To soon to tell, but if you think so feel free to demand a correction from them.
Joel Send a noteboard - 11/02/2012 03:12:40 AM
See the WaPo article below.
And here’s how it works after the compromise: “Our policy is saying that the Catholic hospital doesn’t want to cover contraceptives, and they don’t include that in their policy. It also says that Aetna needs to provide contraceptive services for free to workers in the plan. Aetna sets the premium, but it cannot be higher than it would have been without birth control. The premium does not include contraception.”
And, in the end, that leaves Aetna with the bill. “There is a sort of bank account,” says the official, “and Aetna is sucking it up.”
And, in the end, that leaves Aetna with the bill. “There is a sort of bank account,” says the official, “and Aetna is sucking it up.”
That sounds good, but the White House says a lot of things; in 2008 Obama said Democrats should nominate him instead of Hillary because his healthcare plan did not carry a public mandate and hers did.
"Aetna sets the premium, but it cannot be higher than it would have been without birth control." Just how are they verifying that? Remember, these are the same people who proudly declared health insurance available to everyone because they removed insurer freedom to deny coverage—WITHOUT establishing the very kind of price restrictions mentioned here, thereby allowing insurers to price people out of the market rather than denying them coverage outright. One of the healthcare "reforms" most critical failings is the near total absence of anything to slow, let alone halt or reverse, the growth in prices. Since they have done a complete 180° on this issue in just 48 hours, I will not believe that statement any more than I believed the last one until they demonstrate its veracity. Talk is cheap; it almost has to be with Obamas policies, because there is nothing to them BUT talk.
If you don't want to believe them, that's your prerogative. You still have no factual basis to claim that people will have to pay for coverage. The entire point of the preventive care rule is that it eliminates copays; it seems to me that they are pretty dedicated to making sure that applies evenly.
What you see as a complete 180, others see as savvy political maneuvering. (See article below.)
My factual basis for believing people will have to pay for the coverage is, as already stated 1) Obamas healthcare "reform" is almost completely devoid of cost oversight, one of its biggest flaws and thus one of the biggest liberal criticisms, and 2) Obama has a history of reversing himself, on healthcare in particular and on this issue specifically. So when Obama says, "we will do x, and the law with almost no provisions to enforce it will guarantee it," I believe it about as much as I did when he said it two days ago. Maybe I am more wrong now than two days ago; I hope so, because my only error then was in overestimating how long it would take him to cave just as I said he would. It is what he does. Note Rolands response immediately below yours: Aetna MAY comply to save money, but if they do not Obama has no means to force them. He is pretty much entirely dependent on their voluntary compliance. Again, that is the whole problem with his healthcare "reform:" It relies on those who got rich destroying the healthcare system to voluntarily repair it.
Oh, and I pretty much already knew "what women really think" about this, but even the ones who use contraception do not all agree the government should force churches whose doctrine forbids it to buy it for employees. I think Obama already has the strict pro choice vote locked up (though Romney was a NARAL donor back when he was running for governor of a liberal state. ) I also think the number of religious Americans greatly outnumber the strict pro choice ones, and a lot of the former were already uneasy about Dems in general and Obama in particular. This did not help with anyone on the fence.
Honorbound and honored to be Bonded to Mahtaliel Sedai
Last First in wotmania Chat
Slightly better than chocolate.
Love still can't be coerced.
Please Don't Eat the Newbies!
LoL. Be well, RAFOlk.
Last First in wotmania Chat
Slightly better than chocolate.
Love still can't be coerced.
Please Don't Eat the Newbies!
LoL. Be well, RAFOlk.
This message last edited by Joel on 11/02/2012 at 04:02:26 AM
Democrats bailing on Obama - War against the Catholic Church heats up
09/02/2012 04:03:35 AM
- 1680 Views
This is not a war on Catholics, it is Obama being an idiot again.
09/02/2012 04:52:01 AM
- 707 Views
For someone who used to be a Con Law professor
10/02/2012 08:23:34 PM
- 591 Views
In general, I disagree with that view, but not in this particular case.
11/02/2012 02:02:42 AM
- 822 Views
Also, kudos for linking to a source, and a fairly non-partisan one as well.
09/02/2012 01:33:07 PM
- 788 Views
I am a non-partisan guy, so I only use unbiased sources! *NM*
09/02/2012 04:02:50 PM
- 565 Views
Wanting both parties to be hit by a bus does not make one non-partisan.
09/02/2012 10:05:28 PM
- 656 Views
You lost all credibility in the first line of your post.
09/02/2012 04:49:23 PM
- 725 Views
You actually think any of us has 'credibility' anymore in regards to neutrality? *NM*
09/02/2012 06:46:13 PM
- 464 Views
It's one thing to have a bias.
09/02/2012 07:28:51 PM
- 764 Views
Wow, talk about making a supernova out of a couple hydrogen atoms.
09/02/2012 08:41:44 PM
- 562 Views
The Catholic Church wants to eliminate the birth control coverage requirement entirely.
10/02/2012 12:24:01 AM
- 863 Views
Sounds like they just do not want Catholics directly financing; great argument for public healthcare
10/02/2012 02:27:36 AM
- 797 Views
I'm somewhat suprised that Obama blundered this badly.
10/02/2012 01:40:14 AM
- 1590 Views
Why? Have you not been paying attention?
10/02/2012 02:03:43 AM
- 2024 Views
If I am not satisfied with Romney then my Plan B is to not vote.
10/02/2012 10:58:34 PM
- 2033 Views
How does that help anything? Except Romneys election chances, of course.
