SENATE BILL: Reproductive Health Expansion Act (Passed)

[SevenEleven]

As far as I'm aware from my reading of our healthcare program (Reforming and Regionalizing Public Healthcare Act of 2017) there is not an explicitly broad mandate for reproductive health services to be included in our federal health insurance program- so this bill allows for our quasi public option healthcare plant provide it.

The only existing service was a bill that I helped steer through the House which allowed for abortions which were judged as medically necessary.

The bill also upholds our longstanding stance that abortion is largely a regional issue; as it doesn't seek to overrule or force the regions into providing it.

Seems fair and sensible to me. This will be a huge benefit for women suffering through tragic miscarriages.

[SevenEleven]

Normally I wouldn't prefer tabling but this Senate needs some kind of jolt at this point to get the juices flowing leading into the transition to the new Senate. Perhaps a spirited discussion on abortion will help with that.

Simplifying this bill into an abortion debate is inappropriate. Many pregnancies that are intended to be carried out regrettably require medical terminations that are very disheartening for the involved family.

Nay.

[SevenEleven]

Normally I wouldn't prefer tabling but this Senate needs some kind of jolt at this point to get the juices flowing leading into the transition to the new Senate. Perhaps a spirited discussion on abortion will help with that.

Simplifying this bill into an abortion debate is inappropriate. Many pregnancies that are intended to be carried out regrettably require medical terminations that are very disheartening for the involved family.

This bill isn't just limited to emergency medical terminations though.

By voting to table, one could say you are, ahem, "throwing the baby out with the bath water".

[SevenEleven]

Normally I wouldn't prefer tabling but this Senate needs some kind of jolt at this point to get the juices flowing leading into the transition to the new Senate. Perhaps a spirited discussion on abortion will help with that.

Simplifying this bill into an abortion debate is inappropriate. Many pregnancies that are intended to be carried out regrettably require medical terminations that are very disheartening for the involved family.

This bill isn't just limited to emergency medical terminations though.

By voting to table, one could say you are, ahem, "throwing the baby out with the bath water".

I haven't voted to table yet.

Yet? Don't terminate protections for prospective mothers without considering what is best for all!

[SevenEleven]

Normally I wouldn't prefer tabling but this Senate needs some kind of jolt at this point to get the juices flowing leading into the transition to the new Senate. Perhaps a spirited discussion on abortion will help with that.

Simplifying this bill into an abortion debate is inappropriate. Many pregnancies that are intended to be carried out regrettably require medical terminations that are very disheartening for the involved family.

This bill isn't just limited to emergency medical terminations though.

By voting to table, one could say you are, ahem, "throwing the baby out with the bath water".

I haven't voted to table yet.

Yet? Don't terminate protections for prospective mothers without considering what is best for all!

Come on convince me like you mean it!

Hey, if you think grieving would-be mothers should have to pay a hefty sum for miscarrying, I would love to convince you otherwise but it seems self-evident.

On a more personal note, my nephew was born in a situation that nearly killed his mother. I shudder to think what it would've felt like to get stuck with a huge bill had the worst outcome been necessary.

[SevenEleven]

Normally I wouldn't prefer tabling but this Senate needs some kind of jolt at this point to get the juices flowing leading into the transition to the new Senate. Perhaps a spirited discussion on abortion will help with that.

Simplifying this bill into an abortion debate is inappropriate. Many pregnancies that are intended to be carried out regrettably require medical terminations that are very disheartening for the involved family.

This bill isn't just limited to emergency medical terminations though.

By voting to table, one could say you are, ahem, "throwing the baby out with the bath water".

I haven't voted to table yet.

Yet? Don't terminate protections for prospective mothers without considering what is best for all!

Come on convince me like you mean it!

Hey, if you think grieving would-be mothers should have to pay a hefty sum for miscarrying, I would love to convince you otherwise but it seems self-evident.

I am 85% sure that someone who miscarries would fall under "emergency care", which is explicitly listed as covered in Atlas care going back to the original 2017 text.

I am 85% sure that basing public policy on "85%" situations is the wrong choice. Every Atlasian deserves to be treated with dignity.

[SevenEleven]

Aye.