Start A Petition

Mississippi's GOP Governor Says No American Lacks Health Care

US Politics & Gov't  (tags: healthcare, republicans, lies, propaganda, ethics, government, dishonesty, americans )

- 1917 days ago -
Phil Bryant (R) doesn't like President Barack Obama's health care reform law. It's too expensive and too intrusive, he says. " It's not necessary because everyone's doing just fine now".

Select names from your address book   |   Help

We hate spam. We do not sell or share the email addresses you provide.


Diane O (194)
Wednesday January 23, 2013, 3:35 pm
This man is right. No American is denied healthcare insurance. Even illegal immigrants are not denied healthcare insurance. The taxpayers will pay for illegals to have healthcare....they've been doing this for years. All they have to do is show up at an emergency room. They will be treated for "free." The taxpayers swoop in and pay the bill.

jan b (5)
Wednesday January 23, 2013, 3:35 pm
A Roman Catholic nun named Anne Brooks has struggled for the last 27 years to keep a medical clinic open for the poor. Isn't the Governor in touch with the people ?
Luckily, 476,178 people in Mississippi stood up to the extreme right wing zealots and the likes of Mitt Romney, who said he absolutely supports "personhood" amendments. The people of Mississippi took a stand and protected a woman's right to make her own health care decisions.

Bill K (4)
Wednesday January 23, 2013, 3:37 pm
I would like to see everyone without health insurance lining up at every ER in the country tomorrow asking for the free healthcare both this governor and Romney think we have. We can all leave with free checkups, diagnoses, medicines, and tests.

jan b (5)
Wednesday January 23, 2013, 3:38 pm
Diane get want sick people to handle your food ? Given the fact that the gives fuel for my concern.USA has rid ourselves of many diseases that people from other countries have not------
Its not all about being GENEROUS to outsiders.
There are three major groups which include protozoans (organisms having only one cell), nematodes (roundworms), and cestodes (tapeworms). When reading through a list you will find more than 10 human parasites, but the most common are those that infect the intestinal track. Some even migrate into the brain, lungs, and other parts of the body. and are life threatening.
There are other diseases besides parasites ----and remember we have uninsured who never see a doctor and people who are from a variety of countries who are working in hospitals---in restaurants and schools. Some are illegals not caught in the system yet, those with green cards, visa's They need to get checkups and treated so they don't pass along their diseases to the rest of us through the workplace or children in schools.

Bill K (4)
Wednesday January 23, 2013, 3:38 pm
anyone who thinks this way is drowning in ignorance and doesn't deserve a job as an elected official.

Diane O (194)
Wednesday January 23, 2013, 3:40 pm aren't making any sense IMO.

Carrie B (306)
Wednesday January 23, 2013, 3:40 pm
This appears to be the way most of the elite feel.

Carrie B (306)
Wednesday January 23, 2013, 3:42 pm
Diane, you all say it doesn't make sense when you don't like something.

Diane O (194)
Wednesday January 23, 2013, 3:43 pm
All I can offer the liberals is to look at other countries with the so called "free healthcare" where they are taxing their workers at nearly 50% of their salary to provide "free health" is bankrupting their countries.

Obamacare is a failure. None of the democrats involved in this 2,200 page fiasco had the qualifications to put together a healthcare program. It's just like Michelle Obama changing the lunch menus....she isn't a licensed dietician.....LOL!

Diane O (194)
Wednesday January 23, 2013, 3:44 pm
This administration is like a Chevy Chase movie.

Judy C (97)
Wednesday January 23, 2013, 3:58 pm
What planet is Bryant living on?

Jae A (316)
Wednesday January 23, 2013, 4:10 pm
Oh so it's not ok for legal abortions and it's not ok to have babies who need medical attention...'right to life' but F em once born if they need medical care. You Diane or like a nightmare on elm street with a GOP chain saw mixed in my opinion.

So Diane not nly manged to sprew you ilk as to health care you sprew smart assssss comment in Michaels direction. The fricken First Lady and she can change whatever domestic and social issue to do with the White that she likes. Get over you far as i can tell about you.........racism....just say it out right and skip the B.S. comments like those you've made on this thread , in my opinion.

Jae A (316)
Wednesday January 23, 2013, 4:23 pm
Janice, Diano O...isn't concerned about color is the only reason that I think she comes her to whine about anything....Just my personal opinion of course......

My ditto to Carrie / Judy / Janice and Bill on their comments. A big ol ..malarkey.. to those of Diane O's. ..She best be going back to that thughtless tank group of rightwinger extremist/teabagger klan members and find something new to whine about that perhaps doesn't bring so much suspicion, as to her being a racist my opinion. I do expect her to deny that of course...I mean few are brave enough to just admit it..unless wearing their white hoods/robes that is.

Esther Z (94)
Wednesday January 23, 2013, 4:35 pm
Diane O. you're an incredibly ignorant person; that's the reason most things don't make sense to you. Your thinking is as clear as mud, and that is my humble opinion! Almost all of your comments are terribly insulting, and border on the racist. Your comments on Hispanics, on folks not having health insurance (Go to the Emergency?? Don't you think that would be terribly expensive and would surely bankrupt our nation if everybody used the hospital emergency for preventive or everyday healthcare?), on illegal immigrants, on the First Lady Michelle Obama'a attempt to help and offer better nutrition (I'm sure she had the best dieticians help her with the menu, but of course, you wouldn't acknowledge that little tidbit.) to our school system, are based on bigotted and twisted facts that make sense only to you and all the other extreme right wing Teabaggers. I don't normally waste my time and energy answering on half baked comments from people like you; I think it's a waste of time to try and reason or carry a normal dialogue with someone who lives in an alternate reality, and see's the smallest of gestures as some grand political conspirancy. It's just a waste of time!
One more thing, in answer to a comment you made on President Obama chasing the gay vote; I think you wrote that if you were a lesbian you wouldn't believe anything President Obama said regarding Gay Marriage, since he was such a flip flopper on the issue. Well, as a real life lesbian, let me tell you, I thank the stars you are NOT a lesbian! The horror....
This makes my first and last time feeding the trolll!

