this post was submitted on 23 Jun 2023
356 points (100.0% liked)

Politics

10187 readers
128 users here now

In-depth political discussion from around the world; if it's a political happening, you can post it here.


Guidelines for submissions:

These guidelines will be enforced on a know-it-when-I-see-it basis.


Subcommunities on Beehaw:


This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Invalid@kbin.social 23 points 1 year ago (6 children)

This is only meaningful to people on Medicare or Medicaid because Executive Orders only give the President the power to guide federal agencies (in the executive branch).

It's a rather meaningless gesture to be honest. If a President can do something via EO then another President can undo it just as easily.

[–] Asenath@kbin.social 25 points 1 year ago (3 children)

From medicaid.gov "93,373,794 individuals were enrolled in Medicaid and CHIP in the 50 states and the District of Columbia that reported enrollment data for February 2023."

Seems like a fair number of people.

[–] PelicanPersuader@beehaw.org 22 points 1 year ago

It also includes some of the most vulnerable and low income people in the country. People who cannot afford the care for a healthy pregnancy, let alone raising the resulting child(ren), and those who are in situations where they're at high risk of being raped, like the unhoused. Even if it doesn't affect my access, I'm pleased that the folks who need this coverage can access it.

[–] ArtZuron@beehaw.org 10 points 1 year ago

An estimated 50% of those are women (who tend to benefit the most from easy contraception). Additionally, these individuals are often poorer, and, as a result, disproportionately of minority populations. Not only is it a fair number of people, but also the people that need the help the most.

[–] Invalid@kbin.social 4 points 1 year ago

Another 63 million on Medicare and yet it's still a bandaid on a gaping wound that might get ripped off any minute.

[–] CrimsonOnoscopy@beehaw.org 19 points 1 year ago

Still worth doing IMO

[–] exohuman@kbin.social 14 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (3 children)

It’s all he can do. Do you think the Republicans are going to accept that? How can they push back women’s rights to a point in which they were just baby machines that cooked if they can choose not to be pregnant?

[–] GivingEuropeASpook@lemm.ee 6 points 1 year ago (1 children)

He could be doing a lot more to make contraceptives and even abortion accessible on land under Federal Jurisdiction. He wants to play by the "rules" though.

There's nothing stopping him from using executive and federal power in this way except his own fears and a desire to be "normal" at a time when the United States teeters on complete backsliding to it's worst policies in history.

[–] Invalid@kbin.social 2 points 1 year ago

Executive power is very dangerous. Just look what happened when control of the internet was given to the FCC in the name of net neutrality. Executive orders are how the US ends up with a dictator.

[–] FlashMobOfOne@beehaw.org 4 points 1 year ago

A shame Obama didn't act when he had a supermajority, but he didn't. He was too busy making health care even more expensive.

[–] Invalid@kbin.social 2 points 1 year ago

Why are we relying on politicians to help out our neighbors?

[–] Snapz@beehaw.org 11 points 1 year ago (1 children)

You're purposefully trying to downplay impact without any factual support. It's harder to take away benefits from people than it is to give them. Let the next R president (that of course won't win the popular vote) try to remove access and take that L with the centrist suburban swing state female voters that often influence elections.

This isn't an end all be all solution, but it's FAR from a meaningless gesture.

[–] Invalid@kbin.social 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Factual support that executive orders are easy to undo? EOs aren’t law… they are orders to federal agencies on how they are to operate. It’s as easy as writing a letter and signing it..

Here is a list of things Biden did on day 1.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/rachelsandler/2021/01/20/here-are-all-the-actions-biden-took-on-his-first-day-in-office/

Here is one of the day 1 EOs undoing Trumps previous orders

https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2021/01/25/2021-01767/revocation-of-certain-executive-orders-concerning-federal-regulation

[–] Snapz@beehaw.org 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

No... I was obviously referring to you providing no support of your claim that this will have little/no impact. As others have rightly pointed out, this will impact about 100 million Americans for the next year+ at least. An EO is permission for government workers to do more. It's guidance for regulatory agencies and lawyers to show teeth with the full support of the white house. It does mean something, it's also not a magic pen and paper. But many are better off four-day than they were yesterday and hopefully that increases with time.

Nobody claimed this was the one single and final fix for every one of the ills of society, but that seems to be the strawman you're responding to.

[–] Invalid@kbin.social 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I’ve made no such claim…

A meaningless gesture is a statement intended to make you feel better about the situation without solving the problem. You might also call it a symbolic gesture or a token gesture.

All I’ve said here is it’s not enough.

[–] Snapz@beehaw.org 2 points 1 year ago

There is a HUGE delta between "meaningless" and "not enough".

You can attempt to spin all you'd like, but people can read your comments and draw their own conclusions.

[–] ondoyant@beehaw.org 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

its not a meaningless gesture for the millions of people for whom this protects access to affordable contraception. i agree, this isn't enough, we need more robust protections for this kind of care, but whenever people say shit like this, i have to wonder if you've ever been in a position where you've needed medicare or medicaid. if you've ever required assistance from the government. its seems to me an incredible display of privilege to hold so closely to political ideals while actual human beings are being given material resources to improve their lives and safeguard their health. its not enough, but for the people who need it, measures like this might save actual human lives, and that is always worth it.

[–] Invalid@kbin.social 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Baseless personal attacks… nice..

At least you understood I’m saying it’s not enough but maybe you missed the part that said

This is only meaningful to people on Medicare or Medicaid

[–] ondoyant@beehaw.org 4 points 1 year ago

mmh. i was pretty angry yesterday. don't really stand by that comment. sorry i assumed ill intent, i was reading too much into it. still think there's a bit of a point there, though. if its meaningful for people on medicare and medicaid, it isn't meaningless definitionally. it came off pretty dismissive to me.