Last week, the Biden administration released a series of new rules that, among other things, will require employers to provide leave ( albeit unpaid ) for workers who want to obtain abortions. Pro-life organizations that oppose this fresh authority have Sen. Bill Cassidy, R-La. , to bless.
As was first reported in September, Cassidy, who was in charge of the actual policy that gave rise to the new mandate, left a gap in abortion law wide enough for Biden presidency regulators to pass a Mack truck through. And that is how the Biden presidency went about doing it.
All of this may not surprise Cassidy, who was warned by pro-life organizations in the late 2022 that his policy would impose an abortion leave requirement. However, as I reported next fall, Cassidy was therefore determined to pass the legislation that, obviously, he gave the pro-abortion action the starting it needed.
Cassidy’s business continues to deflect blame abroad, claiming the Biden presidency exceeded its legislative power. Which brings up a straightforward query:” Why did n’t you make it clear in the bill that this law did n’t apply to abortions? ” — that should enable Murphy to look in the mirror.
Pregnant Workers Policy
The regulations implement the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act, which was included as part of a ( swampy ) omnibus spending bill at the end of 2022. Particularly, the controversy surrounds whether the legal definition of “pregnancy, pregnancy, or related health problems ” includes pregnancy; the Biden administration ( naturally ) concluded it did.
The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, which released the rules in question, noted that the Pregnancy Discrimination Act, which passed in 1978, also included the word “pregnancy, birth, or related health conditions. ” In the four-plus years since, the EEOC has interpreted that word to contain pregnancy.
In accordance with the commission’s position next week,” by including the same key word in the [Pregnant Workers Fairness Act ] and no articulating a distinct significance than the [Pregnancy Discrimination Act],” Congress is presumed to understand and desire that the same concept will be used. The EEOC claims that while politicians like Cassidy may be stupid, they should n’t be surprised to use the same language as they did in 1978 and achieve the same regulatory result.
Cassidy’s ( Feeble ) Excuses
The chairman’s company has claimed that Sen. Cassidy’s business made a separate statement during the 2022 debate, as well as a ground statement he gave. Bob Casey, D-Penn. , shows the sponsors ’ intent that abortion should not be considered a “related medical condition ” to pregnancy. However, the EEOC regulation makes note of other politicians ‘ interpretations that the bill would allow employees to take unpaid leave for consultations involving abortion.
According to the regulation,” the Commission may depend on the statute’s straightforward text.” The Commission may interpret the words the same way given the meaning of the words that Congress chose to use and the Commission’s and authorities ‘ long record of interpreting those identical terms to incorporate pregnancy. ” If Bill Cassidy has people he wants to blame for the EEOC’s activity, he may start with himself.
Cassidy’s business complained about my September story, but his own deeds belie his speech. For example, the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act’s predecessor types did not state that employees were required to pay for abortions themselves. To his record, Cassidy included speech in the type of the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act that was signed into law that made businesses exempt from a need to pay for abortions.
But why did n’t he demand similarly explicit language in the bill to prevent a mandate for (unpaid ) abortion leave if he could ask for and receive explicit pro-life language in the bill that addressed the concern that employers should not be required to pay for abortions?
Rationalizing Loss
According to my sources last fall, Cassidy was desperate for a deal, so he did n’t insist on changing the abortion leave requirement. The terrible thing was that Democrats on the other side of the hall were even more desperate.
Why did he insist that the measure be included in the omnibus spending bill that was introduced during the 2022 lame-duck session of Congress, one of the questions I asked Cassidy’s company past fall?
Why did n’t Sen. Cassidy wait 10 more times, until the pro-life majority in the House gave Republicans more leverage to rely on obvious pro-life privileges, to put forward the PWFA? Was there a special reason to support the article in December last year besides the fact that supporters of the bill and Planned Parenthood demanded that it be passed before the Congress ended?
No specific reason was given for the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act to be passed in December 2022 as opposed to January 2023. If these specific statutes had been put on the books for a few more weeks, or even a few more months, the federal government would n’t have shut down or experienced any plague or pestilence descend upon the land.
But Sen. Patty Murray, D-Wash. congressional Democrats were desperate to pass the bill in the 2022 lame-duck period. They knew that the approaching, Republican-led House of Representatives would be more wary of new demands on employers and more forceful on protecting the pro-life reason from new abortion-related mandates. Thus, Cassidy had more influence over whether or not the policy had complete, pro-life protections.
Instead, Cassidy caved, putting the desire of Planned Parenthood and related parties to pass the legislation over his alleged “100 % pro-life” record. And his company is still trying to blame the Biden administration and others for acting in a way that was predetermined by Cassidy’s business. The public dislikes Washington because it is the actual definition of “failure theater ” — spineless politicians trying to rationalize their personal failure with weasel words and weak mistakes.
