HHS mandate: the Cliff Notes version

Our own Frank Weathers has read the mandate so that you don’t have to!

His summation is here.

A highlight or two:

I learned a few things by reading the whole thing. For instance, I learned that the actual rule proposed to the Code of Federal Regulations is 8 and a half pages long, not 80. Sure, the document released on Friday was 80 pages long, but a big chunk of that was language asking for our comments, along with multiple options of how to tackle aspects of implementation, etc. And would you believe “gender equality” is cited as a reason for the mandate? I wouldn’t kid you, now.

So I went through the thing and have pulled out excerpts that I think you might find interesting. In some cases, I even say a few words.

Pages 10-11, I shared this in the post yesterday when the new proposal was handed down. Contrary to what some have said elsewhere, the new changes aren’t as narrow as they used to be:

These proposed rules mark the next step in the process. The proposed rules would make two principal changes to the preventive services coverage rules to provide women contraceptive coverage without cost sharing, while taking into account religious objections to contraceptive services of eligible organizations, including eligible organizations that are religious institutions of higher education, that establish or maintain or arrange health coverage. First, the proposed rules would amend the criteria for the religious employer exemption to ensure that an otherwise exempt employer plan is not disqualified because the employer’s purposes extend beyond the inculcation of religious values or because the employer serves or hires people of different religious faiths. Second, the proposed rules would establish accommodations for health coverage established or maintained by eligible organizations, or arranged by eligible organizations that are religious institutions of higher education, with religious objections to contraceptive coverage. The proposed rules also propose related amendments to other rules, consistent with the proposed accommodations. The Departments intend to finalize all such proposed amendments before the end of the temporary enforcement safe harbor.

That’s for starters.  There’s much more.  Check it out. 


CLOSE | X

HIDE | X