I Continue To Sniff A New Deal On Contraception Coverage

When is a final rule not a final rule?  When it has been announced by Obama as the final rule in the contraception controversy.  Apparently the "final rules" are anything but, which means there is plenty of time for some revisions and accomodations.

An Incomplete Contraceptive Coverage Compromise

Cary Coglianese | 02/13/12

In Friday's highly publicized announcement, President Obama may have helped contain the political firestorm over the new federal mandate that health plans cover contraceptives. But the embers are still hot.  And legally speaking, nothing has changed. On Friday, the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) issued a final rule that looks just like what it announced on January 20 – the very announcement that set off the recent firestorm.

What's going on?

Speaking to CNN just after the president’s announcement, HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius stated, “We’re pleased to announce that the final rule, which will be published later this afternoon, will include this important balance.” She reiterated that “as of the end of today the rule will be finalized.”

But  the rule HHS finalized on Friday actually put in place nothing like what the president announced. On the contrary, the final rule enacts the very same terms that HHS had announced on January 20th. Churches are exempt from the mandate but the only concession religious nonprofits receive is the promised one-year “enforcement safe haven.”  An accompanying guidance, also released Friday, would make the safe haven contingent on a nonprofit completing a certification and providing written notice to its employees that its health plan provides no coverage for contraceptives. In an explanatory preamble to Friday’s final rule, HHS did state that it plans to “work with stakeholders” on a separate rulemaking that would enact the compromise the President announced and even “to develop policies to achieve the same goals for self-insured group health plans.”

But it is clear that the federal government has not even begun to initiate this new rulemaking; it only “will work with stakeholders to propose and finalize this policy before the end of the temporary enforcement safe harbor.”

So at this point the rules don't exist, most importantly the rules for the self-insured; many Catholic institutions went the self-insurance route to escape state laws in, for example, New York and California.  Whether that ploy will still work will depend, obviously, on what the new rules are.  And those rules are subject to ongoing negotiation.

It ain't over 'til it's over.  And maybe not even then.

Comments

[maryrose]

First! Obama is livid that this religious freedom issue has gotten out of his control. Being a dictator is so hard in 2012.

[Captain Hate]

Seriously maryrose; El JEFe is proving his uselessness at everything.

[JeffC]

yeah ... this guys is a Christian ??? ... I am a lifelong atheist and I would'nt ever consider something so obviously anti-religion ...

Obama came to this party dressed as a moderate Christian ... and after a few drinks we find him dancing on the tables as a leftist atheist ... Who Knew ???

[Jane]

I'm reposting this here as i have no idea where anyone is: It's tax exempt Media Matters preliminary enemy list.

I betcha a buck this is the cause of Rupert Murdoch's woes. He should sue.

[Clarice]

I said it all along--he has boxed himself in--He can offend Catholics or PP and the ill informed women PP and the WH persuaded the Church was trying to take away their right to use contraceptives.

How do you put the naughty genii back in the box? Tell people you were exaggerating when you said that?Can you see Boxer's face if they capitulate to the church? Or PP's President's?

[Appalled]

Realistically, the way for Catholic institutions to avoid this problem is to drop medical coverage, and have employees purchase mandatory insurance on the exchanges. That does not avoid the problem entirely -- it tends to shift the "problem" to the individual -- but it is probably the least bad resolution. Since the "penalty" an employer pays if an employee is not covered by a plan is far less than the cost to insure him, the employer does avoid "paying for" contraception.

Once again, Obamacare shifts the responsibility for healthcare from employers to individuals and the government. While this may be good or bad, dependiong on your political coloration, it does mean the Obamacare cost estimates were probably too low.

[MarkO]

Don't we have the House? Where's the legislation? This this why the presidency is paramount.

[Neo]

@iowahawkblog David Burge
You know where they lacked adequate access to contraceptives? Hawaii, 1961.

[daddy]

A MayBee sighting. She's got the feather over at Althouse.

[Extraneus]

Don't we have the House? Where's the legislation?

We don't even have our own Media Matters.

[Clarice]

"Probably too low"? I've already spoken of the hidden bomb in the law that requires an employer pay a ruinous penalty even when he does provide generous health insurance benefits if a single employee whose household income is under $80k decides to take the govt plan over his employer's. Millions of employees are about to find out they cannot retain private insurance. That means they will certainly get substandard care. Most good doctors here do not accept medicaid or medicare patients because they cannot afford to do so..imagine what dumping millions more into the govt pool will mean.

(The only way out is for someone in the family to go work for one of the exempted employers--say the SeIU.)

[rse]

Heather Mac Donald has an excellent analysis of AA and academic mismatch in the LUN.

And yes I am aware that there is something else going on with AA that is not appreciated but this is a good start.

I really worry about higher ed encouraging too many people to see their gender, race, ethnicity, and sexuality in vocational terms. To see themselves as professionally ______ .

