This afternoon on KMOX, Sen. Roy Blunt again demonstrated a distinct lack of understanding of his own amendment that proposes to allow your boss to control your life.
Blunt argued that this is about relgious freedom and the constitution when it's clearly about allowing your boss to come between you and your doctor and medical decisions. Let's go over again exactly what could happen if Blunt's amendment actually makes it onto the Highway Transportation Bill and the President signs it. (Also - what in the world does transportation have to do with birth control?! Just askin.)
- If your boss didn't like the idea of pre-marital sex, they could discontinue any coverage of routine tests for unmarried workers.
- Say your boss was completely against vaccines because they thought they might cause autism, they could decide to eliminate coverage for vaccinations for dependents.
- What if your boss, a devout Scientologist, decided that they were no longer going to cover psychiatry and the depression medication for a spouse or dependent child?
Blunt argued that his amendment doesn't concern anything other than the birth control mandate that the White House rolled out last week, but that's false. The fact of the matter is that Blunt's amendment doesn't specify anything other than what is "contrary to the provider's religious beliefs or moral convictions."
If republicans want to continue making a mountain out of this, I welcome it, if for purely political purposes. 99% of women use birth control at some point in their life, and there's new data showing that as the race for president heats up, we're seeing an 18 point swing from Mittens to Obama of unmarried women. So, dear republicans, keep on going down the road you're on alienating women, 'cause democrats will reap those rewards come November 6, 2012 by electing a president and others who actually support a woman's right to determine her own course of health care.