much rather have the tax break myself, get paid the money they’re currently spending on it, and do my own shopping. Thanks primarily to that tax break I have better insurance with my employer than I did when I maintained my own, but I regret the independence I’ve lost with that.
Would you get better insurance, if you could drop out something, for example contraception coverage?
Does employers buy condoms as well?
I haven’t researched what I would be able to get if I had similar purchasing power. I think my employer has done well by its people in accordance with their means and in my case I’m fine with my actual coverage.
But when I was paying for my own insurance I could change jobs, be unemployed or underemployed, move across the country, and basically so long as I’d kept enough in savings to cover my premium, health insurance didn’t have to be a concern or a factor in my decision-making. Now that I’m dependent on my employer, I’ve lost that flexibility and thanks to Obamacare my old plan probably isn’t waiting around to be picked up again at a moment’s notice.
Why on earth?
She probably had a catastrophic plan that was pretty bare bones (which would have been covered). It probably didn’t cover pediatric dental or a testicular exam for her. It ain’t the cable company. oh. wait. . .
I agree, down with the FDA. Its bureaucracy has caused more deaths by some accounts than it conceivably ever saved. It should be up to states to regulate as they see fit on chemicals.
Actually, I totally agree with this. I’ve been waiting to do it, but there is a post waiting to discuss my thesis that Libertarianism cannot be a political theory on its own, but must complement another. So: libertarian-conservative; libertarian-liberal; etc… Can I be a Libertarian-Burkian?
Which is the more likely outcome?
1) Bad medical outcome – squadrillion dollar lawsuit – end of the industry
2) 1/4 in.-thick package of pills backed by 1/2 in.-thick Patient Advisory Statement
I basically agree, though I’m pretty skeptical of the idea that most political theories work on a comprehensive standalone basis. Libertarianism is by no means unique in not addressing all questions.
Not quite bare bones, but I didn’t see anything quite the same showing up on their website. I’m fine. It’s not a pressing issue for me, but I know it is for others. It’s just poor public policy to tie something so personal as healthcare to one’s employment in any manner. Give us the money we’ve earned and let us decide insurance ourselves.
The closer the purchase decision is to the consumer, the more efficient it tends to be.
Just as a coda, I think this debate reveals why it’s so difficult to have a meaningful discussion about healthcare in America, even among those who generally agree: there are simply too many layers at work, each with its own sordid issue.
Just in the contraceptive case alone, we have the specific issues of whether employers should be required to provide health insurance for their employees, whether that insurance should be required to cover certain “medical necessities” at all, and whether contraception should be considered a medical necessity – not to mention the overarching moral issue of having third parties pay for sexual liberation.
Our system has become so byzantine that even a group of well-educated, well-thought, civil conversants requires a set of stage directions and Cliff’s notes just to discuss something they all agree on.
The counter-argument is that the price of drugs would go up because companies would have to get their products approved by 50 state bureaucracies instead of one FDA. They might have to produce different versions as well to meet different labeling and packaging requirements i.e. “this product labeled for sale in Rhode Island only, not for resale in any other state.”
Health insurance is mostly regulated at the state level, and one of the leading conservative proposals to replace Obamacare is to increase competition by making it easier to buy insurance across state lines. But wouldn’t creating a national market also require moving regulatory authority from the state to the national level?
I’ve floated this balloon on social media with those in apoplexy over the Hobby Lobby rulings and they aren’t convinced. Perhaps it’s due to lack of understanding of negative and positive rights, or ignorance of economics. Thinking as they often do that government grants rights, they miss the obvious that a positive government right is merely a government preference enforced at gunpoint, with your money.
I thought the medical argument was a good one too, but apparently the American College of OB/GYN has endorsed making it available over the counter. If it is ok with them, it’s ok with me.
I think the reasoning is you use the morning after one once ( or we would hope so) while you take the pill every day.
Would you float that out there on Facebook? I’m so tired of hearing about how backward we are compared to enlightened Europeans. What does France do? The lefties love France.
Condoms are on the list of 20 types of contraceptives that Obamacare requires be covered. I don’t know if that is for men, too.
I’m sorry to hear that. I had absolutely no luck using it to rebut lefty-feminist freak-outs, but found it worked best when I presented it on its own with liberal-friendly language.
I didnt want to advertise finnish health care, sometimes it is just hard to understand how US system works. Obama is god Finland, whatever he does, so I am here to learn what really goes on:)
If not OTC, maybe behind the counter, where the pharmacist can dispense the pills without a perscription and also counsel on its use. There are serious risks from using the pill or improperly using it. There has been some discussion among pharmacists that a third category of medicine, behind the counter that would increase health outcomes because some people just don’t like to go to the dr., but may consult with a pharmacist. (things like high blood pressure management) As with everything, this is controversial, drs. generally don’t like the idea.
Sponges and condoms are already OTC.
Update: three Republican senators — including Mitch McConnell — have co-sponsored a bill intended to make this happen.