[Appalled]

Clarice:

The penalty is less expensive than paying for the coverage (by about $5,000 per employee). It is arguably ruinous for an employer that does not provide medical benefits, but it is good for an employer that wants to get out of the healthcare business.

[Jane]

Clarice,

You are on fire today!

[jimmyk]

You know where they lacked adequate access to contraceptives? Hawaii, 1961.

Not to nitpick, but from what my parents taught me, I think that would be 1960.

The penalty is less expensive than paying for the coverage (by about $5,000 per employee). It is arguably ruinous for an employer that does not provide medical benefits, but it is good for an employer that wants to get out of the healthcare business.

I'm not following that--what's the difference between "not provide medical benefits" and "get out of the health care business"?

In any case, I'm not sure the analysis is right. Employers compete, and benefit packages are part of compensation. Unless that $5,000 is less than the difference between the cost of insurance with the employer and what the employee can get through the exchanges, it doesn't necessarily make sense for the employer to pay it rather than provide insurance. People deciding whether to take jobs are going to look at the whole package, and unless I'm missing something, $5K per employee is a pretty good inducement for the firm to provide insurance. But I probably have something wrong, because cathyf has said otherwise.

[Appalled]

jimmyk:

The employer provision of health coverage is an accident of history (WWII wage controls did not limit the addition of health coverage) that became an integral part of compensation due to competition for workers. But employers usually are in the health care business because they feel they have to be -- not because they want to be.

Obamacare changes the calculus for employers because failure to provide benefits, for the first time, will nort mean that their employees will go without medical benefits. Which means that a large employer, sick of the expense of medical benefits and increasing premiums, can exit from the system, and still have covered employees. It is true that these employers pay a $2,000/employee penalty for not providing coverage -- but this is cheeper than the $7,000/employee cost of providing the coverage.

What many employers are doing is taking a wait and see approach now -- after all, Obamacare could be repealed or the Supreme Court could kill it. So why get the bad publicity of being the first to exit the healthcare system? But the financial incentive Obamacare provides for bailing from providing medical benefits has been utterly missed by the pundits, who have been focusing on the issue with mandates.

The real world implicvation is that Obamacare is going to be even more of a deficit generator than expected -- should Obama get reelected. I am comfortable with saying that the designers of Obamacare likely know this, even if the Congresscritters who stitched this Frankenstein together do not.

[jimmyk]

Ok, never mind, I forgot about the "hidden bomb" that Clarice mentioned. (Reminder to self: Always refresh before posting and pay special attention to Clarice's posts--among others.) I would still think if that much is at stake employers would figure out a way to keep everyone on their plan, but it is bizarre feature of the law that is certainly grounds alone for overturning it.

[Clarice]

Appalled, you are not reading what I am saying. My husband pays much more per employee than the new law mandates, but if a single eligible employee--and there may be a couple in his shop because they are entry or low level support and divorced or widowed or single--opts for the govt plan he has to pay $7500 per employee over and above what he has already paid out for private insurance coverage.

Few people understand this.

[Neo]

These guys definitely think outside of the box.

Gene Sperling, director of the White House's national economic council, said today at an official meeting that "we need a global minimum tax"

I expect India and China to embrace this about the same way they embraced the UN's AGW agenda.

[jimmyk]

Appalled: But if the sum of (employee's premium from getting outside coverage) plus the penalty is less than the cost of the insurance for the employer (taking taxes into account), then it makes sense for them to continue to offer it.

Employer-based coverage is a dumb system, but it's not just an accident of history. It's tax-advantaged. That's a big part of why they've morphed from "insurance" to "pre-paid health and lifestyle choice plans."

[jimmyk]

Gene Sperling, director of the White House's national economic council, said today at an official meeting that "we need a global minimum tax"

I would say we need a global anti-trust agency solely to prevent governments from colluding.

[Clarice]

Yes, Jimmy, it's a preposterous feature which I doubt the 20 y. o. drafters or the Pelosi vanguard ever noticed. You can bet unless it's repealed, insurance companies will go under; employers will be forced by the govt to post notices to all employees that they are eligible for the govt program ; and employers will be penalized if they try to dissuade employees from jumping ship--even showing them why the private coverage is superior.

[rse]

neo-

Sperling sounds very much like he is pushing OECD's global eco vision. Dan Mitchell of Intl Liberty blog has done some great work on how OECD hates tax havens.

Sperling's on my radar because he was the Us rep and the 2000 Education for All conference where he would have encountered lots of terrible ideas.

[jimmyk]

Clarice, is all that stuff about notices and penalties for trying to dissuade actually in the law, or are you predicting that it will get added by administrative fiat?

[Clarice]

My predictions, Jimmy It's the way bureaucracies work here.

