Posted on 03/04/2012 1:54:02 PM PST by Netizen
This is the html version of the file http://abcnews.go.com/images/Politics/statement-Congress-letterhead-2nd%20hearing.pdf.
Page 1
Leader Pelosi, Members of Congress, good morning, and thank you for calling this hearing on women’s health and allowing me to testify on behalf of the women who will benefit from the Affordable Care Act contraceptive coverage regulation. Myname is Sandra Fluke, and I’m a third year student at Georgetown Law, a Jesuit school. I’m also a past president of Georgetown Law Students for Reproductive Justice or LSRJ. I’d like to acknowledge my fellow LSRJ members and allies and all of the student activists with us and thank them for being here today.
Georgetown LSRJ is here today because we’re so grateful that this regulation implements the nonpartisan, medical advice of the Institute of Medicine. I attend a Jesuit law school that does not provide contraception coverage in its student health plan. Just as we students have faced financial, emotional, and medical burdens as a result, employees at religiously affiliated hospitals and universities across the country have suffered similar burdens. We are all grateful for the new regulation that will meet the critical health care needs of so many women. Simultaneously, the recently announced adjustment addresses any potential conflict with the religious identity of Catholic and Jesuit institutions.
When I look around my campus, I see the faces of the women affected, and I have heard more and more of their stories. . On a daily basis, I hear from yet another woman from Georgetown or other schools or who works for a religiously affiliated employer who has suffered financial, emotional, and medical burdens because of this lack of contraceptive coverage. And so, I am here to share their voices and I thank you for allowing them to be heard.
Without insurance coverage, contraception can cost a woman over $3,000 during law school. For a lot of students who, like me, are on public interest scholarships, that’s practically an entire summer’s salary. Forty percent of female students at Georgetown Law report struggling financially as a result of this policy. One told us of how embarrassed and powerless she felt when she was standing at the pharmacy counter, learning for the first time that contraception wasn’t covered, and had to walk away because she couldn’t afford it. Women like her have no choice but to go without contraception. Just last week, a married female student told me she had to stop using contraception because she couldn’t afford it any
Page 2
longer. Women employed in low wage jobs without contraceptive coverage face the same choice.
You might respond that contraception is accessible in lots of other ways. Unfortunately, that’s not true. Women’s health clinics provide vital medical services, but as the Guttmacher Institute has documented, clinics are unable to meet the crushing demand for these services. Clinics are closing and women are being forced to go without. How can Congress consider the Fortenberry, Rubio, and Blunt legislation that would allow even more employers and institutions to refuse contraceptive coverage and then respond that the non-profit clinics should step up to take care of the resulting medical crisis, particularly when so many legislators are attempting to defund those very same clinics?
These denials of contraceptive coverage impact real people. In the worst cases, women who need this medication for other medical reasons suffer dire consequences. A friend of mine, for example, has polycystic ovarian syndrome and has to take prescription birth control to stop cysts from growing on her ovaries. Her prescription is technically covered by Georgetown insurance because it’s not intended to prevent pregnancy. Under many religious institutions’ insurance plans, it wouldn’t be, and under Senator Blunt’s amendment, Senator Rubio’s bill, or Representative Fortenberry’s bill, there’s no requirement that an exception be made for such medical needs. When they do exist, these exceptions don’t accomplish their well-intended goals because when you let university administrators or other employers, rather than women and their doctors, dictate whose medical needs are legitimate and whose aren’t, a woman’s health takes a back seat to a bureaucracy focused on policing her body.
In sixty-five percent of cases, our female students were interrogated by insurance representatives and university medical staff about why they needed these prescriptions and whether they were lying about their symptoms. For my friend, and 20% of women in her situation, she never got the insurance company to cover her prescription, despite verification of her illness from her doctor. Her claim was denied repeatedly on the assumption that she really wanted the birth control to prevent pregnancy. She’s gay, so clearly polycystic ovarian syndrome was a much more urgent concern than accidental pregnancy. After months of paying over $100 out of pocket, she just couldn’t afford her medication anymore and had to stop taking it. I learned about all of this when I walked out of a test and got a message from her that in the middle of her final exam period she’d been in the emergency room all night in excruciating pain. She wrote, “It was so painful, I woke up thinking I’d been shot.” Without her taking the birth control, a massive cyst the size of a tennis ball had grown on her ovary. She had to have surgery to remove her entire ovary. On the morning I was originally scheduled to give this testimony, she sat in a doctor’s office. Since last year’s surgery, she’s been experiencing night sweats, weight gain, and other symptoms of early menopause as a result of the
Page 3
removal of her ovary. She’s 32 years old. As she put it: “If my body indeed does enter early menopause, no fertility specialist in the world will be able to help me have my own children. I will have no chance at giving my mother her desperately desired grandbabies, simply because the insurance policy that I paid for totally unsubsidized by my school wouldn’t cover my prescription for birth control when I needed it.” Now, in addition to potentially facing the health complications that come with having menopause at an early age-- increased risk of cancer, heart disease, and osteoporosis, she may never be able to conceive a child.
