Rick Santorum Kinda, Sorta Endorses Government-Supplied Contraception

Still manages to be a jerk about it.

Salon reports:

Speaking last week at the University of Chicago Institute of Politics, former GOP senator and presidential candidate Rick Santorum argued that if the Obama administration wants to ensure all Americans have access to affordable contraception, they should simply give it away rather than mandate businesses include it in their employer-provided health insurance.

Understand, Santorum is saying government-supplied contraception is preferable to the birth-control mandate in which employers who provide health insurance to their employees must ensure that the policy includes contraception coverage. Be he doesn’t think the idea is so greate he would vote for it. Nonetheless, even though he wouldn’t vote for it, he’s mad at the Obama Administration for not trying to do the thing he wouldn’t vote for.


"They were interested in forcing people to bow to Caesar," he grumbles. Yes. Obama wanted to have free contraception and to make every knee at HobbyLobby bow before his tyrannic visage. Bwahahahaha!

Maybe — that's certainly a scary, scary way of looking at things — or maybe the Obama Administration saw that a "free taxpayer-funded contraception" amendment to Obamacare would be roughly as popular among Obamacare opponents as, I dunno, Obama himself, and resolved to get what it wanted by the employer-based health care system that was in place before. Obamacare, as it exists, isn't any lefty's idea of health care utopia: It's the result of a million compromises,all made in the service of offering health care to more people who need it.

Since that's how Obamacare generally works — the employer health system is still in place, with a big honkin' bureaucracy built around it, instead of being replaced by a socialist single-payer system like the ones in the U.K.orCanada —that makes it the more likely scenario, don't you think?

Anyway, that's Rick Santorum, Pennsylvania's former junior senator. Even when he stumbles on a decent idea, he ruins it with half-baked conspiracy theorizing. Yay.

Be respectful of our online community and contribute to an engaging conversation. We reserve the right to ban impersonators and remove comments that contain personal attacks, threats, or profanity, or are flat-out offensive. By posting here, you are permitting Philadelphia magazine and Metro Corp. to edit and republish your comment in all media.

  • xuinkrbin

    What a load of garbage. From the article: “Nonetheless, even though he wouldn’t vote for it, he’s mad at the Obama Administration for not trying to do the thing he wouldn’t vote for.” — Most People wouldn’t smack a random Person on the street but would rather an ax Murderer do that instead. You going to criticize such Persons for not smacking People?

    The criticism of the idea of “forcing people to bow to Caesar” suggests a gross ignorance of a key piece of Christian beliefs: render unto Caesar what is Caesar’s; render unto G-d what is G-d’s. What Rick Santorum is expressing is a belief the current administration considers its legal authority to be limitless. There is no “conspiracy” allegation at work. At the same time, the Author’s apparent ignorance of the origin of the “Caesar” reference would certainly why the Author seems to have nothing better to do than to write pieces critical of Someone with no significant political influence, exuding a lack of quality more befitting the gossip column than any sort of commentary to be taken with even the slightest bit of sincerity.