Jae A (316)
Wednesday January 23, 2013, 5:23 pm
Just so it might make 'sense ' to even you Diane O..about what I'm saying as to my suspicions of your being a racist are increasing daily basically...take a look at your comment above where you said .."The hispanics are having babies at record numbers. " You've singled out a minority to make your point about Obama 's health care plan. As for the remark about Michelle Obama ,to me that was just tasteless/disrespectful and probably prompted by my opinion.. but without that promptiing, just trash talk worthy of no place in public but I image it's all the rage in teabagger groups.... Facts are Diane O....She has more than enough dieticians aiding her in these decisions when it comes to lunch programs and for the food served in the White House..Anyone would do well to take her advice when it comes to meals at home also.

Ditto to Esther;s comments as well as my 'standing ovation' for her comments.

Jae A (316)
Wednesday January 23, 2013, 5:27 pm
My ditto to Esther's was for all of her comment minus 'Well as, a real life Lesbian..."...that for me would of course be...'real life gay man'. Just in case Diane O. isn't able to 'make sense' of why I would Ditto her comments being that I am male....

Tamara Hayes (185)
Wednesday January 23, 2013, 5:28 pm
Wow, the things SOME people will say.

Mike S (86)
Wednesday January 23, 2013, 5:36 pm
Noted and thanks Carrie...and applause to all commenting here, save one whose comments are so thinly veiled, they are utterly transparent, IMO.

Jason S (50)
Wednesday January 23, 2013, 5:38 pm
Healthcare should be a human right and right thing to do for humanity. Money doesn't meaner, time to people before profits in the world today. Also time to rethink are world and our life's, start being better human for humanity. Good posting, thanks

Terry V (30)
Wednesday January 23, 2013, 5:40 pm
Sorry sir, but I am NOT doing just fine...........JEEZ


John B (185)
Wednesday January 23, 2013, 5:56 pm
Thanks Carrie for the link to the article by Jeffrey Young and the video clips. Where on this green earth has Gov. Bryant by living these past 30+ years, or for that matter Dianne O.? Read, viewed and noted.

Carrie B (306)
Wednesday January 23, 2013, 6:54 pm
Wish I could send more green stars, but you know I love you and would send more if I could!

Michael Carney (217)
Wednesday January 23, 2013, 7:50 pm
Well, the Governor of Mississippi, is sure representing, most of the ignorant citizens who thought this idiot was the right choice to vote into office as their Governor...What a whack job, this clown is..And to answer Judy C's question asking what Planet this guy Bryant is living on...It's easy to answer...Mississippi!!!!

Diane O (194)
Thursday January 24, 2013, 1:47 am
Jae, research the statistics and see for yourself. That's not being a racist. That's simply research.

Diane O (194)
Thursday January 24, 2013, 1:52 am
" More than 6 million Latino children in the United States now live in poverty, according to a new report. It's the first time in U.S. history that the single-largest group of poor children hasn't been white.

The trend is driven by the growing number of Hispanics in the country, as well as a high birth rate among immigrants and declining economic fortunes, according to a Pew Research Center report released today (Sept. 28). The unemployment rate among Latinos was 11.1 percent in 2010, compared with 9.1 percent for the nation as a whole.

However, while 6.1 million Latino kids in poverty is a record-breaking number, the rate of childhood poverty is highest for blacks, the new report finds. The rate of poverty for black children is 39.1 percent. In comparison, 35 percent of Latino kids live in poverty, as do 12.4 percent of white children."

So, Jae, you more often than not throw the "race card" out there before you do your own research. There are many more links supporting this statistic in the US.

Carrie B (306)
Thursday January 24, 2013, 2:45 am
Diane, do you think these somewhat skewed numbers have anything to do with a changing demographic, as well as people like you looking upon Latinos as second class citizens ~ whether they are legal or not?

I live in Santa Fe, New Mexico where there is a large Spanish and Mexican population. And no, WE are not all the same, but WE are all Latino and proud of it!

My father's family came here from Spain and worked hard all of their lives. We have never been "takers", but WE are part of the makers of this country!

I have very dear and treasured neighbors from Mexico (all legal, which will make you happy). One couple with two adult children. The mom cleans houses for the Santa Fe elite, dad works construction, the oldest ~a son, works at a very "high end" landscaping business. The daughter and youngest, is a college student working on her degree in accounting ~ while working as a server at an upscale "cafe" here.

Please Diane, do not make your racist comments to me! I watched my father read Denver newspapers from cover to cover ~ just to improve his English. The dictionary by his side was not for show! His education was completed at the end of the eighth grade because his help was needed on the family ranch/farm. This was a man who was a truck driver until a severe injury relegated him to a night mechanic's position! He paid my tuition at private Catholic schools from grades 1 through 12 ~ so I would have a better life than he did! He was a WWII veteran and a very great man and father.

I really do not appreciate your disparaging remarks about my Latino brothers and sisters!

You my dear, live in a very elitist bubble. The real world and all its hardships have never touched you. Aren't you so very lucky? Many of us know what the real world is like, and that is where we have based our decisions!

Danuta W (1248)
Thursday January 24, 2013, 4:17 am

P A (117)
Thursday January 24, 2013, 4:25 am
Thanks Carrie for this - tried to send you a green star but the computer won't let me yet. I did manage to send green stars to Jae and Esther and Janice.

Thursday January 24, 2013, 4:53 am
Will Disne O Please ontribute in a respectful way... or not at all... it's diverting attention to herself and taking away from the issues.... also very irritating as she is such a know all

Carol H (229)
Thursday January 24, 2013, 5:05 am
noted, thanks Carrie. excellent comments, except for someone who seems to need alot of attention...

Alexandra Rodda (180)
Thursday January 24, 2013, 5:27 am
In Australia the Medicare Levy is 1.5% of one's income. there is a 1% surcharge for people with high income.
I do not know where Diane O. gets her 50% from. Maybe it is Fox News.

