iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Diana DeGette: Bishops' Efforts Causing Confusion On Birth Control Rule

Birth Control Mandate

First Posted: 02/ 8/2012 7:00 pm Updated: 02/ 9/2012 2:19 pm

WASHINGTON -- Rep. Diana DeGette, co-chair of the Congressional Pro Choice Caucus, said that at least three of her progressive colleagues, whom she declined to name, have expressed "confusion" over whether to support the Obama administration's new birth control coverage rule after receiving personal phone calls from their Catholic bishops.

DeGette, a Democrat from Colorado, told HuffPost that the caucus had a briefing Wednesday with a panel of ethicists, doctors and hospital administrators to clarify what the contraception requirement does in order to end some of that confusion.

"The bishops are a very powerful group, as we learned during the health care debate," she said. "We had very good attendance at our briefing today because there's a lot of misinformation from the bishops and a lot of confusion among members about what this rule means. Everybody felt like it sort of hit them this week."

The rule, announced in January by the Department of Health and Human Services, requires most employers to offer health insurance plans that cover birth control with no co-pay. Religious entities who employ mostly people of one faith and have the inculcation of religious values as their main purpose, such as churches and other houses of worship, are exempt from the rule. All other employers who morally object to birth control and don't currently cover it for their employees have an extra year to adjust to the new rule.

But the Catholic bishops consider the rule an assault on religious freedom because it doesn't also exempt religiously affiliated employers, such as Catholic schools and hospitals, and they have intensified their lobbying campaign. Bishops all over the country read letters to their congregations this past Sunday urging them to call Congress and the White House and demand that the decision be reversed.

"The federal government, which claims to be 'of, by and for the people,' has just dealt a heavy blow to almost a quarter of those people -- the Catholic population -- and to the millions more who are served by the Catholic faithful," Bishop Timothy A. McDonnell of Springfield, Mass., told his congregation on Sunday. "We cannot -- we will not -- comply with this unjust law."

The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops did not respond to a request for comment.

Prominent political leaders, including House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) and Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney, have also sharply criticized the rule in recent days. Boehner said on the House floor Wednesday that if President Barack Obama does not repeal the rule, Congress will legislatively override it; Senate Republicans echoed that sentiment in a press conference the same day.

But DeGette pointed out Wednesday that she hasn't seen Congress repudiate a rule like this in the 15 years she's been in office, and she's not sure it's even possible to use legislation to reverse a rule before it has been promulgated. While the birth control requirement was announced in January, it hasn't yet gone into effect.

"I'm not sure they've thought this through," she said. "They're trying to make a political point, but the fact is that a lot of what they're saying about the issue is not true."

One point of contention is whether the rule forces employers to cover abortifacients.

"This rule would require faith-based employers -- including Catholic charities, schools, universities, and hospitals -- to provide services they consider immoral," Boehner argued in his floor speech. "Those services include sterilization, abortion-inducing drugs and devices, and contraception."

In fact, the rule covers emergency contraception, which the American College of Obstetrics and Gynecology states is different from medication abortion because it actually prevents an unwanted pregnancy from occurring.

Supporters of the birth control rule also take issue with it being characterized as "an assault on religious freedom." They argue that the alternative, which is allowing employers to cherry-pick health benefits for the women they employ based on the employers' religious beliefs, encroaches on individual liberty.

"My question is: Who has the conscience? The employer who might have some generalized religious charter, but who's employing vast numbers of people who aren't of that religion, or the individual who's exercising his own religious conscience?" DeGette asked.

Rep. Jan Schakowsky (D-Ill.) predicted to reporters that if Republican lawmakers try to repeal the new rule through legislation, there will be a massive backlash equal to the one that hit Susan G. Komen for the Cure last week when it tried to defund Planned Parenthood.

"We saw a mobilization of women around the country that was unprecedented when breast cancer screenings were going to be taken away from Planned Parenthood," Schakowsky said. "We've seen ourselves be discriminated against in health care before, and we're not going to go backwards. It will be at their peril that they try to undo this."

The Obama administration said Wednesday that it has no plans to back down on the birth control rule, although it will work with faith-based organizations to help them implement it.

FOLLOW HUFFPOST POLITICS
Subscribe to the HuffPost Hill newsletter!
WASHINGTON -- Rep. Diana DeGette, co-chair of the Congressional Pro Choice Caucus, said that at least three of her progressive colleagues, whom she declined to name, have expressed "confusion" over wh...
WASHINGTON -- Rep. Diana DeGette, co-chair of the Congressional Pro Choice Caucus, said that at least three of her progressive colleagues, whom she declined to name, have expressed "confusion" over wh...
 
 
  • Comments
  • 1,657
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Post Comment Preview Comment
To reply to a Comment: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to.
View All
Favorites
Highlights
Bloggers
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (28 total)
Wonder Land
...Words Matter
04:31 PM on 02/13/2012
With all due respect , when was the last time that a majority of Catholics agreed with anything
the Catholic Bishops said or did....
Let's remind ourselves here that the Catholic clergy is not exactly standing on high moral ground.
Does anybody actually believe that birth control is immoral....Get real.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
iamone3
05:52 AM on 02/10/2012
When Does Human Life Begin?

