Obama's Second-Term Agenda: Poison for Suburban Women

RadNet, the country's largest imaging and diagnostic company, comments in its most recent investor presentation that mammogram volumes have been adversely affected by the weak economy and a "government taskforce changing the recommended age from 40+ to 50+."

The government taskforce comment is meaningful.  It means that during President Obama's first term, an HHS-supported advisory board recommended that women's health care be rationed.  This is the same entity that more recently recommended that men do without the PSA test, the standard prostate cancer screening procedure.  Admittedly, this is a different HHS-supported independent advisory board, but maybe Mitt Romney was on to something when he voiced concern about ObamaCare rationing our health care through its own IPAB.

RadNet's comment about government's negative impact on mammogram volumes certainly clears the fog created by the Obama campaign's relentless suggestion of a Republican "war on women."  Seen in this light, President Obama's "war on women" scare tactics are a smokescreen, particularly if women have already had their mammograms rationed.

Although both presidential campaigns seek the support of suburban women, President Obama is not talking to them.  He is talking to Planned Parenthood customers.  Suburban women are typically economically established, educated heads of households.  They are typically involved in schools, church, and community.  Not to state the obvious, but they also live in the suburbs, which are incidentally where Target stores sell birth control for nine dollars a month. 

On the contrary, Planned Parenthood's customer base is young and urban -- 75 percent of abortions are by teens and twenty-somethings.  As someone who mentioned the abortion giant five times in one debate and as a regular Planned Parenthood benefactor, the president knows that suburban women are not Planned Parenthood regulars.  Still unanswered is what, if anything, the president will do for suburban women.

Whether married or single, suburban women would very much like to one day enjoy the company of their grandchildren, maintain their hard-earned economic security and lifestyle, and, if married, see their husbands live long and prosperous lives.  Before succumbing to "war on women" hysteria, suburban women might clearly think about three things -- health care, jobs, and the suburbs.  These are the very things a second Obama term would imperil.

First, there is health care.  It only makes sense that ObamaCare's IPAB  would adopt work already done by a prior  HHS-supported advisory board, which prior board recommended curtailing mammograms for women under 50 and eliminating the PSA test.  After the easy stuff, IPAB could then cut services for dementia patients, dialysis, vaccines, intensive care beds, and other elder care services.  These items are not this author's hypothetical rambling, but rather the ideas of ObamaCare adviser Ezekiel Emmanuel.  Under a second Obama term, when aspirin might be the only option, a woman's time with her grandchildren could be cut short, and her husband may exit earlier than she had hoped. 

Second, there is the continued threat to economic stability.  A visit to any DMV or post office persuasively demonstrates that the private sector creates better and more rewarding jobs.  Unfortunately, when the government taxes and spends, it withdraws resources from the private sector, crowds out investment, and eliminates those better and more rewarding jobs.  Even President Obama's treasury secretary has admitted this. 

During his first term, President Obama's profligate spending crowded out millions of jobs, resulting in declining personal income, 26 million unemployed or marginally employed Americans, 46.7 million people on food stamps, record numbers of children living under the poverty line,  teen unemployment in excess of 20%, all-time-high median weeks' unemployed, and almost a million more women being out of work.  Suburban earners and their families likely already feel the stress of precarious employment situations, be they unemployed, part-time-employed, or stuck in a really bad job.  Why should a head of household choose four more years of sleeplessness, irritable bowels, weight gain, reflux, and high blood pressure?

Finally, there are the suburbs themselves.  As odd as this may sound, President Obama really doesn't like where suburban women live.  He intends to redirect their tax dollars away from their homes and their communities.  Stanley Kurtz documents the president's plans in detail in his new book, Spreading the Wealth: How Obama is Robbing the Suburbs to Pay for the CitiesConsider:

Obama is a longtime supporter of "regionalism," the idea that the suburbs should be folded into the cities, merging schools, housing, transportation, and above all taxation. ... The goal: income equalization via a massive redistribution of suburban tax money to the cities.

The president's plans for the suburbs reside in a couple of programs, one of which is the Sustainable Communities Initiative.  This is an initiative "set to recommend redistributive policies, as well as transportation and development plans, designed to undercut America's suburbs."  This initiative is currently focused in Ohio, Florida, and Virginia, but its ambition is directed nationwide, where, according to the president, "[w]e don't need to build more highways out in the suburbs."

So suburban women, by all means be concerned about young inner-city women who are struggling with today's immodest, materialistic, and utilitarian culture -- but don't forget your families.  After all, charity starts at home, and it looks like a second Obama term could wreak havoc on a suburban home as a result of reductions in health care like mammograms and PSA tests; continued joblessness and the stress resulting there from; and, oddest of all, a redistributive war on suburbs that is set to make your school commute much more difficult.

It is surprising that an imaging and diagnostic presentation could have prompted such a cascade of observations, but the RadNet mammogram comment surfaced a fact at odds with the Obama "war on women" narrative: a rationing of women's health care occurred during the first Obama term. 

Repeat: a rationing of women's health care occurred during the first Obama term.  RadNet's mammogram volumes are down.  Unlike the fictional, Planned Parenthood-channeled "war on women," a rationing of health care is very relevant to suburban women, as are jobs, schools, and roads. 

Now is the time for suburban women to pierce the shrill repetition of the narrative and seriously ask whether or not their needs would be met by a second Obama term.  The answer seems pretty obvious.