Congress has created a preposterous law, ruinous to businesses which have tried to be generous to their employees and I predict the bureaucrats will use the usual methods to prevent anyone from getting out from under it.

[Clarice]

I think I might tell my mom she can vote for Obama again if she chooses but I will work with al her kids to retire outside the country if he gets another term.

[Clarice]

I think it's safe to say Obama is officially off his rocker:
he White House announced plans on Monday to help "Arab Spring" countries swept by revolutions with more than $800 million in economic aid, while maintaining U.S. military aid to Egypt.

In his annual budget message to Congress, President Barack Obama asked that military aid to Egypt be kept at the level of recent years -- $1.3 billion -- despite a crisis triggered by an Egyptian probe targeting American democracy activists.

The proposals are part of Obama's budget request for fiscal year 2013, which begins October 1. His requests need the approval of Congress, where some lawmakers want to cut overseas spending to address U.S. budget shortfalls and are particularly angry at Egypt.

Obama proposed $51.6 billion in funding for the U.S. State Department and foreign aid overall, when $8.2 billion in assistance to war zones is included. The "core budget" for the category would increase by 1.6 percent, officials said.

Most of the economic aid for the Arab Spring countries -- $770 million -- would go to establish a new "Middle East and North Africa Incentive Fund," the president said in his budget plan.

[rse]

LUN is an excellent overview of just how destructive crony capitalism has become.

It probably wouldn't surprise anyone that I think the whole media and digital literacy push in ed is a huge example of Corporatism. Hugely expensive favors to the chosen and it undermines academics as designed.

[sbw]

I think it is perfectly consistent for Obama to continue to tie up and loot wherever he can. Wait until he is a lame duck.

[sbw]

Wouldn't surprise me if, after he's gone, they discover evidence Obama tickled the edge of high crimes and misdemeanors.

[Rick Ballard]

Clarice,

Aren't those just attempts to pay off promises made for "support" in the R2P Anglo/French/Italian oil companies in Libya? Support from the Mohametan Brotherhood doesn't come cheap.

[pagar]

"So at this point the rules don't exist,"

This is apparently true about most of the BS the Obama Regime puts out.

Look at the much touted 25 billion mortgage settlement. Some number of State AG's greater than one said they had signed a deal with the banks. A deal that apparently hasn't even been finalized. How many Americans believe they could get their state AG to accept a blank sheet of paper and call it a deal.

http://abigailcfield.com/?p=951

[Appalled]

Posted to the wrong thread -- my response to Clarice, and how Obamacare effects her husband's business --

Clarice:

If your husband chose to provide no benefits, he'd avoid this trap. Again -- nopt what the Obama people were budgeting for -- but the logical reaction to "NO GOOD DEED GOES UNPUNISHED" legislation.

[sbw]

Appalled, that is the point. If they can drive people out of private insurance, we have become Canada... with no way out.

To some, that is what victory looks like. Until it doesn't.

[Clarice]

rick, Could be..But you can see why I think the Congress is laughing..This bit alone as people are out of work, sitting in houses that have lost value and looking at IRA's that are threadbare is enough to encourage folks to put scimitars in their teeth and hoist jolly rogers.

Appalled, he could and it would be fair since most of these folks probably voted for Obama, but I don't think he cares to do that.

[pagar]

From rse's 03:34PM

" the members of Obama’s national finance committee have already recouped an average of around $25,000 in federal dollars for their companies, for every dollar they raised for Obama’s campaign."

Hillary didn't do that well with her cattle futures, did she?

[Old Lurker]

First of all, I would not take the presently stated penalty amounts to the bank, therefore it is risky to use that variable as part of a cost-benefit analysis to the employer.

Second, throwing the employees into the individual coverage market probably means the individual policies cost more per employee than the group plan was costing per employee.

Third, the employee has to buy his replacement individual policy out of after tax dollars, and the employer provided coverage was deductable to the employer and tax free to the recipient.

So if a boss went to his employees and stated the intent to drop insurance, the only way to avoid a revolt would be to offer raises to make the employees whole. And of course those raises are also taxable so grossing up the math to parity is tricky.

And even if the employer solved all the simultaneous equations to make the employees whole and even if that "cost the same" to the employer after penalties and taxes, as soon as the penalty is increased as it will certainly, then the whole solution fails all over again.

And assuming the employees were OK with getting extra pay for getting their own insurance, all individual policies available on the exchange are going to include free birth control and abortions anyway...so the church will be funding exactly what they are against.

The only thing the church can do is force a reversal, or look the other way.

The church has been known to look the other way in the past, so this is going to be interesting to follow.

[glasater]

Charlie Gasparino on one of the Fox Biz blocks this past Saturday said his brother is an MD and the MD brother said there are so many regulations being placed on doctors now that will be very difficult to roll back to say the least of repeal.

