The abortion law builds on legislation passed in 2010 that represented a major shift for a traditionally Catholic country, transforming Spain into one of the most progressive countries in Europe on reproductive rights. Spain's constitutional court last week rejected a challenge by the right-wing Popular Party against allowing abortions in the first 14 weeks of pregnancy.
The debate will be heated in Spain, I imagine, as the conservative opposition pushes back. My daughter had horrible menstrual pain during her adolescence and young adulthood. I'm certain that she would have benefitted from that time.
I disagree that PP was out of public consciousness.
I think people had heard of them. They are a famous organization, so I will stand corrected. But they were never in the news the way they were when they were demonized by conservatives during that time from my recollection. That this activity would be mentioned in articles about her is not "sad", it's expected. In my opinion.
I think this was a poor editorial choice on the part of NPR, to include someone who has never demonstrated any concern about women's health or their rights about health care.
That's why President Trump vowed not to sign a national abortion ban?
I think this was a poor editorial choice on the part of NPR, to include someone who has never demonstrated any concern about women's health or their rights about health care.
AP News was able to publish an obituary without mentioning that man. The CNN article I linked only mentioned him twice, once because the announcement came the same day as inauguration, and because he signed a bill about funding.
I disagree that PP was out of public consciousness.
Maybe for older males it was:) They have no history of ever using them. They served as my GP when before my teaching job kicked in it's health insurance. I didn't need much maintainence but they were there ..just the usual pap smears and mammos.
That's why President Trump vowed not to sign a national abortion ban?
What he does and what he says often are two different things. But I do think he's going to leave it in the states hands and some of the states have oppressive laws. (Yes, I know about Biden...)
Another example of local and several federal authorities waiting until after the inauguration to act so to make Trump would look good.
"Federal and local law enforcement agencies raided a "makeshift nightclub" in Adams County early Sunday morning and took 41 people living in the country illegally and another eight who were in the "nightclub" into custody, according to the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration's Rocky Mountain Field Division.
The DEA, Homeland Security, Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, Immigration and Customs Enforcement and over 100 local partners seized drugs, weapons and cash in the raid. The raid took place at 6600 Federal Boulevard "just before" 5 a.m., according to the DEA."
Republicans in the House are reportedly discussing (here and here) cutting federal Medicaid spending by up to $2.3 trillion (with a "t”) or more. These federal "savings" would be achieved not by reducing health care inflation but by cutting federal Medicaid payments to states. This will force states to dramatically raise taxes, cut other parts of their budget like K-12 education to make up the shortfall and, as is most likely, make deep and damaging cuts in eligibility, benefits, and/or payments to providers and plans. Those cuts, in turn, will lead to millions of people having their Medicaid benefits reduced or losing their Medicaid coverage altogether. The resulting increase in the number of uninsured Americans — there's been no reported discussion of "replace" — will disrupt a critical source of revenue for many hospitals, clinics, nursing facilities, and other providers, especially in those rural and urban communities where Medicaid is a dominant payor.
Quote
Here's what S&P Global has to say in its U.S. States 2025 Outlook posted on January 7:
“…the largest flow of funds from the federal level to the states occurs in the Medicaid program. Thus, any benefit, formula, or reimbursement rate changes to Medicaid, made as an offset to the cost to extend the [Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017], or otherwise, could have state-level credit quality effects as well.”
The analysis goes on to explain:
"Federal-level changes could alter Medicaid funding and place a high burden on states. As it did in past downturns, the federal government helped close an otherwise substantial Medicaid funding gap during the pandemic, including nearly $120 billion in emergency funding during a period of higher health costs and enrollment, providing stability and expenditure flexibility for many state budgets. However, our sector view incorporates uncertainty surrounding the level of federal cooperation and Medicaid funding partnership in future years that could make states more vulnerable to higher medical costs or reduce budgetary flexibility during economic downturns. A weaker federal response to future Medicaid program needs–because of reduced fiscal capacity, structural program and funding changes, or a change in policy–could strain states' economic and fiscal conditions. If this occurred, states might implement eligibility restrictions, benefit restrictions, or cut payments to providers to close Medicaid funding gaps, although these actions could be partly counterbalanced by other costs associated with a higher uninsured population.”
It remains unclear if Trumpublicans don't understand what these things mean or if they simply don't care. It is possible that they don't understand AND they don't care; Trump is the model, after all.
