Representative Buyer's Spectacularly Bad Idea

"Someone who smokes, drinks, participates in bad conduct and behavior, unprotected sex, maybe bad things happen to them, maybe they should pay higher premiums. That is a radical thought, isn't it?" - Congressman Steve Buyer of Indiana

And here you thought that the GOP was just plum out of bad ideas. Leave it to the Republican Congressman Steve Buyer from Indiana's 4th Congressional District, who recently warned us on the dangers of smoking lettuce (no, that's not a typo), to offer up yet another spectacularly offensive and intrusive idea - higher health premiums for those who engage in unprotected sex. We could call it the "barebacker surtax". I'm not sure the Congressman has thought this idea through. Wouldn't this raise health costs for those trying to having a baby?

From Roll Call:

The Indiana Republican floated his unlikely cash-for-sex proposal Thursday during the markup of the health care bill in the Energy and Commerce Committee. Under the plan Buyer posited, those who engage in risky behavior, like smoking, not exercising and (ding, ding!) having unprotected sex, should have to pay a premium for their health care. After all, the reasoning goes, those people are more likely to incur higher health care costs than cigarette-eschewing, condom-wearing gym bunnies.

Why is it that GOP is so obsessed about what happens in our bedrooms? I have to ask just how does the Congressman think such a provision would get enforced?

Tags: Rep. Steve Buyer, US Health Care Reform (all tags)



Re: Representative Buyer's Spectacularly Bad Idea

And here you thought that the GOP was just plum out of bad ideas.

I would never think such a thing.  The GOP is an infinitely deep well of mindbogglingly terrible and/or ridiculous ideas.

by RT 2009-07-22 04:23AM | 0 recs
Re: Representative Buyer's Spectacularly Bad Idea

How about unprotected sex with a spouse? Just curious.

by Coral 2009-07-22 07:21AM | 0 recs
Re: Representative Buyer's Spectacularly Bad Idea

The Pope says it's mandatory.

by antiHyde 2009-07-22 04:58PM | 0 recs
Re: Representative Buyer's Spectacularly Bad Idea

I have to admit sensing some irresponsibility when I hear about mountain climbers and other thrill seekers being rushed to emergency rooms and spending the next six weeks in traction.  If I had a sick child at an emergency room and was waiting because a person fell while climbing a dangerous mountain, I would not be happy.  Granted, these people aren't the reason health-care costs are skyrocketing, but there should be some cost/benefit analysis when deciding how you are going to injure yourself.  Maybe making people pay higher premiums for thrill-seeking isn't such a bad idea.

by the mollusk 2009-07-22 08:56AM | 0 recs
Re: Representative Buyer's Spectacularly Bad Idea

You start picking and choosing and soon all of us will have to pay higher premiums.  I mean, really, life is DANGEROUS.  How about, instead of people who are in need of IMMEDIATE CARE having to wait, we have the resources to take care of the Mountain Climber AND the sick child.

And I swear to God, if ANYONE thinks that having kids, even irresponsibly, is easy, then they are really stupid in all the ugly, nasty connotations of that word.  I just dealt with a sleep-over of only 5 kids and was ready to pull my hair, even after getting into it with "eyes wide open".  

You REALLY want to cure irresponsible pregnancies?  Make it a crime.  Take the children away (give them to on of those million couples waiting to adopt people).  Introduce laws and licensing to GAIN THE PRIVILEGE of becoming a parent of another human being. And then watch the Republican base go banana's.  (No, this is not really a snark, but it is also tongue-in-cheek.  I would like to see people have to take classes to become parents, but I am not crazy enough to think that you could enforce such a law fairly...better to address other issues around child raising.)

by Hammer1001 2009-07-22 01:17PM | 0 recs


Advertise Blogads