alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
From: Christopher Lawrence

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Preventative Care

Date: Wednesday, August 10, 2011 8:40:20 PM

I support the American Association of University Women (AAUW) in asking you

to accept the recommendations of the Institute of Medicine as pertain to

coverage of preventive care under the new health care law, and to reject any

exemptions for “religious employers.” These preventive services are A

CRITICAL ELEMENT of the new law and would provide countless women better

access to necessary health care.

While AAUW believes that “religious refusal” exemptions unjustly deny women

access to contraceptive services, others, driven by an ideological distaste for all

contraceptive services, are pushing the government to make exemptions even

larger. Indeed, some groups are pushing for the exemption to apply to

religiously-run health providers, so hospitals with religious affiliations would be

exempt from the coverage requirement, even though they employ people of all

faiths and ideologies. If granted, this larger exemption would deny access to

thousands of women just because of where they work.

I urge you to ensure women have access to quality preventive care by

accepting IOM’s recommendations and REJECTING the proposed religious

refusal exemption provisions.

Warm regards,

Christopher Lawrence

Spokane, WA
From: Rasmussen Michelle

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Urgent

Date: Wednesday, August 10, 2011 8:43:40 PM

I join with the American Association of University Women (AAUW) in asking you

to accept the recommendations of the Institute of Medicine as pertain to

coverage of preventive care under the new health care law, and to reject any

exemptions for “religious employers.” These preventive services are a critical

element of the new law and would provide countless women better access to

necessary health care.

While AAUW believes that “religious refusal” exemptions unjustly deny women

access to contraceptive services, others, driven by an ideological distaste for all

contraceptive services, are pushing the government to make exemptions even

larger. Indeed, some groups are pushing for the exemption to apply to

religiously-run health providers, so hospitals with religious affiliations would be

exempt from the coverage requirement, even though they employ people of all

faiths and ideologies. If granted, this larger exemption would deny access to

thousands of women just because of where they work.

I urge you to ensure women have access to quality preventive care by accepting

IOM’s recommendations and rejecting the proposed religious refusal exemption

provisions.

Michelle Rasmussen
#### Daniel Hoover, Respondent, v. John Kleis, Appellant

Order affirmed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements. Opinion by

Bradley, J.;

Corlett, J. not sitting.
From: Daniel Cadzow

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: preventive care

Date: Thursday, August 11, 2011 9:46:17 AM

I join with the American Association of University Women (AAUW) in

asking you to accept the recommendations of the Institute of Medicine

as pertain to coverage of preventive care under the new health care

law, and to reject any exemptions for “religious employers.” These

preventive services are a critical element of the new law and would

provide countless women better access to necessary health care.

While AAUW believes that “religious refusal” exemptions unjustly deny

women access to contraceptive services, others, driven by an

ideological distaste for all contraceptive services, are pushing the

government to make exemptions even larger. Indeed, some groups are

pushing for the exemption to apply to religiously-run health

providers, so hospitals with religious affiliations would be exempt

from the coverage requirement, even though they employ people of all

faiths and ideologies. If granted, this larger exemption would deny

access to thousands of women just because of where they work.

I urge you to ensure women have access to quality preventive care by

accepting IOM’s recommendations and rejecting the proposed religious

refusal exemption provisions.

--

______________________________

Daniel M. Cadzow

IGERT Fellow in GISciences

Anthropology Department

State University of New York at Buffalo

380 MFAC- Ellicott Complex

Buffalo, NY 14261-0005

cadzow@buffalo.edu

http://wings.buffalo.edu/anthropology/

http://www.geog.buffalo.edu/giscience/
From: Richard Booth

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Date: Sunday, August 14, 2011 5:46:23 PM

I join with the American Association of University Women (AAUW) in asking you to accept the

recommendations of the Institute of Medicine as pertain to coverage of preventive care under the

new health care law, and to reject any exemptions for “religious employers.” These preventive

services are a critical element of the new law and would provide countless women better access to

necessary health care.

While, like AAUW, I believe that “religious refusal” exemptions unjustly deny women access to

contraceptive services, others, driven by an ideological distaste for all contraceptive services, are

pushing the government to make exemptions even larger. Indeed, some groups are pushing for

the exemption to apply to religiously-run health providers, so hospitals with religious affiliations

would be exempt from the coverage requirement, even though they employ people of all faiths

and ideologies. If granted, this larger exemption would deny access to thousands of women just

because of where they work.

