Share
Email This Page
add comment
Print

Intro: "The Obama administration's new requirement that most health insurance plans provide contraceptive services has exploded into a high-octane political weapon, with combatants on both sides scrambling to score points among the electorate and gin up fundraising from their most ardent supporters."

Republicans are vowing to reverse President Barack Obama's new policy on birth control, blasting the rule that religious schools and hospitals must provide contraceptive coverage for their employees as an attack on religious freedom, 02/08/12. (photo: AP)
Republicans are vowing to reverse President Barack Obama's new policy on birth control, blasting the rule that religious schools and hospitals must provide contraceptive coverage for their employees as an attack on religious freedom, 02/08/12. (photo: AP)



Birth-Control Turns Into Political Weapon

By Lisa Mascaro and Kathleen Hennessey, Los Angeles Times

10 February 12

 

he Obama administration's new requirement that most health insurance plans provide contraceptive services has exploded into a high-octane political weapon, with combatants on both sides scrambling to score points among the electorate and gin up fundraising from their most ardent supporters.

In Congress and on the campaign trail Wednesday, Republicans attacked the rule as another example of government overreach, Exhibit A in the case against President Obama's healthcare law, while Democrats asserted the GOP was trying to turn back the clock on women's rights.

House Speaker John A. Boehner (R-Ohio), a Catholic, fueled the political firestorm by making a rare floor speech vowing to block the requirement that most faith-based employers, including Catholic ones, offer contraception, regardless of their religious beliefs. Churches and other houses of worship are exempt.

The campaign of Mitt Romney, a leading candidate for the GOP presidential nomination, said the rule "compels religious institutions to violate the tenets of their own faith," and Romney vowed to strike it down.

Democrats and Republicans used the controversy to appeal for contributions from their traditional political bases, a strategy that carries risks as well as rewards. At a time when independents and moderates can sway general elections, turning up the heat on a social issue could prove distracting and annoying to voters who are more concerned about unemployment and the sluggish economy.

Amid the rising clamor, administration officials are exploring the possibility of implementing the rule so that religiously affiliated employers could offer supplemental policies, known as riders, for contraception or direct workers to insurance companies that sell such riders.

Even if Catholic voters and independents agree with the White House on substance, the administration doesn't want to appear insensitive to the concerns of the Catholic Church.

Women's groups would be likely to vigorously oppose any alteration of the rule.

"It's absolutely amazing in the year 2012 there is controversy over women's access to birth control," said Rep. Jan Schakowsky (D-Ill.) during a conference call with other Democratic lawmakers. "One's health benefit should not depend on who the boss is."

Republican leaders on Capitol Hill, although emphasizing that their top priority remains jobs, focused escalating rhetoric, and most of the day's attention, on the administration's birth control policy.

"This attack by the federal government on religious freedom in our country cannot stand and will not stand," Boehner said.

Other GOP presidential hopefuls have chimed in too. Rick Santorum accused Obama of trying to "impose his secular values on the people of this country."

Newt Gingrich labeled the policy "the most outrageous assault on religious liberty in American history."

But polls indicate that voters, even Catholic ones, agree that contraceptives should be offered by health plans, even those of faith-based employers. That gives Democrats hope they can benefit from the high-stakes battle.

"This makes Republicans look more extreme," said Eddie Vale, a spokesman for Protect Your Care, a health advocacy organization that has been leading attacks on GOP candidates opposed to the new healthcare law. "It's another concrete benefit they want to take away."

The contraceptive rule takes effect in August, but the administration has granted religiously affiliated organizations an extra year to implement it.

The rule requires that all health plans provide preventive healthcare services, which include cancer screening and wellness exams as well as contraception, without imposing cost-sharing, such as co-pays or deductibles, on employees. The administration already has granted narrow exemptions from the rule for churches, other houses of worship and religious organizations at which employees primarily share the same faith.

But larger faith-based institutions, such as universities or hospitals where workers typically hold a variety of religious beliefs, must comply with the rule. That has generated fierce opposition from the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops because of the church's longtime stance against contraceptives.

The White House struck a careful tone Wednesday, emphasizing Obama's search for "balance."

"He is very sensitive to concerns like these, and he wants to find a way to implement this important rule, because he is committed to making sure women have access to this coverage," White House Press Secretary Jay Carney said. "He wants to find a way to implement it that can allay some of the concerns that have been expressed."

Meanwhile, activists mobilized for battle, using the issue to raise money.

Labor and health advocacy groups allied with Democrats plan a blitz this week in key battleground states: Michigan, Ohio, Wisconsin and Florida. The Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee declared in a fundraising pitch: "Our right-wing opponents continue to launch attack after attack against women's rights, women's health, and women's economic security — and we've got to fight back every single day."

The National Republican Senatorial Committee also launched a petition and donation drive. "The Democrats are using Obamacare to force religious groups to defy their deeply held beliefs," the group said on its website. "Where has our freedom gone?"

