Ginsburg on Hobby Lobby

[SerScot]

RR,

Here's a link on HL and Viagra:

m.huffpost.com/us/entry/5543916

[rdhopeca]

I get what you all are saying, however, my position remains that as an employer offering a health plan (and I've owned my own company that offered a group plan that I paid for), that the goal should be to offer the best plan that you can afford to pay for in the hopes that you are doing your best to keep your employees happy, healthy, and productive...hopefully a group plan such that you are not required to deal with most of the preexisting conditions that have been mentioned.

With that comes the idea that I, as the business owner, have no business in my employees' private lives.

PS my therapist and I agreed earlier this week that I "don't do conflict very well" and we both decided a larger presence on the 'Tank was a good way to practice my conflict coping skills

[aliantha]

Unions are an elite special interest that don't have the best interest of the country in mind.

Now *that* sounds like a topic for a whole 'nother thread....

[Avatar]

PS my therapist and I agreed earlier this week that I "don't do conflict very well" and we both decided a larger presence on the 'Tank was a good way to practice my conflict coping skills

Wait, you talk about the Watch to your therapist? Cool.

--A

[rdhopeca]

PS my therapist and I agreed earlier this week that I "don't do conflict very well" and we both decided a larger presence on the 'Tank was a good way to practice my conflict coping skills

Wait, you talk about the Watch to your therapist? Cool.

--A

I thought you of all people would appreciate the wry sarcasm in this comment, Av.

[Avatar]

--A

[Cail]

Unions are an elite special interest that don't have the best interest of the country in mind.

Now *that* sounds like a topic for a whole 'nother thread....

It's germane in nearly every thread here. Unions overwhelmingly support the party that's in power right now (the Democrats), and have for decades. Unions don't represent the country, nor do they represent the workers that fund them through their dues. Unions exist to make sure that unions exist. Their payoffs to the Democratic party are what gave us the GM buyout and giveaway, and their graft is evident in their exemptions in the ACA.

Unions are government sponsored organized crime.

[Cybrweez]

Because it's the law of the land?

Lol, does this mean anything anymore? Aren't there laws about immigration here? Don't we have an AG who encourages just ignoring some laws?

[Hashi Lebwohl]

PS my therapist and I agreed earlier this week that I "don't do conflict very well" and we both decided a larger presence on the 'Tank was a good way to practice my conflict coping skills

This is the best endorsement of the Tank I have ever seen. I never knew we were therapeutic!

Because it's the law of the land?

Lol, does this mean anything anymore? Aren't there laws about immigration here? Don't we have an AG who encourages just ignoring some laws?

No, it doesn't mean anything any more. The ACA, arguably the cornerstone of this Administration's legacy, has been ignored and/or partially rewritten by the very Administration who fought for it. It is bad enough that they ignore or selectively enforce the laws on the books but it is worse--laughably ironic--when they ignore or selectively enforce their own laws.

[Rawedge Rim]

RR,

Here's a link on HL and Viagra:

m.huffpost.com/us/entry/5543916

I read the article, what there was of it;

1. I personally don't think they should cover viagra, or anything else along those lines. As I've stated, no one that I'm aware of has died from lack of sex.

2. OTOH, I've never heard of viagra or cialis being used as a prophylactic.

[Cail]

Score one for the GOP....

GOP's birth control gamble

Republicans want to beat Democrats at their own game this November by proposing a new way to widen access to birth control.

GOP candidates around the country are saying they want to make the pill available over the counter without a doctor's prescription for the first time since it was approved in 1960.

The party hopes its stance, widely shared by healthcare providers, will help neutralize tough debates over birth control coverage and cut into Democrats' traditional advantage among women voters.

"Cory's proposal puts women in control," said Alex Siciliano, spokesman for Rep. Cory Gardner (R-Colo.), the first 2014 Senate candidate to talk up the idea.
"Making oral contraception available to adults at every pharmacy, without the trouble of a doctor's visit, would drop the retail price and save money and time and hassle," Siciliano said in a statement.

But Democrats have not embraced the overtures, calling them a confused ploy to distract women from the GOP's opposition to abortion rights and universal coverage for birth control.

"Access to contraception and family planning services aren't election-year gimmicks," said Kristin Lynch, spokeswoman for Gardner's opponent, Sen. Mark Udall (D-Colo.).

"They're fundamental rights that we must protect," she continued. "Unlike Congressman Gardner, Mark doesn't see women as a box to check."

The fiery debate is an interesting twist in an election cycle where women's health issues have already played a dominant role.

Republicans have a unique chance to win control of the Senate, and their path to six seats runs through states like Colorado. Ed Gillespie in Virginia and Mike McFadden in Minnesota, both running uphill races against Democratic incumbents, recently echoed Gardner's decision, and GOP strategists predict the group endorsing the proposal will swell.

In response, Democrats are shoring up their support among women voters by emphasizing issues like the Supreme Court's Hobby Lobby decision in July, which allowed for-profit employers with religious objections not to cover birth control in their health plans.