Alexandra Rodda (180)
Thursday January 24, 2013, 5:28 am
America certainly has the worst reputation for health care in the developed world.

Bill K (4)
Thursday January 24, 2013, 6:07 am
if healthcare is so readily available for everyone why must taxpayers foot the bill for health insurance for our elected officials. let's cut this from the budget and let them go to the ERs. let them see how "available" their healthcare will be then.

. (0)
Thursday January 24, 2013, 6:29 am
Maybe Obamacare is too expensive and doesn't work or maybe it will with certain refinements. To make such an uninformed statement that everyone is doing well is utter balderdash. How ignorant and willfully stupid can you be when 1 out 3 Americans across the country are unemployed or barely eking out an existence?
Maybe y'all should consider that the whole idea is to create a two tier system of the 10% Elite who control all resources and wealth and 90% of the remaining population as indentured wage slaves working for banana republic wages and benefits if they're available?
Whatever these clowns on both sides of the fence are smoking; I don't want any as it leads to sociopathic behavior.

Jae A (316)
Thursday January 24, 2013, 8:21 am
Reseach wasn't the point Diane need to back I did not, nor did anyone else challenge you so get over trying to cover,what I and others apparently see as your racism ,with more tripe...

Your first statement about hispanics said exactly what you meant... and how you meant it. point....and you made that very clear as to how your mind works on the topic. It's an automatic reaction for you to say it just the way you did. It's your mindset Diane O that gives it away....not your numbers and other ...' my hood showing..but hey lets talk research not my racism." my opinion..

Angelika R (143)
Thursday January 24, 2013, 8:49 am
There is NOTHING to add to alexandra Rodda's comment, I'll repeat it and absolutely second that:

Alexandra Rodda (168)
Thursday January 24, 2013, 5:28 am
America certainly has the worst reputation for health care in the developed world.

Note to the deniers/t-bagger supporters here: WE do NOT pay "50% tax"(what al ie!) for healthcare and have one of the BEST systems!

Diane O (194)
Thursday January 24, 2013, 9:06 am
Other countries started with low taxes and year after year after year the healthcare costs kept going the taxes kept going up and up. Check out the Scandinavian countries and take a look at what they are paying in taxes then you will get the picture.

The same thing will happen to us.

Diane O (194)
Thursday January 24, 2013, 9:10 am
Carrie, you don't know me at all. "Elitist" is something I'm never called except here on Care 2 because I believe people should take responsibility for their own lives. We have three and four generation families still on welfare....was it designed to do that?

We have a REAL problem in our country. We cannot sustain the cost to have 50% of Americans on some type of government program and redistributive wealth only works until you run out of rich Greece did.

Think it can't happen to the US? Wrong. Rich people get fed up and move to a tax friendly country. Now, think France. In the US, think California and New York.

Jae A (316)
Thursday January 24, 2013, 9:34 am
Thank you Carrie for the article and thank you for standing up for all of us who are in the 'minority' catagory'......You are a loving and very caring person and that's what shows through via your daily mindset.

This is a serious topic and lets hope the racist/rightwing extremist take a back seat when it comes to health issues and aid for those who are in need....less fortunate than the majority of people. We know what racist opinions are and what they are saying on this issue...[See Diane O's comments on the thread for an examples of that.....IMO.].. Their words are worthless in this world if we are to ever live peacefully side by side...and work together for the betterment of all...regardless of the color of skin and or how many children anyone group has. Birth control is a whole other issue but it is related as a topic when it comes to health care...and it's something that everyone, not just one group, should be concerned about...the world over.

The teabaggers and other extremist want a race war ..and they're stock piling firearms in antisipation of one. They're doing all they can to guide things in that direction..but on care2, unlike Fox so called news.this is not going to be turned into a forum for the spreading of racism ,as some have attempted doing on care2 since Obama was least not without replies..up close and personal ones... to be expected by those who are attempting to turn it into a free for all forum for racism.' A least not on my watch' the saying goes.

Lets help get non emergency health care out of the costly emergency rooms and into the doctors offices....even for those having babies....they should be having them in maternity wards when at all possible. It is the over all health care that is important for everone...not just about those in the 'baby' topic catagory...but for those also. There are people who lack proper health care...and are to be found in all age well as in all race catagories. Phil Bryant is totally wrong. He needs to find another job come after his present term has ended. A man to not re-elect that's for certain in my opinion.

Nancy M (197)
Thursday January 24, 2013, 9:52 am
WOW, how ignorant can a man get? YES, people are denied healthcare. Duh.

Nancy M (197)
Thursday January 24, 2013, 9:57 am
"Obamacare is a failure. None of the democrats involved in this 2,200 page fiasco had the qualifications to put together a healthcare program. It's just like Michelle Obama changing the lunch menus....she isn't a licensed dietician.....LOL! "

I understand your point about Michelle Obama though I don't completely agree. Many of us do have a common sense idea of what a good lunch is and if Michelle is promoting THAT, more power to her.

As for insurance, WHO do you think DOES have the credentials to put together a package? Republicans with no more expertise than the democrats you mentioned? CEOs of insurance companies who would love to take millions at the expense of our health? Physicians? Hospital Administrators?

DORIS L (61)
Thursday January 24, 2013, 10:14 am
Gov Bryant, what rock are you living under?

Chris C (152)
Thursday January 24, 2013, 10:52 am
Another GOP idiot (I meant Gov Phil Bryant...Of course, that title could easily include Diane O.)
Diane O-you are SO tiresome!

Chris C (152)
Thursday January 24, 2013, 10:55 am
Article noted!

Terrie Williams (798)
Thursday January 24, 2013, 11:30 am
Sigh.....I was having such a nice fantasy about.......FINLAND. But, I am not feeding Fascist trolls today.

As for this ....person....who managed to hoodwink the majority of his state......For him and his bubble of like-situated-in-life sucker fish....they can all afford health care.....he has no clue about the rest of America and doesn't give a rat's southern end.

