HHS mandate change — big news

9

I am happy to report more promising news from the Trump administration…

We have obtained a draft of a proposed rule change to the HHS mandate. While only a draft, we have reviewed the document and can confirm that the Department of Health and Human Services is considering a major revision to the unconstitutional abortion pill mandate.

This could be a major victory for religious liberty and the conscience rights of all Americans.

In the proposed rule change, religious organizations like the Little Sisters of the Poor, Notre Dame, and EWTN would be free to purchase health care plans without morally objectionable services like sterilizations, contraception, and abortifacients. The Obama-era phony ‘accommodation’ rules would be gone.

Employers would not need to apply to the federal government in order to receive an exemption from the contraception mandate. Instead, employers would simply be free to select health care plans without the mandate altogether. Finally! No American should have to ask permission for their First Amendment right to religious liberty!

Even better: the proposed draft isn’t limited to religious organizations. The draft language would allow any employer, including for-profit businesses who have moral or ethical objections, to opt out of this birth control mandate.

And this updated regulation would become effective immediately as soon as it is published in the Federal Register.

The Draft states:

“Congress has consistently protected religious beliefs and moral convictions in the context of healthcare, including health insurance. In doing so, Congress has promoted access to health services while respecting the ethical or faith-based views held by persons and entities regarding sensitive medical procedures.”

Did you notice the exact language used here? Religious and moral. Ethical or faith-based. Persons and entities. This is the exact opposite of Obama’s hyper-narrow “exemptions.” This language seeks to protect individuals and organizations — including all those with religious or moral objections.

Of course, nothing is final until it is final.

But we are very encouraged by this news, and believe a major change to the notorious HHS mandate could be announced very soon.

The National Women’s Law Center has already promised to file a lawsuit against the new rule. And you can expect a parade of lawsuits and lies from the ACLU, Planned Parenthood and others. Even some extremist ‘Catholic’ leaders are posturing that this would be devastating for women — despite the fact that, sadly, birth control is widely available and affordable without the HHS mandate.

We are prepared to file briefs in any future litigation, and to support the Trump administration in their efforts to protect the rights of conscience and people of faith.

We know members of the White House read our emails.

Our message today for them: it’s time to turn this draft into reality.

We’ve got your back.

The views expressed here are those of the author, and do not necessarily represent the views of CatholicVote.org

Share.

About Author

mm

Brian Burch is President of CatholicVote.org.

9 Comments

  1. For the record, your organization was cheering when the House passed the AHCA.

    “The House of Representatives passed a bill to repeal many of the most onerous provisions of ObamaCare.”

    https://catholicvote.org/religious-freedom-is-a-journey-not-the-destination/

    Those “onerous provisions” including things like insurance mandating vaccination coverage, maternity care, etc.  So in that light, a few questions:

    1. If an employer’s “moral convictions” are that vaccines are secretly drugging our children and causing diseases like autism, do you agree that employers should have the right to forbid employees from purchasing an employer-based plan with vaccination coverage, even if the employees believe that vaccines are best for their children?

    2. If an employer’s “moral convictions” are that abortion is morally valid and helps with things like population control, do you agree that employers can require Catholic employees to purchase an employer-based plan with abortion coverage?

    3. Whether you like it or not, doctors prescribe some forms of contraception.  Do you agree that employers have the right to decide which prescriptions doctors right are valid and invalid for employees?

    4. Let’s say an employer believes the HPV vaccine, which vaccinates against cervical cancer, is morally wrong because such an action may promote promiscuity – an actual belief out there.  Do you believe that the decision about a child’s medical care is best served by the beliefs of the employer or the parent of the child?

    • 5.) Let’s say that your premise is false-that my employer is not nor should be responsible for my health care decisions.

      Now what?

      • I think the accommodation already in place works well: only money from employee premiums would be used to pay for objectionable services. In my opinion, opponents of the accommodation who claim that an employer is still “facilitating” the use of an objectionable act like contraception need to address the following: if the mere act of paying into an insurance system makes one liable for any of the outputs, i.e. the insurance companies can’t keep separate “buckets” of money to fund things, then anyone paying into an insurance system that includes abortions is by the same definition facilitating abortion. Yet, I don’t hear religious leaders and commentators who oppose the accommodation being concerned about facilitating abortion in group and private markets.

        • It doesn’t work that way-the individual employee isn’t executing a private contract with the provider. The employer is-they’re the ones being mandated.

          I’m pretty sure you’d hear from religious leaders if abortion provision was mandated as BC is.

      • You look for another job… that is if you were not downsized and your confidence is high and your libido is low.

  2. Ryan Schroeder on

    There is a great deal of irony using an image of a physician consulting a patient with this story. This rule change would allow employers to opt out of covering physician-issued prescriptions for contraception.

  3. I truly hope that companies will refuse to cover viagra for any unmarried man. These awful men who sleep around must be PUNISHED.

Leave A Reply