OB-GYN group criticizes Texas abortio...

OB-GYN group criticizes Texas abortion bills

There are 493 comments on the KFVS12 story from Jul 5, 2013, titled OB-GYN group criticizes Texas abortion bills. In it, KFVS12 reports that:

The abortion bills under consideration in Texas are being denounced as a form of legislative overreach on the medical rights of women.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at KFVS12.

Dan

Omaha, NE

#22 Jul 8, 2013
Bitner wrote:
<quoted text>
PP TEXAS reported that surplus? Really?
Or could it have been the PP Federation which covers the entire US?
OR, perhaps it was PP INTERNATIONAL (meaning WORLDWIDE, in case you're confused) that reported that surplus?
And you think it should all be allocated to ONE state with 42 clinics in it?
PP national reported it.
I don't think that PP Texas had quantified the amount of money it would take to comply with the proposed facilities upgrades. They just said they couldn't afford it or some such.

“Blessed Be”

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#23 Jul 8, 2013
Dan wrote:
<quoted text>
PP national reported it.
I don't think that PP Texas had quantified the amount of money it would take to comply with the proposed facilities upgrades. They just said they couldn't afford it or some such.
"some such" what?

And what do you think it means, exactly, that they can't afford to use all of the national surplus in ONE state when other states are busy trying to pass similar laws?

Because apparently you were using the fact of the surplus to try to say something about PP as a whole. What was your point?
Dan

Omaha, NE

#24 Jul 8, 2013
Bitner wrote:
<quoted text>
"some such" what?
And what do you think it means, exactly, that they can't afford to use all of the national surplus in ONE state when other states are busy trying to pass similar laws?
Because apparently you were using the fact of the surplus to try to say something about PP as a whole. What was your point?
Only you are contending that PP National would have to blow all $87 million in one shot to shore up the Texas facilities.

I'm not. PP Tx hasn't put a number on it, to my knowledge.

“Define Necessity”

Since: Mar 13

FOR YOURSELF

#25 Jul 8, 2013
Bitner wrote:
<quoted text>
PP TEXAS reported that surplus? Really?
Or could it have been the PP Federation which covers the entire US?
OR, perhaps it was PP INTERNATIONAL (meaning WORLDWIDE, in case you're confused) that reported that surplus?
And you think it should all be allocated to ONE state with 42 clinics in it?
Of course not - Dan thinks (apparently) that it should all be confiscated as 'ill-gotten gains'.
Dan

Omaha, NE

#26 Jul 8, 2013
dedbebbies wrote:
<quoted text>Of course not - Dan thinks (apparently) that it should all be confiscated as 'ill-gotten gains'.
Hardly.

I never said it should be "confiscated".

Thanks for the meaningful contribution.

“Define Necessity”

Since: Mar 13

FOR YOURSELF

#27 Jul 8, 2013
Dan wrote:
<quoted text>
Yeah. Throwing in Monsanto is "logic". A "straight-up comparison"
Monsanto's operations in TX are regulated. There's a comparison, I guess.
Perry's sister is rich?
She will be, if Governor Goodhair has his way....

And pesticides/fertilizers (which are produced by Monsanto) in Texas, are far less regulated than abortion, as we can see from the explosion two months ago, which caused the deaths of 35 people. Perry deregulated that industry in his state, and them demanded Federal compensation for that catastrophe - money is the only thing he cares about - he's certainly not invested in preserving 'life'.
Dan

Omaha, NE

#28 Jul 8, 2013
Bitner wrote:
<quoted text>
"some such" what?
And what do you think it means, exactly, that they can't afford to use all of the national surplus in ONE state when other states are busy trying to pass similar laws?
Because apparently you were using the fact of the surplus to try to say something about PP as a whole. What was your point?
Here's an article that puts some focus on the cost to upgrade:

http://kutnews.org/post/issue-texas-abortion-...

Woman named Miller runs abortion clinics in 5 Texas cities-one that's an ASC. Excerpted below:

"Amy Hagsrom Miller is president and CEO of Whole Woman’s Health, which has abortion clinics in five Texas cities. At the hearing, she said hospitals have a financial reason to reject an abortion physician looking for admitting privileges: hospitals grant privileges to doctors who can bring in business."

“Abortion hardly has any complications, period. We’re not revenue generators for hospitals. We don’t bring business to the hospital as abortion providers," Miller said.

"And then there’s the cost. Miller said it would have cost her one and a half million dollars to build the center she leases in San Antonio. And it took her six years to find an ASC that was about to close its doors so she could come in and lease it. Sounds like a 'revenue generator' for her, anyway.

