1. They allow employers to use religious freedom as an excuse to discriminate against members of the LGBTQ community.
2. Section 4 allows religious non-profits to refuse services that violate their faith, Section 5 allows these non-profits to refuse to hire those who do not belong to their faith.
3. Atlanta's laws ban such practices.
4. Many businesses will not engage in such practices for fear of backlash from the community in the form of boycotts.
5. They allow people to challenge undue burdens placed upon them do to their practices. They require the government to that is has interest in applying the burden and accommodation doesn't apply.
6. Religious minorities
7. It applies to groups that are religiously intolerant of birth control.
8. It can be extended to affect members of society who are being discriminated against.
Sunday, May 8, 2016
Blog 4.1
1. It would cause the decision to be a 4-4 split.
2. It requires insurers to cover all contraceptives without any copays.
3. Some religions do not allow their members to use contraceptives, so making them available would interfere with religious practices.
4. Religiously affiliated non-profits can fill out two page forms to inform the government of their refusal to provide coverage for birth control.
5. They ruled that such "closely held" for-profit organizations could also avoid coverage for contraceptives.
6. They argued that contraceptives can still be accessed by employees so there's no point in not covering them.
7. There are several Catholics on the Court, and Catholics are traditionally against the use of birth control.
8.The insurer is a third party and a separate entity from the plaintiffs, so what the government requires them to do shouldn't matter as long as the plaintiffs don't have to pay for or administer the plans that include contraceptive coverage.
9. It would weaken the idea of religious exemption as many other groups would make the same argument.
10. The case could possibly open the door for many companies to refuse to pay for sexual health products for homosexual employees.
11. The administration would be forced to come up with many new accommodations for different groups.
12. It forces the religious beliefs of employers on their employees.
2. It requires insurers to cover all contraceptives without any copays.
3. Some religions do not allow their members to use contraceptives, so making them available would interfere with religious practices.
4. Religiously affiliated non-profits can fill out two page forms to inform the government of their refusal to provide coverage for birth control.
5. They ruled that such "closely held" for-profit organizations could also avoid coverage for contraceptives.
6. They argued that contraceptives can still be accessed by employees so there's no point in not covering them.
7. There are several Catholics on the Court, and Catholics are traditionally against the use of birth control.
8.The insurer is a third party and a separate entity from the plaintiffs, so what the government requires them to do shouldn't matter as long as the plaintiffs don't have to pay for or administer the plans that include contraceptive coverage.
9. It would weaken the idea of religious exemption as many other groups would make the same argument.
10. The case could possibly open the door for many companies to refuse to pay for sexual health products for homosexual employees.
11. The administration would be forced to come up with many new accommodations for different groups.
12. It forces the religious beliefs of employers on their employees.
Wednesday, March 9, 2016
Blog 3.9
1. They decide based on how desperately the drug is needed
2. They are limiting coverage to patients with more advanced symptoms to limit spending on the drugs.
3. The insurance companies, as they are the ones in charge of directly paying the companies who develop the pills.
4. They, like insurance companies, directly pay hospitals and drug companies. So not really no
5. Other countries have successfully done this to lower prices.
6. There are federal laws that actually ban these programs for negotiating for price reductions with drug companies.
7. Some members of Congress who are on the payroll of the pill companies
8. This tax would replace the many other costs we currently have to pay in our current healthcare system.
9. A Medicare card is mailed to everyone, so everyone receives coverage
10. Relatively disorganized people with low incomes
11. Workers who receive generous tax expenditures for good private coverage, and affluent people who would face large tax increases to finance a single-payer system.
12. Community hospitals, medical groups, and pharmaceutical and medical supply companies.
13. The single-payer system would give rise to debates on the scope of government
2. They are limiting coverage to patients with more advanced symptoms to limit spending on the drugs.
3. The insurance companies, as they are the ones in charge of directly paying the companies who develop the pills.
4. They, like insurance companies, directly pay hospitals and drug companies. So not really no
5. Other countries have successfully done this to lower prices.
6. There are federal laws that actually ban these programs for negotiating for price reductions with drug companies.
7. Some members of Congress who are on the payroll of the pill companies
8. This tax would replace the many other costs we currently have to pay in our current healthcare system.
9. A Medicare card is mailed to everyone, so everyone receives coverage
10. Relatively disorganized people with low incomes
11. Workers who receive generous tax expenditures for good private coverage, and affluent people who would face large tax increases to finance a single-payer system.
12. Community hospitals, medical groups, and pharmaceutical and medical supply companies.
13. The single-payer system would give rise to debates on the scope of government
Tuesday, February 23, 2016
Blog 3.8
1. The turnout of 2016 was 80,000, about 2/3 of those that came in 2008
2. Young people and more lower and middle-income voters.
3. Republican turnouts are crushing previously set records, while Democrats are falling behind
4. He thinks that the Obama administration's main failure was mobilizing the large voting enthusiasm into an effective force post-election. Sanders states he would use this force for continued fights against corporate interests and in congressional and state elections.
5. Rubio is increasingly seeming to be the last candidate standing against Trump.
6. He lost in what was supposed to be his territory.
7. Rubio's campaign is relying on his success in more moderate states like New York and California, states that will most likely reject Trump and Cruz.
8. He won 2nd in New Hampshire, so he is deciding to target Northeastern states and hopefully gain some support from Jeb's power base.
