Posted on 08/30/2024 12:17:32 AM PDT by Morgana
POTTERVILLE, Mich. — Former President Donald Trump said in an interview with NBC News on Thursday that if he is elected, his administration would not only protect access to in-vitro fertilization but would also have either the government or insurance companies cover the cost of the expensive service for American women who need it.
"We are going to be, under the Trump administration, we are going to be paying for that treatment," Trump said before adding, "We're going to be mandating that the insurance company pay."
Asked to clarify whether the government would pay for IVF services or whether insurance companies would do so, Trump reiterated that one option would be to have insurance companies pay "under a mandate, yes."
Abortion and IVF have been political liabilities for the GOP this year. Democrats have blasted Republicans over IVF in recent months, saying GOP-led restrictions on abortion could lead to restrictions on IVF, as well.
In a statement, Sarafina Chitika, a spokesperson for Vice President Kamala Harris' campaign, said that "Donald Trump’s own platform could effectively ban IVF and abortion nationwide" and that "because Trump overturned Roe v. Wade, IVF is already under attack and women’s freedoms have been ripped away in states across the country. There is only one candidate in this race who trusts women and will protect our freedom to make our own health care decisions: Vice President Kamala Harris.”
(Excerpt) Read more at nbcnews.com ...
This proposal has the look of spur-of-the-moment, unserious campaign sloganeering.
I looked back and found that as recently as June there was a tidal wave of GOP Senate rejection of IVF access, much less funding:
WASHINGTON (AP) — Senate Republicans blocked legislation that would make it a right nationwide for women to access in vitro fertilization and other fertility treatments after Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer forced a vote on the matter Thursday in an effort to drive an election-year contrast on reproductive care.
Sen. Tammy Duckworth, a military veteran who has used the fertility treatment to have her two children, has championed the bill, called the Right to IVF Act. The bill would have also expanded access through insurance as well as for military members and veterans.
“As a mom who struggled with infertility for years, as a parent who needed IVF to have my two beautiful little girls, all I can say to my Republican colleagues in this moment is, ‘How dare you,’” Duckworth, D-Ill., said following the vote.
All Republicans except Sens. Lisa Murkowski of Alaska and Susan Collins of Maine voted against advancing the measure, ensuring that it only gained 48 votes — well short of the 60 votes needed. Instead, GOP senators offered their own, alternative legislation that would discourage states from enacting explicit bans on the treatment. Democrats in turn blocked it Wednesday.
Part of the difference is reliance on government solutions. If it were possible for government to pay for something without having the urge to regulate it, this IVF funding or mandating might work. Or, more likely, it will lead to bigger government.
really YOU speak for christians do you..
that is about the dumbest statement i have ever seen here on FR.. nothing wrong with IVF if that is what people need to do, its called an option, way to many people just believe they can dictate what choices people make right or wrong..
THIS IS A TERRIBLE IDEA!
When did he pull it out of his a$s, and why? What advisor thought this was a good idea?
The ghetto rats will be lining up at clinic doors to have Uncle Sam father more brats to qualify for more services.
If people — hopefully couples — want to procreate let them foot the bill. If they can afford it, then fine. If they can’t, then they can’t.
Why should we pay for it?
“They were out of luck for IVF unless they had the money to pay for it.”
So MY FAMILY is supposed to pay? Absolutely not! If their friends truly are under conviction about the plight of these women, pass the plate and take a collection.
The ‘80s IUDs were an option that (apparently) was unhealthy, to say the least. Too bad they didn’t consider abstinence.
So MY FAMILY is supposed to pay? Absolutely not! If their friends truly are
What causes breast cancer? IVF (chemicals, etc.)? Adoption (since an adoptive mother never nursed)? Serious question. I never had kids, but did have breast cancer when there’s no history of it in my family.
“Exactly. IVF is child murder. No Christian can support it.”
I think you’re confusing IVF with something else entirely. IVF is just a medical fertilization procedure that enables couples to have the kid they want to have but can’t due to the female’s medical condition preventing conception... like having uterine fibroids. And no, it’s not anti-Christian.
That said, I still don’t think government should have a hand in saying anything about it, much less funding it. But Trump is in campaign mode and let’s face it... candidates always promise things they will probably never be able to deliver during a political presidential campaign.
Right now, we need every single vote we can get to defeat the radical left Democrats. If what Trump is promising gains us votes this November, I say go for it. It’s critical that we win.
“IVF is child murder.”
That makes no sense at all. It’s kinda the opposite.
Either you’re feeling defensive for some personal reason, or else you’re just ignorant. Or possibly amoral.
Then you don’t know how it works.
Yes, it is deeply un-Christian, and anti-Christian to compel others to support it. Life is a gift from God. It’s not something we snatch from his hand and manipulate to please ourselves.
Animals reproduce, but human beings procreate — a act in which we act in cooperation to God and do not exclude him as if he’s irrelevant.
You’re probably right. The whole subject of procreating has never interested me in the least. Although I know without a doubt that abortion is MURDER, plain and simple.
“Yes, it is deeply un-Christian, and anti-Christian to compel others to support it. Life is a gift from God. It’s not something we snatch from his hand and manipulate to please ourselves.
Animals reproduce, but human beings procreate — a act in which we act in cooperation to God and do not exclude him as if he’s irrelevant.”
Well I disagree. It’s not taking a life, like abortion. It is a method of helping those that have something wrong, internally, that keeps them from conceiving the natural way. Hell, by your way of thinking... one would have to outlaw all medical procedures or surgery as “un-Christian”... since it also “excludes God” and removes it, the healing aspect, from His act alone. I believe the Christian Science folks agree with your stance there. I’m not one of them.
I’m pretty sure its the hormones involved.
IVF takes life. I thought everyone knew this. Multiple embryos are conceived in vitro. Some are implanted; most are destroyed. Of those implanted, further “reductions” take place. IVF is a festival of killing.
“IVF takes life. I thought everyone knew this. Multiple embryos are conceived in vitro. Some are implanted; most are destroyed. Of those implanted, further “reductions” take place. IVF is a festival of killing.”
It’s a complex issue. One could argue that parents that get their eggs fertilized for the purpose of IVF are killing the embryos that do not “take”. I have a hard time believing that God would damn those parents for trying to have a child by IVF, even “if” some of their embryos don’t make it. I just don’t think God would see that as “a festival of killing”. You are free to think of God as you please, however. Me? I know God to be more loving and reasonable than that.
Is that you in the picture??
So you think there are no other ways besides taxation to encourage investment into helping couples have children? You have a limited tiny view of the world and possibilities. I feel sorry for you.
Educate yourself.
Look into how many embryos are “discarded” during IVF procedures. Typically around 10 eggs are collected and fertilization attempted with a success rate of 70%. Not many mothers are then bringing all those to term. And even when they don’t want to discard of the others, many embryos do not survive the cryogenic freezing process.
Beyond that some clinics offer services like letting you select the gender of the baby. That’s the nice way of saying you get to destroy the embryos that aren’t the gender you want.
It is barbaric.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.