I can't WAIT for OBMAMACARE to go into full effect....then I will be able to get insurance for all my PRE-CONDITIONS.....which I CANNOT GET at present.

Gene J (290)
Thursday January 24, 2013, 1:15 pm
50 million uninsured Americans is just fine, huh? Everyone can get insurance? No, they can't, they have to first have a job that pays enough to afford insurance unless fortunate enough to have an employer pay part of it, not all of it as in years gone by. The uninsured have medical issues, yes, and they go to ER's as their primary care, the MOST expensive option, but cannot pay for it, so taxpayers do. Which is why we spend $8,000 per capita in health care costs with poorer outcomes because when you are sick and have no insurance you wait until your illness is unbearable before going to the ER while virtually every other developed nation spends about $2000 per capita and EVERYONE is covered. Cheaper that way, everyone has primary care, preventive care and costs are lowered as a result and the national health organization buys supplies in lots the size of their population and so gets lower prices on those supplies, while we do so by employer, or by insurance company. If we were all banded together, our costs would plummet too and everyone would be covered and have preventive care. It is so simple. But it would definitely cost those who get rich off the rest of us being kept apart and sick, so of course, the Insurance companies, the 1% and their water carrying republican lackey's oppose national health care. They'd lose money. And they ALWAYS put money before the welfare of the people. It is how they got rich. And is as immoral a stance as is possible to take in this time, people before dollars is moral, dollars before people is not. Not everyone is doing fine and THAT is just fine with those who make their fortunes by keeping it that way. They're sick too, a mental health problem, avarice and lack of empathy, a form of sociopath in my opinion. We'll get rid of them eventually, we out number them by a few hundred million after all.

Florence Eaise (132)
Thursday January 24, 2013, 1:35 pm
WOW Diane did i read your comments right? The Hispanics are having babies at record numbers? Really? Seems to me that if you check the REAL statistics Whites are having the majority of babies in America so i dont know where you got numbers also its incredibly offensive to read such a thing and im not even hispanic but alot of my friends are thats a complete falsehood and racists to say the least! Furthermore perhaps you need to get more in touch wih what exactly IS going on in America because i can tell both you and the good for nothing Phil; Bryant that there are PLENTY of people who DONT have medical coverage and are in desperate need of it and there are NO hospitals or doctors in my state of Nj that will just fix you up and send you home and the tax payers pick up your tab thats a flipping jokei know because i am one of the uninsured and trust me NO WHERE is giving out free medical care and taxpayers arent picking anything up the hospital bills YOU NOT the gov but you already have your mind up even though you are WRONG someone please tell me why its so very hard to tell a conservative anything!

Florence Eaise (132)
Thursday January 24, 2013, 1:47 pm
Great post Carrie and im sorry for what Dianne said about Latinos

Patty B (0)
Thursday January 24, 2013, 2:39 pm
ANOTHER wacko from a southern state !The southern states wanted to secede.....they need encouragement as the north is the giver and the south the taker .

Diane O (194)
Thursday January 24, 2013, 3:04 pm
What Diane said about latinos is a statistic. I pulled that from research. You may not like it or accept it but you can't change the statistics

Diane O (194)
Thursday January 24, 2013, 3:05 pm
They are having more babies than whites, blacks, asians, etc. I don't make this stuff up. I happen to enjoy reading statistics.

JL A (281)
Thursday January 24, 2013, 3:31 pm
Recent Trends in Births and Fertility Rates Through June 2012

by Brady E. Hamilton, Ph.D., and Paul D. Sutton, Ph.D., Division of Vital Statistics

On this Page

Data sources and methods

PDF Version Adobe PDF file (73 KB)

The provisional count of births in the United States for the 12-month period ending June 2012 was 3,942,000, which was 1% lower than the 3,981,000 births (provisional count) for the 12-month period ending June 2011 (1). The number of births has steadily declined from the historic high of 4,316,233 in 2007 (Figure) (2,3), but the rate of decline has slowed from 2010 through June 2012.

The provisional fertility rate in the United States for the 12-month period ending June 2012 declined 1% to 63.0 births per 1,000 women aged 15–44 from 63.8 for the 12-month period ending June 2011 (1). Like the number of births, the fertility rate has steadily declined from the recent high of 69.3 in 2007 (Figure) (2,3), although, again, the rate of decline has slowed from 2010 through June 2012.
National Vital Statistics Reports
Volume 61, Number 5 October 3, 2012
Births: Preliminary Data for 2011
by Brady E. Hamilton, Ph.D.; Joyce A. Martin, M.P.H.; and Stephanie J. Ventura, M.A., Division of Vital Statistics
received are weighted to independent control counts of all births
received in state vital statistics offices in 2011. Comparisons are made with final 2010 data.
Objectives—This report presents preliminary data for 2011 on Results—The 2011 preliminary number of U.S. births wasbirths in the United States. U.S. data on births are shown by age, 3,953,593, 1% less (or 45,793 fewer) births than in 2010; the general live-birth order, race, and Hispanic origin of mother. Data on marital fertility rate (63.2 per 1,000 women aged 15–44) declined to the lowest status, cesarean delivery, preterm births, and low birthweight are also rate ever reported for the United States. The number of births declined presented.
Methods—Data in this report are based on approximately 100% declined only for Hispanic, non-Hispanic black, and American Indian or of 2011 births. Records for the few states with less than 100% of records Alaska Native women.
Rates for two of the three largest race and Hispanic origin groups declined, down 6% for Hispanic women and 2% for non-Hispanic black women, whereas the rate for non-Hispanic white women was essentially unchanged.

United States............................3,953,593
Non-Hispanic White.................2,150,926

Sure looks like a majority Non-Hispanic White babies to me when it's over 50%...

