Women Democratic Senators Take On Reform, Show Their Male Colleagues What it Means to Have Cojones

Changes were made in this article at 6:47 pm Friday, October 10th to correct formatting mistakes and typograhpical errors introduced during formatting.

As the manipulation, posturing and bickering over health reform led primarily by conservative male congressional leaders, pundits, anti-choice organization leaders and "anti-reform town hall" groupies drones on, the Democratic women of the Senate stepped up yesterday and in the words of Senator Patty Murray (D-WA) said: Enough is enough!

The Senators’ obvious frustrations–and even anger–at the slow progress on health reform legislation, the fact that untold numbers of Americans continue to become ill or die due to lack of timely health care, and the political games being with played reproductive health services was refreshing, frank, and long overdue.

Eight women senators spoke strongly and succinctly about the disparities in access to affordable health care in the United States, each one hitting on separate but related issues.  The Senators also appeared the same evening in a brief segment of Larry King Live.  Though King consigned them to a couple of minutes at the end of an otherwise largely vacuous show, the Senators nonetheless made clear that the practice of denying women coverage based on the "pre-existing condition" of being a woman would no longer fly.

Senator Barbara Mikulski (D-MD) provided context to the statements of her colleagues by stating:

We the women of the Senate have fought for equal pay and
equal work…and now we are fighing for equal coverage.  We want equal benefits for equal premiums.

Senator Murray made clear that while they were standing up for women, they were standing up for all Americans: "The rising cost of health insurance is hurting women and our

But, she continued, it is critical to fix existing disparties in health care coverage that are affecting women. 

Why specifically women?  Every day in this country the health insurance industry denies
women access to coverage……we want to make sure that in the health care [reform effort] women get equal access to insurance.

The Senators statements shed light on the various ways in which the high costs of health care and the lack of insurance coverage disproportionately affect women….as women, as mothers, as employees, and as caregivers to aging parents and familiy members.

"Women must shoulder the worst of the health care crisis,
including outrageous discriminatory practices in care and coverage," said Senator Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY).

"But it is shocking to think," said Gillibrand:

that [unless we are proactive] in today’s America over
half of the population of this country could be discriminated against in one of
their most basic life’s needs.

All other things being equal, for example, women still pay more for health insurance coverage than men.  Gillibrand cited data compiled by the National Women’s Law Center showing that:

under our current system a 25 year-old woman pays up to  45 percent more for the same or identical
coverage [than her male counterpart.]  And yet, some of  the most essential services required by women are not covered by many insurance plans…[services] such as childbearing, pap smears and mammograms.

Moreover, where women can find affordable insurance, stated Senator Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH), the "actual coverage is woefully inadequate" to their real needs.

Today, the majority of those on Medicaid and Medicare are women and providing sufficient funding for those programs is critical to the health care safety net on which millions depend.  

In addition, the toll taken by the recession has had dramatic effects on women’s access to health care.  On Larry King Live, Senator Barbara Boxer (D-CA) cited statistics showing that 52 percent of women delay going to the doctor because of the cost of care and stated:

I get letters from women that they simply pray they don’t get sick, or that they are waiting to turn 65 to enroll in Medicare. Is this the only form of health insurance they have, prayer?

And…without reform the senior population will not get the care they need.

In their floor statements, the Senators made clear that health reform must address discrimination in insurance costs and in access to care based on sex, especially the refusal to cover basic needs such as sexual and reproductive health care, labor and delivery care, and other essential health needs.

Standard in-hospital deliveries, for example, cost between $5,000 and $10,000, and much more if  there
are complications.  But Senator Boxer pointed out the irony of the fact that in a country that ostensibly "puts family values first…only 14 states…require insurance companies to
cover maternity care."

In fact, as Senator Debbie Stabenow stated with a mix of frustration and incredulity:

Some insurance companies treat pregnancy or the intention to adopt as
a reason to reject someone for a pre-existing condition.

Pregnancy should never be a pre-existing condition," said Gillibrand, "and such
discrimination is unacceptable and is contrary to our
core values of equality and equal rights."

Both Shaheen and Senator Amy Klobuchar (D-MI) focused on the exclusion of women victims of domestic violence from insurance coverage because of the pre-existing condition of having been abused.  “This is unbelievable," said Shaheen, " insurance companies can deny coverage to a woman for having been a victim of domestic

Gillibrand also took on those opponents of health reform using reproductive health care and abortion as a means of attacking health reform.

