Irrelevant

A fan blog of no relevance to anything but what's of interest to me.

Obama Administration Approves Rule That Guarantees Near-Universal Contraceptive Coverage

keepyourboehneroutofmyuterus:

Yay for all who need/want access to birth control in the US. 

Most employers will be required to cover contraception in their health plans, along with other preventive services, with no cost-sharing such as co-pays or deductibles. This means that after years of trying to get birth control covered to the same extent that health plans cover Viagra, our country will finally have nearly universal coverage of contraception.

newsweek: This week’s cover story examines the return of the culture wars and how Obama set a contraception trap for the right. Here’s a preview: The more Machiavellian observer might even suspect this is actually an improved bait and switch by Obama to more firmly identify the religious right with opposition to contraception, its weakest issue by far, and to shore up support among independent women and his more liberal base. I’ve found by observing this president closely for years that what often seem like short-term tactical blunders turn out in the long run to be strategically shrewd. And if this was a trap, the religious right walked right into it. Take a look at the polling. Ask Americans if they believe that contraception should be included for free in all health-care plans and you get a 55 percent majority in favor, with 40 percent against. Ask American Catholics, and that majority actually rises above the national average, to 58 percent. A 49 percent plurality of all Americans supported the original Obama rule forcing Catholic institutions to provide contraception coverage. And once again, American Catholics actually support that more controversial position by a slightly higher margin than all Americans, with 52 percent backing it. So on religious-freedom grounds, the country is narrowly divided, but with a small majority on Obama’s side. And on the issue of contraception itself, studies have shown that a staggering 98 percent of Catholic women not only believe in birth control but have used it. How is it possible to describe this issue as a violation of individual conscience, when no one is forced to use contraception against their will, and most Catholics have already consulted their conscience, are fine with the pill, and want it covered? This is not like abortion, a far, far graver issue. Even the church hierarchy—in a famous commission set up by Pope John XXIII to study birth control—voted to allow oral contraception under some circumstances, only to be controversially vetoed by Pope Paul VI in 1968. And the truth is, there is no real debate among most actual living, breathing American Catholics on the issue, who tend to be more liberal than most Americans. They long ago dismissed the Vatican’s position on this. And after the sex-abuse scandal, they are even less likely to take the bishops’ moral authority on sexual matters seriously. Read the whole thing by picking up a copy on newsstands tomorrow, on iPad today—or just read it on the Beast right this minute.

newsweek:

This week’s cover story examines the return of the culture wars and how Obama set a contraception trap for the right.

Here’s a preview:

The more Machiavellian observer might even suspect this is actually an improved bait and switch by Obama to more firmly identify the religious right with opposition to contraception, its weakest issue by far, and to shore up support among independent women and his more liberal base. I’ve found by observing this president closely for years that what often seem like short-term tactical blunders turn out in the long run to be strategically shrewd. And if this was a trap, the religious right walked right into it.

Take a look at the polling. Ask Americans if they believe that contraception should be included for free in all health-care plans and you get a 55 percent majority in favor, with 40 percent against. Ask American Catholics, and that majority actually rises above the national average, to 58 percent. A 49 percent plurality of all Americans supported the original Obama rule forcing Catholic institutions to provide contraception coverage. And once again, American Catholics actually support that more controversial position by a slightly higher margin than all Americans, with 52 percent backing it. So on religious-freedom grounds, the country is narrowly divided, but with a small majority on Obama’s side.

And on the issue of contraception itself, studies have shown that a staggering 98 percent of Catholic women not only believe in birth control but have used it. How is it possible to describe this issue as a violation of individual conscience, when no one is forced to use contraception against their will, and most Catholics have already consulted their conscience, are fine with the pill, and want it covered? This is not like abortion, a far, far graver issue. Even the church hierarchy—in a famous commission set up by Pope John XXIII to study birth control—voted to allow oral contraception under some circumstances, only to be controversially vetoed by Pope Paul VI in 1968. And the truth is, there is no real debate among most actual living, breathing American Catholics on the issue, who tend to be more liberal than most Americans. They long ago dismissed the Vatican’s position on this. And after the sex-abuse scandal, they are even less likely to take the bishops’ moral authority on sexual matters seriously.

Read the whole thing by picking up a copy on newsstands tomorrow, on iPad today—or just read it on the Beast right this minute.

Ask Cheasty: Confused about Contraception Coverage?

keepyourboehneroutofmyuterus:

This is good clarification on where everything stands right now. Also, written by my smart friend. This is specifically talking about birth control coverage in the state of Texas, where Cheasty and I live.

[NB: the fight over access to birth control will and does affect more than cis women.]