[sbw]

glasater, If Hercules can clean the Augean Stables in a day, we can undo whatever sh*t Obama has produced. It just might take more than a day.

[Thomas Collins]

I agree, sbw, but Hercules may have had an easier job. He didn't have to apply to an Obama Nannycrat for a river diversion and water effluent permit.

[sbw]

Yeah. My job is to take the first step. My job is to cast the first vote.

[glasater]

Gee, sbw, I sure hope so.

But along the lines of travel for healthcare outside our country -- which is such a very sad idea -- I was thinking of those medical centers getting started across the country line between the US and Mexico when Obamacare was enacted. The problem with that is the Mexican drug cartels have made travel South impossible.
Cabo San Lucas seems pretty safe so far from what I've read so there is a little hope.

[Porchlight]

How could it be more difficult to roll back than to fully implement? No one, literally no one, knows what-all is in the damn thing. Surely litigation to repeal what's already been implemented, and halt the rest, would be less complex than moving it forward.

[matt]

I think Breyer may be lurching to the right shortly. LUN.

[matt]

my doc just went to the concierge model. he has been stewing about the squeeze beetwen California medicare, the insurance companies and his ability to do his job for the past several years.

As this trend accelerates we will see more of the NHS model appear.

[daddy]

I don't give a damn about Whitney Houston offing herself after a lifetime of awful personal choices, and I'n not going to give a damn when Charlie Sheen or Lindsey Lohan or Brittany Spears or any of these other morons make the same awful personal choices and off themselves. I am sick of the cult of Michael Jackson's and Amy Winehouse's and other sick personalities that parade across our TV screens night after night after night and poison our culture.

[Pops]

I find it interesting that on one hand the left sooo believes in killing the children of the poor and the 'lower classes' because themselves or society can't afford them...on one hand.

And on the other hand we as a society elevate and love the people who came from such poor begginings. Should Oprah have been aborted, has she cost the economy?

Should David Geffen, Jay-Z, Celine Dion all have been aborted? Would society be better?

How about Shania Twain?

Or all the stars of sports like the NFL and NBA. How much richer would we be if they had been aborted?

Remeber Obama says aborting kids of poor people is a way to SAVE money.

Maybe he thinks all these peoples parents were millionaires.

[GMAX]

Breyer will likely figure out how to exercise his 2nd amendment rights, much to the chagrin of his foggy bottom neighbors. Not cool doncha see...

[daddy]

I figure his next move is to try to outlaw machete's.

[Jim Rhoads a/k/a vnjagvet]

I want a pledge from every GOP candidate that he will do everything he can to unwind the Omaba HHS travesty with the flourish of a pen immediately upon inauguration. The reason: reelecting Omaba guarantees four more years of attacks on the free exercise of religion.

All of the GOP candidates and their spoxpeople should be harping on this in every sunday talk show and cable channel from now until November.

[Appalled]

OL:

Point of Obamacare is that individual policies are avaailable at group rates. (That's what the mandate is supposed to enable).

The isssue you point to is real. That's why noboody is volunteering to be first in getting rid of employee healthcare. But there will be a mad rush to the exits once somebody decides to be first.

[Pops]

You notice liberals not only want you to agree with their lifestyle choices, they demand we all fund them.

So I would suggest the Republicans propose an Abortion Registry.

This would give all the liberals a chance to name an abortion and have that abortion registered at HHS to include a ultrasound of the aborted baby, IF YOU ACT NOW!

Name an abortion after Grandma, or Your Mom, how touching to have them open a beautiful engraved certificate naming their abortion signed by Obama himself.

Supplies of abortions, will be limited and late term abortion prices are bound to go up as liberals respond to this promotion so act now!

For a limited time, pay one price and receive a second abortion named after a family member for half price.

And for an additional payment to the Obama campaign you could win the special Obama leave the baby in the closet until it dies, botched abortion special!

[Old Lurker]

Matt: "my doc just went to the concierge model"

So did my doc, my wife's doc, and my S-I-L who is a doc, all in the last 60 days.

In round numbers, we patients will pay about $1500 per year, and that covers one very complete physical per year plus pretty extensive "health management" oversight by the doc and fast access year round, including email access. No waiting. Actual doctoring beyond the physical is fee for service as rendered.

All three of these docs commit to limit their plans to 600 patients. Don't know about my own doc, but S-I-L will cherry pick her best 600 patients of her 2200 and cut the others loose. If all 600 do their physicals, that is about 2 per day, plus handholding the rest of us. Much better life style for the docs, and better attention to the patients.

Her projected net income will stay about the same as now but will be much steadier since we pay the $1500 in one payment per year upfront, and her quality of life will be much improved.

Sorry about those out of luck 1600, but whatta you want?