The party is also counting on powerful allies like Planned Parenthood Votes to paint Republican candidates as extreme on abortion and birth control access.

Those reminders of Republican opposition form the backdrop for the GOP play on over-the-counter contraception.

In Colorado, tensions were already high after Udall attacked Gardner for his support for "personhood," a set of views that would give legal rights to fertilized eggs and ban common forms of birth control.

Gardner said he changed his mind on the issue, but Democrats don't agree and continue to hammer the issue. The two-term Republican started talking about over-the-counter birth control access several months later.

"Since it makes so much sense, you might wonder why this change has not happened yet," Gardner wrote in a Denver Post op-ed in June. "It's because too many people in Washington would rather play politics with contraception instead of actually making life easier for women."

The piece drew immediate fire from Democrats, who blasted Gardner as a political opportunist and a hypocrite.

"Even a brief examination of Gardner's voting record shows that his newly found support for access to birth control pills is transparently hollow," wrote Rep. Diana DeGette (D-Colo.) in the same newspaper the next day.

The piece noted that Gardner has voted several times in agreement with the Hobby Lobby decision and has demanded ObamaCare's contraceptive coverage guarantee be overturned.

Other Republican Senate candidates have faced similar criticism but say they won’t back down.

“Democrats know there is only one, nasty, bitter divisive path to victory, and they have shown they will do whatever it takes — which means lying to and scaring female voters — in order to hold onto their majority,” said National Republican Senatorial Committee spokeswoman Brook Hougesen.

The maneuvering points to how much Republicans want to loosen what some privately call Democrats' monopoly on the women's health debate.

Strategists said supporting over-the-counter birth control, particularly when Democrats do not fully embrace the position, gives Republicans an opportunity to reintroduce themselves to centrist women.

Democrats said Republican are just muddying the water with proposals that would not ultimately lower out-of-pocket costs.

"We'd be open to an over-the-counter option, as long as it improved access for women," said one Udall campaign official. "However, some OTC proposals, if insurance were removed from the equation, would actually drive up costs for women."

Democrats also argue that their attack ads on Gardner's "personhood" stance will win the day.

At issue now is Gardner's co-sponsorship of the Life Begins at Conception Act, a measure that would define zygotes from the "moment of fertilization" as people meriting legal protection under the 14th Amendment.

Gardner's campaign said the bill would not impose changes to contraception laws. Democrats strongly disagree, calling the measure equal to any "personhood" proposal.

“His support for a federal Personhood law remains strong to this day and it’s going to be a huge problem for him at the polls," said Justin Barasky, a spokesman for the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee.

"Our side has millions of dollars behind TV ads talking about Gardner's 'personhood' position," said another Democratic campaign official. "Writing an op-ed about over-the-counter birth control or mentioning it at a debate does absolutely nothing to combat what voters are seeing in Colorado on TV every day.

But in a year where turnout is on their side and it’s Democrats who have to woo women voters to the polls, Republicans are confident Gardner and a growing number of GOP hopefuls have found the prescription to mitigate charges of a “war on women.”

"The Democrats see this as all about politics,” said a Gardner strategist. “If they wanted to make contraception more available, cheaper and more private, they could agree with us. But they'd prefer to keep this as a political issue."

[Zarathustra]

That's a pretty smart move, politically, economically, medically.

It's ironic that the Dems reject making birth control easier to get, merely because it's a Republican idea. Hypocrites.

[Vraith]

That's a pretty smart move, politically, economically, medically.

It's ironic that the Dems reject making birth control easier to get, merely because it's a Republican idea. Hypocrites.

Heh...it's not a Republican idea [though it's possible the first person to think of it was a Republican, way back when...] it's been around a long time. Now, it was a smart political move to pick up on it and propose it.

Will teens be able to get it OTC? Didn't see in the article. I bet most Rep's won't go for that.
Will Walmart carry it? Pretty sure they're required to, now, as prescription? [not certain about that, but I think so].
Wouldn't it be funny [no, it wouldn't, but could easily happen] if making it OTC really made it less available?

[Hashi Lebwohl]

That's a pretty smart move, politically, economically, medically.

It's ironic that the Dems reject making birth control easier to get, merely because it's a Republican idea. Hypocrites.

They are politicians; thus, they know only how to kiss the feet of lobbyists with blank checks and flip-flop on issues depending upon the prevailing winds that day.

Still...every Republican should come out in favor of making birth control pills OTC right now. The bill should be rushed through the House and presented to Senate at the earliest opportunity--certainly before November.

[aliantha]

It's ironic that the Dems reject making birth control easier to get, merely because it's a Republican idea. Hypocrites.

That's not how I read the objections. The Dems are calling the guy a political opportunist. That's a rejection of the candidate, not of the proposal.

I'd be in favor of making birth control pills available OTC.

I think the proposal would have tougher going with certain parts of the GOP base than it would with most Democrats.