I urge you to ensure women have access to quality preventive care by accepting IOM’s

recommendations and rejecting the proposed religious refusal exemption provisions.

Thank you.

Sincerely,

Richard Booth
Tf) ff 4,26 ry Page 1 of 1
HEO-1kO3t1-1
SING DIVISION SEP 0 2 2011
& REGULATIO
RANCH CEAONS [As of: September 02, 2011
. Received: August 27, 2011
Status: Posted

PUBLIC SUBMISSION __Posted: September 02, 2011

Tracking No. 80f063ed
‘Comments Due: September 30, 2011
Submission Type: Web

Docket: IRS-2010-0017
Requirement for Group Health Plans and Health Insurance Issuers to Provide Coverage of

Preventive Services under the PatientProtection and Affordable Care Act

Comment On: IRS-2010-0017-0038
Group Health Plans and Health Insurance Issuers Relating to Coverage of Preventive Services
under Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act: Amendment

Document: IRS-2010-0017-0151
Comment on FR Doc # 2011-19684

Unknown 13 .
Submitter Information

Submitter's Representative: NARAL Pro-Choice America

General Comment

T strongly support the new policy requiring health-insurance plans to cover birth control without a
copay, CMS-9992-IFC2. Thank you for this important improvement to women's health care.

I also want you to know that I am concerned that certain religious employers may be allowed to
opt out of the requirements. All women should have access to contraceptive coverage, regardless
of where they work.

This policy finally should make near-universal access to birth control
a reality for all women who use it.

Improving women's access to birth control is positive in so many ways.
A woman who can plan when to have a family is able to participate in
society more fully. Allowing women to space their pregnancies
contributes to healthy childbearing. And ultimately, fewer unintended
pregnancies can reduce the need for abortion.

Thank you for following science-based recommendations and making
women's health a priority.

http://fdms.erulemaking net/fdms-web-agency/component/contentstreamer?objectId=09000.... 9/2/2011
Exhibit 99.1

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,AS ADOPTED
            PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of REV Holdings LLC
            (the "Company") for the period ended March 31, 2003 as filed with the
            Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Ronald
            O. Perelman, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, hereby certify, pursuant
            to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
            Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of my knowledge:

(1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
            15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

(2) The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
            material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
            Company.

/s/ Ronald O. PerelmanRonald O.
            PerelmanChief Executive OfficerMay 14, 2003

This certification accompanies the Report pursuant to Section 906 of the
            Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except to the extent required by the
            Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of
            Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has
            been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished
            to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
From: Carolyn Gabel-Brett

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Preventative Services for Women

Date: Wednesday, August 10, 2011 6:58:28 PM

I join with the American Association of University Women (AAUW) in asking you 

to accept the recommendations of the Institute of Medicine as pertain to 

coverage of preventive care under the new health care law, and to reject any 

exemptions for “religious employers.” These preventive services are a critical 

element of the new law and would provide countless women better access to 

necessary health care.

While AAUW believes that “religious refusal” exemptions unjustly deny women 

access to contraceptive services, others, driven by an ideological distaste for all 

contraceptive services, are pushing the government to make exemptions even 

larger. Indeed, some groups are pushing for the exemption to apply to 

religiously-run health providers, so hospitals with religious affiliations would be 

exempt from the coverage requirement, even though they employ people of all 

faiths and ideologies. If granted, this larger exemption would deny access to 

thousands of women just because of where they work.

I urge you to ensure women have access to quality preventive care by accepting

IOM’s recommendations and rejecting the proposed religious refusal exemption 

provisions.

Carolyn Gabel-Brett

11 Cobbs Rd.

West Hartford, CT 06107
No. 346, Misc.

Petitioner *pro se. Louis J. Lefkowitz,*Attorney General of New York, *Paxton Blair,*Solicitor General, and *Winifred C. Stanley,*Assistant Attorney General, for respondent.

#### Jordan *v.*New York.

Court of Appeals of New York. Certiorari denied.
No. 231, Misc.

#### Hester *v.*United States.

Petitioner *pro se.*

*Solicitor General Cox, Assistant Attorney General Miller, Beatrice Rosenberg*and *Robert G. Maysack*for the United States.

