rssObama Proposes Overturning Bush’s ‘Right to Conscience’ Rule
Friday, March 06, 2009 at 4:33 pm
- 5 Comments
The White House has proposed a regulation to overturn a controversial Bush administration rule that expanded the rights of health care workers to deny services they deem morally objectionable.
Taking effect in the final days of the George W. Bush’s presidency, the so-called “right of conscience” rule angered many lawmakers, health care advocates and women’s rights groups, who feared the change would limit women’s access to contraceptives and other reproductive health services. The Obama administration’s proposal, originating from the Department of Health and Human Services, would simply rescind the Bush rule.
The White House justifies the move like this:
Commenters asserted that the rule would limit access to patient care and raised concerns that individuals could be denied access to services, with effects felt disproportionately by those in rural areas or otherwise underserved. The Department believes that the comments on the August 2008 proposed rule raised a number of questions that warrant further careful consideration. It is important that the Department have the opportunity to review this regulation to ensure its consistency with current Administration policy.”
In the eyes of many advocates, the decision is change they can believe in. Cecile Richards, president of the Planned Parenthood Federation of America, issued a statement Friday cheering the move:
Patients, especially low income women, deserve access to complete and accurate health care information and services and today’s action shows that this administration understands and will meet this need. This is a common sense fix.
The White House will accept public comments for the next 30 days.
5 Comments
Pingback posted March 6, 2009 @ 5:04 pm
[...] The Washington Independent placed an observative post today on Obama Proposes Overturning Bushâ [...]
Pingback posted March 8, 2009 @ 1:20 am
[...] The White House has proposed a regulation to overturn a controversial Bush administration rule that expanded the rights of health care workers to deny services they deem morally objectionable. Taking effect in the final days of the George W. Bush’s read more [...]
Comment posted March 11, 2009 @ 11:31 am
Why is government involved here? Is there a national danger? Is this a national security issue?
Bush put the rule in place because of his personal beliefs and to placate his friends. Apparently getting government out of our lives, a great Republican theme, came second to enabling medicine providers to impose their morals and beliefs on a dependent public.
If the recipient of the medicine knows the facts, is not the choice of use up to him/her? Does the President have the right to simply say don't do this or that and the whole country is then bound by such a fiat? Is this a democratic process or a monarchy? What if the President decides that people are inherently untrustworthy and need to be spied on? Or what if he just decides he can point to any person citizen or not and say, “You are an enemy of the state” and then imprison you without habeas corpus, a right to a lawyer, and hold you indefinitely? What if he imprisons you and then has you shipped to Bagram Prison to be kept forever?
If we as Americans don't protest the “small” (if there is such a thing) abuses to our freedom, we will lose those and the big ones.
Comment posted March 11, 2009 @ 6:31 pm
Why is government involved here? Is there a national danger? Is this a national security issue?
Bush put the rule in place because of his personal beliefs and to placate his friends. Apparently getting government out of our lives, a great Republican theme, came second to enabling medicine providers to impose their morals and beliefs on a dependent public.
If the recipient of the medicine knows the facts, is not the choice of use up to him/her? Does the President have the right to simply say don't do this or that and the whole country is then bound by such a fiat? Is this a democratic process or a monarchy? What if the President decides that people are inherently untrustworthy and need to be spied on? Or what if he just decides he can point to any person citizen or not and say, “You are an enemy of the state” and then imprison you without habeas corpus, a right to a lawyer, and hold you indefinitely? What if he imprisons you and then has you shipped to Bagram Prison to be kept forever?
If we as Americans don't protest the “small” (if there is such a thing) abuses to our freedom, we will lose those and the big ones.
Pingback posted September 6, 2010 @ 3:43 pm
[...] Obama Proposes Overturning Bush’s ‘Right to Conscience’ Rule. Bush and the radicals restricted your right to know about your own medical treatment. Obama [...]
RSS feed for comments on this post.
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
