I don’t think this punt means what you think it means Sisters…
All the same…
4 Likes
So it turns out that SCOTUS actually DOES function less like a partisan institution when forced to compromise.
Maybe we should keep it at an even 8 members.
5 Likes
“A four-four court functions. It’s functioned in the past. It will function this time. Just on the really controversial issues they will probably put them off for a year. It’s not the end of the world,”
Senator Hatch
It’ll be a great day indeed when Americans stop indulging the temper tantrums of the religious community. Religion is a form of mental illness; it demands belief in an invisible, all-powerful male being who knows everything, created everything, yet has his almighty plan constantly thwarted by his own creations (us). And, we taxpayers subsidize these fools by giving them tax-exempt status. Why!!! In fact, we should double tax any organization crazy enough to peddle this nonsense.
8 Likes
Yeah, but not a copy editor. It’s actually a job I’d be interested in, but I’m not qualified for it any way, starting with living in D.C.
Once they can get this stinking turd upheld under RFRA, their next argument will be that allowing their employees to spend the governement issued currency that they receive with their pay on contraception would be an unconstitutional use of the governement’s currency issuing power to violate the employer’s first amendment right to exercise their religion by avoiding all involvement in employees spending pay received from the religious employer on contraception.
3 Likes
Good job, pejesq, making the baby Jesus cry.
I still don’t understand why letting women use their earned health benefits is different than letting workers spend their earned income. We’ve already thrown out employment tests that include judging your personal habits & behaviors.
12 Likes
Oh, and BTW the plaintiffs claim that they win because they have not (yet) been order to pay the fine mandated in the law shows just how completely effed-up rightwing nutbars’ (apostrophe in the right place) perception of the world is. The law doesn’t mandate a fine because the Evil Federal Gummint loves fining people, it mandates a fine to encourage employers to give their employees coverage (that includes contraceptive care). If the outcome is going to be employees getting coverage that includes contraceptive care, then the Evil Federal Gummint is happy and really doesn’t care about the fine.
3 Likes
I wonder world-wide, how many babies are buried around the convents?
3 Likes
This thing of inserting apostrophes into plurals baffles me. I can see leaving them out where they should be present, but putting in extra ones? It seems to be recent, is it some autocorrect thing? Regardless, it just makes the writer look incredibly stupid, much more so than other typos.
5 Likes
6 Likes
Perhap’s you 'should learned grammar before accus’ing other’s?..
This, thing of insertin’ apostrophe;s into plurals"’ baffle-s; me. I can-see leavin" them out where they ((s)hould be prescent, but puttin’ in extra ones’? It ceem…s ta be recent, is it some autocorrect ting? Reguardlesslyer, it just make’s the write’r look incredib:ly stu-pid, much more. so than other typo’s!!1!eleven!!
The non-profits said that even filling out the form or sending a government the letter declaring their objections to covering birth control was a burden on their faith, because it set in motion the process by which their employees received the coverage from their insurers, though that coverage was not paid for or part of the employer plans.
Oh, get stuffed.
You aren’t using birth control.
You aren’t paying for birth control.
You aren’t even paying for insurance that would cover the cost of birth control.
You are sending in a form to tell the government that you object to paying for insurance that would cover birth control.
You want to characterize the form as setting in motion a process by which birth control coverage is provided. Nope. The form allows you to buy noncompliant insurance coverage for your employees. The government is arranging for the birth control coverage.
You see, Sisterhood of the Clenched Sphincter, you don’t get to control what action the government takes in response to that form, just as you don’t get to decide what the government does with any sales/income/tax revenue a sister or The Sisters has provided to the government over the years.
Everybody in this country gets their own bubble of religious freedom. You don’t get to extend yours over the rest of us.
15 Likes
I think the opposite.
Roberts will look to ensure as few as possible 4-4 decisions come up as possible. He is a partisan, he simply doesn’t want to appear that way.
