Stanek wkend Q: How will Supreme Court rule on contraception mandate case?
Backdrop from CNN, November 26:
The high-stakes fight over implementing parts of the troubled health care reform law will move to the US Supreme Court in coming months, in a dispute involving coverage for contraceptives and religious liberty.
The justices agreed on Tuesday to review provisions in the Affordable Care Act requiring employers of a certain size to offer insurance coverage for birth control and other reproductive health services [including sterilization] without a co-pay.
At issue is whether private companies can refuse to do so on the claim it violates their religious beliefs.
Oral arguments will likely be held in March with a ruling by late June.
Nearly 50 pending lawsuits have been filed in federal court from various corporations challenging the birth control coverage benefits in the “Obamacare” law championed by President Barack Obama….
The high court last year narrowly upheld the key funding provision of the health care law, a blockbuster ruling affirming that most Americans would be required to purchase insurance or pay a financial penalty – the so-called “individual mandate.”
The constitutional debate now shifts to the separate employer mandates and whether corporations themselves enjoy the same First Amendment rights as individuals.
Three federal appeals courts around the country have struck down the contraception coverage rule, while two other appeals courts have upheld it. That “circuit split” made a Supreme Court review more likely.
The Supreme Court agreed to hear two cases involving for-profit corporations. Among the plaintiffs is Hobby Lobby, Inc. a nationwide chain of about 500 arts and crafts stores.
David Green and his family are the owners and say their Christian beliefs clash with parts of the law’s mandates for comprehensive coverage.
They say some of the drugs that would be provided prevent human embryos from being implanted in a woman’s womb, which the Greens equate to abortion.
The privately held company does not object to funding other forms of contraception – such as condoms and diaphragms – for their roughly 13,000 employees, which Hobby Lobby says represent a variety of faiths….
The law’s supporters say it does not require individual company owners to personally provide coverage they might object, but instead places that responsibility on the corporate entity.
The cases accepted were Sebelius v. Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc.; and Conestoga Wood Specialties Corp. v. Sebelius.
We were all surprised when Chief Justice John Roberts sided with liberals to rule that the federal government under Obamacare could force individuals to purchase health insurance.
How to you think the Supremes will rule on this case?
[Top graphic via RH Reality Check]
Jill Stanek is a nurse turned speaker, columnist and blogger, a national figure in the effort to protect both preborn and postborn innocent human life.
I would consider nasal spray, aspirin, soap, hot water, toothbrushes, dental floss, toothpaste, daily naps, regular exercise and a clean environment all essential to health as well. Will insurance companies be required to provide all of these or will we have to take some responsibility for ourselves?
BTW, cosmetic surgery would do wonders for my mental health. Can I demand my insurance cover it?
We were all surprised when Chief Justice John Roberts sided with liberals to rule that the federal government under Obamacare could force individuals to purchase health insurance.
I can see the objection to such gov’t forcing, yet isn’t it the gov’t (and really – we taxpayers?) that’s going to pay for people who don’t have their own coverage?
We’re not turning away people from emergency rooms now, are we – people who don’t have any or sufficient coverage?
Somebody who doesn’t have health coverage because they elected not to get any – when they are in a wrecked vehicle, bleeding to death, do we leave them there, or do we call the ambulance for them?
“BTW, cosmetic surgery would do wonders for my mental health. Can I demand my insurance cover it? ”
Me too Mary! I have a couple things I would like to have put back up where they were in my 20s! :)
Hi Prax,
LOLLLL.
Likewise. The trouble is its been so long I can’t remember where anything belongs!
Good read for those who like to move beyond just joking, and actually understand the case.
http://www.scotusblog.com/2013/11/court-to-rule-on-birth-control-mandate/
EGV,
Lighten up.
Ex-GOP: Good read for those who like to move beyond just joking, and actually understand the case.
A good read, indeed, Ex-GOP. Owners often incorporate to separate themselves from a business and the attached potential liability, etc., but now looks like some are trying to have it both ways. Good question as to what extent a corporation will be seem to be “a person” in the sense of having religious beliefs of its own.
“these cases are different from the Court’s first rulings on the ACA two years ago, when it upheld a penalty for an individual who refused to obtain health insurance at all and nullified a requirement that states must broadly expand their Medicare program of health care coverage for the poor.”
Well now…. I have not followed much of the AFA or Obamacare debates, but this is a big deal. For the states, Obamacare is the most threatening, as far as I know, because of what can happen with Medicaid. Don’t see how O’care can really be going forward if the states are let out of including more people under Medicaid.
