Tying tubes? Aren't vasectomies cheaper?

And did they finally stop putting salt peter in prison food?

McCain wants to delay Friday's debate ?!?!?!

http://news.yahoo.com/story/ap/20080924/ap_on_el_pr/mccain;_ylt=AnrcbrpBQx5_HkHBKPLksG1h24cA

This will so be on the Daily Show.

How much you wanna bet the Religious Right has no problem with LaBruzzo's candidacy?

Pimps would love this.

Force all the runaways in their stable to get $1000 each and turn it over.

That's not fair! How's a guy like me supposed to make any money?!

Go back in time and start with his mom!

But then who will die in all of the Republican's unnecessary wars in the future?

Won't somebody think of the unnecessary wars of the future?

He sounds like a tax and spend liberal, throwing money away when there are cheaper alternatives. When are the real conservatives just going to admit that Hitler's program was cheaper and more effective. (please note the sarcasm)

Tying tubes? Aren't vasectomies cheaper? -- Jeff II, @15:00

Cheaper, quicker, safer. And even reversible, if need be. But I bet the idea of anyone doing a snip-snip on *his* apparatus gives his willie the shrinks, so it wouldn't have occurred to him.

Hitler sterilized the crazies. The Bozzo-Buzzard wants to sterilize the poor. Same difference and altogether a pity his mother hadn't practiced birth control.

McCain may want to postpone the debate AND suspend the campaign?

Hmm...

McCain is calling off the Friday debate, and suspending his campaign to return to DC and deal with the financial crisis.

I think that's a very smart (political) move on his part.

He should also recommend sterilization of anyone unemployed for any period of time. Just to be sure only tax payers breed.

Nice one, Georgia Girl.

I was going to ask though... isn't free sterilization something liberals are supposed to support? (I do.)

Is paying folks to get it so horrible?
I suppose we ask why only welfare recipients can get paid to tie one on. Should a working woman quit her job for a few months so she can apply for food stamps and a tubal ligation?

I can also understand if a welfare recipient isn't bright enough to understand its a problem birthing mouths to feed when you can't even manage your own... is there a better way to stop this reproduction at taxpayer expense? If the rest of us paid less in taxes, maybe we'd want to afford more kids of our own? (Yes, I know how small a portion of government funding welfare takes up. It's a minimal part of the argument.)

Just saying, not everyone considering this is from Louisiana (if you know what I mean...) There's plenty of white welfare recipients who aren't using the good sense God gave 'em too.

Yuck. I hate defending Republicans.

I think that the esteemed gentleman from Metairie just got done watching Idiocracy and is concerned about the rapid reproduction of morons...

I've sat at a table with this guy. Nothing you can say comes close to capturing the sheer Looney-Tuneness of the way he thinks. He's the only legislator I've ever met who left me literally speechless.

huh.

so, the welfare programs apparently dont provide enough assistance for the recipients to break the cycle of poverty and assure a better life for their children.

obviously, the fault in this case is not with the government for providing too little, but with those on welfare, for having too many babies.

and of course, the solution is to sterilize them.

"It's easy to say, 'Oh, he's a racist, ' " LaBruzzo said."

wonder why that is?

"I think that the esteemed gentleman from Metairie just got done watching Idiocracy and is concerned about the rapid reproduction of morons..."

Believe me: (1) he wouldn't understand the concept, and (2) he's apparently a product of that process, rather than one who might seek to avoid it.

tooweary,

I think it's that, instead of trying any type of education, his first inclination is just to stop poor people from breeding.

I wouldn't support an initiative like this without a well funded contraceptive education program in place first.

It reminds me of the Simpson's when Ned Flanders hippie parents were trying to figure out why Ned was misbehaving and told a counselor "We've tried nothing, and we're all out of ideas."

This seems like a last resort first plan, in my opinion. Burn down the village to save it.

It is true that it is easy to say he's a racist (nice that he is honest about his fear being of black people, and not poor people in general), but much harder to think of a solution to racists like him.

Uh... actually it's a fine idea. Put down the partisan filter for a moment and look at this objectively.

I'm assuming all of us here are pro-choice, right? Most of us probably support subsidizing abortion to make it more available to the poor, even (I do in fact). Why? Because (A) reproductive choices shouldn't be held hostage to cost, (B) unwanted pregnancies are worst financially for the poor, and (C) poor unwanted kids are the most at risk for abuse, future poverty, poor education and pretty much everything else that is teh suck.

Now there's a huge difference between voluntary (even incentivized voluntary) and compelled. This is apparently voluntary. That's the good one, in case it isn't immediately obvious. getting tubes tied is *much* better than getting an abortion. Granted it is on par with birth control, but people don't use birth control consistently by and large.

I do agree that the proposal makes more sense if it changes to vasectomies rather than tubal ligations. But the underlying idea is still good.

Even, maybe especially, if it is from a republican.

