Posted on 10/07/2017 8:36:12 AM PDT by Ennis85
Under the guise of protecting religious freedom and moral sensibilities, the Trump administration is making it harder for women to get access to birth control. On Friday, it rolled back an Obama-era rule requiring most employers to provide their employees with birth control coverage without co-payments. The mandate, established under the Affordable Care Act, has helped millions of women avoid unwanted pregnancy by eliminating out-of-pockets costs for contraception.
Under new rules, the Departments of Health and Human Services, Treasury and Labor will make it easier for employers to deny contraception coverage if they have a “religious or moral objection” to doing so. Further, the departments have made it harder for women who are denied birth control coverage to get no-cost contraception directly from insurance companies, under a process established by the previous administration.
If that were not bad enough, officials made the changes effective immediately. The administration claimed, absurdly, that the rule had to be issued quickly because the normal process of seeking public comment before acting would be “impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public interest.” It used other specious arguments to justify its decision — asserting, for instance, that coverage of contraception could lead to more “risky sexual behavior” among some teenagers and young women.
These regulatory rollbacks will almost surely reverse years of progress. The percentage of reproductive-age women who faced out-of-pocket costs for oral contraceptives, for example, fell to less than 4 percent by 2014 from more than 20 percent just two years earlier, according to the Kaiser Family Foundation. One study estimates that women are saving about $1.4 billion on the pill. The mandate to cover birth control is also very popular; 68 percent of people say they support it.
The Obama administration, knowing that right-wing groups would seize on any pretext to limit access
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
Tired of the left doing this.
That is President Trump and why should I pay for another’s birth control/abortion?
Since when is the responsibility of the U.S. taxpayer to provide birth control? I’ve read the Constitution. It isn’t in there.
NYT ediorial board: if you can’t afford birth control or children...stop fornicating.
In Newspeak, birth control means freebies.
President Trump is NOT limiting access. What he is limiting is their ability to make me pay for their mistakes.
The New York Times lies.
Contraception was not part of the ACA signed into law in 2010. It was twiddled into being by Kathleen Sebelius whose HHS issued a RULE, excluding male contraception coverage, that took effect in 2012
Apparently “risky behavior” only refer to intercourse without contraceptives according to the NYT
.
Ignorance mat be bliss, but promiscuous sex leads to dangerous life-changing events such as STD’s and emotional instability.
This only affects about 100,000 women, but they act like he sewed 65 million woo woos shut
>>That is President Trump and why should I pay for another’s birth control/abortion?
Because you have insurance. You pay for all sorts of things because you have insurance. Birth control is a much better thing to pay for than an abortion. I agree with Trump on just about everything, but this was a bad move.
Health insurance will still pay for birth control prescriptions, so you’ll still pay for it. It is still available to women who want it. But now, they can lie and claim that taking away the zero deductible is an “attack on women” and a “ban on birth control”.
This was a non-issue until he made it one.
Conversely, if an abortion is to save the life of the mother or child, all bets are off.
With all the protection available today, there is NO reason for man or woman to play God and have a precious baby they don't want.
A bad move in an alternate liberal universe. And who cares if the snowflakes wanna scream attack on women. This won’t impact Trump in the least.
Quick question dimwits... If it’s “your body” and “the government out of your reproductive decisions”, then why do you insist on relying on that same government for your birth control?
In Leftspeak, absence of taxpayer funding always means limited access, since they always operate from the underlying assumption that the government is the ultimate provider of every human good.
If the govt doesn’t fund my dental floss, it is limiting my access to dental floss. The govt is -— they say —— Constitutionally responsible for the state of the inside of my mouth. And !y genital tract.
People like myself, who would argue that contraception is part of the problem -— not part of the solution -—and are moreover *prohibited* from participating with it in any way, would thoughtfully disagree with you.
I have had health insurance all my life, and never had a policy that covered contraceptives.
Does anyone actually believe that unplanned pregnancies only occur because people can’t ‘afford’ birth control?
Does anyone actually believe that unplanned pregnancies only occur because people can’t ‘afford’ birth control?
These data from the CDC are very disturbing.
https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/pressroom/sosmap/unmarried/unmarried.htm
It also means a free flow of US taxpayer money to Planned Parenthood and then back to Dems in Congress for their next election funds (and other fun spending things).
Especially when you can walk to a CVS and pick up some bc for under 5 bucks.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.