Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Contraception Accomodation: Who Pays For This?
ABC News ^ | February 10, 2012 | by Jake Tapper

Posted on 02/10/2012 10:39:44 AM PST by Oldeconomybuyer

If not the religious institutions….or the women….who pays for the contraceptive services?

The Obama administration claims it pays for itself, pointing to this new report:

http://aspe.hhs.gov/health/reports/2012/contraceptives/ib.shtml

“While the costs of contraceptives for individual women can be substantial and can influence choice of contraceptive methods, available data indicate that providing contraceptive coverage as part of a health insurance benefit does not add to the cost of providing insurance coverage. Evidence from well-documented prior expansions of contraceptive coverage indicates that the cost to issuers ... is zero.”

We shall see what the insurance companies say…

(Excerpt) Read more at abcnews.go.com ...


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Culture/Society; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: catholic; exemptions; obamacare; socialism


1 posted on 02/10/2012 10:39:46 AM PST by Oldeconomybuyer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer

The fees are paid by the customers. They simply move from a line item to a hidden fee.

This accommodation is pure nonsense.


2 posted on 02/10/2012 10:43:31 AM PST by Triple (Socialism denies people the right to the fruits of their labor, and is as abhorrent as slavery)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer

I wish the White House had held this until the spring planting season ... when this much manure might have come in handy!


3 posted on 02/10/2012 10:44:15 AM PST by In Maryland ("Truth? We don't need no stinkin' truth!" - Official Motto of the Main Stream Media)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer

But.. but.. but it’s FREE. Didn’t zero just say so?


4 posted on 02/10/2012 10:46:18 AM PST by duckman (Go Newt...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer

“If not the religious institutions”

Whoa, they’re still paying because they’ll have to pay the insurance company premiums.


5 posted on 02/10/2012 10:46:39 AM PST by bigbob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer
If you find yourself debating someone who thinks this is a good compromise, ask them:

"what about Catholic health insurance companies ? (They do exist.)

How is this a good 'compromise' when it changes nothing for such companies ?

.

6 posted on 02/10/2012 10:48:02 AM PST by repentant_pundit (Sammy's your uncle, but he behaves like a spoiled rotten kid.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer

Boy, they really did their homework on that one. Downright sneaky. But in the end, the religious institutions are still footing the bill.

I hope the people don’t buy into this shenanigan.


7 posted on 02/10/2012 10:48:55 AM PST by al_c (http://www.blowoutcongress.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer
Rush, on bigger issue, Obama has no constitutional right to issue this by edict. Power grab needs to be challenged.

...Dont get sucked into the debate, reject his authority to declare who needs to do what.

8 posted on 02/10/2012 10:49:27 AM PST by opentalk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer
The President has no delegated power to "compromise" on an area which is not within his purview in the first place.

There are those here and elsewhere who recognize that this is not about "women's health," or "contraception," or any other semantic terms used by the President and his surrogates. So-called "health care reform" itself was the Trojan Horse used by Obama and his fellow "progressives" to bypass and subvert the United States Constitution's limitations on coercive power.

". . . every word of [the Constitution] decides a question between power and liberty. . . ." - James Madison, National Gazette, January 19, 1792

Ours is a "People's" Constitution structuring and limiting the powers of our government, including that of any elected President.

That Constitution has not been amended to grant this President, or any other President, the right to violate its First Amendment's protections. Those provisions are not within the purview of the President, nor any other branch of the government.

The time has come for "the People," to assert their sovereign will and to reject all efforts to bypass or ignore the Constitution.

§ 1907. If these Commentaries shall but inspire in the rising generation a more ardent love of their country, an unquenchable thirst for liberty, and a profound reverence for the constitution and the Union, then they will have accomplished all, that their author ought to desire. Let the American youth never forget, that they possess a noble inheritance, bought by the toils, and sufferings, and blood of their ancestors; and capable, if wisely improved, and faithfully guarded, of transmitting to their latest posterity all the substantial blessings of life, the peaceful enjoyment of liberty, property, religion, and independence. The structure has been erected by architects of consummate skill and fidelity; its foundations are solid; its compartments are beautiful, as well as useful; its arrangements are full of wisdom and order; and its defences are impregnable from without. It has been reared for immortality, if the work of man may justly aspire to such a title. It may, nevertheless, perish in an hour by the folly, or corruption, or negligence of its only keepers, THE PEOPLE. Republics are created by the virtue, public spirit, and intelligence of the citizens. They fall, when the wise are banished from the public councils, because they dare to be honest, and the profligate are rewarded, because they flatter the people, in order to betray them."

