I’m with Yuval. Those who call this supposed compromise an accounting gimmick are giving it too much credit. It doesn’t change anything.
The White House fact propaganda sheet states, “Contraception coverage will be offered to women by their employers’ insurance companies directly, with no role for religious employers who oppose contraception.” But the second clause contradicts the first. There is nothing “direct[]” about this approach. Exactly as with the January order, once an employer selects an insurance company to provide coverage to its employees, that insurance company will provide coverage of contraceptive services to those employees. The employer who objects on religious grounds to providing coverage of contraceptives and abortifacients is still being compelled to do exactly that.
This isn’t even a matter of different form, same substance. It’s the same form and the same substance, with some obfuscatory semantics. Anyone who falls for this is a dupe.