Rick Santorum (US Republican presidential candidate) trying to bring Jesus into the government

Given that most polls showing 55-60% support among women for requiring employers to include contraception in health plans, I'm still trying to understand Ace's claim that this will hurt Obama.

Looking at trends in polls on head-to-head match ups:

Obama / Romney
Obama / Santorum

Obama is widening his lead in the last month (as a result of better economic news, nasty Republican primaries/debates, AND I would suggest, the contraception issue).

 

it's almost like the far right's goal is to alienate moderates.

 

Moderates, Independents, Women.....and the fast growing demographic - Hispanics.

Given Romney's plan for illegal immigrants to self-deport, all of the candidates wanting to repeal 14th amendment citizenship status for children born in the US to illegal immigrants and all of them opposed to the DREAM Act...along with significant support (60%) among Hispanics for the Affordable Care Act

Is it any wonder that Hispanic voter preferences in recent Fox News Poll: Obama - 70%, Romney - 14% with a wider margin against Santorum.
http://latino.foxnews.com/latino/po...sing-ground-to-obama-among-latinos-poll-says/

 

That is not my argument. Birth control is and will continue to be affordable and available. That then says to me that people need to be better informed on how to effectively use birth control to avoid unwanted consequences controllable through the use of birth control. Care to respond to that?
--- merged: Mar 9, 2012 at 5:47 PM ---

I said the pressure is on for him to retain or improve upon what he got in the previous election. It is gonna be difficult. I think he knows it. I think strategists know it. This does not mention actual turnout, which is another issue - he has to get women voters (other base groups as well) to turnout. If he gets 56% to 44% women with a high turnout he can not be beat. That seems obvious to me.

 

That would be me, not most others. I can not believe people who vote, in particular the swing (moderate) voter, don't know if they will vote for Obama or not in November. How is that possible? I think they are simply b.s'ing the rest of us. There are no more real unknowns in terms of what we can expect from the available candidates.
--- merged: Mar 9, 2012 at 5:53 PM ---

How many more times do I need to write this? Access and affordability is not a problem in the US.

 

Just when you've seen it all, part II.

A bill that just passed the Republican controlled House in Missouri:

But it is ok to deny benefits to women and discriminate in employer-based health care provisions.

 

This whole birth control mandate controversy is ridiculous. No one is giving birth control away. No one is making someone else pay for their birth control. Any extra costs borne by companies in compliance with this mandate are easily passed on to their employees. But are there going to be extra costs? My understanding is that for an insurer birth control is a lot cheaper to provide than 10 months of pregnancy care and then 18- 24 years of juvenile medical and dental care.

This isn't about money, this is about denying women the ability to have non-procreation-based sex.

 

Which means men are being denied, as well.

 

The Republican Party has almost, but not completely yet, gone off the deep end.
As a Reagan Republican, now wanting nothing to do with the party, here's what I hope for:
Romney gets nominated.
Obama wins at least 48, if not 50 states.
The Republicans are led back into the modern world by new, as yet unknown leaders who do not worship at the alter of Rush and Hannitty.
This would be good for the country.

 

Unlike buying a condom, women cant just walk into Bubba's bait shop and general store in North Carolina and buy birth control pills.

It is discriminatory to exclude contraception when an employer-sponsored health plan provides prescription coverage. That has been the case at least since an EEOC ruling in 2000, with no push back from Republicans at the time or since that time until they saw it as an issue to take on the ACA in an election year. How many times do I need to write this?

 

or this whole thing could be a canard floated by the republicans to distract from the continued improvements in employment numbers. wedge issue floatation 101.

 

Zero as far as I am concerned. The answer to this false controversy is simple. I can not buy a car without an airbag. Using similar thinking, a health insurance policy should require prescription drug coverage including contraception. Just don't require the employer to pay for it. People should control their own health insurance...or....we should go to a true single payer system.

 

Who is requiring employers to pay for contraception?

 

Good question. As far as I understand it, employers who offer health care insurance to their employees will need to include one that offers coverage for birth control contraceptives as part of the prescription package. If the requirement is more or other than that, I'm unaware of it.

 

Perhaps "mandate" or "require" are not the correct terms to use:

http://www.shrm.org/Publications/HRNews/Pages/ReallyCreateMandate.aspx

I think from a regulatory point of view, defining a health insurance policy to require prescription drug coverage, including contraception, is reasonable. However, I do not find Obamacare reasonable.