The 8 Preventive Health Services that Women Start Getting Free Today

From birth control to breast-feeding support, American women are now eligible for eight additional preventive health care benefits without copay under the Affordable Care Act

  • Share
  • Read Later
Getty Images

Starting today, about 47 million American women will have access to free preventive health services as part of a new provision in President Obama’s Affordable Care Act. Comprehensive preventive care coverage will now be provided for insured women enrolling in new health care plans or renewing their existing policies on or after Aug. 1, 2012.

Here’s the breakdown, courtesy of the Dept. of Health and Human Services, of the eight services women are now eligible to receive under the new provision without a copay or any cost sharing:

  • Well-woman visits: This includes an annual well-woman preventive care visit for adult women to obtain the recommended preventive services, plus additional visits if women and their doctors determine they’re necessary.
  • Gestational diabetes screening: This screening is for women 24 to 28 weeks pregnant, and those at high risk of developing gestational diabetes. Women who have gestational diabetes have an increased risk of developing Type 2 diabetes in the future, and their children are at a significantly increased risk of being overweight and insulin-resistant throughout childhood.
  • HPV DNA testing: Women who are 30 or older will now have access to high-risk human papillomavirus (HPV) DNA testing every three years, regardless of Pap smear results. Early screening, detection and treatment have been shown to help reduce the prevalence of cervical cancer.
  • STI counseling: Sexually active women may receive annual counseling on sexually transmitted infections (STIs). The sessions have been shown to reduce risky behavior in patients, but only 28% of women aged 18 to 44 discuss STIs with a doctor or nurse.
  • HIV screening and counseling: Sexually active women can receive annual counseling on HIV. Women are at increased risk of becoming infected with HIV: from 1999 to 2003, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reported a 15% increase in AIDS cases among women, and a 1% increase among men.
  • Contraception and contraceptive counseling: Women will have free access to all government-approved contraceptive methods, sterilization procedures and patient education and counseling. This does not include abortion drugs. Most workers in employer-sponsored plans are currently covered for contraceptives; however, employers with religious affiliations will not be required to pay for birth control. Rather, insurance companies providing health plans to such employers will cover the cost.
  • Breast-feeding support, supplies and counseling: Pregnant and postpartum women now have access to comprehensive lactation support and counseling from trained providers, as well as breastfeeding equipment.
  • Interpersonal and domestic violence screening and counseling: Screening and counseling for interpersonal and domestic violence is provided free for all adolescent and adult women. An estimated 25% of women in the U.S. report being targets of intimate partner violence during their lifetimes.

These services are in addition to the existing preventive care that the ACA makes available without copay to those with private health insurance and Medicare, including annual wellness visits, cholesterol screening, other cardiovascular screenings and cancer screenings, including mammograms, colonoscopy and cervical cancer tests.

MORE: Colorado Shooting Victims to Get Free Health Care. Why Not Everyone?

78 comments
Aubrey Holloway
Aubrey Holloway

Kudos! Habitual health care

visits are indeed a big help for women. It is imperative to undergo regular

health checkups to prevent or determine possible diseases. In this way, a

healthier and happier way of living can be guaranteed. :)

http://www.primarycareak.com/

K Hall
K Hall

The title is very misleading.  It's only "free" for ladies with health insurance.  That's nice for them, but the ones that really need the help are the millions of working Americans who don't have insurance.  This part of the ACA does nothing for them.

Emily affiliate_manager
Emily affiliate_manager

Living with Herpes is really hard, especially when you are a single. Don't upset by the condition, you are not alone. According to a report from the largest Herpes singles dating site HerpesandDating.net, 98% of its members who used to be on a general dating site to find the love and support were rejected by others. That could be the reason that why HerpesandDating.net is so popular and now has more than 650,000 members.

 

elizabeth52
elizabeth52

Still so much harmful excess - HPV negative women can't benefit from pap tests, biopsies or anything else. Doing pap tests AND HPV tests is unnecessary, expensive and causes confusion leading to over-investigation. The Dutch have a new program that is evidence based and in the best interests of all women, 5 hrHPV primary triage tests offered at ages 30,35,40,50 and 60 and only the roughly 5% of women aged 30+ who are HPV positive and at risk will be offered a 5 yearly pap test. The vast majority of women are HPV negative and not at risk - they will be spared from unnecessary pap testing, biopsies etc...and will simply be offered the remaining four HPV primary triage tests or they can test themselves using the Delphi Screener. Those HPV negative and no longer sexually active or confidently monogamous can forget all further testing. Piling up screening tests just worries and harms women, costs a fortune and it's inefficient. (but great for profits!)

Well-woman exams lead to anything but wellness - they are not recommended in many countries, including the UK and Australia. The routine pelvic exam is of poor clinical value and risks your health, even unnecessary surgery. It does not detect early ovarian cancer, you have the same rates of early ovarian cancer (and of ovarian cancer overall) as countries who don't do routine pelvic exams. Your Dr Carolyn Westhoff and others have written articles warning women, they partly blame this exam for your very high hysterectomy rates, 1 in 3 women by age 60, 600,000 every year - so much for wellness exams! Routine breast exams, there is no evidence they help, but they lead to excess biopsies. Breast screening - be careful and make up your own mind, the Nordic Cochrane Institute concluded a decade ago that they are of little benefit, but lead to serious over-diagnosis. The UK is currently doing a full review as concerns mount that the risks may exceed the benefit. (assuming there is one!) See the excellent NCI summary at their website, "The risks and benefits of mammograms"...we have excess in our system too, but nothing like the States. I also struggle to understand how your doctors get away with coercing women into these exams in exchange for the Pill and even migraine meds etc...that would amount to medical misconduct here.

Killroy71
Killroy71

There's no "free" health care. If there were, you wouldn't need health insurance. Just go to the doctor/hospital/pharmacy and voila! No charge.  When was the last time that happened - without flashing your insurance card.

Please stop saying "free." We all pay.  Not that there's anything wrong with that. We just need to stop the illusion that health care is (1)free or (2) a right. It's neither.

Hollywooddeed
Hollywooddeed

Excellent! Maybe our health system ranking in the world will improve.

We're #37! We're #37!

Jason Sharma
Jason Sharma

There is nothing "free" about this. A more accurate description would be "now included with women's life insurance policies". 

allusersknowsbest
allusersknowsbest

Does this mean us men can get away with paying for less drinks to all the females at the corner pub since they will have more of their own money not being spent on birth control? So we men all think the women should buy us drinks instead? So all men should celebrate and consider this as great news as if we all got entitlements (increased amount of loose women, smaller bar tabs, and more sex). Thank you Obama us men should be getting considerably more sex from women at the corner pub and paying for less drinks, you got our votes-wink wink. Maybe men should get condoms and lubricants free then we will all be feeling a little more shagariffic.

bcfred
bcfred

No copay or cost-sharing, huh?  I don't get such consideration for my visits to the doctor, but apparently I am paying for this out of my premiums.

rocknwroll
rocknwroll

What about some of these services for men?  Time for a discrimination lawsuit.

Chris
Chris

We won't be able to afford silly things like preventative care under a Romney administration.

Jean Robart
Jean Robart

What about some added health benefits for single older women? In your 60s you don't have to worry about contraceptives or breast feeding. But older women need screenings just the same as young women of child bearing age.

aaronscc
aaronscc

 If women encouraged their single sisters to STOP engaging in behavior that has expensive consequences and sought to sterilize their sisters who are already making many state dependents.  It isn't the college girls who are having a hard time coming up with $10/mo for birth control.  Shift the expenses of welfare and there will be LOTS more funds for legitimate women's healthcare needs. 

It's the

It's the

luckybear5
luckybear5

Where is this 47 million number coming from? I'm irritated that every news story is touting that so many women can now get this treatment under ACA - most women that currently have insurance will realize that their insurance provider is "grandfathered in" meaning they are exempt. Also - some states are refusing to expand their medicare / medicaid and are also exempt. If you switch insurances - good luck not having a "pre existing condition" which also makes the insurance company not have to pay for you. Get a hold of insurance companies and see how many existing costumers this helps. 

INOSH
INOSH

An insurance policy may be paid for by the employer, but it is the SOLE PROPERTY OF THE EMPLOYEE.

The insurance policy is owned 100% by the employee, as a *benefit in lieu of wages for work rendered* It is NOT A GIFT. It is the EARNED property of the worker.

The employer is solely the conduit gathering the collective payments from the workers and paying the group policy premiums on behalf of the employees as their agent. The employer does not at any time have property rights over the insurance policy nor over the money used to pay it -- these are earned ownership sole property of the employee.

The employer has no moral responsibility on how the employees exercise their options from the health insurance policy. The republican party is acting against property rights of the employees, and acting against the free moral agency of the individual employees. There is an absolute wall of separation of church and state and the republicans are anti-constitutional when they force employer religion on employees by law.

Mike C
Mike C

How convienent right before the election. There is nothing free somebody will pay for this PONZI scheme government growth program. So you get a free health screening and a condom now, but later your cancer survival rate goes down from the rationed care. SEE GREAT BRITON.

Don't let this gimmick fool you. This is like the crack dealer who says the first hit is on the house.

Freedom205
Freedom205

First, this is not "free." The costs simply transfer to all insured in the form of increased premium costs. Second, these services were already pretty well covered, you just had to pay copays. Copays reduce cost (like deductibles in car insurance). No deductible? Higher cost. Economics 101.

The Thinker
The Thinker

I am not sure how ignorant people have to be to believe that these will not benefit everyone. We live in a society and the benefits you receive may be unseen.

How about you go educate yourself and learn why these preventive steps help almost everyone in this country?

Cmdr_Casey_Ryback
Cmdr_Casey_Ryback

GIMME, OWE-BAMA

Gimme, gimme, gimme, gimme, gimme, gimme, gimme, gimme, gimme, gimme, gimme, gimme, gimme, gimme, gimme, gimme, gimme, gimme, gimme, gimme, gimme, gimme, gimme, gimme, gimme, gimme, gimme, gimme, gimme, gimme, gimme, gimme, gimme, gimme, gimme, gimme, gimme, gimme, gimme, gimme, gimme, gimme, gimme, gimme, gimme ..

Cmdr_Casey_Ryback
Cmdr_Casey_Ryback

GIMME, OWE-BAMA

Gimme, gimme, gimme, gimme, gimme, gimme, gimme, gimme, gimme, gimme, gimme, gimme, gimme, gimme, gimme, gimme, gimme, gimme, gimme, gimme, gimme, gimme, gimme, gimme, gimme, gimme, gimme, gimme, gimme, gimme, gimme, gimme, gimme, gimme, gimme, gimme, gimme, gimme, gimme, gimme, gimme, gimme, gimme, gimme, gimme ..

Virginia Nancarvis
Virginia Nancarvis

 The health insurance you NOW receive through your employer is grandfathered..up to the time they may choose to change it. Then it must meet the provisions in the ACHA..(unless the company is self-insured). Pre-existing health insurance has been in effect for several years..access the state you reside in to get the information..For example, Pennsylvania's  pre-existing health insurance has a premium of around $250 a month. Kentucky's pre-existing health insurance is age based and tiered..so a person can choose a basic plan that is around $100 a month for the younger person...up to about $400 for those in the age group up to the age of sixty-five with the most expensive, most benefit plan. If a state refuses to expand their Medicaid base/requirements (which is not very smart as the federal government picks up 100% of difference for the first few years)..then that state will deny health insurance to millions of its constituents..Those with insurance will continue to pay for those unable through the more expensive E.R. option or taxes for clinics. It, in essence, frees up tax revenue for those states that choose to use the provision of the ACHA and opt into the health insurance exchange.

Cmdr_Casey_Ryback
Cmdr_Casey_Ryback

GIMME, OWE-BAMA

Gimme, gimme, gimme, gimme, gimme, gimme, gimme, gimme, gimme, gimme, gimme, gimme, gimme, gimme, gimme, gimme, gimme, gimme, gimme, gimme, gimme, gimme, gimme, gimme, gimme, gimme, gimme, gimme, gimme, gimme, gimme, gimme, gimme, gimme, gimme, gimme, gimme, gimme, gimme, gimme, gimme, gimme, gimme, gimme, gimme ..

Freedom205
Freedom205

Your ignorance of property rights is embarrassing. Health insurance was never an "individual property right." It was always a form of "benefit" that employers may or may not offer. It was always up to the employer to offer this or not ... The employer's "right" if you will. Sorry if you do not like the constitution's restriction on government interferring in church business but that is the law. If you want church out of government, you must also take the other limitation....government stays out of churches. You can't pick and choose what part of the law to follow. Of course I know that is hard for liberals to understand.

Virginia Nancarvis
Virginia Nancarvis

 Rationed care is quite prevalent now...used by the private health insurance companies to boost profits..I have read some comments where a pre-existing condition was assigned to a client when as a teenager they used Retin A for acne..or one woman stated the Caesarian she received was considered a pre-existing condition. I and my mother (who passed away last year at ninety four)  receive(ed) Medicare. It is a decent health insurance, neither her nor myself were refused care by a doctor or being accepted under their service, and were never denied care we needed.

Virginia Nancarvis
Virginia Nancarvis

49% of large group health

plans do not routinely cover birth control97% of large group plans

cover prescription drugs, but only 33% of those plans cover oral

contraceptives, which are the most popular method of reversible female

birth control in the countryA paltry 15% of large group

plans cover the five most common forms of birth control: oral

contraceptives, diaphragms, IUDs, Depo Provera, and NorplantWomen age 15-44 pay 68% more

for out-of-pocket healthcare costs than their male counterparts, largely

due to the cost of reproductive healthcareHealthinsurancerates... The pill costs..anywhere from $100 to $1000 a year (every woman is different..not all are able to use the cheaper forms of birth control pills) annually IUD..cost $1000/one time cost Implant..cost $800/one time cost every few years Patch..cost $660/annually Shot..cost $300/annually..Your Economics 101 for men...not so much for women that are paid less for the same work as well.

J. Bradshaw
J. Bradshaw

We already do.  Visit Planned Parenthood and ask.  They'll hook you up, bro.

Jean Robart
Jean Robart

 Only one of these "free" options applies to my age group. Understandable that the writers of the ACA would ignore the women who have worked all their lives and are now retied. No taxable income, so they are expendable?

Freedom205
Freedom205

You have spoken like a true socialist. What benefits the socialist state by nature must benefit the individual. Societial "fairness" trumps individualism. No thanks, I'll stay ignorant if that is the education you want me to recieve.

Michaela Knower
Michaela Knower

 I need your help to debate my mother.  She is so well read but skews EVERYTHING so that it is the compassionate, good dems suffering the aftermath of the greedy rep.  Are you up for it? PLEASE!!!  You can start by reading one of her articles published in the paper.  http://bismarcktribune.com/new...

PLEASE!!

Ginevra915
Ginevra915

 Jean   Don't you have daughters?  Nieces? Granddaughters? Friends? Do you not live in a community that will be better off  if the health of all Moms is improved?  We value your service to your country, and we are also glad the next generation will have it a bit better.

Wayward Son
Wayward Son

"A government that robs Peter to pay Paul can always count on the support of Paul" George Bernard Shaw.

FKR
FKR

Guess what, NONE of these apply to men. Do you want us to cry 'boohoo'? How is every healthcare measure going to apply to every person? That's just plain silly. You could look at other provisions of ACA that would apply to you and appreciate them, such as the end of no insurance for pre-existing conditions. Even if only 5% of ACA affects individuals directly, we, as a society, will be better off in the long run.

ERenger
ERenger

All insurance is socialist. You should prove your rugged individualism and drop all of your insurance. Stop asking other premium payers to pay for your misfortune! 

Jardin J
Jardin J

You are correct, available is not the same as free. And no, there is no such thing. In this case, everyone took a small piece of the burden so that the women in need would be taken care of. 

And Americans love socialism, we just like it by other names. Unless you're suggesting we get rid of Social Security and Medicare. Or all the tax cuts given to businesses. All the examples I just mentioned need reform, but I hope you aren't suggesting strict capitalism/Darwinism. That would mean the government should just leave the elderly, sick and start up businesses to their own devices. The government is not being activist. This is not a moral issue. It was sold to us that way, (partly to help the re-election campaign) but the reality is that if these measures are used correctly, the ACA will save us a lot of money in less emergency room visits, and in payouts from the actual welfare offices. (food stamps, housing assistance, etc...) In a way, it's actually an effort at decreasing welfare. The sad part is that we had to have it forced on us, and we weren't willing in the first place.I also said "in this case I'm glad...." I'm sure there will be other legislation that will cause us to disagree in the opposite direction. Also, I'm sorry if you felt bullied. I thought you might take it in the same spirit that I took your using the word "libertard" and suggesting that we don't respect individual liberties.

Jardin J
Jardin J

Preventative services for women have always been available? Where do you live?

And I did use the word "promote".

Here is what baffles me- How is this a bad thing? Women everywhere get services they often skipped because they couldn't pay. Why are you unhappy about this? Why isn't this something you want to contribute to? 

You should be happy for your coworkers, friends and all the women  who won't die from HPV, and fall into poverty from having unplanned children. But no, you're worried about the few extra dollars you have to pay which will benefit everyone. 

It's really hard not to come to the conclusion that conservatives are a bunch of selfish, money-hungry jerks. I'm very happy that in this instance, you were all forced to act like decent human beings. 

Jardin J
Jardin J

This "socialism" you speak of used to be called by another name- the Community. And it used to be our duty to contribute to it. Now it seems that they only apply when some people *cough/republicans/cough* want to tell others what to do in the bedroom. 

Spare me.

J. Bradshaw
J. Bradshaw

"No thanks, I'll stay ignorant if that is the education you want me to recieve."  (sic)

From the tone of your post it sounds like you have no choice but to remain ignorant.  Also, it's "receive".  (I before E, except after C or when sounding like A as in neighbor and weigh.)

FKR
FKR

Nice try indeed. HIPAA (just to give you the proper acronym) only guaranteed coverage if you were already IN a plan and you had not sought treatment or advice for a condition within the past 6 months. It did not help people without insurance buy into a "pre-existing condition insurance plan", something ACA now allows. Did you not know that?? 

You would greatly benefit from actually acquiring information from trustworthy sources. If you are indeed interested in facts, that is.

Freedom205
Freedom205

Nice try but the preexisting conditions exclusion was already erradicated by HIPPA. That has been in place for years or did you not know that? The only restriction permitted was a one year temporary exclusion for those who did not have previous coverage for a condition before signing up to a plan. That was to avoid "free riders" (those who purposely did not get insurance until they got diagnosed with a costly condition).

ERenger
ERenger

It's voluntary socialism, like joining a commune. You should quit your hippie commune and drop your socialist insurance coverage. And give up the patchouli, ya long-haired, wooly-headed commie. 

Freedom205
Freedom205

All private insurance that you voluntarily choose to obtain is socialist? You are clearly uneducated. Why don't you prove your rugged liberalism and learn your socialist terms?

Freedom205
Freedom205

So, it looks like you DO want to move our discussion into the ACA. Okay, but I only have time for one last reply so I will leave you with the last word.

1. Americans love socialism?? No, LIBERALS love it.  Conservatives do not and you liberals always demonize us for it - you know "selfish" "money lovers" etc....  

2. As for social security, you do know that it will not be there for you right?  You have read about that I assume.  What is paid into that system today is paid out today. The babyboom generation is calculcated to wipe it out. Whenever conservatives do try to reform it Liberals demonize them for it.  That just kicks the can down the road. . . the road just happens to be a dead end one.  Way to go! 

3. Sure I would be for getting rid of all entitlements.  I am for tax reform as well so yes get rid of ALL tax cuts - to businesses AND  to the over 50% who dont pay a dime but get a refund (talk about nuts).  A standard lower tax on all  people with no deductions or breaks - sounds good to me.  I am surprised that as much as you liberals pound the table about "fairness" you dont want our tax system to be fair.  I know . . .according to you it IS fair becuase the poor get government kickbacks and the "evil rich" pay all the bill.  sorry, but that is NOT fairness, it is progressive ideology (that's why it is a "progressive tax")

4. Leaving elderly and all to their own devises? Nope,  This comes full circle to our original debate about community.  Research how our Great Society was built before all the social programs - did you see granny on the street and the poor in mass on the street? No.  REAL American "community" took care of them - In order - spouse, family, church, charity.  Needs were taken care of by private citizens VOLUNTARILY working together.  Then Big Government moved in and mandated the "morality" it wants to force us to pay for. That is the difference between you and me - I put my faith in individuals, you put yours in big government.   

5. Yes I would love to see strict Capitalism (although I will admit we have not had it in merica for a long, LONG time).  Capitalism is what made American great.  Capitalism overcame Communism during the Cold War and is, in my opinion, under assault now by the left-wing of this country.  Even China understands it needs some Capitalism to succeed, it has been the only exception thus far to the typical downward spriall that governments take (you know, from capitalism then socialism, then communism, frequently to dictatorship, finally to collapse) China has gone from dictatorship to communism to a hybrid with capitalism.  My how it has helped them rise.  Economists estimate that China will be the dominate economy by 2030.  Yes, due to accepting some capitalism.     

6.  As for the ACA since you brought it up again, it was sold as a way to "decrease insurance costs" - which it certainly will not do.  Cost of insurance was the issue people wanted addressed but the Liberals took it as a blank check to push their ideology.  It was a rush job and Liberals (Pelosi specifically) said we have to pass it to know what is in it.  What?  That is horrible for any legislature (whether R or D) to do. No one stopped to try to really address the real issue citizens were concerned with- - rising costs.  I for one am all for getting employers out of being the middle man but ACA punishes them instead of helping them get out of that role. Also, no one seems to have seriously researched the impact of allowing medical insurance to be sold directly to consumers across State lines  (like all other insurance models).  Consumer Driven Health Care (placing the individual in the driver seat) is the only way to manage costs.  As long as we as users don't see the costs, we have no incentive to control them and neither do service providers.   

We certainly disagree on EVERYTHING and, at least currently, only in America can you do so freely.  That is an INDIVIDUAL freedom we have been given by our Constitution.  And, you can individually enjoy visting Home Depot (giving millions to gay marriage activists) and I can enjoy a chicken sandwich from Chick fil a (giving millions to the other side of that debate). Only in America!         

Freedom205
Freedom205

First, I live in America and yes preventive services have always been available. What you seem to be confusing is availability v.s. "free" (nothing is really free but I digress).

Second you used the word promote but did not emphasize it....promote is not "provide." Huge difference.

Third, I can think of lots of derogatory names to call liberals but I take the high road apparantly when you can't debate me on logic you resort to schoolyard bullying. It's okay, it is a liberal attack plan, I get it.

I am glad you are happy that government forced your morality on me. Just be careful because when government becomes activist it may just ram conservative morality down your throat at some point. I will expect no complaints from you if so since you are all for government forcing things on people. Remember, if you live by the sword, you die by it. I just hope you are not like all liberals I know...all for government forcing your views on conservatives but then complain and boycott people who dare give a different opinion.

Finally, go back and look at my posts, when did I ever say preventive medicine is bad? You are twisting our debate. We are simply discussing this claimed endorsement of socialism in American history that you assert exists. I disagreed. You responded. I explained how your response is inaccurate. You retaliate by calling me names and insinuating that I am heartless because I allegedly don't think women deserve preventive care. I never said that and you know it. Now, if you want to change the topic to discuss Obamacare, just say so and I can tell you my thoughts. Til then, don't you dare put words into my mouth.

Freedom205
Freedom205

The real meaning of the Constitution "101":

1. The preamble states that the constitution was established to provide for "justice...the common defense...PROMOTE the general welfare and secure the Blessings Of Liberty to ourselves..." I like how you conveniently skipped these important limitations of our government. Individual liberty....you can't get an endorsement of socialism from a document expressly limiting government and preserving individual rights. Government is supposed to promote general welfare of its people (eg. Promote their individual happiness) .. this does not mean provide social welfare. That was not a concept considered by the founders. Read your history.