Why is contraception free but not fertility treatments?
Hi ts,
I still think that insurance should cover the basics of good health that I mentioned. If you need your hot water heater replaced, it should be covered. If you need cleaning supplies, it should be covered. Why are these any less essential to good health than contraception? I’m sure we all know how repulsive and dangerous poor oral health is, so why doesn’t insurance cover my toothpaste, toothbrushes, and dental floss?
Note to self: There shall be no joy when Ex-GOP is in the house.
I wonder if Obamacare covers chill pills.
Mary,
I would be a lot healthier if I had a pool and whirlpool in my house. Some rich person should have to pay for it.
Certainly if Obamacare forces taxpayers to cover birth control drugs, then other recreational drugs such as marijuana, LSD, methamphetamine, cathinone derivatives, cocaine, beer, and of course TOBACCO, should also be covered.
It’s fun to hear leftists say that birth control drugs are not recreational……. which means that to them, sex is more work than pleasure.
Bummer for them!
comment posted on incorrect thread and removed
Hi Prax 9:20am
LOLLLLLLLLLL. Love it!
I hate to say it but Hobby Lobby needs to take a page from Walmart…
Why should birth control have a mandate priority over say high blood pressure medicine? It is obvious that high blood pressure medicine can stop more illness, heart attacks and death then birth control.
Unfortunately the answer to this question has nothing to do with health care. The reason is that the BC mandate can be used to fabricate a non-existent war on women.
truth – I know you didn’t specifically ask this question of me (the last one) – but I actually agree with you that more things should be fully covered. I do believe that some states have individual provisions, but I’m not positive on that.
It does make sense though that we, as a society, should encourage people to regulate their health so it doesn’t turn into an emergency situation.
Ex-RINO, The number of people signing up for Obamacare who are getting put onto Medicare is staggeringly higher than the number signing up for private insurance. Doesn’t this mean rates are going to have to go up next year for the people who get private plans on the Obamacare exchanges?
No, it does not.
I thought Obamacare was going to save the government money. How are we paying for the Medicare expansion?
There is no Medicare expansion.
Sorry, I always mix those up, How are we going to pay for the Medicaid expansion?
Same way it was always being paid for. The medicaid expansion actually costs less than it did when the CBO did their initial projections because states were allowed to opt out, and some states did – so the medicaid numbers won’t be hit.
http://www.cbo.gov/publication/43472
CBO on the cost reduction.
So are you saying thatt he non-participating states, the ones that aren’t expanding Medicaid, are projected to to have a reduction in the number of Medicaid enrollee’s that will offset the increase in Medicaid enrollee’s on the Exchanges? So the theory is that enough existing enrollee’s in the non-participatory state are going to move onto private policies to offset the net cost to our government.
Well that is not happening. As I alluded to above, there have a been a staggeringly greater number of people getting put on Medicaid and staggeringly few enrolling in private policies on the exchanges. If you are counting on Wisconsin Badgercare people to buy private policies then you better rethink things cause they can’t afford it and they will be going uninsured and paying the fines. It’s not happening. What you will end up is a net increase in the number of uninsured people due to Obamacare. Wisconsin had to grant thousands of citizens who were supposed to be going onto Obamacare a 90 extension on Badgercare because Obamacare was leaving them uninsured as of January 1st.
No truth – that’s now what I’m saying.
The CBO is saying that if all the states expanded Medicaid, it would equal a certain number of enrollees. Because some states did not expand Medicaid, many people who were in those projected numbers will not be able to be covered by Medicaid – so the numbers are less than what was projected. Did you look at the CBO info I posted?
Something we should all find very reassuring.
http://www.cnbc.com/id/101225308
I did look at the CBO projections. And the CBO scores whatever is put in front of them. And what I said is that the numbers that the CBO was given to ‘score’ are not even close to the way the numbers are working out.
Mary, the cyber-security people who testified before congress last week said they could not recommend any US citizen enter their information into the website.
http://cnsnews.com/mrctv-blog/matt-vespa/security-experts-unanimous-testimony-obamacare-website-still-isnt-secure
How would anybody make much of a guess at this point based on the numbers of enrollees, given the slowness that was previously demonstrated in Mass under Romneycare rollout, and given the natural tendency to procrastinate? Do you not think it’s a bit premature for anybody to make assumptions given actual numbers? I would think anybody doing that would be halfway between foolish and downright stupid. No?
