A total of seven states have joined together in a lawsuit against the Obama administration, seeking to halt the mandate requiring employers to offer health insurance that includes free access to contraceptive drugs that can cause abortion.
As resistance intensifies to the Obama administration’s mandate requiring employers to offer health insurance that includes free access to contraception, a federal judge has ruled that pharmacists in Washington State can be guided by their consciences rather than the state with regard to stocking and distributing abortifacients — the types of contraceptive drugs that can cause abortions.
In a move that is fated to incite political mutiny, Sens. Tom Coburn (R-Okla., left) and Richard Burr (R-N.C.) unveiled a bold Medicare reform proposal on Thursday that would expedite a transition to private health insurance, increase the eligibility age for oncoming seniors, and enact higher premiums for middle- to upper-class retirees.
America’s Roman Catholic bishops have joined other Christian and conservative voices in rejecting President Obama’s “compromise” on his earlier announced mandate requiring all employers — including most religious institutions — to include free contraception to women in their health insurance coverage.
Christian and pro-family groups are blasting President Obama’s “compromise” on his contraception mandate for religious groups as a meaningless distinction without a difference. On February 10, the White House announced that under a revision to the objectionable decree, religious institutions would not be required to offer free contraceptives to women employees as previously mandated. Instead, the requirement would be totally shifted to their insurance providers.
Former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney has lately been arguing strenuously against the Obama administration’s decision to force all employers, regardless of their religious convictions, to provide insurance coverage for contraception, including contraceptives that can cause abortions. The government's decision has been widely denounced by officials of the Roman Catholic and Orthodox churches because they are opposed to both birth control (except in certain limited circumstances) and abortion.
The press release issued by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), which operates under the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), on July 19, 2011, signaled the beginning of its regulatory process, this time concerning “mobile medical apps.” The announcement made it plain that such regulation certainly fell under its jurisdiction, as if declaring it made it so: “The use of mobile medical apps on smart phones and tablets is revolutionizing health care delivery,” according to Jeffrey Shuren, M.D., director of the FDA’s Center for Devices and Radiological Health. “Our draft approach calls for oversight of only those mobile medical apps that present the greatest risk to patients when they don’t work as intended.”
Former U.S. Rep. Kathy Dahlkemper of Erie, Pennsylvania, was one of six pro-life Democrats in Congress who caved in to pressure from President Barack Obama to vote for the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (aka ObamaCare) against their best judgment.
Americans in favor of food sovereignty have been clashing with the federal government for years over raw — or unpasteurized — milk, which has been targeted by the federal government and severely regulated through the Food and Drug Administration. Annual legislative sessions have been an opportunity for major changes to be made to the way raw milk is regulated in this country, but more Americans are taking up the issue in their states, where they are asserting their individual rights to purchase and distribute it.
Two advisers to the Obama administration during the creation of the law known as ObamaCare exposed in the New York Times on Wednesday one of the predictable consequences of that law: the end of health insurance companies in America.
First it was the Happy Meal, then it was school junk food, and now it's sugar. It seems that in the state of California no food is safe from the reach of overzealous elitists who wish to see the government regulate nearly every facet of American lives. The latest example features a group of researchers from the University of California San Francisco who are advocating that the federal government control sugar in the same way it does alcohol and tobacco.