Carrie B (306)
Thursday January 24, 2013, 3:32 pm
Hispanic Pregnancies Fall in U.S. as Women Choose Smaller Families
Published: December 31, 2012

ORLANDO, Fla. — Hispanic women in the United States, who have generally had the highest fertility rates in the country, are choosing to have fewer children. Both immigrant and native-born Latinas had steeper birthrate declines from 2007 to 2010 than other groups, including non-Hispanic whites, blacks and Asians, a drop some demographers and sociologists attribute to changes in the views of many Hispanic women about motherhood.
Enlarge This Image

Jason Henry for The New York Times
At left, Tom and Marucci Guzman Beard and their daughter, Attalai, with extended family.

The New York Times
As a result, in 2011, the American birthrate hit a record low, with 63 births per 1,000 women ages 15 to 44, led by the decline in births to immigrant women. The national birthrate is now about half what it was during the baby boom years, when it peaked in 1957 at 122.7 births per 1,000 women of childbearing age.

The decline in birthrates was steepest among Mexican-American women and women who immigrated from Mexico, at 25.7 percent. This has reversed a trend in which immigrant mothers accounted for a rising share of births in the United States, according to a recent report by the Pew Research Center. In 2010, birthrates among all Hispanics reached their lowest level in 20 years, the center found.

The sudden drop-off, which coincided with the onset of the recession, suggests that attitudes have changed since the days when older generations of Latinos prized large families and more closely followed Roman Catholic teachings, which forbid artificial contraception.

Interviews with young Latinas, as well as reproductive health experts, show that the reasons for deciding to have fewer children are many, involving greater access to information about contraceptives and women’s health, as well as higher education.

When Marucci Guzman decided to marry Tom Beard here seven years ago, the idea of having a large family — a Guzman tradition back in Puerto Rico — was out of the question.

“We thought one, maybe two,” said Ms. Guzman Beard, who gave birth to a daughter, Attalai, four years ago.

Asked whether Attalai might ever get her wish for a little brother or sister, Ms. Guzman Beard, 29, a vice president at a public service organization, said: “I want to go to law school. I’m married. I work. When do I have time?”

The decisions were not made in a vacuum but amid a sputtering economy, which, interviewees said, weighed heavily on their minds.

Latinos suffered larger percentage declines in household wealth than white, black or Asian households from 2005 to 2009, and, according to the Pew report, their rates of poverty and unemployment also grew more sharply after the recession began.

Prolonged recessions do produce dips in the birthrate, but a drop as large as Latinos have experienced is atypical, said William H. Frey, a sociologist and demographer at the Brookings Institution. “It is surprising,” Mr. Frey said. “When you hear about a decrease in the birthrate, you don’t expect Latinos to be at the forefront of the trend.”

D’Vera Cohn, a senior writer at the Pew Research Center and an author of the report, said that in past recessions, when overall fertility dipped, “it bounced back over time when the economy got better.”

“If history repeats itself, that will happen again,” she said.

But to Mr. Frey, the decrease has signaled much about the aspirations of young Latinos to become full and permanent members of the upwardly mobile middle class, despite the challenges posed by the struggling economy.

Jersey Garcia, a 37-year-old public health worker in Miami, is in the first generation of her family to live permanently outside of the Dominican Republic, where her maternal and paternal grandmothers had a total of 27 children.

“I have two right now,” Ms. Garcia said. “It’s just a good number that I can handle.”

“Before, I probably would have been pressured to have more,” she added. “I think living in the United States, I don’t have family members close by to help me, and it takes a village to raise a child. So the feeling is, keep what you have right now.”

But that has not been easy. Even with health insurance, Ms. Garcia’s preferred method of long-term birth control, an IUD, has been unaffordable. Birth control pills, too, with a $50 co-payment a month, were too costly for her budget. “I couldn’t afford it,” she said. “So what I’ve been doing is condoms.”

According to research by the National Latina Institute for Reproductive Health, the overwhelming majority of Latinas have used contraception at some point in their lives, but they face economic barriers to consistent use. As a consequence, Latinas still experience unintended pregnancy at a rate higher than non-Hispanic whites, according to the institute.

And while the share of births to teenage mothers has dropped over the past two decades for all women, the highest share of births to teenage mothers is among native-born Hispanics.

“There are still a lot of barriers to information and access to contraception that exist,” said Jessica Gonzáles-Rojas, 36, the executive director of the institute, who has one son. “We still need to do a lot of work.”

In Denver, Olga Gonzalez, the daughter of Mexican immigrants, teaches a family-planning class in Spanish to Mexican immigrants. She tells her students that as a teenager in the 1980s, she decided to take the long view on life: “I chose to do the college route first and establish my career and then think about babies later.”

Now 40, Ms. Gonzalez has a master’s degree in nonprofit management, two children and a solid foothold in the professional middle class. (Her father, one of six children, never finished the fifth grade back in Guanajuato, Mexico, before he had to go to work.)

Ms. Gonzalez often asks her students, “What is the optimum situation we want so our kids don’t struggle?” The students answer that they want education and smaller families, just like Ms. Gonzalez, who is content to keep the number of her children at two.

Ms. Guzman Beard is an advocate of smaller families, too. She is the youngest woman on staff at Latino Leadership, a nonprofit group that serves the poor in Central Florida. She has refused to involve the group in abstinence-only education initiatives, much to the chagrin of her older, tradition-minded colleagues.

“There needs to be real-life situations in the contraception conversation,” she said. “At the end of the day, we can’t tell families how many children to have, but if you’re already in a position where you don’t have enough money to care for them, that you’re unemployed, that you don’t have stable housing, why would you be adding more children to that mix?”

Ms. Guzman Beard’s mother, Marytza Sanz, founded Latino Leadership 12 years ago and is content to let her daughter make programming decisions, as well as choices about her own family’s size — without grandmotherly interference.

“I think we are changing,” said Ms. Sanz, 54, whose own grandmother had nine children in Puerto Rico, and who faced considerable pressure to produce a large family herself after marrying in Bayamon at age 18. However many children her daughter ends up having, she said, she will support her.

“One, two, three or four, grandma is going to be here,” Ms. Sanz said.

Diane O (194)
Thursday January 24, 2013, 3:38 pm
Thank you, Carrie, for supplying us with one woman's personal experience. However, the statistics I listed can be researched. The number of hispanic babies born in the US far outnumber white, black and asian children.