C. A. 10th Cir. Certiorari denied.
Here's how you know
 **Official websites use .mil** .mil
 **Secure .mil websites use HTTPS** lock () https://


Skip to main content (Press Enter).
 Toggle navigation
            
            U.S. Central Command
                CENTCOM
        Search
                    Search CENTCOM:
                        Search
                Search CENTCOM:
                    Search
    Home

    ABOUT US
    
        COMMAND PRIORITIES

    LEADERSHIP

    COMPONENT COMMANDS

    HISTORY

    POSTURE STATEMENT

    CENTCOM AOR
    
        CENTCOM COALITION

    OPERATIONS AND EXERCISES
    
        USMTM

    CONTACT
    
        OPERATIONAL CONTRACT SUPPORT

    COMMUNITY RELATIONS

    THEATRE MEDICAL CLEARANCE

    INNOVATION VENDOR PORTAL

    MILITARY MEMBER INNOVATION PORTAL

    MEDIA
    
        SOCIAL MEDIA

    NEWS ARTICLES

    PRESS RELEASES

    STATEMENTS

    IMAGERY

    VIDEOS

    TRANSCRIPTS

    VISITORS AND PERSONNEL
    
        FAMILY CENTER

    FAMILY READINESS

    CENTCOM WEBMAIL

    SOCIAL MEDIA SECURITY

    ACCOUNTABILITY

    EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS

    USCENTCOM UNCLASSIFIED REGULATIONS

    FOIA LIBRARY

    INNOVATION OASIS

    WELCOME GUIDE  Search
 Search
 All Images All ImagesCommunity RelationsOtherPreviousCommanders
 Upload Date Upload DatePhoto DateTitle
  Share
  
 Small () Medium () Full Size (2.71 MB)
 Photo Gallery
 About UsCommand PrioritiesLeadershipComponent
   CommandsHistoryPosture Statement
   Area of
   ResponsibilityCENTCOM Coalition
   Operations And
   ExercisesOperation Inherent
   ResolveResolute Support
   MediaSocial MediaNews ArticlesPress ReleasesVideo And Imagery
   Visitors And
   PersonnelFamily ReadinessCENTCOM WebmailSocial MediaSecurityAccountabilityEmergency
   Preparedness
   ContactCommunity Relations
                    Stay Connected
                
                Privacy & Security  Inspector General  FOIA  Privacy Act
            

Hosted by Defense Media Activity - WEB.mil
Page | of 1

“REC-} A034 I-/0

LEGAL PROCESSING DIVISION As of: September 01, 2011
PUBLICATION & REGULATIONS Received, August 16, 2011
Status: Posted

PUBLIC SUBMISSION Posted: September 01, 2011

Tracking No. 80ce234b
‘Comments Due: September 30, 2011
Submission Type: Web

Docket: IRS-2010-0017
Requirement for Group Health Plans and Health Insurance Issuers to Provide Coverage of
Preventive Services under the PatientProtection and Affordable Care Act

Comment On: IRS-2010-0017-0038
Group Health Plans and Health Insurance Issuers Relating to Coverage of Preventive Services
under Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act: Amendment

Document: IRS-2010-0017-0104
Comment on FR Doc # 2011-19684

Submitter Information

Name: Jean Marie Kroll
Address:
2500 Idontwantmail Street
Bellingham, WA, 98225-8315
Email: artiseverywhere@yahoo.com

General Comment

I strongly support the new policy requiring health-insurance plans to cover birth control without a
co-pay, CMS-9992-IFC2. Thank you for this important improvement to women's health care.

Improving women's access to birth control is positive in so many ways. A woman who can plan
when to have a family is able to participate in society more fully. Allowing women to space their
pregnancies contributes to healthy childbearing. And ultimately, fewer unintended pregnancies
can reduce the need for abortion.

Thank you for following science-based recommendations and making women's health a priority.

http://fdms.erulemaking.net/fdms-web-agency/component/contentstreamer?objectId=09000... 9/1/2011
From: Sloane, Bonnie Fiedorek

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Health Care for Women

Date: Thursday, August 11, 2011 8:03:50 AM

I join with the American Association of University Women (AAUW) in asking you to accept 

the recommendations of the Institute of Medicine as pertain to coverage of preventive care

under the new health care law, and to reject any exemptions for “religious employers.” 

