My Storify mini-rant on what happens if Donald Trump wins the nomination.
Do not fall in love with politicians. They will only break your heart.Read More »
Buried deep in the Obama DOJ’s response to Justice Sotomayor’s eleventh hour emergency stay of the abortion-pill mandate for a group of Catholic nuns, is a glimpse into the Obama Administration’s plan for the HHS Mandate.
The Mandate, which forces all employers to pay for abortion pills regardless of their religious objections, has been challenged by numerous religious organizations and Christian owned businesses alike.
Each facing steep fines that would send most any entity (regardless of whether they are a charity or business) into bankruptcy.
We have long detailed how it is far more expensive for a business that chooses to provide insurance that covers everything except abortion-pills to pay the HHS Mandate penalty than for a business to refuse to provide insurance for it’s employees at all and be subject to ObamaCare’s “employer responsibly tax.”
As I have previously explained, in a given year, a company with 100 employees “would be fined $3.65 million for providing insurance but refusing to violate its faith by paying for abortion pills, but would only be fined $140,000 for providing no insurance at all.”
The disparity is mindboggling. But now we know why. The Obama Administration wants religious employers to drop their insurance coverage. Don’t believe me, read for yourself straight from the Obama Administration’s memo to the Supreme Court.
The preventive-services coverage provision in general, and the contraceptive-coverage provision in particular, apply only if an employer offers a group health plan. Employers, however, are not required to offer group health plans in the first place. Large employers (those with more than 50 fulltime-equivalent employees) face a potential tax if they do not provide coverage, but that gives them a “choice” between two legal options: provide a group health plan or risk payment of the tax.
That’s right, the Obama Administration is saying that religious employers who don’t wish to have their faith violated can make the “choice” to refuse to provide any insurance for their employees and pay the smaller tax.
After forcing millions of Americans off “plans they liked,” the Obama Administration is now hoping to force employees of religiously based organizations and business to lose their insurance as well?
It’s just one more confirmation that ObamaCare isn’t about providing insurance, it’s about government expansion and abortion. The extent to which President Obama will go to defend his extreme agenda is astounding.
Matthew Clark is Associate Counsel for Government Affairs and Media Advocacy with the ACLJ. A lifelong citizen of the Commonwealth of Virginia, he lives with his wife and three boys in Northern Virginia. Follow Matthew Clark: @_MatthewClark.