Just like the Obamacare mandate, for a number of years now the state of Texas has had a law in place that requires any insurance plan that offers prescription drug coverage to also cover contraception. That includes all FDA-approved methods, from the birth control pill to diaphragms, to IUDs. (Not condoms, which are sold over the counter, but you get my drift.) Texas is one of 28 states that have such regulations, but even in states without the laws, this was fairly standard practice. The innovation here is that Obamacare promises women access to contraception with no additional co-pay – in other words, free.

But what was the big deal? Hasn’t this “no co-pay contraception” part of Obamacare been in the news for a while? Why, all of the sudden, were Catholic bishops on tv and radio complaining about government interference in their right to religious freedom?

In short, that’s a great question. First of all, the Obama administration did not, as it might appear from the dust-up, just release a regulation solely about contraception coverage. What we’re talking about here are the ACA’s regulations about preventive care. Preventive care includes everything from annual exams to mammograms, blood work, colonoscopies, and yes, contraception.

Anybody who is paying attention has known about these regulations for months.  But early last week, The Department of Health and Human Services released their final version of the regulations, and the Catholic bishops were ready for battle.

The original (pre-kerfuffle) regulations contained an exception for religious organizations. So if an organization’s primary purpose is the practice of religion (i.e., a church or diocese), then it doesn’t have to cover contraception through its insurance plan. However, if an organization is affiliated with a religion, but its primary purpose is not the practice of religion, (i.e., Seton Hospital or charities), then those institutions were not exempt.

The Catholic bishops were furious because, in essence, they felt the regulation was forcing Catholics to condone and pay for something that violated their religious beliefs. In an election year where conservatives seem to be grasping at straws, this generated a lot of political momentum.

Friday’s compromise quelled the hubbub by retaining the original exemption for churches, and by setting up a system that will work as follows. If Jane Doe works for XYZ Catholic University and XYZ doesn’t cover contraception, Jane Doe will call XYZ’s insurance company and say, “Hey insurance company, I need coverage for contraception.” The insurance company will then adjust Jane Doe’s policy to cover contraception. XYZ’s insurance plan will pay for it, but the cost will not come out of the plan’s premiums. This way, the employer need not know, nor must they pay.

Wait a second, you say. The insurance company will just eat the cost of contraception?

Essentially, yes. Obama wagered that insurance companies would be okay with this deal because it’s cost effective for them (birth control is way cheaper than an unintended pregnancy), and pretty much, he was right. They’ve issued a statement belly-aching about “setting a bad precedent,” but so far, so good. Churches and diocese and the like will still have the exemption they started with, but all the rest of us will have access to contraception at no additional co-pay, as originally promised in the law.

Disaster averted, it seems, for the time being. While the U.S. Bishops are still not satisfied, it appears most catholic voters support the policy.

Three Democrats walked out of a House Oversight and Government Reform hearing on religious liberty and the birth control rule on Thursday to protest Chairman Darrell Issa’s (R-Calif.) refusal to allow a progressive woman to testify in favor of the Obama administration’s contraception rule. The morning panel at the hearing consisted exclusively of men from conservative religious organizations.

Delegate Eleanor Holmes Norton (D-D.C.), told reporters in the hallway outside the hearing that she marched out because it was being conducted like an “autocratic regime.” The other members who left were Reps. Carolyn Maloney (D-N.Y.) and Mike Quigley (D-Ill.).

There are 10 witnesses testifying at Thursday’s hearing. None of those individuals — listed as testifying prior to hearing — are in favor of the Obama administration’s birth control rule, and few are women.

Barry Lynn, executive director of Americans United for Separation of Church and State, was listed as a witness for the hearing, but Simon Brown, a spokesman for Americans United, told The Huffington Post that Lynn will not be testifying. (He will, however, be submitting written testimony to the committee.)

Democrats say they tried to invite another witness — a young woman — to testify, but were blocked by Republicans.

Issa said at the hearing that he rejected the Democrats’ female witness, Sandra Fluke, because, as a Georgetown University law student who “appears to have become energized over this issue,” she was “not appropriate or qualified.” He said that in lieu of allowing her to speak at the hearing, he instructed his staff to post a video online of Fluke speaking at a previous press conference.

The Huffington Post, “House Democrats Walk Out of One-Sided Hearing on Contraception, Calling It an ‘Autocratic Regime.”

So much for this.

(via inothernews)

How To Have Sex With An Aspirin Between Your Knees

keepyourboehneroutofmyuterus:

Just in case you haven’t yet had time to work this out for yourself. 

“‎Now, we are not sure why Foster Friess thinks this will be safer for anyone, then again, he thinks Rick Santorum should be president, so he’s obviously not terribly bright. Please, take your sex advice from us, not him. Having sex with an aspirin between your knees will NOT prevent pregnancy or disease. But it will feel good.”