It's a statistic. You can't get around that.

JL A (281)
Thursday January 24, 2013, 3:39 pm
It is important to pull current information, statistics and research and understand the limitations of the data in all research.

Past threads have demonstrated using factual data on other countries that when tax rates are at 50%, there are a whole lot of additional things beyond health care being provided for that money (e.g., disability income for all, adequate retirement, etc.)

Diane O (194)
Thursday January 24, 2013, 3:40 pm
Personally, I don't care which ethnic group is having babies and which ones aren't. It's life. It happens. But know this....illegals come to the US and have babies who when born in the US are an American citizen. That's the lure. Have your babies in the US and they are automatically US citizens.

Diane O (194)
Thursday January 24, 2013, 3:43 pm
Indeed it is, JLA. So if you have time pull up a "current" statistic that refutes the ones I put up. I can learn something new every day. I'm always open to that.

So, bring me your link/research that says otherwise.

JL A (281)
Thursday January 24, 2013, 3:44 pm
But the actual statistics cited in Carrie's article match the actual data I posted just before that--that IS the factual, actual information--the majority of births were Non-Hispanic Whites with trend data indicating it is probably going to continue to be even moreso.

Carrie B (306)
Thursday January 24, 2013, 3:49 pm
Diane, as a matter of pure logic ~ if Latinos make up the largest ethnic group in the US ~ does it not make sense that they would be having more babies?

JL A (281)
Thursday January 24, 2013, 4:14 pm
54.4% of babies born in the last year of data available were Non-Hispanic Whites. (the percent calculation from the number posted from National Vital Statistics Reporting.

Past Member (0)
Thursday January 24, 2013, 5:53 pm
Jae A., Thank you for your eloquent comment,I would send you another green star, but can't for the usual reason. I'm sorry to see that some people who post here on Care2 think that finally going to the emergency room when you are finally sick and desperate enough to do so constitutes healthcare. Fortunately, you are a minority on this site and will someday be a minority in this society as well. We are moving forward towards a more humane attitude that supports giving everyone in our society the 'human right' of a long and healthy life. The overt racism and hate imbued in some people's comments doesn't deserve the dignity of a reply.

Past Member (0)
Thursday January 24, 2013, 6:10 pm

Thomas P (280)
Thursday January 24, 2013, 6:30 pm
Noted...thanks Carrie. This is probably one of the most ignorant commentaries made by someone who is supposed to be at least remotely knowledgeable of the facts since he is a Governor of a state. The notion that people have "health care" because they can go to an emergency room totally discounts the one of the biggest problem with health care...rising costs. If more people had access to affordable health care (as the Affordable Care Act provides), then that would eliminate having to go to emergency rooms to treat non-emergencies (such as strep throat), thereby saving everyone money. Apparently this Governor doesn't understand the concept of wellness visits and the logic behind them. That seems to be a recurring theme with many on the Republican absence of logic.

Mitchell D (104)
Thursday January 24, 2013, 6:35 pm
Emergency care is literally, a stop-gap procedure, of whatever intensity, what happens next?
These clowns will grab at any whisp of an excuse to try to make their case.
MY younger son, almost 27 y/o, has no health insurance!
But, this guy is from Mississippi, a place those from Alabama look down upon.

JL A (281)
Thursday January 24, 2013, 7:04 pm
The research regarding preventative care resulting in far lower costs to people, insurance companies and government programs than not providing it has been consistently true since the 1970's. Sad that someone can be Governor and not know what reduces budgets and saves the taxpayers' money.

. (0)
Thursday January 24, 2013, 7:49 pm
Actually Diane, Germany is doing quite well and they have a better quality of life than we do.

And in response to another comment of yours, our embassies let in a lot of women to have babies here. It would be nice if they refused them, but they don't seem to. And these are ones that come here legally.

The Scandinavian countries have some of the highest quality of life, greatest respect for women and some of the highest salaries.

If these countries are so bad with their high taxes, ask people that live there. Your opinion, doesn't really hold much weight.

Diane O (194)
Friday January 25, 2013, 4:11 am
These countries also have very high taxes. Healthcare is never free. As the cost of healthcare goes up as it always does it is the taxpayers who pay the price so that everyone can have this "free" medical care.

America cannot be compared to very small countries such as the Scandinavian countries. It would be like comparing apples to oranges.

I hope our country will find the answer to our healthcare issues. So far Obamacare has been a bust and the premiums have already gone up.

I realize there's a solution to every problem but our country hasn't found it yet.

JL A (281)
Friday January 25, 2013, 5:32 am
Repeat, the taxes also pay for disability income, retirement incomes, child care and preschool for all, college for all who want, inexpensive public transportation in addition to health care so personal budgets are only expected to handle food, shelter, clothing of life essentials and non-essentials. As Hugh pointed out, the reduced stress and improved quality of life make the "insurance" paid through taxes to cover all those expenses at a far lower cost than we pay is deemed worth it to those living with it.

Bill K (4)
Friday January 25, 2013, 6:32 am
yes healthcare costs go up. so better to have it controlled by us then by corporate CEOs whose primary motive is profits. things are always cheaper when the costs are shared. as it is now we are at the mercy of the greedy and that's why so many people can't afford healthcare. that's a crime and anyone who supports a system like that lacks basic compassion.

Lois Jordan (63)
Friday January 25, 2013, 4:50 pm
I will not feed the troll....but will say that I have friends with adult kids who lost their jobs through no fault of their own and can't afford insurance. They DO go to E.R.'s when they're sick or hurt. They have no money to pay these bills and they're turned over to collection agencies. Some of these bills are in the 10's of thousands of dollars now, and will never be paid. Is this going to help America recover?
Carrie, I loved your comments, but *I'm sorry I'm unable to send a green star to Carrie, since I sent one in the past week....buckets of stars if I could!
Some people just have no heart....or soul.