Perhaps you think my friend’s tragic story is rare. It’s not. One woman told us doctors believe she has endometriosis, but it can’t be proven without surgery, so the insurance hasn’t been willing to cover her medication. Recently, another friend of mine told me that she also has polycystic ovarian syndrome. She’s struggling to pay for her medication and is terrified to not have access to it. Due to the barriers erected by Georgetown’s policy, she hasn’t been reimbursed for her medication since last August. I sincerely pray that we don’t have to wait until she loses an ovary or is diagnosed with cancer before her needs and the needs of all of these women are taken seriously.
This is the message that not requiring coverage of contraception sends. A woman’s reproductive healthcare isn’t a necessity, isn’t a priority. One student told us that she knew birth control wasn’t covered, and she assumed that’s how Georgetown’s insurance handled all of women’s sexual healthcare, so when she was raped, she didn’t go to the doctor even to be examined or tested for sexually transmitted infections because she thought insurance wasn’t going to cover something like that, something that was related to a woman’s reproductive health. As one student put it, “this policy communicates to female students that our school doesn’t understand our needs.” These are not feelings that male fellow studentsexperience. And they’re not burdens that male students must shoulder.
In the media lately, conservative Catholic organizations have been asking: what did we expect when we enrolled at a Catholic school? We can only answer that we expected women to be treated equally, to not have our school create untenable burdens that impede our academic success. We expected that our schools would live up to the Jesuit creed of cura personalis, to care for the whole person, by meeting all of our medical needs. We expected that when we told our universities of the problems this policy created for students, they would help us. We expected that when 94% of students opposed the policy, the university would respect our choices regarding insurance students pay for completely unsubsidized by the university. We did not expect that women would be told in the national media that if we wanted comprehensive insurance that met our needs, not just those of men, we should have gone to school elsewhere, even if that meant a less prestigious university. We refuse to pick between a quality education and our health, and we
Page 4
resent that, in the 21st century, anyone thinks it’s acceptable to ask us to make this choice simply because we are women. Many of the women whose stories I’ve shared are Catholic women, so ours is not a war against the church. It is a struggle for access to the healthcare we need. The President of the Association of Jesuit Colleges has shared that Jesuit colleges and universities appreciate the modification to the rule announced last week. Religious concerns are addressed and women get the healthcare they need. That is something we can all agree on. Thank you.
She requires us to pay for her RECREATIONAL SEXUAL EXPLOITS. Did the Jesuits at Georgetown vet her in an interview?
I wonder what the admissions process is like at Georgetown Law. Did they even interview her? What are her grades? What was her LSAT score? Was she an affirmative action admisssion?
Georgetown has a health insurance mandate (see link 24)
You can either go on theirs - if not you must waive it officially or they will charge you for it - or buy your own or use parents plan (as long it is to the standards that Georgetown sets forth).
Their insurance isn’t cheap - $157/month - you can get cheaper on the open market in DC.
Fluke is being pissy about Georgetown - well, they don’t “make” you buy their insurance but they do “make” you buy health insurance to their premium levels.
It’s like Mini-ObamaCare -lol
If some of her twit 30 yr old friends can’t figure out that if they need BCP’s for a condition or sex(who cares - whatever) that they can opt out of the Georgetown plan and get their own....these twits make women look like weak-in-the-knees idiots - apparently they can’t figure out how to take care of themselves...what do they need - flashcards?
(I had University health coverage in college - early 80’s - I don’t remember if it was mandatory but I know I was on it - I think I had a check up once in those 4 years)
I think not.
a video made after she was denied the opportunity to testify,
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/sandra-fluke-a-fake-victim-of-georgetowns-policy-on-contraceptives/
Meet Sandra Fluke: The woman you didn’t hear at Congress’ contraceptives hearing
A very few might, but some Catholic universities don't. Some even have coed dorms, which facilitates the 'hook-up' culture. When our daughter was looking for a Catholic college, she eliminated all of the ones with coed housing, choosing, instead, Ave Maria Univ. in FL.
My poor 99%er, not Georgetown lawyer brain has no cells to spare for her B.S.