"Flagship newscasts on ABC, CBS and NBC spent over 46 minutes covering President Donald Trump pardoning Jan. 6 defendants but barely found time to mention former President Joe Biden issuing preemptive pardons for his family, according to a new study."
"Flagship newscasts on ABC, CBS and NBC spent over 46 minutes covering President Donald Trump pardoning Jan. 6 defendants but barely found time to mention former President Joe Biden issuing preemptive pardons for his family, according to a new study."
Fair enough. Trump himself in defending his pardons deflected to this. I know a pardon is a pardon but really to me, emphasis on it's my take, is that comparing Biden's preemptive pardons to pardoning violent felons is apples and oranges. I could have told you without a study news coverage would have been more heavy on the Trump pardons.
Still, I remember watching Jeopardy and the show was stopped to cut to Biden's pardoning of Hunter. In America you don't interrupt Jeopardy unless it's big. Sorry it wasn't long enough coverage and a bigger controversy that Trumps, but is it?
I probably wouldn't be bothered with most of Trumps pardons but I'm left with a sick feeling when I watch the footage and hear the stories and understand they are free without remorse, bragging that they will go out and get more weapons.
"Flagship newscasts on ABC, CBS and NBC spent over 46 minutes covering President Donald Trump pardoning Jan. 6 defendants but barely found time to mention former President Joe Biden issuing preemptive pardons for his family, according to a new study."
I absolutely hate the preemptive pardons for Biden's family and for the January 6th committee. I also hate that he pardoned violent criminals. I hate a lot about his final years when he did a lot of things that emboldened Trump and turned it into a what about for everyone. He lost my respect in many ways.
But I don't see the two presidential pardons the same in that Biden is a bitter president going out and he is now history. His pardons don't have impact on the country as a whole. (It is very wrong for the individuals who were the victims that their attackers are getting off. But we all face our Maker one day, so as imperfect as justice is on this earth, I have confidence everything is made right in the end.)
The difference with what Trump did is the fact that he did this on his first day. Among many other things, it sets the tone for what is to come. It gives his fans the signal that he has their back if there comes another time where something is forced by violence.
I'll go as far as to say if he had pardoned all the January 6 rioters on the way out the door, I would consider it wrong and an injustice but I would not see it as a threat to our country, and going forward I'm all the more mistrustful of a president who demands law & order for certain people, but throws it out the window for others, especially when it benefits him.
Those who call undocumented immigrants "illegals" should be a little more consistent.
Specializes in NICU, PICU, Transport, L&D, Hospice.
mtmkjr said:
I absolutely hate the preemptive pardons for Biden's family and for the January 6th committee. I also hate that he pardoned violent criminals. I hate a lot about his final years when he did a lot of things that emboldened Trump and turned it into a what about for everyone. He lost my respect in many ways.
I don't see the two presidential pardons The same in that Biden is a bitter president going out and he will be history. His pardons don't have impact on the country as a whole. It is very wrong for the individuals who were the victims that their attackers are getting off. But We all face our Maker one day, so as imperfect as justice is on this earth, I have confidence everything is made right in the end.
The difference with what Trump did is the fact that he did this on his first day. Among many other things it sets the tone for what is to come. It gives his fans the signal that he has their back if there comes another time where something is forced by violence.
I'll go as far as to say if he had pardoned all the January 6 rioters on the way out the door, I would consider it wrong and an injustice but I would not see it as a threat to our country, and going forward be all the more mistrustful of a president who demands law & order for certain people, but throws it out the window when it benefits him.
Those who call undocumented immigrants "illegals" should be a little more consistent.
I agree with your assessment about the prioritized pardons of the people who attacked our Capitol at Trump's request. He is sending a message that has ugly implications for the country and anyone who crosses him. This will make threats to judges and others who resist or try to follow the law more sinister.
I am ready to be done with Biden. He's out of office, he can't issue any more pardons. He is history.
The other guy, will be around for 4 more years (if health problems don't get to him). He's freed convicted and admitted violent criminals, and may do so again, if they re-offend.
Tweety, BSN, RN
36,400 Posts
I think people had heard of them. They are a famous organization, so I will stand corrected. But they were never in the news the way they were when they were demonized by conservatives during that time from my recollection. That this activity would be mentioned in articles about her is not "sad", it's expected. In my opinion.