Count this liberal in with toowearyforoutrage. I think we should curb the reflex leftist response to an idea like this. As a psychiatrist, I think there are some women who keep having babies they can't support or raise properly out of a combination of poor impulse control, depression, and difficulty thinking and planning for a future beyond next week (which has both cognitive and social causes.) Then our society has to try to teach these kids and address their understandable developmental and psychiatric problems, and we are doing a pissed-poor job of it, and that's not going to change any time soon. LaBruzzo may be a racist jerk or he may not, but he isn't suggesting forced sterilization, and there probably are women who would be happy to be paid to have their tubes tied and who might be able thereby to give more attention to the kids they already have.

Oh, the media charaterizing McCain as taking a bold step to go to Washington and to discribe an economic work out of this economic crisis.

A few seconds later it is said Obama started the conversation early this morning. Wasn't it a suprise when Hillary called for a stimulus package for America and it happened?

All five networks are perhaps broadcasting a lie on McCains part. To me its way to obvious these first line Journalist are working in concert with the hard core Republican Neo-Con's here, are in a huge fraud telecast of handing out information. Sheesh FOX is the best for this horrible decitful practice, doing it with a smile.

Let's just offer them a years supply of crack for their babies and sell them to affluent families for profit.

Better yet, no one gets on welfare until they have harvested their own organs for cash.

What is really scary, is I bet this idea is being well received in many southern states where poverty flourishes under decades of republican rule.

I love how people with nothing are responsible for every problem in out Nation. The people with money, power, and influence are the victims, even from the very race they forced here to make themselves wealthy.

karen:

as a psychiatrist, do you understand the concept of "autonomy" and how a large economic incentive might be, you know, coercive?

Why not have them identified with arm bands, rounded up and loaded on trains, and sent to camps where they can be "concentrated", maybe call them "work camps" or something. All we need to establish is how much money do you need before you're allowed to have children?

You know, China had this great "one child per family" idea awhile back. Sounded crazy at the time, but it seems to have had some success.

I don't like the idea of incentivizing the poor specifically. I think the only way to run this fairly is to make it available for everyone. Or better yet, free contraception, family planning and voluntary sterilization for everyone. Maybe as part of some sort of general free health care plan that everyone had access to...

Isn't this interfering with God's Will that women have as many babies as He wants them to have?

The reason this proposal is silly policy is because the proponent has no understanding of scale. Tieing the fallopian tubes of individual women does little to address current or future pending obligations. Individual poor people just don't place that great a burden on the public. In comparison a few billionaires can place a huge burden on the public treasury. The only value of this bailout scam is that it illustrates just how little poor people cost and just how little it would cost to implement some valuable social programs.

Whatever problem poor people inflict on Republicans I expect with $700 billion dollars of money I could spend anyway I chose, I could fix the problem.

Realistically - name one major global problem which cannot be directly tied to overpopulation?

We're in this current housing mess because the federal government (both democrat and republican - this did NOT develop exclusively over the last 8 years) ENCOURAGED lenders to provide home ownership opportunities to low income families. If there were less people who fell into this bracket, there'd be less foreclosures, and less crises. Additionally, less people equates to lower demands on oil, food, land, etc.

Volunteer sterilization is a good START.

Absolutely -- candidates have dealt with crises and managed their electoral campaigns before this.

McCain's move was motivated by desperation, not statesmanship.

Instead of re-exploring the Eighth Amendment, and the precedents set by Buck vs Bell, Skinner vs. Oklahoma, and Stump vs. Sparkman, I'd like to raise my hand to be the first woman paid $1,000 for voluntary sterilization. I've been trying for years to get my tubes tied, but no doctor will do it because of the sexist notion that "all women want a baby! It's NATURE! You just haven't met the right MAN!!" I'm sick to effin' death of men telling me what to do with my uterus, and if there's a legislator out there willing to PAY me for something I've been begging for, count me in.

Oops -- wrong thread. What I meant to say:

Volunteer sterilization is a good START.

Okay. You first.

Hear me out. If, as part of the deal, LaBruzzo will include mandatory lobotomies for the registered republicans of his district, I'm willing to listen.

Hear me out. If, as part of the deal, LaBruzzo will include mandatory lobotomies for the registered republicans of his district, I'm willing to listen. Posted by: WL

What do you hope to achieve by this? Doesn't one have to have a brain to lobotomize in the first place?

LaBruzzo said he worries that people receiving government aid such as food stamps and publicly subsidized housing are reproducing at a faster rate than more affluent, better-educated people..

and the key phrase here is.. better-educated people.

Meaningful sex education with contraception on prescription has done the job brilliantly in most European countries which have enjoyed declining birth rates for quarter of a century.

"Bumfights" as policy.

100% for this... and more! [likely for different reasons than our right-wing buddy here]

Offer a substantial tax break for any couple that agrees to have either a vasectomy or tubal ligation after 2 children.

Overpopulation is the number 1 problem facing the planet today... period.

This is also the proverbial 'elephant in the room' that cannot be addressed or even whispered about in the US political system.

But young girls are having babies while they're still in school. By the time they're out on their own it's too latefor this sterilization plan.
So I guess we've got to start sterilizing teenagers!

(...if they're black...)

Come on, you can make five times that much selling your spare kidney on the organ donor market.