11/02/2012 01:08:22 AM
- 1875 Views
No everynametaken this is not unconsitutional according to the first ammendment
11/02/2012 12:14:29 AM
- 1901 Views
Obama doing this actually impresses me to no end.
10/02/2012 02:21:10 AM
- 2112 Views
He is already preparing to cave.
10/02/2012 02:42:32 AM
- 2104 Views
Why are you even replying to me? What you said has little meaning to what I said.
10/02/2012 03:33:27 AM
- 1880 Views
Aaaaand you can put your hat back on now: Obama has already caved.
10/02/2012 04:04:30 PM
- 2116 Views
Yup, the cave already happened.....you could have set your watch to this! *NM*
10/02/2012 05:00:02 PM
- 1651 Views
Actually, no, I could not; I expected it to take another week or two.
11/02/2012 01:27:31 AM
- 2016 Views
No, you don't have to buy it from insurers. You get it for free, just like everyone else will. *NM*
10/02/2012 09:55:53 PM
- 1771 Views
"The employees can then buy the coverage directly from an insurer."
11/02/2012 01:25:52 AM
- 2087 Views
Then that article is wrong.
11/02/2012 01:43:40 AM
- 2044 Views
Two days ago the White House said it would not back down from requiring school/hospital compliance.
11/02/2012 01:57:50 AM
- 2012 Views
So in summary... the article you posted was wrong.
11/02/2012 02:18:00 AM
- 1578 Views
To soon to tell, but if you think so feel free to demand a correction from them.
11/02/2012 03:12:40 AM
- 812 Views
Losing the exchanges is a pretty big loss
11/02/2012 03:30:15 AM
- 727 Views
So they refuse to cover it for the next two years, then do an about face in 2014.
11/02/2012 03:57:53 AM
- 876 Views
If Aetna does not provide the free contraception as part of the compromise
11/02/2012 02:46:14 AM
- 604 Views
Yeah, I saw that; if Aetna does not do as Obama says by 2014 they lose out on free profits then.
11/02/2012 03:13:36 AM
- 668 Views
So Jehovah Witness employers should not have to pay for blood transfusions?
10/02/2012 03:57:47 AM
- 676 Views
Not if it conflicts with their religious beliefs.
10/02/2012 04:20:32 PM
- 828 Views
Money is not the same as speech!
10/02/2012 07:20:56 PM
- 582 Views
And actions are different from both—until others are expected to pay for ones actions.
11/02/2012 12:53:40 AM
- 823 Views
No it isn't Joel, empirically you are dead wrong
10/02/2012 11:24:19 PM
- 810 Views
I do not see how requiring private entities do it instead of the feds is "least restrictive way."
11/02/2012 12:53:22 AM
- 804 Views
Catholic Charities of Sacramento Inc. v. Superior Court
11/02/2012 01:21:46 AM
- 743 Views
"the Court found that it wasn't a religious organization, it was just a non-profit corporation."
11/02/2012 01:36:33 AM
- 593 Views
One last point
10/02/2012 11:35:25 PM
- 905 Views
The federal government forcing private groups to facilitate without committing sin also infringes.
11/02/2012 01:03:30 AM
- 682 Views
You argument does not make sense
11/02/2012 01:26:57 AM
- 572 Views
It was an analogy, not an equivalency.
11/02/2012 01:48:14 AM
- 693 Views
Lets enhance your analogy making it closer to reality
11/02/2012 02:19:41 AM
- 782 Views
Why could I not buy it with my own money?
11/02/2012 03:46:33 AM
- 754 Views
Re: Why could I not buy it with my own money?
11/02/2012 04:17:17 AM
- 1998 Views
In other words, I could.
11/02/2012 04:21:05 AM
- 492 Views
You believe it can't help people since it is not single payer? *NM*
11/02/2012 04:31:13 AM
- 474 Views
Since you answered this in your other response I will just adress it there. *MN*
11/02/2012 05:59:37 AM
- 769 Views
Some more points
11/02/2012 02:30:27 AM
- 830 Views
Sex is not a necessity either.
11/02/2012 03:56:51 AM
- 751 Views
LMAO due to Obama's compromise (the word compromise should have a in it )
11/02/2012 12:12:57 AM
- 794 Views
Obama just got two weeks of being portrayed as "anti-church" to the point even Dems complained.
11/02/2012 02:00:28 AM
- 722 Views
The polls disagree with you.
11/02/2012 02:32:59 AM
- 680 Views
It is an interesting article, but not for the polls.
11/02/2012 04:18:17 AM
- 726 Views
I wouldn't put too much into that poll anyway
11/02/2012 05:37:05 AM
- 855 Views
Frankly, I hope Obamacare DOES die, just not because of the public mandate.
11/02/2012 07:18:04 AM
- 732 Views
I haven't really heard about it outside of this post, so the negative exposure can't be too bad.
11/02/2012 05:56:58 PM
- 561 Views
There seems to be plenty of Hell raising over it, but you are in the States and I am not.
11/02/2012 07:55:51 PM
- 585 Views
I don't think it's quite the laughing matter you think it is
11/02/2012 12:31:23 PM
- 732 Views
Understood.
11/02/2012 07:51:14 PM
- 715 Views
mmm...
11/02/2012 08:20:26 PM
- 743 Views
The man talked about during the campaign was the one elected with a mandate.
12/02/2012 02:28:15 AM
- 890 Views
I think Obama (for once) was far more clever you give him credit for...
15/02/2012 05:11:10 PM
- 944 Views
Surrendering on liberal issues then blaming Republicans is not just Obamas strategy, but his POLICY.
15/02/2012 07:23:04 PM
- 793 Views