Senate GOP blocks bill to overturn Hobby Lobby ruling

The Senate on Wednesday torpedoed a Democratic plan to reverse a recent Supreme Court ruling allowing some employers to decline to provide employees insurance coverage for some forms of birth control on religious grounds.

The bill failed to get 60 votes needed to cross a procedural hurdle, as Republicans were largely united against it. Three Republican senators voted for the bill: Mark Kirk of Illinois, Lisa Murkowski of Alaska and Susan Collins of Maine. The bill had no hope of passage in the Republican-controlled House.

In its June 30 Hobby Lobby decision, the court ruled that closely held companies could refuse to pay for some contraception that violated the religious tenets of the owners.

usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2014/07/16/senate-hobby-lobby-contraception-ruling/12738193/

From the article:

Senate Republicans on Wednesday blocked a bill aimed at **restoring free contraception for women **who get their health insurance from companies with religious objections, a legislative setback for Democrats that they hope will be a political winner in November’s elections.

They weren’t free, AP!! Someone has to pay for them. That’s the point. The government was trying to make Hobby Lobby provide something against their religious liberty.

The anti-religious liberty bigotry of senate Democrats is clearly on display.

Jon

There is criticism of the AP so I edited the post and posted another story.

Don’t they just come from the birth control tree growing out back?

The sad thing is, people really do think goods and services are somehow “free”. :rolleyes:

Yep. That is pretty much the core of the problem. Too many people are expecting things for ‘free’ without realizing that, one way or another, they [or somebody else] will be paying for them.

But a Republican woman–Sen. Kelly Ayotte, R-N.H., is leading an effort to consider an alternative.

She said she plans legislation that will “reaffirm that no employer can prohibit an employee from purchasing an FDA-approved drug or medical device, including contraception.” The bill also is “going to focus on expanding access for women to have access to contraception. And so we have a sense of the Senate and we are asking the FDA to undertake a study to determine whether over-the-counter purchase of contraception is safe and effective for adult women so that we can look at this issue to see, are there ways we can give greater access for women to purchase contraceptives? So that will be included in our bill.”

Finally, she said, “we want to increase affordability” by giving people “greater rights to use health savings accounts and flexible spending accounts.”

mcclatchydc.com/2014/07/16/233478/senate-hobby-lobby-vote-set-for.html

Here is a statement regarding the bill:

ayotte.senate.gov/?p=press_release&id=1511

She said she plans legislation that will “reaffirm that** no employer can prohibit an employee from purchasing an FDA-approved drug or medical device, including contraception**.” The bill also is “going to focus on expanding access for women to have access to contraception.

And my questions,
What employer is prohibiting their employees from buying contraceptives?
Who is restricting access to contraceptives?

Why does Senator Ayotte feel the need to buy into progressive propoganda?

Jon

Why can’t the government do something useful, like mandate that our employers buy us beer. That way when someone objects we can claim they are trying to impose their morality on us.

I’m sure Democrat’s will say the new bill doesn’t go far enough. IUDs and sterilization can’t be done over the counter and will still run into the $1,000+ range. Both Ginsberg and the current senate bill object to employees footing the bill for expensive procedures. While Hobby Lobby or others might be okay to pay for sterilization a Catholic owned business should not be. In other words I’d fear that removing abortifacients might make others say it’s okay to force sterilization since only Catholics object.

Regardless, I am glad the bill was blocked. Now if only my fellow Coloradoans would kick Udall to the curb this fall and get us back to splitting the senate seats.

Access is always the code word for free when we Dems use it.

I hope Alaska votes Murkowski out of a job when her term expires.

…the right to keep and drink beer shall not be infringed"

:extrahappy:

Jon

So I guess the government is blocking my access to rifles since they don’t force my employer to arm me. :shrug:

Well, of course they would. It is not in the thought process of progressives to allow exceptions (for long).

Jon

Not to be offensive here but I don’t think that this Rep senator is saying this buying into the agenda. By the wording it sounds like Ayotte is throwing this bs back at the democrats.

It doesn’t take a PHD to figure out what the dems are trying to do with this bill they knew would never pass the house. They want to show the rep’s as leading the war on women!

I think this Ayotte is giving the public a different perspective that no one is being denied contraceptives… hey while were at it let’s take a look at any health risks associated with said contraceptives. I think this is brilliant!

Of course being a Canadian I might not know what the “bleep” im talking about… so sorry aboot any naiveté on my part.:thumbsup:

I think it’s a smart move.It guts the Democrat lie on what the ruling did

The mandate should include all legal forms of alcohol. Otherwise, the government would be discriminating against those of who think beer is disgusting. :wink:

The Democrats have polled the language that works best to make people angry on this issue. This provision is meaningless. It’s only in there to counter the Democrat’s claim that Hobby Lobby means no more birth control for women working for a Christian employer.

JMR

Here’s a video clip of comments from Sen. Tom Coburn following the defeat of this bill. His comments are spot on.

Kelly Ayotte went way down in my estimation. A northeastern moderate/liberal Republican. She’d be useful as part of a GOP majority though - in that her seat would give the balance of power to the more conservative GOP majority among senators. That is why I’d vote for her over the Democrat if I lived in her state. But as a future leader, no way.

As for the OP, this is proof that there is a difference between the GOP and the Democrat party.

Ishii

Good move by the GOP. Last time I checked, the Senate can’t just vote away SCOTUS rulings. Separation of powers, anyone?

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.