The Faith and Freedom Coalition, a group led by longtime conservative leader Ralph Reed, asked supporters in an email, "Have you had enough of Obama's war on religion?"

If so, the email said, sign a petition and make a contribution now.

This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it

This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it

Kim Geiger and Noam N. Levey in the Washington bureau contributed to this report.

 

Comments  

We are concerned about a recent drift towards vitriol in the RSN Reader comments section. There is a fine line between moderation and censorship. No one likes a harsh or confrontational forum atmosphere. At the same time everyone wants to be able to express themselves freely. We'll start by encouraging good judgment. If that doesn't work we'll have to ramp up the moderation.

General guidelines: Avoid personal attacks on other forum members; Avoid remarks that are ethnically derogatory; Do not advocate violence, or any illegal activity.

Remember that making the world better begins with responsible action.

- The RSN Team

 
+10 # kyzipster 2012-02-10 07:42
You go Republicans! In the end this will be as popular as the Terri Schiavo "controversy".
 
 
+24 # bluepilgrim 2012-02-10 08:20
Somewhat less so now, but Catholics are not supposed to eat meat on Fridays, so let's make it a rule that people can't use food stamps to buy meat on those days?

So, it seems that the Catholics are unable to herd their flocks into compliance with their doctrines and need goverenment to enforce them?

What next? Bring back all the rules that say you can't work on Sundays and make it illegal for subsidized public transportation to carry people to work on those days?

Oh, wait -- I know... those religions which don't allow any medical procedures but rely on prayer -- can't disrespect those religions in favor of the others, so let's not allow insurance or government medical benefits to allow any sort of procedures which any religion disallows...

Obviously religions can't survive by relying on just themselves to get people to follow thier rules -- they need government to force everyone to follow them...

This country has gone completely nuts.
 
 
+4 # Glen 2012-02-10 12:17
Churches no longer have a boogie man out there to assist them with rules. With bad luck the church might bring back the Tonton Macoutes.

The Catholic church as always been political, and has controlled enormous amounts of money and power, not to mention land. Protestant churches have rather envied that influence and wealth, especially here in the U.S.

You are right, bluepilgrim, that the push and pull and illogical power plays between churches and the government is driving this country back a few hundred years.
 
 
+16 # coach777b 2012-02-10 09:00
This is a manufactured crisis, ginned up by a group of old, white males, whose vision of women goes back to the 14th century. The religious strictures of the Taliban, the mullahs of the middle east and the the ultra-orthodox in Israel should not be imported into America. If contraceptive medicines are not allowed for women employed by Catholic universities or hospitals, why is Viagara or Cialis OK for male employees? The cardinals and their repub chorus should get their tentacles out of women's bodies.
 
 
+19 # Billy Bob 2012-02-10 09:08
This is why we need single-payer. That would solve it immediately. In fact, right now, religions don't even have to pay taxes (although it's becoming clear that they should). With single-payer religious groups couldn't complain because they're not paying into it.
 
 
+6 # Billy Bob 2012-02-10 09:08
This is why we need single-payer. That would solve it immediately. In fact, right now, religions don't even have to pay taxes (although it's becoming clear that they should). With single-payer religious groups couldn't complain because they're not paying into it.
 
 
0 # Billy Bob 2012-02-10 21:03
Sorry for the double-post. I didn't even know that was possible on RSN. I didn't do it on purpose.
 
 
+12 # giraffee2012 2012-02-10 09:12
Wake up Catholic rulers: This is 2012 and long ago your "rules" (not even found in any Bible) should be discarded. Religion is not about what a person does with his/her body. You cardinals (not birds) and GOP leanings should teach love, respect, honor and all those things but leave our bodies to us to do as we please. Good grief - I hope you lose more of your flock over this "attention getting tantrum" --- Of course Catholics have given organized religion a bad taste in my mouth for a long time.

VOTE DEM - NEVER FOR THE GOP/TP or we'll all be starving
 
 
+10 # Billsy 2012-02-10 10:03
In a depressed economy, birth control is an economic necessity as well as a fundamental right. The last thing a poor family needs is another mouth to feed.
 
 
+1 # Ken Hall 2012-02-10 19:46
Neither does Mother Earth. At a time when human population is stressing the limits of the biome and affecting the climate, birth control, contraception, and yes, even abortion, should be readily and universally available.
 
 
+6 # Todd Williams 2012-02-10 10:34
I watched MSNBC this morning and say the Bishop of Washington speak about this issue. All he could do was talk about the Catholic church's right to religious freedom. He really never fully addressed a women's right to contraceptives. I understand this because of the church's long held position on birth control. Fine then. Don't provide these services for your wokers whether they be Catholics of not. But I say it is high time we ended the IRS tax exemptions for religion -ALL religion. These institutions have had a free ride long enough.
 
