I think we're missing something that was brought up today by somebody on-line: The White House may've brought this issue up for three reasons: (1) drive up the female youth vote, since Obamacare is supposed to provide for contriception(2) Give Mittens trouble with the social conservatives over his past, and (3) make the right-wing overreach and overreact.
Well #3 might've come true.
Sen. Marco Rubio has introduced a new Senate bill to which would allow any employer to deny birth control coverage. OK this is not drawing straws over religious organizations, this is ANY employer by their own whims and ideology can deny birth control as part of their coverage.
Right-winger David Frum facepalmed today over that:
Quote:
Republicans are not proposing to allow employers and plans to refuse to cover blood transfusions if they conscientiously object to them (although there are religious groups that do). Or vaccinations (although there are individuals who conscientiously object to those as well). Or medicines derived from animal experimentation. (Ditto.)
No, Marco Rubio's Religious Freedom Restoration bill provides for one conscientious exemption only: contraception and sterilization. Which means it will be very hard if not impossible to persuade the target audience that this debate is not in fact about contraception. Everybody quite sure that's a wise debate to have?
It should be also noted that most Americans support this mandate, I believe 54%. Frum might be onto something.
(Ironically, this possible overreach won't hurt Rubio, make him a hearthrob to those base morons. Future GOP running mate, read all about it!)
