The contraception fight is expanding far beyond Washington, with several states eyeing ways of blocking the new Obama administration rule requiring most insurers cover contraception, or considering rolling back rules that the states themselves already had on the books.
The combination of a hot-button social issue and the calendar for state implementation of the health care reform law’s fine print virtually guarantees the fight will continue for months. Even if the debate subsides in Washington, voters may hear about it in their states for some time to come.
So they’re going into a major election year fighting to cut back on insurance coverage for contraception, because it offends Catholic bishops?
New Hampshire, for instance, is one of 28 states that already have a contraception coverage mandate similar to the new federal rule — but Republican lawmakers there are considering repealing it.
“We didn’t know it was there,†Speaker William O’Brien told the Nashua Telegraph last week. “We don’t want it there.â€
You’d think if the mandate was so all-fired oppressive, someone would have complained.
Lawmakers in several of these states — including Missouri, Louisiana and Oklahoma — have already banned coverage for abortion in plans sold under health insurance exchanges.
But the health care law gave states that flexibility on abortion, explicitly. The contraception picture is more complicated. What, for instance, happens if a legislature prohibits insurers from covering the full range of contraceptives in policies sold through an exchange — but federal rules require it?
Such an approach could grow out of the so-called personhood bills, which give embryos legal rights from the moment of conception, pending in several states that could potentially outlaw emergency contraception because it can prevent implantation of fertilized eggs.
That could force a politically difficult problem for the Obama administration.
A difficult problem for the Obama Administration? The damnfool personhood thing couldn’t even pass in Mississippi, once people understood that it might outlaw some forms of birth control. Do Republicans really want to be the anti-birth control party? Is that not political suicide?
It’s not political suicide if they expect the election to be fixed, but need cover for electoral fraud.
This is such a bad move for the Repugs. I think I have mentioned that I am one of your elderly blog readers; and, I am very tired. I have believed that I had no more battles in me and have wanted to leave the battles to the youth who will be impacted the most. However, I am so angry about this beating up of women figuratively, I may get back into the saddle again. This issue may even cause our past feminist leaders to rise out their graves to help out. The Repugs talk about religious freedom (which is really a red herring). But, it is NOT religious freedom when only one religion–the Roman Catholic church–is doing the complaining. It is NOT religious freedom when that one church is trying to shove its religions dogma down my throat. This is just one more skirmish in the War on Women. If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, it is a duck. I personally think this is the epitome of assininity by the Repugs. We need to take names and make them pay with the loss of their jobs.
This is playing fine on the far right. The lunatics think freedom of religion can be stretched to allow employers to reject ANY Health Care mandates on ‘moral’ grounds. (Not only are corporations people, they are exceedingly moral corporate persons.) Obama conceded on the Hyde Amendment when drafting AHC no federal funds for abortion – so for the right to challenge on ‘moral’ grounds they are going after contraception, which is VERY thin ice for elephants.
What could bite them on the butt is that the driving force behind restricting abortion is ALSO the driving force behind contraceptive prohibition. For most voters who find abortion distasteful (I am one of those) the logical alternatives are education and contraception. For a bunch of folks, this debate will be a huge WTF moment with a backlash. The questions are – how big? and where?, since this could extend from DC all the way to state elections.
We need an internal “like” button, Bonnie. I feel the same as you, as deeply.
They’ve swallowed their own BS flavored Kool Aid.
We all know about the 27%ers – and we know they’ll jump-off any bridge they’re told to jump off of.
But you’re got to wonder what they’re thinking when it comes to the soccer-moms and six-pack dads they worked so hard to appeal to in the 2000-2008 elections?
“We’re all Catholics now!” may not appeal to them and much as “Compassionate Conservatism.”
And ‘What are they thinking?’ is a fair question, until you remember how little thinking is actually going on with Conservatives and Republicans. They don’t “think” anymore – they “feel.”
And just because they feel that America wants to return to the halcyon days of the 1950’s, when “Amos and Andy,” and Sammy Davis Junior, were the only black faces you saw on TV; and that in thinking back to the days of “Father Knows Best,” they forget that the father, Danny Thomas, wasn’t a Priest. And that maybe Ward picked-up some “Trojans” on the way home, and seeing the boys were out playing, showed them to June and she smiled before she called Wally and “The Beaver” in, and served them all the dinner she made while wearing her pearls. And when, the next morning, she says, “Ward, you were a little rough on the beaver last night,” she won’t be talking about her son.
Not every State is a red one. And not every District is a red one. Sure, those 27% are scattered all around the country, and even NY City and State have their share, but they’re still only 27% – and I think a lot of people will look at them jumping off the bridge and say, “The Hell with that! We can still get “The Pill” and rubbers without having to go on the black market. Let’s go home and make love, not political war.”
So, have at it, Conservatives. It’s your funeral. If I had money, I’d be donating to the Santorum campaign – just for the pure shits and giggles of it. JFK won in 1960 by saying he won’t be going to the Catholic Church for advice. And Santorum is saying in 2012 that he will be looking to The Pope, Cardinals, and Bishops, for advice on how to run this country.
If he can sell that, he’ll deserve to win, and we deserve to lose – because a nation THAT stupid, SHOULD perish from this Earth.
Added to the education cuts, the union busting, and the random state cut backs, the GOP is going all out to garner the love and affection of the voters. Just ask Scott Walker (WI) about that.
We haven’t hit any bans on birth control here in WI that I’m aware of, but the state senate did pass yesterday a repeal of the ‘Equal Pay Act’. That’s simply the law that tries to have women make the same as men in similar professions. They repealed that. And they think there’s widespread support for that? Ok, with a recall election looming in the near future, you want to do stuff to piss off a little more than half of the electorate. Just stunning.
Some people just love to fight. They’ll keep pushing our buttons until they get a war.
I have long been baffled at those who want to live like that. They let us enjoy our peace for a while, but can’t enjoy it themselves. Emotion trumps logic, so we get the strife.
I’m tired too, but will fight back as I can. It’s wonderful to see public shame and attention stop the hands of those in power. We are finally at that point of people power, but this is where the vigilance comes in.
bckeyblue,
Look on the bright side – what they’re doing in WI may be abusive, but it’s not abusive AND intrusive, like the “D*ck’s for D*ldo’s” legislators in VA.
Some sort of insane rage against women seems to have spread amongst Conservatives like an Ebola virus.
Even some Conservative women have to be concerned. When they go to vote, they may pull the lever, or fill in the circle, for Democrats, unbeknownst to their worse halves.
What will do they try to do if that happens, try to pass “Ladies, Let Your Husband Cast Your Vote Act?”
“Some sort of insane rage against women seems to have spread amongst Conservatives like an Ebola virus.”
It was always there, Mr. Gulag. That is why they are Conservatives.
Lynne,
You’re so right!
It’s just that they were better off at masking it. And their open racism and xenophobia, too. They’ve never tried to be subtle about their homophobia.
And why is it that, even though they’re like rabid, howling-at-the-moon mad dogs, I still fear that the American voters won’t see that, and put them in power again soon?
We are an endlessly stupid and gullible people.
CUND Gulag – I think you hit the nail on the head when you said they WERE masking it.
Past Tense – Before Now – The mask is OFF and the open opposition to women’s rights is out there in the open.
Freedom of religion doesn’t apply to what they are trying and the attempt to twist the first amendment to ‘cover it’ looks like a cat trying to ‘cover it’ on a tile floor. Not only can you smell it you can see it, too.
The political suicide question has been much on my mind, since the Republicans’ basic strategy in this election does seem to be to tell everyone who isn’t a wealthy, straight, white male to drop dead.
It goes beyond that, actually. I’m a straight white male myself (though not particularly wealthy), but the Republicans have made it clear that they hate me too, for any number of reasons. I live in California, for example, I wanted the public option, and I’m not even Christian.
As paradoctor pointed out, hating on a majority of the electorate is not a viable campaign strategy unless you can stop all the people you hate from voting.
The ‘stand’ of the Catholic Church on contraceptives is interesting. It’s not that the church is against preventing pregnancy, it’s that the church is against a woman ingesting into her body any ‘foreign’ object meant to prevent pregnancy. Abstinence is okay, because it’s ‘natural’. The rhythm method is okay for the same reason. (The church has never mentioned/dealt with males putting ‘foreign’ objects on their ______to prevent pregnancy, which is interesting in itself.)
I had a, what turned out to be, one-way conversation with a priest friend years ago suggesting that there are times when abstinence is not ‘normal’ and times when the rhythm method (excuse me while I check my calendar) isn’t ‘normal.’ I should have assumed that my argument would be moot given that I was talking to a celibate.
Completely offtopic – c u n d gulag, I just parsed your name. Is there a particular title you prefer because you know damn well no one’s typing that out every time 🙂 ?
(I ask primarily because I prefer to be referred to as “‘weirdo” if my name is to be shortened, rather than “longhair(ed)”. I sometimes joke that the former has a more person-place-or-thing-ness to it, rather than the more adjectival quality of the latter. Don’t ask me why I care – or why I picked such a long nom de blog.)
“gulag’s” fine, LHW.
Glad you care enough to ask! 🙂
Btw – my moniker is due to “Baby Doc” Bush, and the things that were going on from 9/11 afterwards.
And, if Republicans win in 2012, or 2016, or 2020, etc., I think it’s still appropriate! :’-(