No. I think it time for the government to be transparent and it is important they give us the numbers for analysis.
Your response doesn’t make sense. So you think that there hasn’t been enough numbers given, so anybody making any sort of projections are foolish? How could you say there aren’t enough numbers to make any analysis, yet post analysis that was made based on numbers you say aren’t there?
My analysis was made by numbers that were there. My response to you was to your suggestion that the numbers were not important and your suggestion that only a fool would even try to analyze them.
So why did you say it’s time for the government to be transparent about the numbers? So do you think they have been transparent, or do you think they haven’t?
The federal government has not been very transparent. The exchanges opened up on October 1st, over two months ago, and I believe they have only released numbers once since then.
Fortunately there are alternative sources for some of the numbers.
Coming soon to America. If you are diagnosed with cancer expect to wait between 55 and 117 days til your first chemo treatment. That is the data for Canada’s government run health care system. As someone who had a son that went through cancer I can appreciate how awesome the US health care system is/was pre-Obamacare. When my son got diagnosed he was on chemo within 5 days of being diagnosed. If he had needed to wait even another week his outcome would have been bad. But hey! It would have been covered care.
truth – CBO adjusted the numbers of health care reform.
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/12/03/business/affordable-care-act-so-far-seems-likely-to-cost-less-than-expected.html?ref=annielowrey&_r=1&
Ex-RINO,
What good is government subsidized insurance like the Canadian model if you have wait two or three months after a cancer diagnosis before you get chemo?
We aren’t doing the Canadian model, so that’s kind of a weird question to ask.
But isn’t the single payer model what you always said you would prefer?
truth
I posted an article on the current health care plan being implemented. You replied with a response on universal health care, which has nothing to do with the current health care model. Stop changing the subject please.
You asked for pricing the other day – I’ve not provided two pieces of information. So there you go. Do with it what you will – but realize that your ranting and raving seems completely off base given what I’ve provided you.
“Stop changing the subject please.”
I already told you that the CBO scores based on whatever numbers are put in front of them. And what I said is that the numbers that the CBO was given to ‘score’ are not even close to the way the numbers are working out.
I can understand that you don’t want to respond to my assertion that the single payer system you see as the best solution is horrible compared to the system we had in the US and are trying to “fix”. I gave you real life examples of why.
And the biggest Obamacare lie of all is your assertion (and Obama’s at his press conference today) that most people can shop around for health care plans that increase everybody’s benefits on their health are plans while decreasing the cost of their health insurance. How many times are you Democrats going to try and get away with these bold in-your-face lies?
He also said that the web-site is now working at ‘private sector velocity’ and 90% of the time when it is not under maintenance. What the hell does that mean?
truth -
I didn’t respond to your question because I’m tired of your stupid games. You throw out some headline you read on one of your fringe websites, I give you the actual information with actual facts and actual links, and then you just change the subject to whatever the heck is the newest headline.
You said there weren’t numbers, yet you said that certain things are working out certain ways based on numbers you say yourself aren’t there. So what the stink are you even talking about?
I just really, really wish you were both smarter, and nicer in these debates. It gets old. I’ll answer your questions ones you go back and finish the first conversation.
You said Medicare was expanding when it wasn’t. You then realized it was Medicaid. I showed you information that says Medicaid has long term projected costs less than what was projected. So what is your other point? Are you saying long term government costs are higher than what they projected? If so, prove it. If you are making some other claim, state it clearly using the actual right verbiage, and back it up.
Seriously, if my fifth grader wrote some of the stuff you did with as little evidence, as poorly reasoned, and with as little backing – I’d beg the school to hold her back. Seriously.
I didn’t even read your last two posts. Dead with this issue first. Medicaid. What’s your point?
Hi ts,
I think he means this gov’t run monstrosity is a colossal cluster**** and the private sector does anything better.
However, unless you want some hacker to do a rectal exam on you, I would advise you steer clear of that website.
Oh great, and now I’ve got to deal with a lady who wants to eliminate insurance and barter with doctors using farm animals.
Lovely.
EGV,
I was addressing ts.
Also, I thought you were over your chicken fixation.
Excellent Mary – you and ts can go and figure out how things work together. Good luck.
And on the Chickens – It’s your plan – own it.
Hi Mary
EGV,
Sad indeed.
In the meantime, I hope you didn’t trust your information to that Obamacare website.
Hi TS
I get my insurance through my employer, as do you. Neither of us work through exchanges.
