And how to reach it.
The goal at this point seems to be to find a way to force HL to "personally" pay for what we want them to pay for by making them face some sort of legal loss and preserve the women's dignity. To some extent it's about HL. To some extent it's about striking back at the forces of oppression. And if we can leverage that to hurt other forces of oppression, great.
It pays to remember that what was overturned wasn't the ACA, but a particular administrative regulation to implement the ACA that was based on an interpretation of the ACA.
If the goal is to provide these particular forms of birth control to the women--and for all the legal opinions one way or the other, that's precisely where we are and not where in our worst nightmares we might be--they should rewrite the opt-out mechanism and the means to let the people involved somehow trigger provision of the birth control.
One thing that's easy to overlook in all of this is the goal: As soon as it becomes moral and personal it's all us-versus-them, we're-good/they're-bad, and our vindication and their punishment are the order of the day. The cause becomes us and our virtue, which must be victorious over the forces of evil. It reduces the women involved not to objects but to symbols.
It sets up the other side for the same kind of response and instead of finding a solution we must fight until victory and our banner flies high over the corpses of the vanquished foe. The solution could probably be produced in a few weeks and in place in a couple of months, after the necessary time for regulatory criticism and public comment. But it wouldn't feel good, so it's something that will be used to score political points and drag out probably for years. Think of the children! The Alamo! And the Maine!
= new reply since forum marked as read
