White House says Obama considering rolling back mandatory insurance coverage of contraception

[mod mom]

White House says Obama considering rolling back mandatory insurance coverage of contraception

-snip

The problem is, the decision has already been made. In August, the administrationannounced new rules requiring all new insurance plans to cover birth control and emergency contraception by 2013. At an early October fundraiser in St. Louis, President Obama himselfhailed the rule. And when President Obama appeared before the U.N. in September, the administration touted the contraception rule as an example of America's commitment to women. So when Carney says "this decision has not yet been made," he's wrong. It has been made—and by reopening it, President Obama is succumbing to pressure from anti-choice groups.

Even worse, Carney says President Obama is trying to "strike the right balance between expanding coverage of preventive services and respecting religious beliefs" without acknowledging the fact that the rules announced in August already included an exemption for churches.

Even though that balance has already been achieved with the existing exemption, anti-choice groups are nonetheless claiming that the new rule violates their religious freedom. They say they want to expand the exemption beyond churches to include hospitals and other facilities with religious affiliation, regardless of the religious beliefs of the people who work at and are served by those institutions. Despite their rhetoric, such an expansion would have nothing to do with religious liberty—remember, churches themselves are already exempted—and in fact would allow anti-choice activists to impose their own religious and moral views on others. What they really want is to get rid of the rule altogether, and they're more than happy to use any tactic at their disposal to begin chipping away at it.



-snip

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/11/29/1040891/-White-House-says-Obama-considering-rolling-back-mandatory-insurance-coverage-of-contraception?via=blog_1

Margaret Sanger is rolling in her grave! :mad:

[Angry Dragon]

1. they seem like evil, evil people

[mod mom]

3. The poorest of women & families will suffer the most if this Democratic president

makes this deal.

[roguevalley]

26. and he's a good man/dem/Christian in what manner/form?

Is there no end to the evil?

[Angry Dragon]

37. I was talking about the ones wanting exemptions

I have no idea what you are saying or asking

[Name removed]

2. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Raine]

9. Unfortunately no, the real suprise would be if it was other

than this kind of thing. :-(

[Me.]

4. Well That's One Way Of Insuring Women Will Vote For You

:sarcasm:

[rurallib]

5. get a fricking spine Obama - there is an election coming

secondly - christ, save me from your followers

[cyglet]

6. Facepalm

I voted for him why again? :banghead: :shrug:

[kath]

40. I'm wondering the same thing.

But you can be damned sure I won't do so again.

[Name removed]

7. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[mod mom]

10. Doesn't Obama realize these kooks will never vote for him anyways? Why appease them

and piss off your base? I don't get it but then I don't understanding any of the caving to the GOP. It accomplishes nothing but strengthening their resolve.

[MisterP]

23. well, if Dems lose they can blame it on "lefties" turning up their noses, like with 2010

and if they win they move rightwards because we'll vote for them anyway, like in 2006 and 2008...

[Edweird]

28. Win/Lose/Draw the RW policies will get ratcheted up further.

[Mimosa]

43. ^ Exactly! ^

I seriously don't understand why the administration is courting the right wing nuts.

[county worker]

8. This kind of stuff is obviously put out by the Romney campaign.

In my 65 and 1/2 years I have never heard of Democrats who would turn their back on women's reproductive rights.

[TheKentuckian]

29. Carney isn't with Mittens.

[county worker]

38. Yes, I know.

[Edweird]

30. The Romney campaign uses Whitehouse.gov?

[kath]

41. Well, the guy in the WH is no Democrat - it just becomes clearer and clearer and clearer.

[Autumn]

11. Maybe Obama is not aware that the decision has already

been made. Why go back and make a compromise on something that has already been compromised and settled?:shrug: This is just stupid.

[TheWraith]

12. Or, gosh, maybe Carney misspoke at a briefing, or the question wasn't clear on which aspect.

After all, one vague statement is completely justified grounds for a massive collective freakout and crapping all over our elected officials who have been steadfast on this issue.

[Edweird]

13. Here's the quote from Whitehouse.gov:

"And with that, I will take your questions. Jake.

Q I’ve heard from a lot of Democrats in the last few weeks who are concerned about President Obama possibly granting an exemption to Catholic churches, hospitals and universities from the requirement that all insurance plans cover contraception. I’m wondering if you could shed any light on this decision. I know the President has not yet made a decision, but I think these Democrats, a lot of them in the abortion rights community, are concerned that this is even being discussed. Could you explain why the President is considering an exemption, and what’s going into his decision-making?

MR. CARNEY: Well, part of the process, Jake, as you know, was seeking and receiving public input before the guidelines that were announced by the Secretary of Health and Human Services would go into effect. That process did result in public input, as well as resulted in numerous comments from various folks who have concerns about this issue.

The President has -- this decision has not yet been made. You can be sure that we want to strike the right balance between expanding coverage of preventive services and respecting religious beliefs. And that’s the balance that will be sought as this decision is made."

http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2011/11/29/press-briefing-press-secretary-jay-carney-and-chairman-presidents-counci

I don't see anything 'vague' in that statement.

