Health plans to comply with a subset of the Affordable Care acts Health Reform provisions. On the other hand, grandfathered health plans are not required to comply with certain other requirements of the Affordable Care act; for example, the requirement that Preventive Health services be covered without any cost sharing. So isnt hhs saying there, quite specifically, these, in our view, are not within this subset of particularly significant requirements as to which there must be immediate compliance . Well, the question would be whether theres a compelling interest in compliance with these requirements. And id like to make two points in response to your honors question. First, with respect to the issue of delay, which i think, mr. Chief justice, your question raised, and my friend on the other side has put a lot of weight on, id refer the court to the ada. I dont think anybody would doubt that the americans with doubt that the americans with disabilities act advances interest of the high
Rule. It finally sets a system of regulation so that you can properly recycle, but in a way that the communities themselves know that if these efforts are underway in their community it a hazard to them. I think there are ways in which we can look at this in a variety of ways, not just as Technical Assistance, but really pushing markets by providing a certain Regulatory Framework that states can take advantage of where we would have the capacity to define it a little better than the states. That is what this rule is all about. We are trying to do it both individually through Technical Assistance as well as systemically to provide a more Solid Foundation for our recycling industries. Here. T is good to i know a lot of folks who religiously recycle all of their stuff. Then they hear it is just dumped in the same pile. That is the problem with electronic waste. In it has been a persistent problem. I have one other issue that i want to bring up. This is with regard to catalytic converters
Speaking with our cspan viewers this evening. Thank you for having me. Thank you for your calls and comments on how the government should regulate ecigarettes. We appreciate the input and the calls. Zp coming up on cspan president obama announces plans to move immigration resources to handle the influx of unaccompanied minors at the border. And then the Supreme Court oral rgument in the case of burwell v. Lobby, and later president obama introduces his nominee to be the next Veterans Affairs secretary. On the next washington journal a look at the Supreme Courts ruling on the contraception mandate in the federal Health Care Law. Our guests are ed whelan from the ethics and Public Policy from and Elizabeth Wydra the hobby center. And crate whitlock on the yearlong investigation of the safety of american drone use. Washington journal is live every morning at 7 00 eastern on cspan and you can join the conversation on facebook and twitter. Tuesday, iraqs ambassador to the u. S. Speaks about
But with respect to title vii, of course, its still the case that that employers with 15 or fewer people are not subject to that law, and thats 80 of the employers in the country. And if you run the math, thats its at least 80 thats its going to be somewhere between 10 million and 22 Million People who are not within the coverage. No one would say that because the coverage is incomplete in that respect, that title vii enforcing title vii doesnt advance those were decisions those were decisions that congress made, right . Yes. Well, the grandfathering is not a decision that congress made, is it . Well, the way in which its implemented is a decision that the agency has made, thats true. But even with respect to the Preventive Services, i dont think anyone would say that theres not a compelling interest in advancing Colorectal Cancer screening and immunizations and the things that the Preventive Services provisions provide in addition to contraceptive coverage. I just think this a compell
Should be applied uniformly across all employers. Heres, respectfully, why i dont think that that works, which is i think the question whenever there are exemptions in the statute is to ask yourself, do the exemptions undermine the compelling interest that the government asserts. Theres nothing inconsistent with an interest in prohibiting employment discrimination to say were going to focus on the people who actually employ the most people and therefore can engage in the most discrimination. Its quite a different matter, and i dont think anybody would think that congress would pass a title vii that said, hey, as long as you have a preexisting discriminatory policy, youre allowed to keep it. That doesnt seem like it would be consistent. Counsel, your attorney, one of the attorneys below, on behalf of your clients admitted that the grandfathered policies werent going to be around very long because any change to an existing policy and he said these changes happen on a yearly basis. And we