Internationally-known geneticists and biologists have testified that human life begins at conception. In 1981 (April 23-24) a Senate Judiciary Subcommittee held hearings on the question: When does human life begin? The following doctors testified:

Dr. Hymie Gordon, Chairman of the Department of Genetics at the Mayo Clinic, said: "By all the criteria of modern molecular biology, life is present from the moment of conception."

Dr. McCarthy de Mere, a medical doctor and law professor at the University of Tennessee, testified: "The exact moment of the beginning of personhood and of the human body is at the moment of conception."

Dr. Jerome Lejeune, The Father of Modern Genetics, testified that, "Each of us has a very precise starting moment which is the time at which the whole necessary and sufficient genetic information is gathered inside one cell, the fertilized egg, and this is the moment of fertilization. There is not the slightest doubt about that and we know that this information is written on a kind of ribbon we call the DNA."

The late Dr. Lejeune of Paris, France, discovered the genetic cause of Down Syndrome. He received the Kennedy Prize for this discovery, as well as the Memorial Allen Award Medal, the world's highest award for work in the field of Genetics.
markgoode
a voice from the center
04:51 PM on 03/15/2012
Until a fetus is sufficiently developed to survive on its own outside the uterus, it is not a living creature. In terms of national identity, a fetus does not become a citizen of the United States until it is born.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
iamone3
12:34 PM on 03/16/2012
By your definition those living on life support are not citizens. I will stick with the experts on this that life begins at conception.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
l78lancer
Wisdom is the principal thing
01:20 AM on 02/10/2012
This is a smoke and mirrors issue. Most states have laws on the books regarding this matter. Many if not most catholic hospitals and universities already make contraceptives available. The majority of catholics disagree with the bishops. And just short of 100% of catholic women have tried or are using contraceptives.

The real deception here is that this has nothing to do with war on religion, despite the war cries of the bishops and the rightwing. This is a matter of labor law, not a matter of freedom of speech except to the extent that noncatholic women who work for these institutions will have their right totally trampled on by not enforcing this with the insitituions. If this was a significant concern then why did the catholic church permit their own hospitals and universities to provide contraception? Why didn't they discipline them? Why didn't catholics protest these institutions? Why didn't broad-based protests erupt in the states where these laws were passed?

Hospitals and universities are not churches. If they do not want to follow the laws then they should get out of the business.
photo
White Paper
My micro-bio is still empty!
08:26 AM on 02/12/2012
I78lancer - thanks for a thought provoking commentary. It's nice to see a post based on facts and not emotions. Ironically, if anyone has ever paid for health insurance through their employer, they have paid into a pool of money. Though their plan offered through their employer may not include contraceptive care, their insurance provider might provide it under other plans. So essentially folks have already been paying for others birth control. This is truly a woman's right to make decisions about her health and not a religious infringement issue. It's not a labor law issue and certainly not a First Amendment issue. As you stated, most states already have laws regarding this. It talking with my friends who are catholic (are there are many) the majority of them do not agree with the bishops on this issue. If you count the number of posts on this site of non-catholics AND catholics that are in favor of this new law, you will see that people are overwhelmingly in favor of not having interference in issues concerning women's health! A majority of catholic women have stated they DO USE or HAVE USED birth control. Sadly, this hierarchy of old, white men will not be able to be progressive enough to see what their flock wants. Sadly, they cannot move past their old, rigid doctrine. Sadly, their doctrine does not bring them any closer to heaven!
photo
KJ Spion
Afghanistan '02; Iraq '06, '07, '09
08:46 PM on 02/12/2012
Racist!
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
l78lancer
Wisdom is the principal thing
10:14 PM on 02/15/2012
Thx. F/F.
07:26 PM on 02/09/2012
What the bishops don't want us to notice is that healthcare is part of their employees' compensation for their work; employers have no more business imposing their religious opinions one what service their employees' healthcare covers than they have imposing those opinions on the employees' choice of how and where to spend their wages.
04:25 PM on 02/09/2012
I'm not particularly religious and don't personally have any problem with birth control but if this rule is going to offend a significant fraction of the population maybe they should drop it. It's not as if most forms of birth control cost more than a few dollars anyway.
photo
Brian Gilmer
Good citizens make good citizens.
06:15 PM on 02/09/2012
The problem with an exception to the rule is that others will also ask for exceptions. The government decides what it considers health insurance for the purpose of enforcing the law. If a organization creates something that only covers pain relievers and then call it health insurance the government should be in a position to say no that is not health insurance and require the employer to pay for uninsured people.
07:22 PM on 02/09/2012
Pull your pants up, MrSavage, your middle (or upper?) class male privilege is showing. The set of services the Nasty Conspiracy of Child Buggerers want to opt out of covering is as follows: "Well-woman visits, screening for gestational diabetes, HPV testing, STD counseling, HIV testing and counseling, breastfeeding support and supplies, contraception, and screening and counseling for domestic violence." Not all of that costs "no more than a few dollars," and in any case, to force women to pay more than men for healthcare (men get coverage for services women never need, such as prostate cancer screening and treatment for erectile dysfunction) constitutes unacceptable discrimination. Read more at http://www.patheos.com/blogs/slacktivist/ -- three of the top four articles on that blog at the moment are about this manufactured controversy.
10:52 AM on 02/13/2012
Wow, that's quite the straw man you've built there.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
THISIKNOW
04:07 PM on 02/09/2012
If we had single payer, this would not be an issue at all.
photo
Brian Gilmer
Good citizens make good citizens.
06:15 PM on 02/09/2012
Yes, then we would have Legislators that would not want to cover this or that procedure.
photo
SantaMonican
Visit the carousel, in the Hippodrome, on the pier
04:06 PM on 02/09/2012
The Bishops, and the GOP, are using the Catholic churchs name, to further a cause, most Catholics want nothing to do with.
04:05 PM on 02/09/2012
Is it too much to ask for a little honesty here? Where is the confusion being sown by the bishops? There really isn't any dispute over what the government is requiring. Both sides agree that the rule would require church run organizations such as schools and hospitals to provide contraception as part of their health insurance plan. If they don't they will face stiff fines. The only other choice is shutdown the non-church organizations or violate their moral precepts.

