The recent birth control battle has stimulated constant conversation. President Barack Obama recently revised his law, putting the responsibility for providing birth control on insurance companies instead of employers.
Obama said, “If a woman’s employer is a charity or a hospital that has a religious objection to providing contraceptive services as part of their health plan, the insurance company — not the hospital, not the charity — will be required to reach out and offer the woman contraceptive care free of charge.”
Compromise might not have been the best solution in this situation. While the president conceded with good intentions, this metaphorical olive branch has backfired.
After the revisions were announced, Republicans banded together and turned what was meant to be a simple act into a large, complicated mess — something Republicans do well.
House Speaker John Boehner, along with other Republicans, signed legislation attacking not only birth control, but heath care reform as a whole.
The legislation is titled the “Respect for Rights of Conscience Act.” The bill is co-sponsored by Rep. Randy Neugebauer who explained his reasoning for sponsorship in the Texas Insider.
Neugebauer said the revisions did “nothing to lift the mandate on religious-affiliated hospitals, colleges, and charities to contract with an insurer that provides free contraception, sterilization, and abortificatients to their employees.” He must have been reading something different than everyone else, and ignored what Obama said when he made it clear the revisions remove all responsibility from the employer.
Nevertheless, H.R. 1179 is catching the attention of confused Republicans and those who oppose Obama in general.
Neugebauer said the act would overturn Obama’s law, and protect First Amendment rights that are being infringed upon. But this means any group that has an objection to birth control could refuse services, not just religious institutions and affiliates.
He added, “The sooner we repeal this mandate, and Obamacare as a whole, the sooner we can restore freedom and liberty to Americans.”
Compromising on a fair and needed law may seem like a bright idea, but it has initiated a firestorm of counterattacks that overpower any good intentions.