Hobby Lobby's Retirement Plan Invests In Birth Control Manufacturers

[Oceander]

TPM Livewire

Hobby Lobby's Retirement Plan Invests In Birth Control Manufacturers

 Caitlin MacNeal – April 1, 2014, 6:30 PM EDT

Hobby Lobby sued the federal government over the health care law's requirement that businesses provide their employees with health insurance that covers contraception — the Supreme Court heard oral arguments in the case last week.

However, the company purchased a retirement plan for its employees that invested in companies that manufacture contraception, Mother Jones reported.

The company's 401(k) plan for employees had $73 million invested companies that make the emergency contraception pills, intrauterine devices and drugs used for abortions, according to documents filed with the Department of Labor in 2012 reviewed by Mother Jones.

The companies invested in by multiple mutual funds in Hobby Lobby's retirement plan include Teva Pharmaceutical Industries, Pfizer and Bayer. Some of the funds also invested in Aetna and Humana, insurance companies that provide plans covering contraception.

Hobby Lobby contributes generously to its employees 401(k)s, according to a website set up by the company to explain its lawsuit against the federal government.

[Atomic Cow]

If it's like anything like the 401K my company has, we do not pick and choose the specific investments.

The fund manager does that.

[Oceander]

If it's like anything like the 401K my company has, we do not pick and choose the specific investments.

The fund manager does that.

There are funds that make their investments based on certain non-economic criteria, such as funds that don't hold stock in any tobacco-related company.  I'm sure they could find funds that don't hold stock in any contraceptive-producing company.

[Atomic Cow]

There are funds that make their investments based on certain non-economic criteria, such as funds that don't hold stock in any tobacco-related company.  I'm sure they could find funds that don't hold stock in any contraceptive-producing company.

True, but they might not have even thought about it.  It's one of those things which could easily be overlooked.

[ABX]

As a general practice, most companies do not manage their retirement packages in house since Enron. My company, for example, Uses Merrill Lynch to manage 401K plans.

[Oceander]

As a general practice, most companies do not manage their retirement packages in house since Enron. My company, for example, Uses Merrill Lynch to manage 401K plans.

Most small to medium companies do so; however, those companies still have some freedom in deciding what funds/investments the plan assets will be put into.

[mountaineer]

So what? Hobby Lobby's objection isn't to birth control pills, it's to funding abortions. A tangential investment in Pfizer, which may make drugs used in abortions, is not the same thing as paying the insurance bill for an abortion.

[SouthTexas]

I wonder if Mother Jones has Smith &Wesson in their 401K? Or do they even have 401Ks?

That's the origin of the 'report'.

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2014/04/hobby-lobby-retirement-plan-invested-emergency-contraception-and-abortion-drug-makers

[Oceander]

I wonder if Mother Jones has Smith &Wesson in their 401K? Or do they even have 401Ks?

That's the origin of the 'report'.

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2014/04/hobby-lobby-retirement-plan-invested-emergency-contraception-and-abortion-drug-makers

That would be an interesting fact to research.

[truth_seeker]

So what? Hobby Lobby's objection isn't to birth control pills, it's to funding abortions. A tangential investment in Pfizer, which may make drugs used in abortions, is not the same thing as paying the insurance bill for an abortion.

Do you think Hobby Lobby's management objects to abortions in the case of rapes, too?

A "morning after" pill for a woman that was raped would seem like a pretty mainstream option.

Abortion in cases of rape is favored by 77% in a major poll. (77% = mainstream)

What if Hobby Lobby didn't approve of blood transfusions, vaccines, etc.?

What if Hobby Lobby was muslim managed, and didn't paid grant time off for Christian holidays?

[Oceander]

I wonder if Mother Jones has Smith &Wesson in their 401K? Or do they even have 401Ks?

That's the origin of the 'report'.

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2014/04/hobby-lobby-retirement-plan-invested-emergency-contraception-and-abortion-drug-makers

Mother Jones doesn't have a 401(k) program or other pension type program, at least as of 2011, according to their Form 990: http://assets.motherjones.com/development/about/pdfs/2011_990.pdf

[LambChop]

So what? Hobby Lobby's objection isn't to birth control pills, it's to funding abortions. A tangential investment in Pfizer, which may make drugs used in abortions, is not the same thing as paying the insurance bill for an abortion.

How could one be morally opposed to funding something they aren't morally opposed to making money from?