Senator Kirsten Gillibrand argues on the Senate floor to ensure coverage of reproductive health care in health insurance reform.

"As we address inadequacies in our health system," said Gillibrand, "we must safeguard the women’s health
clinics that are essential points of care for millions across the

Gillibrand continued:

Their work is being politicized….[but] politicizing health care delivery endangers young women
putting them at risk for teen pregnancy, STDs, or cervical or breast cancer.

Women’s health clinics provide critical services to women every day. In my own state, over
400,000 New Yorkers receive health care from Planned Parenthood each yearAbout 50 percent of them are working adults whose jobs do not offer health care benefits.

"Our strategy for reform," she continued, "must protect the critical services
that these clinics provide and
expand upon their success."

On Larry King Live, King asked Stabenow how these "women’s problems" would be addressed.  In response, Stabenow said the Senators planned to make sure that women can get affordable and equitable coverage; that pregnancy is not a
pre-existing condition and that maternity coverage is included.

We also need to provide additional help to pay for prescription drugs, strengthen Medicare and Medicaid, and take other steps to eliminate disparities.

Gillibrand agreed:

We must reform our broken system…end disparities [based on] race and
gender and make quality affordable health care affordable for every single

SEIU has further information on statements by women policymakers on health reform.

Like this story? Your $10 tax-deductible contribution helps support our research, reporting, and analysis.

For more information or to schedule an interview with contact press@rhrealitycheck.org.

Follow Jodi Jacobson on twitter: @jljacobson

  • faultroy

    These comments by Senators are very misleading and shows a clear "grandstanding" in trying to throw a bone to their constituents. For example the fact that women are being discriminated against:It is in violation of Federal Law to discriminate on the basis of gender. So if these companies are discriminating on the basis of gender, they should be prosecuted. The comment that a 25 year old pays 45 per cent more than her male counterpart is ridiculous. Perhaps she pays more if she has a family because then it would be family coverage, but a single woman 25 years old without children does not pay more than a single man 25 years old. She may pay slightly more based on actuarial usage, but that is based on average medical usage costs and certainly not a gender bias. It is a fact that women and children make up the majority of medical expenses. And in the matter of "pre-existing" condition. What the insurance companies are saying is that if you are pregnant at the time of applying for insurance, they will not pay for your pregnancy since it was acquired prior to you having insurance–but of course if you already have insurance, this of course is covered–just like any other medical issue.. This is done to men also. And, if the female Senators get their wish, this will increase our insurance premiums even more than they already are, since the costs will be spread over everyone. Lastly the comment about 52 percent of women delay going to a doctor because of health care costs is perfectly reasonable since it is so expensive. That statistic does not say they do not get treatment, but merely that they DELAY treatment–there is a difference. What the Senators do not mention is that for men, the numbers are far higher. Furthermore, men die ten years earlier than women–and they believe for this very reason. I’m all for a national healthcare plan, but I also like to see a little bit of balance in these comments. And to the blogger: there are a lot more people concerned about the proposed plans than conservatives. It is a no brainer that this will be wildly expensive and we have no idea how we are going to pay for this. Quite frankly I am surprised that not more people are up in arms about the cavalier way we are approaching one of the most momentous and far reaching decisions of my lifetime. One that will have serious ramifications for generations to come.

  • hatmaker510

    Faultroy –
    I must respectfully disagree with your entire response. You claim the Senators’ statistics are wrong … NO, the stats given by the senators are correct. Please provide citations to your claims. Otherwise you are making baseless, empty accusations.
    As for senators "grandstanding" in trying to throw a bone to their constituents", I beg to differ. Considering Debbie Stabenow is my senator – and has been for years – she does not, nor has she ever, "thrown bones" to her constituents.


    Jodi – Thanks for bringing this to us.  

  • grayduck

    Why not pursue these reforms at the state level? And why should people who do not use "sexual health care" services be forced to help pay for those services?



  • crowepps

    For the same reason that thin people have to help pay for stomach stapling of the grossly obese, teetotalers have to help pay for alcohol treatment programs and people who eat sensibly have to help pay for treating diabetics — it’s immoral to withhold health care in order to punish people for being ‘bad’.