The fact that Rush has brought any attention to her at all is even worse than his appalling apology for telling the truth about this chutzpah slut!
You said it, that is the key word: “Recreational”. I mean what’s next, paying the beer tab for the frat parties? If it was some girl who said she needed $3000 bucks to pay for beer and Rush called her a drunk would THAT be inappropriate? Hell no. The left is scamming once again, playing on peoples emotions. Rush should have NEVER apologized by on the same coin he should have never given them ammunition because we will never hear the end of this. They will exploit this to no end to influence the stupid.
About your other questions: From what I’ve read, this woman isn’t even a student although I can find no confirmation of this. What is confirmed is she is NOT 23 but 30 years old and graduated in 2003 with a BS in sex studies.
Wait till Thursday when Ann Coulter puts out her column. I absolutely gaurantee you 1000% Ann will rip this woman 3 new a-holes, expose her for what she really is.
admittedly i dont bother much with watching/reading the events in realtime, as i have you guys for the cliif note/dummies version...but if this is it, rush screwed the pooch, and missed a golden opportunity to shine the light back onto planned parenthood, which most ALL wimmin know of, and can use to get FReebies...
this was/is a goldmine of rebuttable stuff, and skank that this commie activist is, she didnt speak of her own activities...
The dean of Georgetown had a perfect opportunity to defend the school and the church and wimped out. He defended her right to politicize the issue as a women’s rights matter instead.
My alma mater, a Jesuit University, has become a bastion of liberalism. I don’t support it anymore and will no encourage my grandchildren to attend.
This overt example is out there for all to see. She is either a loose woman or runs will that type of crowd. Verbally declaring her societal classification may aggrivate some, but it is nevertheless accurate. So, our leadership, even the President of the United States cast his lot with this type of behavior as a pretext to drive the wedge between women and conservatism. Obama is shameless and purile in his declarations. This woman has willfully submitted herself to the congressional left and the president to be used and whored out to coarsen an already crass and rapidly degenerating society. The light is flickering and the wind is picking up. How will the light seek the darkness if light is extinguished. God have mercy on this country...to have been given so much, and it count it so little.
Yes. Big-time. Fluke never mentioned her own sex life. Never said she was on contraceptives or that she had ever taken contraceptives.
Fluke gave the stories of six other specific women.
Then Rush said that Fluke - Fluke - was a slut and a prostitute. Rush said that Fluke said she was getting so much sex she couldn't pay for it. Rush questioned how proud Fluke's parents were about all of her recreational sex.
All of that sex that Fluke never mentioned a single time.
Rush counted the number of condoms that Fluke needed for the amount she said she spent on contraception . . . but Fluke said how much one woman (not Fluke) who was taking birth control pills for a medical condition paid for them.
So . . . while conservatives had the high moral ground on the issue of Obamacare forcing religious healthcare plans to provide care than ran against religious principles (like contraception), we lost it because of Rush. He had to apologize. People on FR are calling Fluke a slut, saying she's round-heeled.
Rush could have attacked all of the BS in Fluke's testimony. Instead, he apologized and whenever the issue of Obamacare and contraception comes up, what will be remembered is Limbaugh erroneously calling Sandra Fluke a slut and then apologizing. Not that Georgetown shouldn't have to pay for contraceptives against Roman Catholic religious principles.
You said 'Rush screwed the pooch." Yep.
Dittos
I can see the problem with where Rush went politically ,
Republican are having a hell of a time getting traction on the theme that this is about Religious freedom. Dems claim it is about women's health, which in many cases birth control pills are.
But also in today's modern culture of “My sexual activity is my business, but my health care bills are your responsibility”, women's ability to have sex without pregnancy is equated to their health. And Rush goes out and attacks her jokingly on an assumed sexual activity of hers, wrt to free birth control pills.
In this insane world homosexuals have the right to sexual freedom, but we are responsible for the bills.
BTW Don't smoke because that's a public health issue if you do,
Making this debate part of sex-birth also brings up the practical issue, if women use birth control when they don’t want to have babies then there are less abortions and less welfare(and less child support orders). That is probably the reason why a debate on BC mandates cant be won. It cant be won on a cost argument.
2. Georgetown only requires students to buy their insurance if they have not obtained insurance elsewhere. Insurance elsewhere is available elsewhere for a similar price as Georgetown's but at that price covers only generic drugs fully (brand name drugs are subject to deductibles and copays).
TO SUGGEST OR INFER THE ONLY SOURCE OF HEALTH INSURANCE IS GEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY IS A CANARD.
