Experts Say Iran Attack Is Irrational, Yet Hawks Are Winning the Debate. [Peter Beinart | The Daily Beast] - From the chairman of the Joint Chiefs to the head of Mossad, the experts are speaking out against attacking Iran over its nuclear program, but hawks like the GOP presidential candidates are drowning out the warnings.
Julie Rovner writes on the NPR Health Blog:
There’s been no let-up in the debate about the Obama administration’s rule requiring most employers to provide prescription birth control to their workers without additional cost.
Here’s the rub: The only truly novel part of the plan is the “no cost” bit.
The rule would mean, for the first time, that women won’t have to pay a deductible or co-payment to get prescription contraceptives.
In fact, she notes, employers have for the most part been required to provide contraceptive coverage as part of their health plans since December of 2000.
Read More: Rules Requiring Contraceptive Coverage Have Been In Force For Years : Shots – Health Blog : NPR.
So, can someone please explain to me how providing coverage with a deductible or co-pay doesn’t violate “conscience” but providing it without a deductible and co-pay does?
For those who don’t mind profanity-laden political analysis:
Rick Santorum Primary Victories – Rick the Dick’s Delegate-Deprived Embrace by the Base. [Charles Pierce | Esquire] - Last night, with no delegates to their national convention on the line, and with the attention of the country largely elsewhere, the Republican base arose in Missouri, and in Minnesota, and in Colorado, and it delivered one unmistakably clear message to the party, and to the nation at large.
The Jane Addams Hull House Association, one of the largest non-profit social service organizations in Chicago, abruptly shut down on Friday, January 27th.
Shane Feratu and Scott Martin (for the website of the Fourth International) write:
Millionaires and billionaires abound in the Chicago region, but not even a few million could be raised to ensure an orderly closure of a historic charitable institution, let alone sufficient funds to sustain it. The era when the bourgeoisie and its institutions sought to veil social problems through reform has passed into one of austerity, when social spending is seen as a drain on the wallets of the wealthy and will no longer be tolerated.
Read More: Chicago’s Hull House closes after 120 years of service. [WSWS]
January deficit fell sharply to $27 billion: CBO. [Reuters] - The budget deficit shrank by nearly half in January compared to a year earlier as tax collections from individuals rose and outlays fell, the Congressional Budget Office said on Tuesday. The CBO said it expects the Treasury Department to report a $27 billion deficit for January, versus a $50 billion deficit in January 2011. The January budget gap will bring the total deficit for the first four months of fiscal 2012 to $349 billion, a decrease of about $70 billion from the same period of fiscal 2011.
‘Secret money’ is funding more election ads. [Dan Eggen | The Washington Post] - More than a third of the advertising tied to the presidential race has been funded by nonprofit groups that will never have to reveal their donors, suggesting that a significant portion of the 2012 elections will be wrapped in a vast cloak of secrecy. The bulk of the secret money spent so far has come from conservative groups seeking to propel a Republican into the White House, advertising data shows. Read more.
At Mass this past weekend, most Roman Catholics in the United States heard sermons or were read letters from their Bishops railing against a recent decision by the Department of Health and Human Services concerning implementation of health care reform. My own Bishop, Thomas John Paprocki of the Diocese of Springfield in Illinois, said in his letter that President Obama was “being either dishonest or delusional or he is incompetent.” He also referred to Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius as a “pro-abortion Catholic.” This rhetoric was apparently typical, as Bishops across the nation characterized the HHS decision as nothing less than an attack on religious liberty.
It being the (sad) case that a dedication to the facts has been lacking in some similar communications from the Church hierarchy in the past, I felt it necessary to investigate the matter myself. It has been difficult to parse, but here is what I’ve learned.
The controversy centers on which preventive services for women will be mandated for insurance plans under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act which was passed into law by Congress in 2010. The law gave HHS broad discretion to determine which services would receive required coverage.
In the Summer of 2011, HHS announced rules requiring all new private health plans to cover preventive services such as mammograms, colonoscopies, blood pressure checks, and childhood immunizations without charging a copayment, deductible or coinsurance. In the Interim Rule announced by HHS in August of 2011, “FDA-approved contraception methods and contraceptive counseling” was added to the list of required preventive services. “Religious institutions” were given an exemption from the requirement.
“The administration also released an amendment to the prevention regulation that allows religious institutions that offer insurance to their employees the choice of whether or not to cover contraception services. This regulation is modeled on the most common accommodation for churches available in the majority of the 28 states that already require insurance companies to cover contraception.”
- HHS Press Release, August 1st, 2011
So churches would be exempt from the provision, and could legally exclude such services from their employee health plans.
