Watchdog reporting needed on Gardner

10 thoughts on “Watchdog reporting needed on Gardner”

1. Look at Gardner shovel the shit. He's never going to anything to keep that promise. We all knew he wouldn't.

   Log in to Reply

   1. Ditto.

      He couldn't/can't.  A pharmaceutical manufacturer brings its drug to the FDA and asks for OTC status.

      Our lying weasel Senator-elect campaigned claiming the pill being prescription only was some kind of legislative glitch of Obamacare requiring the government to come between you and your healthcare.  He's a lying sack of shit who ran a dishonest campaign, and was elected because people are stupid (including those running Udall's campaign.)

      If he had any intention of following through on this campaign meme, he or any of the half dozen other lying Republican Senators-elect who used this trope to deflect their heinous anti-woman records (I'm looking at you Speaker Motorcycle Vagina) could call the drug makers in for hearings on why they haven't made such applications, or how the congress could facilitate the process for them.

      When pigs fly.

      Log in to Reply

2. Reconcile??? Pshah!!! — "There is no federal personhood bill" . . .

   Log in to Reply

3. Besides, it's bad policy in any case.  Make them over-the-counter and bingo, insurance companies don't have to cover the cost, thus putting them out of reach for millions of women who otherwise can't afford the cost.

   In this particular case, I'd just as soon have Cory sit on his thumb and do nothing to harm his constituents.

   Log in to Reply

   1. Which is why con-man Cory is so full of shit when he mentions working with ACOG. He'll name drop them, but won't enact their agenda.

      “We feel strongly, however, that OTC access to contraceptives should be part of a broader dialogue about improving women’s health care, preventing unintended pregnancies, and increasing use of contraception, including long-acting reversible contraception (LARC). Over-the-counter access should not be used as a political tool by candidates or by elected officials.

      “Regardless of any current or future proposals from lawmakers, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has not yet approved oral contraceptives for over-the-counter use, and any future FDA approval for such use would likely cover only a subset of oral contraceptive formulations.

      “Of course, cost continues to be a major factor in a woman’s consistent use of contraception, and many women simply cannot afford the out-of-pocket costs associated with contraceptives, OTC or not.  That’s why ACOG strongly supports the Affordable Care Act (ACA) provision that mandates insurance coverage of birth control, as well as other preventive services, without cost-sharing for the patient.

      “Separately, OTC access to oral contraceptives alone will not help to increase use of the most highly effective methods, such as intrauterine devices (IUD). IUDs are more effective than oral contraceptives, and because they can last for as many as ten years, they are also cost-effective. However, their initial out-of-pocket costs – which can near $1,000 – can be prohibitive for women who don’t have comprehensive insurance coverage.

      “It is also important to note that over-the-counter access to contraceptives does not obviate the need for women to see their gynecologist each year. An annual health assessment is a fundamental part of medical care for all patients, including women, and allows women to discuss with their gynecologists their reproductive health plans, learn about birth control options other than oral contraceptives, and receive important preventive health services, such as vaccines.

      “Recent political discussions on the importance of OTC access to contraceptives are welcome, but ACOG remains firmly in support of comprehensive strategies to increase adoption of more-effective methods and to provide all women with the contraceptives they need at no cost.”

      All that advocating for "abortions for moochers" will hardly get any traction in the Dirksen building, but I'd love to give lobbying for it a try.

      Log in to Reply

4. I guess you missed Slimy's press release on his vote, Jason?  Let me translate that into English for you, Jason:

   "We desperately need comprehensive immigration reform in this country.  What we don't need is anyone actually doing anything to facilitate that, most certainly not President Obama . . . 

   . . . I support immigration reform. But, let's find a way to get some more white folks, and maybe a few of those Asians into here, huh?  Canadians would be ok. I mean, we already got all the hispanics we're ever gonna' need, and then some, right now.

   If god has wanted more immigrants here, he would have put them in this country legally."

   Log in to Reply

5. I just hope I don’t hear anyone acting surprised…they were warned.
   the moderate voters who elected him deserve the Senator they are going to get….only problem is..we all get to share the spectacle…

   Log in to Reply

6. His conduct will only help Bennet.  Moderates won't want to vote for a Republican in 2016 after seeing Cory go back to being who he really is.  Gardner is going to be Bennets best election tool.

   Log in to Reply

   1. I would actually like to see a primary effort by someone who is not a corporate apologist like the good Senator. Time for some good ol' grass roots populism…

      I nominate tater heap tom….

      Log in to Reply

      1.                                  Tater Heap Tom

                                                for US Senate!

                                            A tater in every heap!!

          

         Log in to Reply