Elizabeth M (65)
Saturday January 26, 2013, 1:17 pm
Read, viewed and noted. Thanks Carrie. Ah Ha Mr. Bryant has lived the good life for the past 30 years and just never wanted to take his blinders off to see the rest of the people in America.

Lynn Squance (235)
Saturday January 26, 2013, 2:43 pm
"An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure."

The wise words of Ben Franklin affirm that if we prevent a problem occurring in the first place, it will save a great deal more in time, effort and cost than it would in trying to repair the damage done later because we hadn't paid attention to possible problems earlier.

Bryant, and the rest of the Republican/Teabaggers, are guilty of neaderthal thinking. People going to the emergency is not healthcare coverage. It is a great way to support the financial health of hospitals and insurance companies, but a lousy way to support the good health of Americans. Why doesn't Bryant, and all of the naysayers, go for 1 year without health insurance and see what it is like to stand in an emergency ward that is jammed with non emergencies? They would never do it! Besides, they are likely already healthy enough that they wouldn't go anyway.

It is Bryant's type of thinking that has sky rocketed the cost of healthcare, not Obamacare.


Lynn Squance (235)
Saturday January 26, 2013, 2:54 pm
@ Diane O, for someone so concerned about fiscal responsibility and personal responsility, as usual you are out to lunch. It costs a lot more for people to go to the emergency plus that care is stop gap in that there is no follow up. On going preventative care is what is needed before emergencies arise. You should understand that on a financial level. I know you don't understand it in a common sense, compassionate way.

And BTW, when I was working and making an excellent salary in the high 5 figure range, I paid less than 35% in taxes which included Canada Pension Plan contributions, employment insurance premiums, and medical premiums. That is a far cry from your quoted 50%. And Hugh W has quoted excellent information I know to be true.

So please, quit with the racist comments and BS.

Diane O (194)
Saturday January 26, 2013, 4:05 pm
President Obama will deliver a second inaugural address later this month. He’ll no doubt reflect on what he’s done during his first four years in office — and on his signature healthcare law in particular.

Let’s reflect with him. During his first campaign for the presidency in 2008, the president promised that his health reform plan would “bring down premiums by $2,500 for the typical family” by the end of his first term.
In 2013, Millions Of Americans Face Obamacare Tax Hikes Sally Pipes Sally Pipes Contributor
Obamacare's Cruel War On Patient-Centered Healthcare Sally Pipes Sally Pipes Contributor
Obamacare's Rationers Employ The "It's Good For You" Defense Sally Pipes Sally Pipes Contributor
In The Aftermath Of Obama's Re-Election, What's Next For Health Care? Sally Pipes Sally Pipes Contributor

Well, that first term is just about up. And health insurance isn’t any cheaper. In fact, it’s more expensive. Premiums have increased by an average of $3,065. And they’re about to go up even more, as Obamacare takes effect during the president’s second term.

At the end of 2012, Mark Bertolini, the CEO of Aetna, the third-largest health insurer in the country, warned that many consumers would face “premium rate shock” with the advent of Obamacare’s major insurance regulations in 2014. He predicted that unsubsidized premiums would rise 20 to 50 percent, on average.

For some people, premiums would double. “We’re going to see some markets go up as much as 100 percent,” Bertolini told Bloomberg News.

Aetna isn’t the only company forecasting higher health-insurance premiums. In California, Blue Shield has asked regulators to approve premium increases of up to 20 percent. Obamacare’s new regulations were a factor in the request. A spokesperson for the company said the new law “will bring a lot of volatility” into the market.

A shock? Not to those who’ve been paying attention. When Obamacare was making its way through Congress, the Congressional Budget Office warned that premiums in the individual market would increase by 10-13 percent.

Even the law’s designers admit that it will raise premiums. Massachusetts Institute of Technology Economics Professor Jonathan Gruber, one of Obamacare’s chief architects, estimated that premiums in Wisconsin would rise by about 30 percent by 2016 following implementation of the law. Most of the Badger State’s individual insurance market will see an even larger increase, averaging about 41 percent.

Obamacare’s defenders typically respond that the law’s subsidies will decrease what people actually pay out-of-pocket for insurance.

But that’s not always the case. Many individuals will still pay more even after they receive the generous subsidies to which the law entitles them. According to a report conducted by Gruber, 59 percent of the individual market will end up paying more after taking the subsidies into account. The average increase? Nearly a third.

These premium hikes will hit young people hardest. As The New York Times reported in October, insurers and health policy wonks are warning that the young will “face higher premiums because of a provision that limits how much rates can vary based on a person’s age.”

Typically, insurers charge older individuals more because they have higher average health costs. But because Obamacare includes a “community rating” provision that restricts how much insurers can charge people of different ages, the young will end up paying more — essentially subsidizing the coverage of older individuals who require more expensive care.

These won’t be small increases. Health insurance expert Bob Laszewski has said that young adults should expect their premiums to double thanks to Obamacare’s rules.

The law will make insurance more expensive for everyone else by saddling it with expensive mandates. Obamacare tasks states with figuring out which health benefits are “essential” and thus mandatory for insurers.

The result? Furious lobbying by every healthcare group, from acupuncturists to chiropractors to fertility specialists, all of whom want to make sure that coverage of their services is required for all policies issued in the state. The more coverage mandates there are, the higher premiums rise. Indeed, benefit mandates can add as much as 50 percent to the cost of insurance.

As President Obama’s second term unfolds, few — if any — families will see the $2,500 in health insurance savings he promised four years ago. The White House is now clinging to the hope that premiums won’t rise quite as fast as they have in the past.

In other words, health insurance costs are going up. And for that, you can thank Obamacare.

If you lived in America you would be aware of what is really going on. Obamacare is a nightmare for the US.