We should sterilize all the rich people instead. That way the people who're in the best position to support children have to adopt all these kids that have no parents.

Because really, it kinda sucks that the people most likely to insist that women give up unwanted babies for adoption are pretty likely to be having so many kids of their own that they don't actually take in any of these kids they wanted to be available for adoption.

So yeah. Give all the wealthy men vasectomies (since as another poster mentioned, they're cheaper and less invasive, so you can do more of them). If wealthy people want to sterilize one group for economic reasons, I wonder if they've ever considered putting their own organs on the metaphorical chopping block.

If the research was done to make tubals and vasectomies reliably reversible, not unrealistic with foreseeable developments in nanotech, this could be a program with some merit. Anyone who has worked in social services or child support enforcement knows that you don't have to be a member of the tinfoil hat brigade to know that irresponsible parenting is an enormous burden on society.

If the research was done to make tubals and vasectomies reliably reversible, not unrealistic with foreseeable developments in nanotech, this could be a program with some merit. Anyone who has worked in social services or child support enforcement knows that you don't have to be a member of the tinfoil hat brigade to know that irresponsible parenting is an enormous burden on society.

OMG - This Republican is a Communist! Don't the Chinese Communists limit the number of births? I knew the Republican Party was just a shill for the Communists all along!

Dan: Holy crap! It's true! No wonder they're trying so hard to fill America with so-called "Red States." They want the whole thing to be a Red State!

Metairie. The one-time home (and political launching pad) of David Duke.....

A thousand bucks??? I don't have to call my insurance company for preapproval to know a tubal costs way more than a thousand bucks. Crikey, I got my gall bladder yanked out a couple years ago and that was 8 grand!

My wife is birth and delivery nurse and comes home with tragic stories almost every day. So many of the people who are having babies are truly scary: drug addicts, 16-year-olds, high school dropouts, 3rd generation welfare, crazies, you name it. I live in a state that is whiter than Wonder-bread so this is not a racial issue. These people and their prodigious offspring are a huge and growing burden on society and will be for generations.

Providing financial incentives for responsible behavior is a great idea. The cost is insignificant relative to a damaged baby growing up in a dysfunctional household.

As a VERY liberal person (okay, Democrat) - I have always thought that some version of this idea would be a good thing. I am not sure how to implement it - but there are definitely situations that would be better for everyone if sterilization was an option - even "coerced" in some way (?).

I think that the esteemed gentleman from Metairie just got done watching Idiocracy and is concerned about the rapid reproduction of morons...

Posted by: Homer on September 24, 2008 at 3:20 PM

One generation too late.

note to all the "liberals" arguing in favor of this:

your "i'm a liberal, BUT..." schtick is just as tired as "but i have LOTS of black friends!"

Actually, about 20 or 30 years ago, there was a big move by a number of (Republican) people in state governments --- as they were taking people off of the welfare roles --- to give women money if they agreed to take a long-term contraception implant. At least one proposal suggested that women in prison who agreed should be given parole.

As long as it is voluntary, I see no problem with this at all. Poor women should have as much access as possible to birth control, just as all women should. Yes, the motivation for this particular bill is likely racist, but dissing birthcontrol that happens to target poor/minority women is asinine knee jerk leftism.

Speed wrote: Isn't this interfering with God's Will that women have as many babies as He wants them to have?

This applies only to upstanding, Christian white women, like Sarah Palin. Married white women "give birth to God's little miracles." Poor, brown women "breed."

anon:

so then why not simply make contraception, abortion, and tube-tying free of charge?

especially if you make it free to anyone who wants it, including the middle and upper class.

i dont see how that's unreasonable, and it would do away with the racist motivations of the jackass who suggested it.

it's the focus on those at the bottom of the income ladder that makes it odious in the first place.

Lost in this discussion is the fact that whatever welfare spending LaBruzzo is bemoaning is not even a drop in the ocean compared to the money currently being wasted in Iraq & about to be lavished on Wall Street.

That's what gets me about these representatives trying to make a name for themselves by cutting welfare spending -- it's a pittance. If you want to make a name for yourself by cutting government spending take a look at the defense & homeland security budgets. Would we really be less safe if the defense budget was cut in half?

Thanks, Karen, doubtful....

If there aren't good contraceptive/education programs in place (I foolishly assumed there WERE), this is mere stupidity, not necessarily racist. After all, just a good to have minorities not reproduce one way than another, right? He should back both.

Another thing I thought about payment...
Anyone on welfare probably isn't landing a job that provides sick leave where a woman could recover from a sterilization operation. It costs her substantial cash to take advantage of a free sterilization.

It reminds me of free vacations where all you'd have to do is book about 500 bucks in airfare to get to the place. Great deal, but not actually available.

La Bruzzo push to use funding to control the masses is old school eugenics. Cyber-eugenics as explained in Bernard Amador’s new novel Cyber-eugenics: The Neural Code tells how advances in cognitive science and the cracking of the neural code may be the future direction of a modern day eugenics movement where families will no longer have to be paid or women alter their bodies. Technology will be used in conjunction with social engineering to accomplish the eugenic ideal in America.