 
+5 # SOF 2012-02-10 12:12
Yes, end tax exemptions for religion. Also, I'd like to make sure insurance companies are not allowed to pay for infertility costs or Viagra, because those are an affront to my religion which includes responsible parenting, reduction of the burden of overpopulation on the planet and opposition to forced payment for processes which I believe are morally questionable. I'm sure the right would agree.
 
 
+2 # Todd Williams 2012-02-10 12:56
Interesting comment. Wonder who paid for all the Octomom's fertility treatments?
 
 
+3 # Tippitc 2012-02-10 12:20
The use of birth control is a private issue - not something a bunch of old men waving religion around have any business meddling in. And for the Catholic Church to be held up as some beacon of light makes me want to throw up - maybe they should clean up their own house re: a LONG history of child abuse!!
 
 
0 # diacad 2012-02-10 12:20
I agree with the earlier post by Billy Bob. By tying up government subsidy with employer-funded private health
insurance, the Obama administration has again painted itself into a corner.
Right now, a "compromise" is being cobbled together, but even Biden can't
make a silk purse out of a sow's ear.

Be sure to see this video by Lawrence O’Donnell, MSBNC host: If we had single payer, we wouldn’t be in this mess.
http://www.pnhp.org/news/2012/february/lawrence-o’donnell-msbnc-host-if-we-had-single-payer-we-wouldn’t-be-in-this-mess
Posted on Thursday, February 9, 2012
 
 
+3 # Holyone 2012-02-10 12:53
Rick Santorum, a Cahtolic, says that he will not support the use of contraceptives because they encourage people to be promiscuous. This applies to married couples as well, I suppose.

Many people are not Cahtolic and do have a right to be free of their doctrines (Thank God for Martin Luther and Henry VIII).

These Bishops are so outraged by the contraception issue , Would it not have been consistant if they had shown this same outrage in the molestation of hundreds of children, not by lay Catholics, but, by CATHOLIC Priests?

Did Rick Santorum not want to stop these outrageous acts of promiscuity against innocent childern? Probably not . The PRIEST were good Cahtolics and did not use contraceptive devices which makes child abuse OK?

Look, you can't have rules of convience unless you are to be taken seriously.The Cahtolics lost their moral authority some time ago. on such issues.

98% of Catholics use contraceptives and many even dare eat meat on Fridays.

Men making rules for women has never been a reasonable posture.

Today, the President outwitted these Pretenders and still will provide a plan for free contracetives for ALL women.

Go Mr. President!!!
 
 
+4 # michelle 2012-02-10 18:08
If we don't stand up to the catholic church now they will turn us into a christianist version of Afghanistan. I am so angry over this. Who invited the council of catholic bishops to become a branch of government. Christians claim there is a war against christians in this country, well, by god there better be or we are all in trouble. Remember ladies, real women don't sleep with catholics.
 
 
+3 # margpark 2012-02-10 18:57
While I am not worried about contraceptives at the age of 75, I am very worried about our country. People used to have abundant children as babies died quite frequently and they needed big families to have a few grow to adulthood with the ability to sustain their elderly parents. That is no longer true. Most babies grow to adulthood. The world is overpopulated and that also has an effect on our world and our atmosphere. The Catholic position (which most Catholics pay no attention to) is anti-life not pro-life.
 
 
+3 # Ken Hall 2012-02-10 19:42
The Founding Fathers, when they wrote the Constitution, were wise enough to impose a robust firewall between politics and religion, a wall that Christian nut-cases have been chipping away at ever since. I recommend, to those who want solid information, the small book "Fighting Words", the author's name escapes me right now. The author points out that the US was more than a few years old when "In God We Trust" appeared on US currency, and it was 1954 before the words "under God" were inserted into a perfectly good Pledge of Allegiance. The book does a good job of arming a person with factual information that refutes the bogus "original intent" arguments concerning disestablishmen t, abortion, etc.
 
 
0 # Susan1989 2012-02-12 13:38
If it were men who got pregnant this would not be an argument. How outrageous that anyone decide who should or should not use birth control. This entire debate is about keeping women under the control of men. When Mr. Santorum uses the word promiscuous, we can be certain he is referring to the behavior of women. Since when has a man been described with that adjective? It is mind boggling to think that anyone thinks that the sex lives of American women should be controlled by the religious beliefs and values of a handful of white men who see only one world view. Regardless of what anyone says or does people will continue to have sex. Limiting access to birth control affects mostly women who are often deserted by men and fall into poverty. The only thing left is tp blame them for having sex. How tragic that we are such a sexist country.
 
 
0 # Willman 2012-02-12 19:22
The religious beliefs of "CELIBATE" men.Who looked the other way while some of their own did what they felt like with young boys and men.
 

THE NEW STREAMLINED RSN LOGIN PROCESS: Register once, then login and you are ready to comment. All you need is a Username and a Password of your choosing and you are free to comment whenever you like! Welcome to the Reader Supported News community.