The facility costs her $40,000 more a month to operate than her other abortion clinics. She said if the abortion bill becomes law, the cost of upgrading abortion facilities will be too big and the number of clinics in Texas will drop from 42 to 5."

Miller runs one abortion clinic that costs her $40,000 more than the others she runs. Despite this added expense, she didn't mention closing it nor has she closed it and opened one in it's place that isn't an ASC, thus reducing her overhead.

Dan

Omaha, NE

#29 Jul 8, 2013
dedbebbies wrote:
<quoted text>She will be, if Governor Goodhair has his way....
And pesticides/fertilizers (which are produced by Monsanto) in Texas, are far less regulated than abortion, as we can see from the explosion two months ago, which caused the deaths of 35 people. Perry deregulated that industry in his state, and them demanded Federal compensation for that catastrophe - money is the only thing he cares about - he's certainly not invested in preserving 'life'.
Sister Kathryn said she'd be "richer", inferring she was already "rich".

Monsanto didn't own nor operate the plan in West, Tx.

A Donald Adair did.

“Blessed Be”

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#30 Jul 8, 2013
Dan wrote:
<quoted text>
Only you are contending that PP National would have to blow all $87 million in one shot to shore up the Texas facilities.
I'm not. PP Tx hasn't put a number on it, to my knowledge.
You still didn't answer my question. What was your point with that post about it, then?

“Blessed Be”

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#31 Jul 8, 2013
Dan wrote:
<quoted text>
Here's an article that puts some focus on the cost to upgrade:
http://kutnews.org/post/issue-texas-abortion-...
Woman named Miller runs abortion clinics in 5 Texas cities-one that's an ASC. Excerpted below:
"Amy Hagsrom Miller is president and CEO of Whole Woman’s Health, which has abortion clinics in five Texas cities. At the hearing, she said hospitals have a financial reason to reject an abortion physician looking for admitting privileges: hospitals grant privileges to doctors who can bring in business."
“Abortion hardly has any complications, period. We’re not revenue generators for hospitals. We don’t bring business to the hospital as abortion providers," Miller said.
"And then there’s the cost. Miller said it would have cost her one and a half million dollars to build the center she leases in San Antonio. And it took her six years to find an ASC that was about to close its doors so she could come in and lease it. Sounds like a 'revenue generator' for her, anyway.
The facility costs her $40,000 more a month to operate than her other abortion clinics. She said if the abortion bill becomes law, the cost of upgrading abortion facilities will be too big and the number of clinics in Texas will drop from 42 to 5."
Miller runs one abortion clinic that costs her $40,000 more than the others she runs. Despite this added expense, she didn't mention closing it nor has she closed it and opened one in it's place that isn't an ASC, thus reducing her overhead.
And?

Your post implied that the "surplus revenue" should be used to fix the clinics just in Texas.

Was that your point? If not, then what WAS your point in posting it?
Dan

Omaha, NE

#32 Jul 8, 2013
Bitner wrote:
<quoted text>
And?
Your post implied that the "surplus revenue" should be used to fix the clinics just in Texas.
Was that your point? If not, then what WAS your point in posting it?
I did indeed imply that surplus revenue can be spent on facilities if needed.

They have donors, and can ask them for money also.
Dan

Omaha, NE

#33 Jul 8, 2013
Bitner wrote:
<quoted text>
And?
Your post implied that the "surplus revenue" should be used to fix the clinics just in Texas.
Was that your point? If not, then what WAS your point in posting it?
.....and I don't think that ALL PP National's surplus revenue should be spent in Tx. My point was that there IS surplus revenue that COULD be used in that manner. PP National can spend it as they see fit, or ask for donations.

“Blessed Be”

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#34 Jul 8, 2013
Dan wrote:
<quoted text>
.....and I don't think that ALL PP National's surplus revenue should be spent in Tx. My point was that there IS surplus revenue that COULD be used in that manner. PP National can spend it as they see fit, or ask for donations.
And that was your point? Really?
Dan

Omaha, NE

#35 Jul 8, 2013
Bitner wrote:
<quoted text>
And that was your point? Really?
Yeah.

“Define Necessity”

Since: Mar 13

FOR YOURSELF

#36 Jul 8, 2013
Dan wrote:
<quoted text>
Sister Kathryn said she'd be "richer", inferring she was already "rich".
Monsanto didn't own nor operate the plan in West, Tx.
A Donald Adair did.
Nonetheless, dangerous fertilizer plants in Texas have been de-regulated, while one of the safest surgical procedures out there is getting ready to be regulated nearly out of existence.

