Democrats Looking For Legislative Fight Over Abortifacients
One has to wonder if this is a winning strategy going into the 2014 election cycle. Other than their abortion loving base, will this get out the vote for them? And is it the brightest idea to attack private companies in this manner, attempting to remove their 1st Amendment Rights?
(The Hill) Democrats want to lure Republicans into a fight over birth control with legislation to reverse the Supreme Court’s decision that ObamaCare may not require certain businesses to include contraception in their employee health coverage.
At least three bills are being crafted in the House and Senate to amend the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA), which the high court used as the basis for its ruling that the contraception mandate violated federal law.
Democrats are expected to introduce the measures prior to Congress’s August recess as part of an effort to recalibrate the party’s election-year messaging. Their hope is to turn out female voters by casting the court’s decision in Burwell v. Hobby Lobby as a strike against reproductive rights.
This could easily backfire, if Republican messaging is on point (yeah, not always something we can count on, though there are always the outside groups making TV commercial buys): they can easily point out that this is not about contraception, but abortifacients. They can also point out that the “contraception mandate” was not, in fact, part of the Obamacare law as written, but wholly a concoction of Team Obama to patronize their base and young women, moochers who want Someone Else to pay for their condoms and birth control pills. Though, of course, avoiding mentioning that last part.
“It will drive women to the polls this November to vote for the women candidates who are on the right side of women’s access to basic healthcare.”
“This will be a huge motivator for women in the fall and a liability for Republican candidates up and down the map,” Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee (DSCC) spokesman Justin Barasky added.
Abortifacients is a big driver of women to the polls? One has to wonder about their priorities and incompetence in using proper contraception to avoid getting pregnant.
Federal health officials could pursue regulations requiring insurers or the government to pay for birth control for women whose employers opt out of the mandate.
But for now, despite pressure from liberal groups, the White House is putting the onus on Congress. The tactic amounts to inviting the GOP to a legislative fight.
“The best way to resolve this situation is for Congress to pass a law,” White House spokesman Josh Earnest said Monday.
So now it’s up to the Central Government to pay for women to obtain abortifacients? Doesn’t that violate the Hyde Amendment?? Oh, right, loopholes. Why can’t they pay for them themselves? Why is it necessary for Someone Else to pay for them?