Paul Ryan, whose plan most conservatives supported, pushed for a health care exchange for Medicare personnel. I know that doesn’t fit into your barter system, but I would be a bit suspicious of any of your right wing friend posters who knock internet exchanges that they themselves support.
You have to understand this is the way EGV gets when he knows he has no good response to what is posted. That is how the ‘progressives’ roll whenever anybody calls them out for spewing another bold-faced lie? Can you believe that are still trying to make people believe they can insure additional people and also get rid of pre-existing conditions and lifetime caps etc and lower the cost of medical care for everyone? They are snake-oil salesmen that lie in-your-face as long as they can get away with it. When Obamacare tanks in 2014 they will say that it will not really come around until 2016 etc. etc. etc. And the modus operandi is to keep lying, the bolder the better. How stupid do they think people must be? The house of cards is falling because their lies and rhetoric are butting up against reality. The train wreck continues. Next year another 80 million are expected to lose their coverage. Already many people are losing their doctors.
truth -
I believe that you are literally the dumbest person I know. The way you take half-truths and spin it into misinformation is somewhere between sad, and evil.
Now, if you have a contention with Medicaid – a point that you want to make, make it.
EGV,
Well, don’t count your chickens before they’ve hatched. I thought that would help you relate.
You may very well lose your employer coverage. I did. It was replaced and many of my Obama schmoozing co-workers aren’t too thrilled. Now they have to change doctors and transfer records, assuming of course the doctors at the clinic they are now required to utilize can even accommodate them. People can only stretch themselves so thin.
Then you may have to go on this website. I almost did just out of curiosity. Thankfully I saw this video first. I bet you’re glad you were warned as well.
Mary,
I would go without insurance before I would out my information on the obamacare website.
Hi ts,
Same difference. Since it doesn’t work and constantly crashes, you can’t get insurance anyway!
Now, some people not only don’t have insurance, but some hacker has their identity.
I’ll state it again for you Ex-RINO. An astonishingly high number of people have enrolled for Medicaid since the launch of the Obamacare exchanges on Oct 1st. And an astonishingly low number of have signed up for private health care plans.
“Now, some people not only don’t have insurance, but some hacker has their identity
Or if they call the (800) # then some ex-acorn enroll-America hack has their information and enters it into the site for them…..doh
LOL — Obamacare’s going to cost less than expected because the Obameconomy is performing so much worse than expected.
What a cunning fellow he is!
LOL
That’s some funny stuff.
Rasqual! :) Good to see you, dear chap! It’s been quite a long time, eh?
Dear Ex. I do not think you have carefully read Doug’s extensive reply to your love affair with OCare, which Doug posted on November 30, 2013 at 9:14 pm. Please re-read that very informative comment. Then, once you realize your foolish pressing forward, perhaps instead of rudely calling another commenter here ”the dumbest” you will finally realize that Doug exposed you for an overgrown O’s water boy, a kind of a blind allegiance really.
My oldest son, a 4th grader, has a teacher who is fond of telling her class that “those that call you dumb are dumb themselves.” Not too long ago you railed against two commenters who degraded O with names you considered insulting but now you commit the same. I would say that my son’s teacher definitely has a point.
truth – again – what are you even saying? Astonishingly high compared to what? The CBO projections you said were garbage? Astonishingly low compared to what? What numbers are you comparing it to – what baseline are you working with? And why are you correlating Medicaid to private insurance anyways?
You are typing things, but not really saying anything.
Thomas -
I read Doug’s earlier – the first part was a very good point. The second part seemed like old news – yes, that decision was made a long time ago, has been vetted, flushed out, and is done with. It seemed like a surprise to Doug. What’s to comment on? A lot of states opted in, some haven’t and are projected to in the future, and some never will.
On truth’s – he wasn’t making the point early on – it was Doug. Truth made a contention that Medicare was expanding, which it wasn’t. Then he threw out partial headline after partial headline without any logic, backing, sources, or thought. If you want to make heads or tails of his actual medicaid argument you can try. The point he is making does not appear to be the point Doug is making. Why you seem to be lumping the two together is an unknown.
Do you feel that truth is trying to say what Doug said earlier? Because it actually seems to be opposite things they are saying – Doug saying states opting out and not having medicaid expanded will threaten the entire package – and truth is saying medicaid enrollment is higher than expected.
So can you clarify Thomas?
Mary –
I’m confused by your post. You said that your work lost insurance, but people aren’t happy with the clinic they are required to go to.