These preventive services are a critical element of the new law and would provide 

countless women better access to necessary health care.

While AAUW believes that “religious refusal” exemptions unjustly deny women access to 

contraceptive services, others, driven by an ideological distaste for all contraceptive 

services, are pushing the government to make exemptions even larger. Indeed, some 

groups are pushing for the exemption to apply to religiously-run health providers, so 

hospitals with religious affiliations would be exempt from the coverage requirement, even 

though they employ people of all faiths and ideologies. If granted, this larger exemption 

would deny access to thousands of women just because of where they work.

I urge you to ensure women have access to quality preventive care by accepting 

IOM’s recommendations and rejecting the proposed religious refusal exemption 

provisions.

Sincerely

Bonnie sloane

___________________________________________________

Bonnie F. Sloane, Ph.D.

Distinguished Professor and Chair, Department of Pharmacology

Leader, Breast Cancer Biology Program, Karmanos Cancer Institute

Wayne State University

School of Medicine

540 East Canfield

Detroit, Michigan 48201

313-577-1580 (Office)

313-577-1112 (Laboratory)

313-577-6739 (Fax)

E-mail: bsloane@med.wayne.edu
From: Kathy Alberque

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: RIN 1210-AB44 Mandatory Birth Control

Date: Saturday, August 06, 2011 12:08:32 AM

To Whom it May Concern,

I object in the strongest of terms to mandating birth control with no co-pays under

the Affordable Care Act.

Birth control is already widely available to all women, subsidized largely by

taxpayers. Demanding that we further subsidize other people's birth control by

increasing our insurance premiums in these days when families are struggling just to

make ends meet is an outrage. 

The mandate violates my conscience and that of millions of Americans who oppose

birth control on moral and religious grounds. 

It is undisputed that one of the operations of contraceptives is to render the

endometrium hostile to implantation, so that if fertilization occurs, the newly

conceived child may be lost to an early abortion. I also strongly object to the

inclusion of free sterilization as well as abortifacient pills like ella, which can work

weeks after a person's biological beginning to cause an abortion.

And what of Catholic employers and others who oppose birth control, but are now

going to be forced to participate in these plans and/or offer it to their employees?

This flies in the face of the conscience protections that Americans have historically

enjoyed.

The conscience provisions attached to the rule are so narrowly crafted that they

would appear to force Catholic institutions to make free birth control and sterilization

available in health plans, or cease hiring and providing services to non-Catholics. 

It is incomprehensible that such a mandate is being forced upon the people of the

United States.

It is no secret that Planned Parenthood, the largest abortion chain in America, is

behind this mandate, and will reap huge financial benefits from it at a time when

citizens in the United States are working on both the state and federal levels to

defund the abortion giant. 

The majority of Americans are pro-life and we do not want our tax dollars and

insurance premiums supporting the nation's largest abortion chain.

It is imperative that you give credence to my personal objection along with those of

millions of other Americans who do not want to be forced to pay for and provide

medication, devices, and procedures that do not treat or prevent any disease or

illness, but distort and render inoperable a healthy reproductive system. This rule is

unjust, untenable, and un-American--and it should be stricken.

Sincerely,

Kathy Alberque
Tigard, Oregon
From: Rose Marie Kuhn

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Preventive Care for Every One!

Date: Wednesday, August 10, 2011 5:58:47 PM

I join with the American Association of University Women (AAUW) in asking you to

accept the recommendations of the Institute of Medicine as pertain to coverage of

preventive care under the new health care law, and to reject any exemptions for

“religious employers.” These preventive services are a critical element of the new

law and would provide countless women better access to necessary health care.

RTZ
In the

Court of Appeals

Second Appellate District of Texas

at Fort Worth

No. 02-23-00311-CR

LEANDRO CHAIN GONZALES,

Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS

§

§

§

§

§

On Appeal from the 43rd District Court

of Parker County (CR23-0225)

July 25, 2024

Memorandum Opinion by Justice Kerr

(nfp)

JUDGMENT

This court has considered the record on appeal in this case and holds that there 

was no error in the trial court’s judgment. It is ordered that the judgment of the trial 

court is affirmed.