He is all about his legacy, so the last thing he wants is anyone to the left of Scalia or the court. If the court has a liberal majority, the “Roberts Court” could be remebered for liberal decisions. what good is it being Chief if you are always in the minority?
1 Like
a legal landscape that got much more complicated after the Supreme Court’s ruling in 2014’s Hobby Lobby case
A good sign of a crappy decision.
A court can’t find a right to privacy in the Constitution, but it can find that a non-human legal entity has a right to religious freedom?
Just wait until some 22nd-century robot lawyer discovers the Hobby Lobby case and realizes the implications.
6 Likes
I don’t think so at all. I think he’s tired of getting beat around the head for making the correct legal call when a conservative call is what was desired. Roberts wants his reputation to remain as a respected jurist, he isn’t interested in going down like a Scalia. I imagine Scalia was a thorn in his side on a constant basis. I can’t even imagine what happened after Roberts changed his mind on the ACA to ensure what was a correct outcome. I don’t think Roberts ever wants to be in that position again. Roberts does not want another Scalia. I expect he’d take Garland in a hot second.
2 Likes
None of this matters anyway as ObamaCare is slowly imploding.
The major players are getting out and the 20 miles of legislative duct tape is unraveling.
UnitedHealth Group (NYSE: UNH), the largest insurer in the U.S., recently announced that it would be vacating a majority of the 34 states it’s currently operating in beginning in 2017.
Humana has also threatened to pack up shop due to losses suffered on Obamacare exchanges.
Also, more than half of all of Obamacare’s approved healthcare cooperatives closed up shop heading into 2016 due to unsustainable losses and an insufficiently funded risk corridor, which was designed to protect money-losing insurers by taking money from insurers that were raking in the dough hand over fist.
In Virginia, national insurer Aetna (NYSE: AET) announced an average premium rate hike request averaging 13%
Anthem Blue Cross Blue Shield, is requesting an average rate hike of 15.8%.
according to Obamacare data aggregators ACASignUps.net, the weighted average of the 13 received rate requests is nearly 18%.
Moda Health Plan and Oregon’s Health Co-Op, which are both requesting average rate hikes of 32%.
Providence Health Plan is nipping at their heels with an average rate hike request of 29.6%.
These three health plans comprise practically three-quarters of all enrollees in
Oregon’s individual Obamacare marketplace, implying a weighted average increase per ACASignUps.net of 27%! Ouch!
In 2016, insurers that were losing money on Obamacare’s exchanges requested $2.87 billion in financial assistance. Unfortunately, the risk corridor doled out just $362 million, or 13% of what was requested. This is the primary reason that more than half of Obamacare’s approved healthcare co-ops closed up shop heading into 2016.
Further, without the risk corridor protecting new insurance entrants, there could be little incentive for increased competition,
What a load of copy and paste BS.
1 Like
Except it’s not.
Nope again. Frankly, I wish it were somewhat true as it would make my April and May insurance filings that much easier to accomplish.
Except this isn’t the whole story. Having been involved in some of these group activities with United, their problem is that they, along with many of the conservative states actually, assumed this would go away and they put off any changes they needed to make to remain successful. Their competition is kicking their rear ends in those states because they were prepared for what getting on the exchange would entail. In addition, United might be vacating the exchanges, but they are leaving subsidiaries on board all across the U.S.
EDIT: For an example, see Harken Health in Georgia and Illinois.
Okay? They can threaten all day. It’s the kabuki dance of getting more money from the government.
12 out of 23. These are private businesses that fail and succeed based on their own merits. Most businesses fail, this has nothing to do with Obamacare.
They can request all day long. It means exactly nothing until the review process is done. These are pretty standard pre-Obamacare requests. Now, they have to provide significantly more documentation and must declare rate increases on their own websites that are over 10% if such increases are, in fact, granted.
What?
Again, this is your free market at work. Most private businesses fail.
10 Likes