[Sandy Daze]

ArchBishop Chaput, 12 Feb 12:

HHS mandate insulting and dangerous

The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services refused on Jan. 20 to broaden the exception to its mandate that nearly all Catholic employers must cover contraception, abortifacients, and sterilization in their health-care plans.

An "accommodation" offered Friday by the White House did not solve the problem. Instead, it triggered withering criticism from legal scholars such as Notre Dame's Carter Snead, Harvard's Mary Ann Glendon, Princeton's Robert George, and Catholic University of America president John Garvey, along with non-Catholic scholars including Yuval Levin, the religious liberty law firm the Becket Fund, and numerous Catholic and other organizations.

Many Catholics are confused and angry. They should be.

Quite a few Catholics supported President Obama in the last election, so the ironies here are bitter. Many feel betrayed. They're baffled that the Obama administration would seek to coerce Catholic employers, private and corporate, to violate their religious convictions.

But it's clear that such actions are developing into a pattern. Whether it was the administration's early shift toward the anemic language of "freedom of worship" instead of the more historically grounded and robust concept of "freedom of religion" in key diplomatic discussions; or its troubling effort to regulate religious ministers recently rejected 9-0 by the Supreme Court in the Hosanna Tabor case; or the revocation of the U.S. bishops' conference human-trafficking grant for refusing to refer rape victims to abortion clinics, it seems obvious that this administration is - to put it generously - tone deaf to people of faith.

Philadelphians may wish to reflect on the following facts: The Archdiocesan Secretariat for Catholic Human Services spends $278 million annually on services to the community. About 4,000 employees make up our secretariat's workforce. Catholic Social Services is the largest social-service agency in Pennsylvania and the largest residential care/social-service subcontractor with the Department of Human Services of the City of Philadelphia.

[Pops]

Fineprint: Abortions subject to change without notice. Your abortion may not be gauranteed to be a minority, but at PP, its darn likely.

[Benjamin Franklin]

Pops really popped his cork, today, eh?

How many unwanted children have you adopted or supported?

Otherwise, your 'compassion' is nothing more than the sound of tinkling brass.

[Old Lurker]

Appalled, I think the mandate is required to get the insurers to accept preexisting conditions and to provide free services of indicated sorts (like birth control and abortion). It would stun me if there is extra money left over to then offer individuals group rates to boot. Doesn't matter though because none of it works anyway.

[Sandy Daze]

ArchBishop Chaput, 12 Feb 12, continued. . .

There's more. Archdiocesan Catholic Health Care Services is the largest faith-based provider of long-term-care services to the poor and elderly in the five-county area, and the seventh-largest nationally. And our Nutritional Development Services ministry serves more than eight million meals a year to schoolchildren, summer programs, and child-care centers. It also provides 2 million pounds of nonperishable food to needy families and the elderly through its Community Food Program.

Much of the money used by these ministries comes from public funding. But of course, the reason these ministries are trusted with public funding is that they do an excellent job. The service relationship works well without compromising the integrity of either the government or the Church. In fact, in a practical sense, government often benefits more than the Church.

It's also important to note that many millions of the dollars disbursed are resources directly donated by faithful Catholics to carry out their Gospel mission to serve the needy. For the Church, this makes perfect sense: As a believing community, we share our resources freely and gladly. We'll cooperate with anyone in service to the common good, so long as we are not forced to compromise our religious beliefs.

But the HHS mandate, including its latest variant, is belligerent, unnecessary, and deeply offensive to the content of Catholic belief. Any such mandate would make it morally compromising for us to provide health-care benefits to the staffs of our public-service ministries. Moreover, we cannot afford to be fooled - yet again - - by evasive and misleading allusions to the administration's alleged "flexibility" on such issues. The HHS mandate needs to be rescinded.

Many critics are focusing on the details of this or that particular version of the HHS regulation - the narrowness of the religious exemption, the breadth of the mandate, the hollowness of the grace period. As useful as this approach may be, it risks wandering into the weeds. The White House response on these points is ambiguous and weak. The true magnitude of the issue is getting lost as just another debate about details.

In reality, no similarly aggressive attack on religious freedom in our country has occurred in recent memory.

[daddy]

"You notice liberals not only want you to agree with their lifestyle choices, they demand we all fund them."

Pops,

A father and son team from Pennsylvania who harassed Sarah Palin, who threatened to kill one of her Attorney's and to rape another one, are being sentenced today in Anchorage. The story is here: Father, son face sentencing in Palin lawyer harassment.

Par for the course in the comments, our local Lefties want to honor the 2 perps, offering to share beers with them, and wanting instead to send Todd Palin to jail. Standard Liberal stuff.

[Clarice]

OL. we do the same. And most of our specialists demand payment up front with any insurance payment for the services paid directly to us.

[Clarice]

Sandy, that's a fine statement . Have you a cite to it?

[Clarice]

P.S> Casey already said he opposed the regulation. How long will it take for Rendell and the others to start banging on the WH doors?

[Sandy Daze]

ArchBishop Chaput, 12 Feb 12, final. . .

The current administration prides itself on being measured and deliberate. The current HHS mandate needs to be understood as exactly that. Commentators are using words like "gaffe," "ill conceived," and "mistake" to describe the mandate. They're wrong. It's impossible to see this regulation as some happenstance policy. It has been too long in the making.

Despite all of its public apprehension about "culture warriors" on the political right in the past, the current administration has created an HHS mandate that is the embodiment of culture war. At its heart is a seemingly deep distrust of the formative role religious faith has on personal and social conduct, and a deep distaste for religion's moral influence on public affairs. To say that this view is contrary to the Founders' thinking and the record of American history would be an understatement.

Critics may characterize my words here as partisan or political. These are my personal views, and of course people are free to disagree. But it is this administration - not Catholic ministries, or institutions, or bishops - that chose the timing and nature of the fight. The onus is entirely on the White House, which also has the power to remove the issue from public conflict. Catholics should not be misled into accepting feeble compromises on issues of principle. The HHS mandate is bad law; and not merely bad, but dangerous and insulting. It needs to be withdrawn - now.

Charles J. Chaput is archbishop of the Archdiocese of Philadelphia. E-mail him at [email protected].

~~~~~~~~~~~~

I'm not sniffing the same deal on Contraception Coverage. In fact, I'd bet there will be no deal.

Make or break, Freedom of Religion or Freedom (only of) worship. The Bishops may have been quiescent for far too long or too accommodating to Caesar, but no longer. The campaign plan now enacted will not end until victory. The Catholic Church has seen worse than Voldemort before, and today none of those challenges still exist.

See Hit's Whom The Gods Would Destroy

OWG (Voldemort Will Go)!
Sandy

[Benjamin Franklin]

BTW;

How comes y'all never mention GWB?

Oh, I forgot the thin nature of your loyalties.

[Cecil Turner]

. . . it does mean the Obamacare cost estimates were probably too low.

Wow. There's a limb.

So, you gonna vote for him (again) anyway?

[Saul Alinsky]

Pops imaginary child was born not aborted and living in a red state making a living by working hard and giving to his community and favorite charities while trying to raise a family under the boot of the Federal government. While you and your imaginary son have done F**k all for their country or even their own self-esteem.

So, give it a break and stop the ad hominem attacks on Patriots and honorable people. That is what we are suppose to represent. You are embarrasing us.

[Benjamin Franklin]

"What they overlook is two thousand years of history. An organization does not survive for that length of time -- and no other organization has -- without internalizing things not completely understood by even the deepest thinkers among us."

Oh, we understand ruthlessness...and leading the charge (two thousand years worth) against women's rights.

[Sandy Daze]

Clarice,

I greatly admire Arch Bishop Chaput's putting it right out there in the Philadelphia Inquirer. Cardinal designate Dolan is bringing to bear his forces. His Bishops are mobilizing. Your count of +/- 170 total means that soon additional verbal vollies will be lobbed against Voldemort.

This is just the beginning.

In case the link was missed, it is LUN'd and here.

OWG!
Sandy

[henry]

Today is the anniversary of the Tilted Kilt expedition. here are the results they want to roll back. The idiots will try to occupy the Capitol all week to keep hope alive, anyone see buses headed this way?

[Jim Rhoads a/k/a vnjagvet]

How many unwanted children have you adopted or supported?

My wife and I had the pleasure of adopting and supporting five daughters, two as infants and later three Korean sisters 12, 9 and 7 years old. All were unwanted. Thankfully, all are now well adjusted women who now have their own families. If it were not for these gifts, we would not have had the joy and sometimes pain of having children, and our lives would have been barren for it.

[Benjamin Franklin]

"So, give it a break and stop the ad hominem attacks.."

So, the answer is no. Just another, hypocrite bloviating about the chirren(sic) while ignoring the need in front of his craven eyes.

Par for the course in the world of the modern Pharisee.

[Benjamin Franklin]

Jim; I salute you and your family.

But you aren't the screaming Mimi. I'll wait for that spiritual man, Pops.

[Clarice]

Here you go Sandy-http://pjmedia.com/tatler/2012/02/13/philadelphias-archbishop-chaput-calls-the-hhs-regulation-insulting-and-dangerous/

[Jack is Back!]

Sandy,

I just think that the Bishop's will continue to speak out but do nothing offensive until after SCOTUS. They then have plenty of time to go on the attack. But I continue to write and call my Senator's and Congressman. Especially that syrupy voiced shill for Obama, Bill Nelson, who is DoA here in Florida. I told him this could help save him some respectful exit by at least getting 48% of the vote and he just said the Regime was compromising.

[narciso]

This is considered courageous by comparison,

http://www.stateline.org/live/details/story?contentId=631108

[Clarice]