9. Trump does not yet view Rubio as a threat to his campaign.
2. Young people and more lower and middle-income voters.
3. Republican turnouts are crushing previously set records, while Democrats are falling behind
4. He thinks that the Obama administration's main failure was mobilizing the large voting enthusiasm into an effective force post-election. Sanders states he would use this force for continued fights against corporate interests and in congressional and state elections.
5. Rubio is increasingly seeming to be the last candidate standing against Trump.
6. He lost in what was supposed to be his territory.
7. Rubio's campaign is relying on his success in more moderate states like New York and California, states that will most likely reject Trump and Cruz.
8. He won 2nd in New Hampshire, so he is deciding to target Northeastern states and hopefully gain some support from Jeb's power base.
9. Trump does not yet view Rubio as a threat to his campaign.
Blog 3.7
1. The debate used to be focused on the level of liberalism of Obama's future candidates, but now it is over the obstructionism of Senate Republicans.
2. If the party's situation gets worse, Republicans may regret not letting in Obama's compromise candidate, who will be moderate compared to the nominee a very likely Democrat Senate will elect.
3. They can either maintain the party's strategy or allow for the nomination and face party disgrace.
4. It's pretty scary
5. There have been 3 vacancies during an election year, and an additional 2 from the previous year that were filled during election years.
6. Grassley claims that we have an 80-year tradition of not confirming Supreme Court appointments during election years. It's been 80 years since the Senate filled a seat that opened up on election years.
7. Democrats claim that as many as 14 nominees have been confirmed in election years in America's history. Only one, the appointment of Anthony Kennedy, occurred within the past 70 years.
8. The two appointees before Kennedy were both blocked by the then Democrat-controlled Senate.
9. The two parties, which have become more and more polarized, are working harder and harder to prevent nominations from going through.
10. None whatsoever, so it is possible for the Senate to wait until the next election.
2. If the party's situation gets worse, Republicans may regret not letting in Obama's compromise candidate, who will be moderate compared to the nominee a very likely Democrat Senate will elect.
3. They can either maintain the party's strategy or allow for the nomination and face party disgrace.
4. It's pretty scary
5. There have been 3 vacancies during an election year, and an additional 2 from the previous year that were filled during election years.
6. Grassley claims that we have an 80-year tradition of not confirming Supreme Court appointments during election years. It's been 80 years since the Senate filled a seat that opened up on election years.
7. Democrats claim that as many as 14 nominees have been confirmed in election years in America's history. Only one, the appointment of Anthony Kennedy, occurred within the past 70 years.
8. The two appointees before Kennedy were both blocked by the then Democrat-controlled Senate.
9. The two parties, which have become more and more polarized, are working harder and harder to prevent nominations from going through.
10. None whatsoever, so it is possible for the Senate to wait until the next election.
Blog 3.6
1. McConell is going to wait for the next president to allow any supreme court justice to be selected by the Senate.
2. The Senate did all in its power to block him from appointment, starting the current trend of blocking an appointment by a different-party president.
3. In 2007, Chuck Schumer, a Democrat in the Senate during Bush's term, said the Senate would reject any appointments made by President Bush except in, "extraordinary circumstances."
4. Cases on abortion, birth control, voting rights, and marriage equality
5. Cruz believes that the Court will help mandate "unlimited abortion-on-demand, partial birth abortion with taxpayer funding and no parental notification" and will do away with the 2nd Amendment.
6. The Democrats have, in the eyes of the Republicans, started the tradition of blocking Supreme Court appointees based on politics and weakened the filibuster to ram appointees down the minority's throat.
7. It maintains the tradition of checks and balances in our government.
2. The Senate did all in its power to block him from appointment, starting the current trend of blocking an appointment by a different-party president.
3. In 2007, Chuck Schumer, a Democrat in the Senate during Bush's term, said the Senate would reject any appointments made by President Bush except in, "extraordinary circumstances."
4. Cases on abortion, birth control, voting rights, and marriage equality
5. Cruz believes that the Court will help mandate "unlimited abortion-on-demand, partial birth abortion with taxpayer funding and no parental notification" and will do away with the 2nd Amendment.
6. The Democrats have, in the eyes of the Republicans, started the tradition of blocking Supreme Court appointees based on politics and weakened the filibuster to ram appointees down the minority's throat.
7. It maintains the tradition of checks and balances in our government.
Blog 3.5
1. Fewer Senators retire each year, which makes the data more susceptible to change based on smaller fluctuations.
2. Many do not actually register as lobbyists, but instead do work that is very similar to lobbying but does not require them to register with the government.
3. The most common to become lobbyists are party or committee leaders, or former members of the Ways and Means committee.
4. They have the practice needed to communicate and persuade Congress members. They also generally are experts in access, which they can sell to multiple clients.
5. These revolving door lobbyists give their employer a better chance of winning support for their side (63% wins with firms who employ revolving-door lobbyists)
6. For every one dollar public interest groups/unions spend, corporations spend about thirty-four dollars.
7. The author says more should be done to make it more likely for these politicians to go into working for public interest groups.
2. Many do not actually register as lobbyists, but instead do work that is very similar to lobbying but does not require them to register with the government.
3. The most common to become lobbyists are party or committee leaders, or former members of the Ways and Means committee.
4. They have the practice needed to communicate and persuade Congress members. They also generally are experts in access, which they can sell to multiple clients.
5. These revolving door lobbyists give their employer a better chance of winning support for their side (63% wins with firms who employ revolving-door lobbyists)
6. For every one dollar public interest groups/unions spend, corporations spend about thirty-four dollars.
7. The author says more should be done to make it more likely for these politicians to go into working for public interest groups.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)