2. All governments are charged with building roads, infastructure...that is not socialism. Our government is also constitutionally charged with defending us (I know liberals hate the fact that the government is constitutionally charged with funding the military) Police and fire is just the state's version of defense. That is not a federal power.

3. Social welfare you mention IS based in socialism...that is not a founding principle which was the thrust ofmy post. Nonetheless, it is a costly and soon to be bankrupt concept. But you are correct that this is based upon socialist ideas as it was passed (just like Obamacare) during a huge economic downturn when people were scared and sought some ounce of security. As your man Obama said, "never let a good crisis go to waste." That is the socialist battle cry. These toxic programs will be the death knell without preemption. Just look at Greece as an example.

4. This is not about "providing preventitive medicine to women," please! That has always been available . Nice try though.

5. Yes, I am saying America became great and is great because it promotes individuals and rewards their hard work NOT because of socialism ideology. Yes, individuals made their businesses and wealth not the government.

Jardin J
Jardin J

American History 101:

Let's begin with the Constitution. In the preamble, it clearly states "We the people... provide for the common defense (and) promote the general welfare..."  

These words, along with the rest of the Constitution, lead us to invest in infrastructure, agriculture, education, and science; giving us the highest GDP on earth. And we did it (collectively) by paying a portion of our income and electing officials to administer the funds in such a way that provided opportunities for everyone.

Other examples of your so-called socialism- Medicare, Social Security, the FDA, Fire/police departments.... 

Sound familiar? Or do you honestly think we got to be the richest nation in the world by operating as free agents, with no responsibilities to our neighbors?

Contributing to preventative services for women obviously falls in the category of the general welfare, but in your mind it's Socialism. Now it's your turn. Enlighten me- how is giving private sector insurance companies more business is even remotely socialist?

Freedom205
Freedom205

Please expound upon this socialist history of America that you seem to have invented. Please give me evidence of this allegation. I will save you time, there isn't any. You do not comprehend the difference between socialism and Americanism. Socialism is when *cough* liberal government forces the "community" to abid by its version of decency regardless of what the citizens want. Of course, its all because the libtards know what is best for the poor backwoods communities. Republican communities leave it to the individual to decide what morality they wish to support....it is up to you.

Spare me you rhetoric.

J. Bradshaw
J. Bradshaw

Jake Bradshaw added you to his circles and invited you to join Google+.

Click here to get started with Google+: https://plus.google.com/_/noti...

Google+ makes sharing on the web more like sharing in real life. ------------------------

You received this message because Jake Bradshaw invited notify-309f4236-dc34-11e1-8ab4-003048c07f88@disqus.net to join Google+. Click here to unsubscribe from these emails: https://plus.google.com/_/noti...

J. Bradshaw
J. Bradshaw

Well, you sure figured me out. Since you already so much about me based on my politics, I'll let you finish this thread out on your own. Good day.

Freedom205
Freedom205

First, you want me to stick to a high road but allow you to rummage in the sewer with your belittling rhetoric? Typical liberal, hold us to a higher standard than you hold yourself because you are above reproach. Second, I am not sure what is not a high road about my question. I am simply trying to see if you have a contributor to your clear psychological issue.

J. Bradshaw
J. Bradshaw

Way to stick to the high road, Professor.

Freedom205
Freedom205

Nice comeback....calling me "scooter." Another attempt to belittle me and make yourself feel superior. You really have a superiority complex. Are you small in size or something?

Freedom205
Freedom205

In order to make themselves feel superior, liberals like to attack the wholly unimportant aspects of an argument such as one's quick postings on their phone without aide of spellcheck when they lack the mental faculties to counter the substance of the argument. But thank you enlightened one for showing my obvious insuperiority to you in regards to grammar. I would much rather be more superior on the merits of the statement. Your chosen method of attack simply shows that I am.

facebook-1047704628
facebook-1047704628

 Proper grammar is 'it sounds as if you have no choice' not 'like you have no choice.'