RadNet, the country's largest imaging and diagnostic company, comments in its most recent investor presentation that mammogram volumes have been adversely affected by the weak economy and a "government taskforce changing the recommended age from 40+ to 50+."

The government taskforce comment is meaningful.  It means that during President Obama's first term, an HHS-supported advisory board recommended that women's health care be rationed.  This is the same entity that more recently recommended that men do without the PSA test, the standard prostate cancer screening procedure.  Admittedly, this is a different HHS-supported independent advisory board, but maybe Mitt Romney was on to something when he voiced concern about ObamaCare rationing our health care through its own IPAB.

RadNet's comment about government's negative impact on mammogram volumes certainly clears the fog created by the Obama campaign's relentless suggestion of a Republican "war on women."  Seen in this light, President Obama's "war on women" scare tactics are a smokescreen, particularly if women have already had their mammograms rationed.

Although both presidential campaigns seek the support of suburban women, President Obama is not talking to them.  He is talking to Planned Parenthood customers.  Suburban women are typically economically established, educated heads of households.  They are typically involved in schools, church, and community.  Not to state the obvious, but they also live in the suburbs, which are incidentally where Target stores sell birth control for nine dollars a month. 

On the contrary, Planned Parenthood's customer base is young and urban -- 75 percent of abortions are by teens and twenty-somethings.  As someone who mentioned the abortion giant five times in one debate and as a regular Planned Parenthood benefactor, the president knows that suburban women are not Planned Parenthood regulars.  Still unanswered is what, if anything, the president will do for suburban women.

Whether married or single, suburban women would very much like to one day enjoy the company of their grandchildren, maintain their hard-earned economic security and lifestyle, and, if married, see their husbands live long and prosperous lives.  Before succumbing to "war on women" hysteria, suburban women might clearly think about three things -- health care, jobs, and the suburbs.  These are the very things a second Obama term would imperil.

First, there is health care.  It only makes sense that ObamaCare's IPAB  would adopt work already done by a prior  HHS-supported advisory board, which prior board recommended curtailing mammograms for women under 50 and eliminating the PSA test.  After the easy stuff, IPAB could then cut services for dementia patients, dialysis, vaccines, intensive care beds, and other elder care services.  These items are not this author's hypothetical rambling, but rather the ideas of ObamaCare adviser Ezekiel Emmanuel.  Under a second Obama term, when aspirin might be the only option, a woman's time with her grandchildren could be cut short, and her husband may exit earlier than she had hoped. 

Second, there is the continued threat to economic stability.  A visit to any DMV or post office persuasively demonstrates that the private sector creates better and more rewarding jobs.  Unfortunately, when the government taxes and spends, it withdraws resources from the private sector, crowds out investment, and eliminates those better and more rewarding jobs.  Even President Obama's treasury secretary has admitted this. 

During his first term, President Obama's profligate spending crowded out millions of jobs, resulting in declining personal income, 26 million unemployed or marginally employed Americans, 46.7 million people on food stamps, record numbers of children living under the poverty line,  teen unemployment in excess of 20%, all-time-high median weeks' unemployed, and almost a million more women being out of work.  Suburban earners and their families likely already feel the stress of precarious employment situations, be they unemployed, part-time-employed, or stuck in a really bad job.  Why should a head of household choose four more years of sleeplessness, irritable bowels, weight gain, reflux, and high blood pressure?

Finally, there are the suburbs themselves.  As odd as this may sound, President Obama really doesn't like where suburban women live.  He intends to redirect their tax dollars away from their homes and their communities.  Stanley Kurtz documents the president's plans in detail in his new book, Spreading the Wealth: How Obama is Robbing the Suburbs to Pay for the CitiesConsider:

Obama is a longtime supporter of "regionalism," the idea that the suburbs should be folded into the cities, merging schools, housing, transportation, and above all taxation. ... The goal: income equalization via a massive redistribution of suburban tax money to the cities.

The president's plans for the suburbs reside in a couple of programs, one of which is the Sustainable Communities Initiative.  This is an initiative "set to recommend redistributive policies, as well as transportation and development plans, designed to undercut America's suburbs."  This initiative is currently focused in Ohio, Florida, and Virginia, but its ambition is directed nationwide, where, according to the president, "[w]e don't need to build more highways out in the suburbs."

So suburban women, by all means be concerned about young inner-city women who are struggling with today's immodest, materialistic, and utilitarian culture -- but don't forget your families.  After all, charity starts at home, and it looks like a second Obama term could wreak havoc on a suburban home as a result of reductions in health care like mammograms and PSA tests; continued joblessness and the stress resulting there from; and, oddest of all, a redistributive war on suburbs that is set to make your school commute much more difficult.

It is surprising that an imaging and diagnostic presentation could have prompted such a cascade of observations, but the RadNet mammogram comment surfaced a fact at odds with the Obama "war on women" narrative: a rationing of women's health care occurred during the first Obama term. 

Repeat: a rationing of women's health care occurred during the first Obama term.  RadNet's mammogram volumes are down.  Unlike the fictional, Planned Parenthood-channeled "war on women," a rationing of health care is very relevant to suburban women, as are jobs, schools, and roads. 

Now is the time for suburban women to pierce the shrill repetition of the narrative and seriously ask whether or not their needs would be met by a second Obama term.  The answer seems pretty obvious.

RECENT VIDEOS