3. If this debate is about contraception, the method of contraception is not relevant. Since the method of contraception is relevant, this is not a debate about contraception, but instead is a debate about something else.
THE CONTRACEPTION ARGUMENT IS A CANARD.
4. The positive benefits of hormonal birth control have not been validated to the point the pills can be prescribed for that benefit. That said, the positive benefits of combined oral contraceptives are well documented due to the 50 year history of combined oral contraceptives, and are a benefit of generic versions of combined oral contraceptives. Most drugs released since 1990 have expired patents and therefore are available in generic form.
THE NON-CONTRACEPTIVE BENEFITS ARGUMENT IS A CANARD.
5. While I do not have the details of the Georgetown student health insurance benefits, it is a reasonable guess to say regular doctor visits and annual physicals are covered (perhaps partially covered requiring a copay and deductible), to include gender specific medical treatment (i.e., PAP smears, pelvic exams, etc. for women). It is also likely there is nothing preventing a physician from prescribing birth control at the request of the insured. What is likely is the primary coverage portion of the Georgetown student insurance policy does not cover birth control medical devices (i.e., IUD, ring, etc.), and the prescription drug coverage portion specifically does not cover prescription birth control drugs. That said, anyone can take a doctors prescription and pay for the drug themselves. They can also notify the doctor their insurance does not cover the cost of certain drugs and request the doctor only prescribe the low cost alternative (i.e., alternative drugs available in generic form). This happens today with people who have high-deductible insurance with health savings accounts (HSAs), and who pay for their prescription drugs out of their HSA. It also works this way for anyone purchasing medical marijuana.
THE "ACCESS" ARGUMENT IS A CANARD.
People in California have access to medical marijuana with a prescription. No insurance's prescription drug benefit pays for medical marijuana. Q.E.D.
What is Fluke's argument about? Cost? Debunked. Women's health? Debunked. "Access". Debunked.
Fluke is part of a vast left wing conspiracy to conflate others paying for something as equal to liberty--i.e., mandating someone else (government or private industry) pay for something (in this case, optional medical treatment), is equal to protecting personal freedom ("access"). Where do we go from here? Logically, if self expression is a protected liberty, and for a transgendered person to fully realize their self-expression they must have gender reassignment surgery paid for by insurance.
That is the slippery slope, but what is this about? Fluke is not a useless idiot, she is a willing player in this drama. When you see Fluke as just another in a line of left wing feminist activists determined to crush religious organizations in the name of women's heath, then it makes sense. It is not about access, it is not about affordability, it is not about health. It is about secularizing the remaining (small "o") orthodox religious institutions BY FORCE. As people fled mainline protestant denominations for Catholic church and evangelical Protestant churches, the progressives started to lose control of religion. The bishops and leaders of the mainline Protestant churches have no political clout any more, but the Catholic bishops and the leaders of evangelical Protestant churches do. And they are a threat to progressives, so they must be crushed.
That is what this is all about. And Fluke is not some draftee dragged into the progressive army unwillingly, but she is a long serving captain in that army.
When I was in college, the university offered very affordable insurance for those who were not on their parents' insurance, but it was not mandated.
I don't know about Georgetown, but about 10 years ago this was a big issue when a meningococcal meningitis infection spread between universities during spring break. Later, as a result of the anti-vaxer generation of parents, there were mumps outbreaks in several universities.
Basically, the university infirmaries were overrun during various outbreaks, and wanted to move treatment to the local medical facilities.
This prompted universities to require students have health insurance.
But we have gone from treatment meningococcal meningitis outbreaks, mumps outbreaks, and other life-threatening diseases to optional prescription drugs.
Every one is going to be listening to Rush to see how this plays out.
And yet.... by your own words, even you don't see how WELL it worked.
Read them again.
No one will listen now. I;m going to try to remember to listen to Rush. What time does he come on?
You are correct. What she was talking about was how all the other women she knows that are students at Georgetown are such sluts.
If you are on government supplied(taxpayer paid for) bc, and you get pregnant, it is the government's legal responsibility(in the leftest view) to pay for that abortion. And it will not be an optional thing.
Later will come mandatory abortion for 'non-perfect' children, and the Chinese version of 'sexual selection'.
Maybe Ms. Fluke's 'word' is not backed up by evidence.
So.... what you are saying is that she was denied a testimony in front of Congress, because Issa knew she was just a political whore, and she had no real evidence, just stories she made up about her slutty Georgetown schoolmates . So they held a ‘fake’ hearing presentation (making her a media whore) and that is what Rush was commenting on?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.