9 posted on 02/10/2012 10:49:27 AM PST by loveliberty2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer

This assumes that women would not acquire contraception if it was not provided by their insurance. An untrue argument.

The vast majority of people that wanted to use contraception would get it on their own if they had to. Heck, there is an ultra-cheap, over the counter contraceptive—condoms.

Obama’s argument also doesn’t consider the long term cost of hormone contraceptives. It’s know that they are linked to cancers later in a woman’s life (as is abortion). The cost of treating one additional case of breast cancer will wipe out any savings from not having children.

And of course, the economic argument being made is that it’s cheaper to have avoid children than have them. Duh, but it begs the obvious question: should moral decisions be made due to economic reasons?


10 posted on 02/10/2012 10:50:13 AM PST by Brookhaven (Mitt Romney has been consistent since he changed his mind.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer
I thought that one of the reasons that the Regime was giving for requiring contraceptive/abortion-covered health insurance was because of the expense that women would otherwise have to pay for these "services".

Now they're saying that the insurance company can provide it free of charge?

Anybody else see a disconnect here?

11 posted on 02/10/2012 10:50:43 AM PST by BlueLancer (KOMEN PINK: The color of the water in the basin after Pilate finished washing his hands)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer

Obummermath:
1 + 1 = 0


12 posted on 02/10/2012 10:51:24 AM PST by bunkerhill7 (Harvard teaches Math?? ??? Who knew?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Brookhaven
This assumes that women would not acquire contraception if it was not provided by their insurance. An untrue argument.

It also assumes that women MUST, absolutely MUST, have sex when they are not in a life situation to have a baby.

13 posted on 02/10/2012 10:56:01 AM PST by MrB (The difference between a Humanist and a Satanist - the latter knows whom he's working for)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer
He be paying for it from his STASH!!!
14 posted on 02/10/2012 11:10:28 AM PST by Foolsgold (L I B Lacking in Brains)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BlueLancer
Anybody else see a disconnect here?

Yes, the liberal brain is disconnected from reality!

Let me help you understand this new position. According to their study and findings, if an insurance company pays for something, even if it is MORE of that product than was being used before, it will be cheaper - practically free - at least to those who receive it. Except that those who are using it are paying higher premiums, but that doesn't correlate to having paid for the items which the insurance gives away - for free.

Is that better?
15 posted on 02/10/2012 11:40:40 AM PST by ExTxMarine (PRAYER: It's the only HOPE for real CHANGE in America!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer

I wonder if an Insurance Provider says the only contraceptive they cover is the good ol’ use of the word “No”, aka, “Stop”, etc.?


16 posted on 02/10/2012 12:36:46 PM PST by traditional1 (Stay thirsty, my friends.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer
Who Pays For This?

Hey Dumb Dumb! It's Frrreeeeeeeeeee!

Ugh, so stupid! /libtard

17 posted on 02/10/2012 12:52:31 PM PST by douginthearmy (Obamagebra: 1 job + 1 hope + 1 change = 0 jobs + 0 hope)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: traditional1

PSSSST ...it’s aspirin trad.....the answer is ASPIRIN....the nuns taught us ASPIRIN...see,

1, you put 2 asprin bet. the knees ...

and

2 you don’t let ‘em go....

3.n yer contracepted...

VIOLA and NO PROBLEMO....cheap also

...i reserve the balance of my time....


18 posted on 02/10/2012 3:04:31 PM PST by flat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer; All
Since when can a president of the United States just saunter up to the podium and declare that the language of a legislative act will be changed?

Don't get caught up in the sideshow, FReepers. The main event is right in front of us. Obama is re-writing legislation on a whim. He must be stopped.

Where the hell is Congress today?

19 posted on 02/10/2012 3:22:21 PM PST by Semper911 (When you want to rob Peter to pay Paul, you'll always have the support of Paul.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: flat
No wonder I find aspirins all over the floor every morning.....

LOL

20 posted on 02/10/2012 3:36:07 PM PST by traditional1 (Stay thirsty, my friends.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: traditional1
' No wonder I find aspirins all over the floor every morning.....' wimmons....can't live w/'em .....'n ya cant live w/'em..
21 posted on 02/13/2012 11:15:09 AM PST by flat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson