Seriously, GOP? Really?

[Dinner]

The White House is apparently back tracking which is weird since over 90% of women support this as well as a majority of men. Obama just fundementally lacks balls.

[Uncle Sparky]

With a religious hospital? Yes, we'd be unallowed due to the DOL's reading of the separation of church and state.

So... would they convene a synod? If a priest kiddiefiddles, can the state get involved? This strikes me as archaic.

[Imran Siddiqui]

I believe you are confusing the Department of Labor's jurisdiction over health plans with the state or federal government being able to prosecute crimes under criminal law.

[DinoDoc]

Imran it seems clear that the policy you are describing in about to change.

[Ogie Oglethorpe]

The White House is apparently back tracking which is weird since over 90% of women support this as well as a majority of men. Obama just fundementally lacks balls.

'

Does this mean Obama is not one of the 90%?

[Imran Siddiqui]

Imran it seems clear that the policy you are describing in about to change.

We'll see. This is HHS stuff. They have to convince the DOL. This is actually harder than it sounds (working in government, it is almost like each agency is its own state the federal union of the US government).

[giblets]

'

Does this mean Obama is not one of the 90%?

Obama is not among the 90% of women, no.

[DinoDoc]

Since when was the USCCB a "progressive" group?

The Catholic Health Association and the NETWORK social justice lobby are progressive Catholic groups however.

Kaine and Casey are both waging Senate election bids this year, as I'm sure you're aware.

That was the point of citing them among others. If it wasn't politically uncomfortable why would they be coming out against it rather than walking in lockstep with their party if it is as costless as you allege.

[Elok]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-16985757

If I'm reading this correctly, insurance companies will have to pay for the contraception themselves if the employer objects. Which doesn't seem fair to them, but luckily for all others concerned, nobody in America has any sympathy whatever for health insurance companies. They could generate sufficient lobbying pressure to kill this, I think, but they might decide to go along for PR purposes if the projected costs are low enough. If that doesn't happen, Plan C: employees' condoms and pills will be paid for by Philip Morris and the executive board of NAMBLA.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Not sure why this wasn't the plan in the first place. I mean it makes everyone happy except insurance companies.

[The Mad Monk]

You put out the least reasaonable option first. Politics 101.

Now the repsonse is , "it's only insurance companies" instead of, "why is he dictating required coverage to insurance companies"?

[Elok]

Well, it is kind of grotesquely funny in its unfairness.

"Wait, why are we required to eat healthcare costs based on somebody else's decision? Doesn't this mean a number of penny-pinching employers are very likely to discover they're Catholic in the near future?"

"Yes, but nobody likes you, so I don't give a damn. At least until the election's over."

Remains to be seen how many people on both sides will still despise the president for one or more of the positions he's taken, a la Susan B Komen.

[Ogie Oglethorpe]

Remains to be seen how many people on both sides will still despise the president for one or more of the positions he's taken, a la Susan B Komen.

And who said he is a devisive President.

[Elok]

'Course, this is going to raise somebody's health insurance premiums. I don't think they can get away with just charging Catholic employers extra to make up the difference, so in all likelihood, *everybody* will be paying, in a very small way, for Catholic university employees' birth control.

...our country is really screwy.

EDIT: This is probably obvious to everybody else here who's not as dumb about money matters as I am, but there's really no workable solution here.

Insurance company eats costs entirely? Not gonna happen.
Employee pays more for birth control? Defeats the point of free contraceptives, no?
Only Catholic employers pay more? That's exactly what Obama was trying to shut up in the first place, and I don't think anybody's going to fall for such a dodge.
All employers/all employees pay more for Catholics' employees? That's going to raise a whole new stink, leaving out the perverse incentive to "go Catholic" and offload some insurance costs on the general public.

Now, after some digging I've found arguments to the effect that savings from avoided pregnancy costs, etc. make subsidized contraceptives ultimately cost-neutral for insurance companies. I don't know if that's true, but if that were sufficient reason to get them to absorb condom costs this whole argument would be moot.

[Dinner]

http://www.cnn.com/2012/02/10/politics/contraception-controversy/index.html?hpt=hp_t2

Well, it's official, Obama has once again caved even though he had the support of the majority of the country's population including virtually every woman in the country. The man is a wuss.