ARC's 1st Law: As a "progressive" online discussion grows longer, the probability of a nefarious reference to Karl Rove approaches one

Wednesday, July 13, 2005

Reason 1,425 to cancel a subscription to the St Louis Post-Dispatch

Not like I need a reason, since I canceled my subscription 5 years ago... But rumor has it that ARC:Brian recently canceled his subscription. Am curious as to whether this was an example of what pushed him over the edge?

RIMSHOT: No Viagra for you!

CALLING IT A "FRIVOLOUS" USE of taxpayer dollars, Missouri Gov. Matt Blunt has ordered the Division of Medical Services to "stop providing erectile dysfunction drugs at taxpayers' expense."

The governor's order follows recent reports that the state paid for such drugs for 26 registered sex offenders during the past year. But the new ban applies to all state Medicaid recipients, who reportedly used $200,000 worth of Viagra and other erectile dysfunction drugs between May 2004 and May 2005.

However, Missouri officials, legislators and employees who get health coverage through the Missouri Consolidated Health Care Plan can still make "frivolous" state-subsidized "lifestyle choices." Viagra and Levitra are listed on their plan's approved drug formulary. Moral of the story: When you're poor, everything is more expensive - sometimes even sex.

First off... the title.... I mean, seriously.

second, is it the P-D's position that sex offenders SHOULD have viagra so they can sexually abuse other inmates?

Is the P-D be in favor of means testing prisoners, allowing those who are "economically disadvantaged" prisoners to get the drug on my dime?

The moral of the story is that if you commit a crime, the State of Missouri won't be helping you achieve an hour-long erections... This is apparently cruel and unusual punishment in the eyes of the P-D. One wonders what the P-D's position was regarding E.D. prior to the invention of Viagra, Levitra, & Cialis.

Kudos to Governor Matt Blunt

***ARC: Brian adds***
Editorials like that sure don't help. The P-D has been using the comparison between what state legislators and employees get via their health care insurace as a condition of their employment and what medicaid recipients get. As though if an employee of the state gets more than a medicaid recipient it means that Gov. Blunt is hoarding the extra's for his staff.

The comparison is ludicrous. State employees, theoretically at least, work for the state, so you know, compensating them is probably going to be necessary at some point. If providing Viagra to state employees allows us to retain the best and brightest to cut state spending, I'm all for it.

***UPDATE St Wendeler***
And they've extended the comparison to state employees vs prisoners. As everyone knows, if you want more of something, subsidize it. Do we really want more sex offenders in Missouri (who'll think "Hey, if I get caught in Missouri, at least I can have some fun while I'm in prison!")?

Your Co-Conspirator,
ARC: St Wendeler