Gas is about to head to $4 a gallon. The administration is proposing upping theTSA tax on travelers and airlines forcing us to pay more for their intrusive, stupid actions. Scimitars and Jolly rogers will be added soon to Pickets and Pikes are Us.

[narciso]

So I guess they are going to change the name to LATF;

http://pjmedia.com/tatler/2012/02/13/fda-wins-its-war-against-amish-milk-producer/#comments

[Sandy Daze]

Blistering, indeed, Clarice. Thnx.
~~
JiB - Offensive. . . hmmmm. You mean protests and the like? The laity may not wait for a signal from the Bishops to begin. I'm thinking of a melding of the faithful with Clarice's Jolly Rogers & scimitars. Yes, that's the ticket. Have you had a chance to read (Hillsdale's) Paul Rahe's article
American Catholicism’s Pact With the Devil Please be sure to read the comments in which a very rigorous exchange is taking place.

OWG !
Sandy

[narciso]

the only thing that is a little dodgy about that Daily Caller story, is that didn't explicitly list her as a target;

http://www.facebook.com/notes/sarah-palin/professor-dershowitz-is-right-about-media-matters/10150557220588435

[Clarice]

I thought so much of what Archbishop Chaput said was compelling and I loved that like me, he picked up on the Administration's "freedom of worship" instead of "freedom of religion". But most of all I liked that he made clear this was not an error but a deliberate insult and attempt to undermine religion in the US.

[Sara]

The LDS Church began the self-insurance change over in the '70s and in the '80s became completely self-insured. This includes all employees, Mormon or not, who work for any company owned by the church. Since 1994, this coverage included dependents up to age 26, again whether church members or not, as long as a parent worked for an LDS owned company.

They do NOT OFFER contraception coverage.

Exclusions from DMBA coverage:

Fertility / Family Planning / Home Delivery / Surrogate Pregnancy & Adoption 4.1 Family planning, including contraception, birth control devices, and/or sterilization procedures, unless the patient meets Deseret Mutual’s current medical criteria 4.2 Abortions, except in cases of rape or incest, or when the life of the mother and/or fetus would be seriously endangered if the fetus were carried to term 4.3 Care, treatment, diagnostic procedures, or operations in relation to in-vitro fertilization 4.4 Reversal of sterilization procedures 4.5 Planned home delivery for childbirth and all associated costs 4.6 All services and expenses related to a surrogate pregnancy or other pregnancy resulting in the adoption of a child (including care, treatment, delivery, diagnostic procedures, or operations, as well as maternity care for the surrogate mother and prenatal/postnatal care for the newborn child) are excluded. All services and expenses for complications related to a surrogate pregnancy or other pregnancy resulting in the adoption of a child are also excluded

You can agree or disagree, however, if you question Romney's stance on this issue from a financial, small government question, then consider that his church is more than involved with the right to continue to self-insure, which as I understand it, is eliminated by Obamacare.

[But she was playing with my mind, as well as Daddy's.]

Where's Daddy when I wanna tell 'im a story? I asked my daughter if the contraception debate had reached her cloister and she said it's reached NYTimes. So I told her that the New York Times wasn't the only opinion out there she replied that there was CNN.
==================

[Extraneus]

Appalled has indicated that he wants to vote Republican this time. I think we should accept and welcome that as the considered judgement of someone in the middle. Obama's b.s. and race advantage fooled a lot of people, but it's not all their fault. Herman Cain appealed to people like us, and so does Allen West, Thomas Sowell and others, and not just for their positions. Many of us knew Obama was a wolf in sheep's clothing, and it's too bad that everyone wasn't equally suspicious, but a lot of history and emotions were at play.

[narciso]

It's curious to consider the model they are bound to employ;

In accordance with the traditional antireligious doctrine of marxist-leninist ideology, the state adopted a policy of promoting atheism. Religious beliefs were considered backward, reactionary, ignorant, and superstitious.

The 'Committees for Defense of the Revolution' said

[Danube of Thought]

"it's not just an accident of history. It's tax-advantaged."

I think the tax advantage is part of the same accident. When employers were told that employee insurance premiums wouldn't count as wages, employees were told that the value of the premiums would not be taxable as income.

So here we are.

[Gmax]

Can I say (again) "I told ya so" about the Bishops? Whoever said the Church would back down got some 'splainin' to do. You need asbestos gloves to hold that letter from Archbishop Chaput.

Folks Dalkemper and Stupak look like they were rubes rolled by Zero. Expect the Democrat exodus to continue, this will be the last straw for some...

[Gmax]

Ex

It would be a whole easier to take his change of heart if he admitted he made a huge @ss mistake and ignored what we told him for months. But instead we get lectures about the flaws of certain Republican candidates. Are you kidding me with the miserable failure ideologue incompetent in the WH?

[Gmax]