Perry wants to deregulate all private business, EXCEPT abortion, in keeping with the so-called 'conservative' value of government just small enough to fit in a uterus.
Dan

Omaha, NE

#37 Jul 8, 2013
dedbebbies wrote:
<quoted text>Nonetheless, dangerous fertilizer plants in Texas have been de-regulated, while one of the safest surgical procedures out there is getting ready to be regulated nearly out of existence.
Perry wants to deregulate all private business, EXCEPT abortion, in keeping with the so-called 'conservative' value of government just small enough to fit in a uterus.
Who said it's being regulated out of existence?

The people who will be impacted by the regs are claiming it, but of course they'll say that. They don't want to have to pay to comply.

“Define Necessity”

Since: Mar 13

FOR YOURSELF

#38 Jul 8, 2013
Dan wrote:
<quoted text>
Who said it's being regulated out of existence?
The people who will be impacted by the regs are claiming it, but of course they'll say that. They don't want to have to pay to comply.
I said it's getting READY to be regulated out of existence. That's the whole point of these laws, other than increasing the personal wealth of the Perry family. IF they were about safety, then EVERY outpatient surgery would be required to be performed in an ambulatory surgical center. That is not the case, and there is not a single law being considered which would make it the case.

And you know it.
Dan

Omaha, NE

#39 Jul 8, 2013
dedbebbies wrote:
<quoted text>I said it's getting READY to be regulated out of existence. That's the whole point of these laws, other than increasing the personal wealth of the Perry family. IF they were about safety, then EVERY outpatient surgery would be required to be performed in an ambulatory surgical center. That is not the case, and there is not a single law being considered which would make it the case.
And you know it.
.....but they could simply spend the money and get the facilities in compliance.

Right?

“Define Necessity”

Since: Mar 13

FOR YOURSELF

#40 Jul 8, 2013
Dan wrote:
<quoted text>
.....but they could simply spend the money and get the facilities in compliance.
Right?
1) Not every abortion facility in Texas is a subsidiary of Planned Parenthood, and thus they don't all have a claim on the funds that to which you keep referring.
2) Even Planned Parenthood's 'surplus' to which you referred, is on a national, not state, level. Texas clinics don't have access to the entirety of those funds, even if they ARE PP clinics.
3) The regulations are not being applied fairly to all outpatient clinics in Texas - just the ones which provide abortion.
and
4) "Simply spending the money" will not address the fact that even NON-SURGICAL abortions (which comprise the VAST majority of abortions) will be required to be performed in an expensive Ambulatory Surgical Center, incurring costs for the patient which are wholly unnecessary.

It's bad law all the way around.
Dan

Omaha, NE

#41 Jul 8, 2013
dedbebbies wrote:
<quoted text>1) Not every abortion facility in Texas is a subsidiary of Planned Parenthood, and thus they don't all have a claim on the funds that to which you keep referring.
2) Even Planned Parenthood's 'surplus' to which you referred, is on a national, not state, level. Texas clinics don't have access to the entirety of those funds, even if they ARE PP clinics.
3) The regulations are not being applied fairly to all outpatient clinics in Texas - just the ones which provide abortion.
and
4) "Simply spending the money" will not address the fact that even NON-SURGICAL abortions (which comprise the VAST majority of abortions) will be required to be performed in an expensive Ambulatory Surgical Center, incurring costs for the patient which are wholly unnecessary.
It's bad law all the way around.
1.) Roger that. This lady runs 5 and even though the one that IS an ASC costs her 40K/month more to run, it's apparently viable as she hasn't closed it.

http://kutnews.org/post/issue-texas-abortion-...

2.) That's up to PP national, isn't it? In any event, they can raise funds, right? Donors?

3.) If the law passes, "fair" or not, that'll be the cost of doing business in TX. States regulate some businesses a lot and make it hard to do that type of business there. This isn't new.

4.) That's up to the centers as to what they charge, right?

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Abortion Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Pope Francis eases way for divorced Catholics w... 5 hr Electric-Blue 42
News Oklahoma governor vetoes bill to jail abortion ... 10 hr Retired SOF 15
News Oklahoma lawmakers OK bill criminalizing perfor... 10 hr Retired SOF 38
News Thousands Protest Roe V. Wade Decision (Jan '08) 12 hr zef 311,139
News Newfoundland charity volunteer ousted for pro-g... 18 hr Bob 3
News Planned Parenthood sues Indiana for abortion law Tue Three Days Paleo 37
News In Egregeious 'Feticide' Case, Woman Fights Bac... Mon Three Days Paleo 2
More from around the web