Boehner Vows to Block Abortifacient Mandate, Somehow

He doesn't say how. I'm not sure he has a plan. But he says he'll find a plan.

n a rare speech on the House floor, Mr. Boehner, Ohio Republican, said the rule is “an unambiguous attack on religious freedom” and said the House's Energy and Commerce Committee will write a bill that would overturn the rule — if Mr. Obama doesn’t rescind it himself first.

“If the president does not reverse the department’s attack on religious freedom, then the Congress, acting on behalf of the American people and the Constitution we are sworn to uphold and defend, must,” Mr. Boehner said.

Jay Carney says whatever compromise is fashioned must still wind up covering the abortifacients and birth control. Which is, you know, not a compromise.

The new rules gave a one-year grace period to religiously-affiliated groups to comply, and White House advisers said they will use that time to try to find an accommodation — though they said they will insist that women receive the coverage somehow.

“There are ways to, I think, help resolve this issue that ensures that we provide that important preventive service, that health care coverage to all women, and that tries — in a way that also tries to allay some of these concerns,” White House press secretary Jay Carney said Tuesday.

By the way, you know what Plan B costs? $20-30 or cheaper.

In order to spare women the costs of having to shell out twenty bucks once or twice a year (and that would be a lot, wouldn't it?), Obama's determined to run roughshod over religious liberties.

And it's not even sparing them the costs, of course. Insurers do not have piles of magic free money. What they pay out must always be a fair amount less than what is paid into them via premiums.

This is just adding an additional cost to premiums, then giving it back (minus administrative costs) to the final client.

It saves no one any money. Women using it are actually just paying for it via their premiums. (Well, women using it are being subsidized by women who have no need for it or refuse to use it; but that's an odd subsidy, isn't it?)

And all for a $20 pill. Something that costs less than a pizza with three toppings.

This is not about money. This is about imposing a Preferred, State-Endorsed Culture on people from the top down.

It's not about saving the end-user that $20 (which is not saved at all, but simply paid in premiums).

It's about forcing the insurer to compromise his own beliefs. It's about co-opting him. It's about using state coercion to pummel him down into conformity.

How many times could the average sexually-active woman need this over the course of a year? Four, five times at most?

Here's a fat $60 er year raise, partially deferred (on the employer's end) by not having to pay for a birth control/abortifacient rider in insurance policies.

You're now self-insuring. You're welcome.

posted by Ace at 06:45 PM

| Access Comments