[TheWraith]

15. You're right--it simply proves the original article is total horseshit of the worst kind.

The reporter asks whether there's going to be an exemption for Catholic organizations to the established requirement.

Carney says no decision has been made on that.

Shit-stirrers trying to fracture the left run around screaming OBAMA SELLS OUT ABORTION RIGHTS; REVERSES CONTRACEPTION REQUIREMENT, FELLATES PRO-LIFERS.

[Edweird]

18. Unless your 'shit stirrer' comment was self-referential you're going to have to show me

where people are "screaming OBAMA SELLS OUT ABORTION RIGHTS; REVERSES CONTRACEPTION REQUIREMENT, FELLATES PRO-LIFERS." I don't see that in this thread (other than YOU!). All I see is disappointment that reproductive rights are not a *GIVEN* as they should be with a Dem president.

From where I sit the article is dead on.

I'm not sure you and I see eye-to-eye on who 'the Left' is. One of us is mistaken.

[woo me with science]

19. The screaming in all caps is in your post, Wraith,

not so much elsewhere in the thread.

And the namecalling, again.

[muriel_volestrangler]

24. Looks like a decision was made to me:

** Group health plans sponsored by certain religious employers, and group health insurance coverage in connection with such plans, are exempt from the requirement to cover contraceptive services. A religious employer is one that: (1) has the inculcation of religious values as its purpose; (2) primarily employs persons who share its religious tenets; (3) primarily serves persons who share its religious tenets; and (4) is a non-profit organization under Internal Revenue Code section 6033(a)(1) and section 6033(a)(3)(A)(i) or (iii). 45 C.F.R. §147.130(a)(1)(iv)(B). See the Federal Register Notice: Group Health Plans and Health
Insurance Issuers Relating to Coverage of Preventive Services Under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PDF - 201 KB)

http://www.hrsa.gov/womensguidelines/#footnote2

That was issued at the start of August. Carney claims Obama is thinking about changing this to include any religious-run organisation, no matter the make-up of its purpose, employees or customers.

This has been in the news before the question was asked; there's no way Carney just 'misspoke'. Obama is considering the request from the Catholic bishops to allow their hospitals to withhold contraception. The Kos article is justified.

[Autumn]

27. Thank you for that link,

sounds like they are thinking of giving more exemptions.

[woo me with science]

33. Thank you for the link. nt

[Autumn]

14. No reason for you to freak out Wraith.

No one has crapped on any of your elected officials. Chill out. So Carney either fucked up or there is still some discussion about appeasing the nuts.:shrug: Carney was wrong. Obama made the decision already.

[TheWraith]

16. I'm getting very tired of the shit-stirrers trying to screw with the left.

Believe me, if you don't think that there is an active, well financed effort to spread misleading shit around "left wing" media in order to try and suppress support for Democrats, you are underestimating the Republican propaganda machine.

[Autumn]

20. Do you not get what Carney said was wrong?

Obama made the decision requiring all new insurance plans to cover birth control and emergency contraception by 2013 and announced it in August. If it's being discussed again, that's a problem. No one is stirring shit. It's a bit of news and people are discussing it. IMO if Jake Tapper asked the question because he has heard concerns about it, there's good reason to discuss it.

[Edweird]

31. Then maybe you should stop?

[inna]

22. thank you.

[DaveJ]

17. Has any other President required insurance companies to cover the pill?

If not, then I do not understand why anyone should be so flabbergasted. Or maybe they have, I don't know, serious question.

[Edweird]

21. Post #20 covers it.

[Bluenorthwest]

36. Any other President required every citizen purchase insurance?

See that makes a difference, don't you think?

[woo me with science]

25. And the betrayals keep coming... nt

[ProSense]

32. Which

"And the betrayals keep coming... "

..."betrayals"? The fact the President introduced new rules or Carney's comments?

The problem is, the decision has already been made. In August, the administration announced new rules requiring all new insurance plans to cover birth control and emergency contraception by 2013. At an early October fundraiser in St. Louis, President Obama himself hailed the rule. And when President Obama appeared before the U.N. in September, the administration touted the contraception rule as an example of America's commitment to women. So when Carney says "this decision has not yet been made," he's wrong. It has been made—and by reopening it, President Obama is succumbing to pressure from anti-choice groups.

[woo me with science]

34. Too many to list, ....but you knew that.

Otherwise you wouldn't have to work nearly as hard.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=439&topic_id=2400260&mesg_id=2400903

[ProSense]

35. So

the rule at your link is the betrayal?

[kenny blankenship]

39. Ah, so this is what they meant by "they'll fix it later."

[Dawson Leery]

42. Tax churches.

[Doctor_J]

44. There don't seem to be any issues on which he won't give in

You wuld think the comical array of Republican "contenders" would give him the freedom to reach out a little and do the right things. Unless he's really is a right-wing conservative, in which case this sort of makes sense.

[woo me with science]

45. I think it's time to stop calling it "giving in."

He has been very consistent in his embrace of corporate/Republican policies.