I was leaning on the side of Hobby Lobby, but now? not so much. 

[musiclady]

How could one be morally opposed to funding something they aren't morally opposed to making money from?

I was leaning on the side of Hobby Lobby, but now? not so much.

Repeat:  Hobby Lobby is morally opposed to abortion, not birth control.

There are millions of us who believe that.

Lean back to the side of Hobby Lobby.

[truth_seeker]

So what? Hobby Lobby's objection isn't to birth control pills, it's to funding abortions. A tangential investment in Pfizer, which may make drugs used in abortions, is not the same thing as paying the insurance bill for an abortion.

Sounds very similar to "what the meaning of is, is."

And the company doesn't pay the insurance a bill for an abortion.

The company pays the bill for the insurance. The insurance in turn, pays the medical community for services determined by the doctors and the insured patients, in privacy.

Broadly speaking, "religious freedom" is being claimed, to impose one's beliefs  upon another.

Not one bit different from when the Southern Baptist Church supported slavery, then segregation, then discrimination.

http://www.sbc.net/resolutions/899

Muslim honor killings and genital mutilation are just around the corner, if this notion of "religious freedom" becomes justification for actions which might otherwise be illegal.

We seem to be going backwards. It is entirely different to practice the tenets of one's faith, and to impose them unwillingly upon another.

[LambChop]

Repeat:  Hobby Lobby is morally opposed to abortion, not birth control.

There are millions of us who believe that.

Lean back to the side of Hobby Lobby.

Some of the investments they have are companies that make drugs used for abortion.  Still leaning away.

[musiclady]

Some of the investments they have are companies that make drugs used for abortion.  Still leaning away.

You're assuming that they knew that (which, as stated above by others, they may not have).

Also, this is according to Mother Jones, is it not?

Reliable source on which to make a judgment??

[LambChop]

You're assuming that they knew that (which, as stated above by others, they may not have).

Also, this is according to Mother Jones, is it not?

Reliable source on which to make a judgment??

I'm not assuming they didn't know.  I'm assuming they didn't care.  Which makes me lean the way I am.

Besides, truth_seeker gives a good argument.  As I've said before, have we not learned anything from OK state capital?  Statues for Satanist because religious freedom has to be equal and fair.  As the saying goes, careful what you ask for, you just might get it.

[Oceander]

Forbes' rejoinder to Mother Jones' accusations:  http://www.gopbriefingroom.com/index.php/topic,134685.0.html

[SouthTexas]

Mother Jones doesn't have a 401(k) program or other pension type program, at least as of 2011, according to their Form 990: http://assets.motherjones.com/development/about/pdfs/2011_990.pdf

Thanks, got busy yesterday and today will be about the same. LOL

Sort of what I expected.

[SouthTexas]

I'm not assuming they didn't know.  I'm assuming they didn't care.  Which makes me lean the way I am.

Besides, truth_seeker gives a good argument.  As I've said before, have we not learned anything from OK state capital?  Statues for Satanist because religious freedom has to be equal and fair.  As the saying goes, careful what you ask for, you just might get it.

Always consider the source and this case is no exception.  If you haven't already, refer to Oceander's post on "who" decides where the investment actually goes. 

[massadvj]

Sounds very similar to "what the meaning of is, is."

And the company doesn't pay the insurance a bill for an abortion.

The company pays the bill for the insurance. The insurance in turn, pays the medical community for services determined by the doctors and the insured patients, in privacy.

Broadly speaking, "religious freedom" is being claimed, to impose one's beliefs  upon another.

Not one bit different from when the Southern Baptist Church supported slavery, then segregation, then discrimination.

http://www.sbc.net/resolutions/899

Muslim honor killings and genital mutilation are just around the corner, if this notion of "religious freedom" becomes justification for actions which might otherwise be illegal.

We seem to be going backwards. It is entirely different to practice the tenets of one's faith, and to impose them unwillingly upon another.

I would tend to agree with you if the Hobby Lobby case was about religious freedom, but it is not.  The congress passed a law that specifically requires agencies to implement policies that have the least impact on religious freedom, and in this case the agency decided to go the other way.  The original Obamacare law had no provision that required taxpayers to pay for abortions.  In fact, Ben Nelson's vote for the law was predicated on that provision being removed.  The abortion funding requirement was added by Sebelius without congressional authorization.

This case is about administrative overreach.