Are you thinking "well that is just one Bishop." Wrong again. Here is the Bishop Jenky of Peoria on Feb 10th:

Politicians who consider themselves Catholic but collaborate in “the assault against their faith” should remember they will one day have to give account for their acts before God, Bishop Daniel Jenky of Peoria, Illinois said Feb 10.

“There is a last judgment. There is a particular judgment. May they change their minds and may God have mercy on them,” he told CNA during his visit to Rome.

When asked specifically about recent actions of Democratic Health and Human Services Secretary Sebelius Kathleen Sebelius and House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, Bishop Jenky replied “I am utterly scandalized.”

“The Lord once said ‘if you deny me at the end, I will deny you,’ this from our most merciful, good Savior. And so if it is a choice between Jesus Christ and political power or getting favorable editorials in leftist papers, well, that’s simply not a choice.”

Both Sebelius and Rep. Pelosi have been at the forefront of attempts to force Catholic institutions to cover contraception, sterilizations and abortifacients as part of their staff’s health insurance plans.

Bishop Jenky said there are too many Catholic politicians in the U.S. who “like to wear green sweaters on St. Patrick’s Day and march” or “have their pictures taken with the hierarchy” or “have conspicuous crosses on their forehead with ashes” but who then “not only do not live their faith they collaborate in the assault against their faith.”

[Benjamin Franklin]

"“There is a last judgment. There is a particular judgment. May they change their minds and may God have mercy on them,” he told CNA during his visit to Rome."

That's the same truncheon used by the Vatican for 1500 years. Ask Galileo and Copernicus.

If I were them, I would worry about their own accountability when they approach the Throne of God.

[Benjamin Franklin]

If you're not refined and enlightened enough to realize that an unrestricted right to butcher innocent unborn babies is an integral part of a utopian society, then you should just stick to worshiping the woman-oppressing sky fairy of your choice and leave the law-making to your betters.

[matt]

I'm afraid the Philistines will still vote Democrat, Gmax. There is a level of our society that lives on Facebook and twitter and 30 second newsbleats that may be irrecoverable.

Close friends of ours have one of their own and 7 adopted kids. Funny thing is that they're liberal Catholic dems. They are between a rock and a hard place now.

Hopefully the dualism of liberal believers runs up against the hard brick wall of the ulterior agenda of the Left.

What once was progressivism and social democracy or communitarianism has become a Stalinist overthrow of Amerikka.

[Gmax]

Matt

You only have to believe that this could have an impact on 5to 10 % of Catholics to see the impact. You dont have to SWAY every Catholic voter, as that is not going to happen. But think about PA with an extraordinary concentration of Catholics and then go read the Salena Zito discussion of what is already a tough climb for Zero in the Keystone state.

[Benjamin Franklin]

Geez, Matt. Any cat turd boxes in your house?

You are going around the bend just as Danyoob is...

[Benjamin Franklin]

"If you're not refined ..."

Nice post, GobMax.

[Danube of Thought]

"Cabo San Lucas seems pretty safe so far from what I've read so there is a little hope."

I've not heard of any drug violence at Cabo, and I'm down there at least once a year. There's quite a thriving cosmetic surgery practice down there--the babes go down for a little nip and tuck, then hang out in the sun till they're healed.

[Gmax]

And the featherman does not realize it, but his sneering and condescension is exactly why its a lead pipe cinch that this going to backfire bigtime on the progs. They all act the same way and the bitter clingers are a bit tired of it too. Keep sneering, it will elect Republicans in lots and lots of places. Maybe 60 Senators. Wouldnt that be a hoot?

[Frau Indianerherz]

Cleo's plastic war bonnet is askew.

[maryrose]

Gmax;
You are in my head on this issue.
clarice: As always you are inspiring and spot on in regard to the assault on freedom of religion. Obama believes in the freedom to worship at Wright"s anti-American house for 20 years. Watch what Obama does. It tells you accurately who and what he is and the beliefs he puts forth. He misquotes from the Bible and goes to Church only when someone like Perry calls him out for his war on religion. Catholics know persecution . We lived through and survived the Moorish invasions and the Crusades. Obama is messing with the wrong group of people.Catholic women have his number. Now I just have to convince my nun friends on the social justice bandwagon.

[henry]

Responses to senate recall challenges are now online. PDFs at the link.

[Extraneus]

I wish our token lefty would explain what's so important about contraception that they'll take to the mattresses over it. We like to say that leftism is their religion and abortion their only sacrament, but aren't they proving that this is actually true? Is the idea of abortion or preventing human birth really their moral argument? Knowing that the $60/month figure is b.s. and that condoms cost about 50-cents each, and less in bulk, is there really a moral argument for government-funded contraception? If so, I haven't heard it and would like to.