SECOND DISTRICT COURT OF APPEALS

By _/s/ Elizabeth Kerr__________________

 Justice Elizabeth Kerr
From: Lisa Berlincourt

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Thank you for supporting birth control access for all women

Date: Tuesday, August 02, 2011 5:57:02 PM

Dear Kathleen Sebelius, Secretary of Health & Human Services,

I am writing you today to thank the Department of Health & Human Services for the decision to require

health insurers to cover the full cost of contraception, beginning in August 2012.

Access to birth control is extremely important to women's rights and the ability to lead our lives. The

largest employer in my area is a religious institution which has for years provided health insurance

options that do NOT cover birth control in any form. This, in my opinion, is discriminatory on both

gender and religious grounds and I hope that your organization's decision will be a step forward for

women who work in my area.

Thank you for prioritizing women's basic health care needs.

Sincerely,

Lisa Berlincourt

504 W. Lowell Ave

Mishawaka, IN 46545
Here's how you know
 **Official websites use .mil** .mil
 **Secure .mil websites use HTTPS** lock () https://


Skip to main content (Press Enter).
 Toggle navigation
            
            U.S. Central Command
                CENTCOM
        Search
                    Search CENTCOM:
                        Search
                Search CENTCOM:
                    Search
    Home

    ABOUT US
    
        COMMAND PRIORITIES

    LEADERSHIP

    COMPONENT COMMANDS

    HISTORY

    POSTURE STATEMENT

    CENTCOM AOR
    
        CENTCOM COALITION

    OPERATIONS AND EXERCISES
    
        USMTM

    CIVILIAN CASUALTY REPORT

    CONTACT
    
        OPERATIONAL CONTRACT SUPPORT

    COMMUNITY RELATIONS

    THEATRE MEDICAL CLEARANCE

    INNOVATION VENDOR PORTAL

    MILITARY MEMBER INNOVATION PORTAL

    MEDIA
    
        SOCIAL MEDIA

    NEWS ARTICLES

    PRESS RELEASES

    STATEMENTS

    IMAGERY

    VIDEOS

    TRANSCRIPTS

    VISITORS AND PERSONNEL
    
        FAMILY CENTER

    FAMILY READINESS

    CENTCOM WEBMAIL

    SOCIAL MEDIA SECURITY

    ACCOUNTABILITY

    EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS

    USCENTCOM UNCLASSIFIED REGULATIONS

    FOIA LIBRARY

    INNOVATION OASIS

    WELCOME GUIDE  Search
 Search
 All Images All ImagesCommunity RelationsOtherPreviousCommanders
 Upload Date Upload DatePhoto DateTitle
  Share
  
 Small () Medium () Full Size (5.36 MB)
 
 RC23
 Photo Gallery
 About UsCommand PrioritiesLeadershipComponent
   CommandsHistoryPosture Statement
   Area of
   ResponsibilityCENTCOM Coalition
   Operations And
   ExercisesOperation Inherent
   ResolveResolute Support
   MediaSocial MediaNews ArticlesPress ReleasesVideo And Imagery
   Visitors And
   PersonnelFamily ReadinessCENTCOM WebmailSocial MediaSecurityAccountabilityEmergency
   Preparedness
   ContactCommunity Relations
                    Stay Connected
                
                Privacy & Security  Inspector General  FOIA  Privacy Act
            

Hosted by Defense Media Activity - WEB.mil
From: STEPHANIE MARTIN

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Thank you for supporting birth control access for all women

Date: Tuesday, August 02, 2011 4:46:12 PM

Dear Kathleen Sebelius, Secretary of Health & Human Services,

I commend the Department of Health & Human Services' landmark decision requiring health insurers to

cover the full cost of contraception, with no co-pay, beginning in August 2012.

This policy places a much-needed importance on women's health that is too-often not a priority in

health care policy. Birth control is a critical part of preventive care, and making contraception available

to all women, regardless of their insurance or ability to pay for it, will significantly reduce long-term

health care costs associated with unplanned pregnancies.

Thank you for prioritizing women's basic health care needs.

Sincerely,

STEPHANIE MARTIN

34 Spring St

Cambridge, MA 02141
From: Felicia Miller

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: My view on religious exemptions

Date: Friday, August 19, 2011 2:28:58 AM

I believe employers should have no say on if a woman chooses to receive contraceptions. Please

drop that provision, it makes no sense.