JL A (281)
Sunday January 27, 2013, 3:24 pm
State Trends in Premiums and Deductibles, 2003–2009: How Building on the Affordable Care Act Will Help Stem the Tide of Rising Costs and Eroding Benefits

The Impact of Health Reform on Health System Spending

May 21, 2010 | Volume 88

Authors: David M. Cutler, Ph.D., Karen Davis, P.h.D., and Kristof Stremikis, M.P.P.
Contact: David M. Cutler, Ph.D., Otto Eckstein Professor of Applied Economics, Harvard University,
Editor: Christopher Hollander

Issue Brief (801K PDF)


The health reform legislation passed in March 2010 will introduce a range of payment and delivery system changes designed to achieve a significant slowing of health care cost growth. Most assessments of the new reform law have focused only on the federal budgetary impact. This updated analysis projects the effect of national reform on total national health expenditures and the insurance premiums that American families would likely pay. We estimate that, on net, the combination of provisions in the new law will reduce health care spending by $590 billion over 2010–2019 and lower premiums by nearly $2,000 per family. Moreover, the annual growth rate in national health expenditures could be slowed from 6.3 percent to 5.7 percent.

D. M. Cutler, K. Davis, and K. Stremikis, The Impact of Health Reform on Health System Spending, Center for American Progress and The Commonwealth Fund, May 2010.

JL A (281)
Sunday January 27, 2013, 3:26 pm

Health Insurance Premiums Will Surpass Median Household Income in 2033: Study
March 12, 2012

money Health Insurance Premiums Will Surpass Median Household Income in 2033: Study
By Jenifer Goodwin
HealthDay Reporter

MONDAY, March 12 (HealthDay News) — If current trends continue, health insurance premiums will surpass the median U.S. household income in 2033, a new study says.

Using data from the Medical Expenditure Panel Survey and the U.S. Census Bureau, researchers calculated the premiums paid by Americans from 2000 to 2009 and compared them to incomes. They found that insurance premiums rose 8 percent from 2000 to 2009, while household incomes rose only about 2 percent.

If those same rates continue during the next two decades, the average cost of a family health-insurance premium will hit half of median household income by 2021 and surpass it by 2033, the study found.

The median household income was $49,800 in 2009.

The study is published in the March/April issue of the Annals of Family Medicine.

The calculations in the study include all premium costs — including the portion paid by the employer and the employee. What the projections don’t include are out-of-pocket costs, such as co-pays for treatments and drugs.

When co-pays are factored in, the situation looks even worse, said co-lead study author Dr. Richard Young, director of research at John Peter Smith Hospital in Fort Worth, Texas.

According to their projections, the employee portion of the premium plus out-of-pocket costs — not including what the employer has to shell out — will equal about half of family income by 2031.

Despite the worrisome trend, these latest numbers are slightly brighter than the prior projections, done in 2005, which estimated that premiums would surpass household income in 2025.

Two events have come into play that have curtailed spending somewhat, Young said. In the coming years, the reforms that will come as a result of the 2010 Affordable Care Act will help to reign in the cost trajectory, while the recent recession has also led more families to spend less on health care.

Yet neither is enough to make more than a minor dent in the looming issue, Young said.

“Even under optimal assumptions about how much the Affordable Care Act will affect the cost of health care, it’s still growing faster than the overall economy, meaning the cost of health related to everything else in the economy is getting worse and worse,” Young said. “If you look at what is being paid by employers for their employees, for an average-wage person, that cost is a huge percentage of their income. And that’s not even getting into the cost of Medicare and Medicaid on the tax side.”

Bob Phillips, director of the Robert Graham Center, a division of the American Academy of Family Physicians that researches health care to help inform policy-making, said the trend in increasing health-care costs has gone on for long enough that such projections are “realistic.”

“This trend is real, and along the way we are going to be dropping more and more people as a lot of people are unable to afford health insurance,” Phillips said.

As patients who get cancer or some other expensive illness run up bills they can’t pay, more will end up in bankruptcy.

“This is going to leave a lot of working-class families destitute,” Phillips said. “It adds to the anxiety of what you’re going through and leads a lot of people to make choices that are not the right ones for their health, to forgo treatment or medications, or to pretend they don’t have that illness. It’s fair to say it’s killing lots of people. Even after they’ve passed on it leaves the family holding incredible costs that they can’t pay.”

The solutions, Young and Phillips agreed, will not be easy. Tweaking payment systems isn’t enough, Young said. Instead, health professionals, policy makers and U.S. health-care consumers have to be willing to accept more significant, structural changes.

“We have to decide: What is health care? What should be covered? What should we provide?” Young said. “Unless we’re willing to talk about some difficult realities, there is nothing historically that has shown that any of these financing tweaks has made any substantive difference. If we want to avoid crushing our children and grandchildren with health-care-related debt, then we need to start having some deeper discussions.”

One example cited in the paper: Medicare recently added coverage of the prostate cancer drug Provenge (sipuleucel-T), which will cost an estimated $93,000 for treatment to increase life expectancy by four months.

Young also believes in a greater reliance on family physicians and other primary-care doctors instead of more costly specialists, and in being more prudent in what tests are ordered.

Although much of the debate over health care has focused on who is paying for it — single payer, private insurance or public insurance — Young said that an even more fundamental discussion has to take place about what sort of health care should be provided, regardless of who is paying.

“Who writes the checks isn’t the problem,” he said. “The problem is a deeper sense of what the health care system should be and what kinds of things doctors should treat.”

More information

The Kaiser Family Foundation has more on trends in health-care costs.

SOURCES: Richard Young, M.D., director, research, John Peter Smith Hospital, Fort Worth, Texas; Robert Phillips Jr., M.D., MSPH, director, Robert Graham Center, Washington, D.C.; March/April 2012 Annals of Family Medicine

Last Updated: March 12, 2012
Or, log in with your
Facebook account:
Please add your comment: (plain text only please. Allowable HTML: <a>)

Track Comments: Notify me with a personal message when other people comment on this story

Loading Noted By...Please Wait


butterfly credits on the news network

  • credits for vetting a newly submitted story
  • credits for vetting any other story
  • credits for leaving a comment
learn more

Most Active Today in US Politics & Gov't

Content and comments expressed here are the opinions of Care2 users and not necessarily that of or its affiliates.

New to Care2? Start Here.