The problem, as I understand it, is that the exemption does not apply to organizations such as hospitals, schools, universities and charitable groups that are affiliated with churches, but only to the churches themselves. The Bishops and other religious groups were in conversation with the Obama Administration during the period of comment for the rules, advocating for a broader exemption. On January 20th, Secretary Sebelius announced that the final rule will allow the affiliated institutions an additional year (until August 1st, 2013) to comply with the law, but will not exempt them from the provision.
Whether this constitutes an attack on religious liberty (or violates First Amendment protections) I do not know. I’m still trying to understand the implications more clearly, and would welcome pointers to more information, commentary and discussions. Clearly at issue is the tension between the rights of faith-based institutions to practice and defend their beliefs, and the rights of individuals and our society to be free from imposition of those beliefs.
I’ll be posting more here as I give the matter additional study and prayerful consideration.
A Few Links
E.J. Dionne’s Analysis (RealClearPolitics, 24 November 2011)
Obama’s Catholic Friends and Enemies. [RealClearPolitics] - Any time the Obama administration touches issues related to the Roman Catholic Church, it seems to get itself caught in a rhetorical and moral crossfire that leaves all involved wounded and angry. This is what’s happening in the battle over how contraception should be covered under the new health care law.
Here are the top donors of the 2012 election cycle thus far to Barack Obama, Mitt Romney and Newt Gingrich. Click on any of the lists for more information.
| Obama | Romney | Gingrich |
 |
 |
 |
In case you’re interested, here are links to information for Ron Paul and for Rick Santorum.
The Unholy Alliance: Monsanto, Dupont & Obama. [Ronnie Cummins | The Huffington Post] - On the campaign trail, President Obama affirms that agribusiness cannot be trusted with the policy and regulatory powers of government, but in office, he’s let Monsanto, Dupont and the other pesticide and genetic engineering companies know they’ll have plenty of friends and supporters within his administration.
Billy Wharton peels back the layers to reveal the essence of Ron Paul: an ideology that would only make the problem worse.
The Misadventure of Ron Paul. [Socialist WebZine] - Forget the Fed. Leave aside all the slogans about “living within our means” and “punishing generations with debt” for a moment. Ron Paul is the most pro-corporate politician in the Presidential race.
Remarks by the President in State of the Union Address. [The White House] - “Think about the America within our reach: A country that leads the world in educating its people. An America that attracts a new generation of high-tech manufacturing and high-paying jobs. A future where we’re in control of our own energy, and our security and prosperity aren’t so tied to unstable parts of the world. An economy built to last, where hard work pays off, and responsibility is rewarded.”
Full text is here.
“We have to have a president who understands how to get an economy going again. He [Obama] does not. He plays 90 rounds of golf when you have 25 million people out of work. He says gasoline prices doubled during his presidency. He says don’t build a Keystone pipeline.”
- Mitt Romney, Florida Debate, 23 January 2012
I am utterly amazed that this sort of argument in favor of Keystone XL goes unchallenged. The fact is that the project would likely increase our gasoline prices. The oil that would be produced from the project would be exported, because that’s where the money is to be made. Take a look at this from a December 31st USA Today report, noting that fuel is now the largest U.S. export, and that we are now a net fuel exporter.
There’s at least one domestic downside to America’s growing role as a fuel exporter. Experts say the trend helps explain why U.S. motorists are paying more for gasoline. The more fuel that’s sent overseas, the less of a supply cushion there is at home.
Keystone XL is not expected to lower gasoline prices in the United States, nor would it help us move toward “energy independence.” It would, however, help to increase the profits of Big Oil while despoiling environmentally fragile areas and contributing to global warming.
The question remains whether Rmoney is ignorant, cynical or just a big fat liar.
Congress Tosses PIPA and SOPA Antipiracy Bills. [WSJ.com] – Leaders of the Internet movement that turned little-noticed antipiracy legislation into a national cause proclaimed victory Friday after congressional backers abandoned their bills.
Yesterday this site, along with thousands of others on the Web, went “on strike” to protest the SOPA/PIPA legislation which is making its way through Congress. The legislation is being boosted by the big entertainment companies (Hollywood, the record industry, etc.) as a way to prevent “online piracy” and protect their property, but many believe that there are adequate copyright enforcement methods already available, and that this law would give the government (and individual copyright holders) too much power to censor online content they feel is objectionable.
Yesterday’s action has been called “the largest online protest in history” and it seems to have had some impact. According to Fight for the Future (the folks who run AmericanCensorship.org) there were only five U.S. Senators who had publicly opposed the measure as of last week. As we approach next Monday’s crucial Senate vote, now there are 35. It takes only 41 to block the bill.
We need to keep the heat on. I would urge you to learn more about this important issue, and to call your own Senators in advance of Monday’s session, and to call them again every day until the fight is over.
Use your freedom wisely.