An uninsured person isn’t required to use any certain clinic – only people who are insured are required to go to certain facilities.
When you have no counter argument just pretend like you don’t understand what they are saying….
“An astonishingly high number of people have enrolled for Medicaid since the launch of the Obamacare exchanges on Oct 1st when compared to the astonishingly low number of people who have signed up for private health care plans.”
EX: I was simply pointing out to you that Doug check-mated you there and than, rather w/o any heads-up I shifted gears to comment on the post in which you used that derogatory term.
We (those that comment here) are not alike Ex and although you exault yourself as the-know-it-all-political-analyst-gift to this blog you must realize that others here are patriotic defenders of freedom, true democracy and capitalism. I am sorry to report but I do not consider you in that category. Your agenda is to the contrary. (and some of us actullly lived the reality you promote).
You may cite studies, research and numbers but know that any of that can and has been discredited many times by someone who is always independent of special interests. None of that surpasses the actual hard facts about how this ACA implementation has become the most despised and forced endeavor and the hard facts (uncovered w/o any help from your fellow dems) off all the fallacies the ACA contains. You seem to also defend the man who lied to the American people time and time again about what the ACA is about.
I’d rather take truthseeker for his genuineness than anyone whose only objective is to discredit the voice of the American people.
Thomas -
Two points:
1) Are you talking about the same Doug post as I am? His first part, he indicates that businesses want to seem to be both people, and corporations void of that responsibility. His second component expressed that he didn’t know that Medicaid didn’t expand to the whole country. How is that a ‘check-mate’? Seriously – are you talking about a different thread?
2) On everything else – it’s good to know this board has it’s own Joseph McCarthy. Nothing better than somebody who believes somebody that doesn’t agree with them is a bad American. Love it.
truth – there’s no counter argument because you’ve made no point? Sure, maybe your expectations were that 2 people would register for Medicaid, and now we have more, so it’s astonishingly high. You haven’t said at all what the numbers are high or low compared to, and why you think that’s an issue. It’s like you’ve said “it’s colder out”. Sure – so what’s your point?
I mean, how would you want me to counter. ”I don’t think they are astonishingly high or low. Though since you haven’t made a point as to the relevance of them being high or low, it doesn’t matter anyway”.
Come on truth – step up your game a little. I beg of you.
You know Ex that the only thing that set me off was you calling another commenter “the dumbest” you know.
And I have told you that you were the one having issues with other people demeaning O (and actually made a very big stink about it that took valuable space from other people’s comments LOL). Yet, you have exhibited the very behavior you railed against. TS does not agree with you and you call him what?
Check what my post actually was referencing before going off on your high horse accusing me of calling you a bad American. My point was that those that comment here do so with their best intentions for America. And I cannot equate an ACA supporter to that end. I was born and raised in a system which you promote. Everywhere on this planet where such healthcare systems exist, it is subsidized out of pocket by the very recipients of it, just to get “something better and faster.” But I will not argue that with you anymore. You know what you know and so do I. Time will tell Ex…
TS: Next year another 80 million are expected to lose their coverage.
Truthseeker, that’s not true, and you and I already discussed it. That was you or somebody else making a ludicrous mistake. That is being willfully blind, seizing onto something just because you think it’s somehow “against Obama.”
Thomas R. to Ex-GOP: Doug exposed you for an overgrown O’s water boy, a kind of a blind allegiance really
I did? No, don’t think so, Thomas. Here is my take on Medicaid: we cannot afford it. We just cannot “pay for everybody.” With or without Obamacare, Medicaid is gonna go broke/gonna have to cut services or deny them. In the past, the Federal Gov’t paid half or up to 70% (some range very close to that) of the states’ Medicaid expenses. It averages paying for 57%.
I don’t know how Obamacare changes that. The Supreme Court nullified a requirement that states must broadly expand their Medicare program of health care coverage for the poor? Then how does Obamacare go forward, with respect to the poor? I really do not know – I’m asking.
Regardless of Obamacare or not, Medicaid has been headed for a financial train wreck. The states – which have to balance their budgets – they ain’t like the Federal gov’t – have to get the money for Medicaid from somewhere, or else make the care provided fit the money that is there. Paul Ryan’s Republican budgets have the Federal gov’t paying half, across the board, which would crush the poorest states – it would be increasing their share of Medicaid costs by 85%, not to mention that Ryan’s proposal includes block grants of money to the states from the Federal gov’t that are less that current support payments, i.e. services would have to be cut, in many cases drastically.