So Malor went to the trouble of actually reading the ObozoCare reg-workaround to the 'religion problem.'
It's going to be MAGIC!!
...If neither the insured person nor the employer was going to pay for
this healthcare, who was? Today's notice of rulemaking solves the
problem by declaring that no one does.
The Obama Administration accomplished this feat of financial witchery
by making two magical claims. First, it declares that for insured group
health plans, the cost of contraception and abortifacient coverage with
be "cost neutral, and may result in cost savings" once all other
benefits are considered. (Pardon me for a minute while I flash back to
Obama making the same false claim about Obamacare's own impact on the
federal budget.)
That is, HHS simply mandated that this change 'WILL be cost-neutral.' Ex nihilo, "cost-neutral."
The rule cites a study that finds the cost of contraception is
cheaper than the cost of unplanned pregnancy, which is idiotically
beside the point, since no one, not even the Obama Administration, is
suggesting that people who do not get free contraception will
necessarily fail to use any contraception at all. This pathetic,
financially dubious dodge is the fig leaf that the Obama Administration
has hung on the religious employer exception. It gets worse though.
Second, for self-insured health groups, like some corporations, the
proposed rule says the cost of contraception and abortifacients will be
offset because the ultimate issuer of the objectionable coverage (the
rule contemplates a third party) will get to deduct the cost from the
federally-mandated exchange fees that all such insurers will have to pay
to continue operating under Obamacare. Essentially, Obama is saying to
these insurers: "You must pay me a fee to stay in business, but you can
deduct the cost of contraception from the fee, so that makes the
contraception coverage free."
Obozo didn't 'contemplate' the taxpayer, who WILL pay for the deduction.
But at least that's consistent.
I pooped a rainbow once. Tonight, I pooped a J.
ReplyDelete