One need not agree with Catholic teaching to acknowledge that the issue is plain and clear. There is no confusion. Nor is there a disagreement that the rule provokes questions of the extent of the protections of the first amendment.

I wonder if supporters of this rule will be just as happy if Rick Santorum becomes president and bans contraceptive coverage? Is it wise to be giving the government this power? Why not get health care away from the employer, give the tax break to the individual, and let everyone decide what's best for themselves.

http://bullpasturechronicles.blogspot.com
photo
Brian Gilmer
Good citizens make good citizens.
06:22 PM on 02/09/2012
If the Catholics don't want this coverage in their health insurance then just don't provide employees with health insurance. There is not a "stiff" fine. It is consistent with the cost of covering uninsured which is much less then the cost of providing health insurance. Not offering health insurance to employees will not cause an organization to shut down.

This is well within the limitation of the first amendment. The rule covers only what the government considers health insurance. This does not place any burden or restriction on the practice of religion.
12:49 PM on 02/10/2012
It is very hard to see your reasoning here. You are advocating that the government can order the Church to provide something it considers immoral or not provide anything at all. How does that not restrict their free exercise of religion?

The fine goes to hundreds of thousands of dollar. Quite stiff.

Setting aside the first amendment there is no constitutional authority for the government to mandate anything with regard to health care. However, even if the authority did exist, it is indisputably a violation of the first amendment which provide both that the government "shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion" violation 1 and violation 2 "restricting the free exercise thereof." To argue otherwise requires you, like humpty dumpty, to insist that words mean whatever you declare them to mean, no more and no less.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
truthsayer4ever
Veritas In Caritate
03:52 PM on 02/09/2012
These "bishops belong in church" not in politics. Get out!
photo
Brian Gilmer
Good citizens make good citizens.
06:24 PM on 02/09/2012
It is a good thing to have the Catholic Bishops involved in public policy. It is important that the clergy be involved in public debate both because they have a unique role in society and they are citizens of the US.
03:33 PM on 02/09/2012
Will the Catholic Church teaching also stop VIAGRA for MEN?
03:30 PM on 02/09/2012
Congress you better be darn sure polling on this issue is on you're side.
Opinion of congress is sitting at 10 percent now. I predict single digits in an election year if the American public thinks ..... Oh I don't know.... The economy and jobs ought to be getting a higher priority than the religious lobbyists of the Catholic Church
photo
Picachu
Facts Are Right Wing Kryptonite
03:01 PM on 02/09/2012
Yes Catholic bishops don't have to worry about feeding or clothing or caring for children. After all, Catholic priests are "celibate", at least as long as you don't count buggering altar boys as sex. The bishops, of course, must spend a great deal of time covering up for the buggery. This is one of many reasons why I am an X catholic.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
nikanj
free the fnords
05:32 PM on 02/09/2012
The hypocrisy is extraordinary, considering that some priests employ
a 100% guaranteed effective method of 'contraception' themselves . . .
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Jeanette DeBella Bogue
pretty sure I'm going straight to hell....
02:56 PM on 02/09/2012
Why are the GOP so threatened by my uterus?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Montana 123
Mama to Three Little Monkeys
03:28 PM on 02/09/2012
I know. Sad isn't it?
George Picard
Send lawyers, guns and money
03:37 PM on 02/09/2012
Hate to tell you but the Catholics voted for Obama in 08. 54 46

And we just dont catholics should be made to pay for something they are agaisnt, that whole freedom of religion thing.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Jeanette DeBella Bogue
pretty sure I'm going straight to hell....
04:44 PM on 02/09/2012
Noone is making you pay for contraception. The CHURCH is exempt from having to provide contracpetion coverage in their insurance polcies, however, a church affiliated hospital does. Why should I as an employee, be denied coverage because my religious belief is different than my employers?

BTW, 95% of Catholic women have used contraception.
02:25 PM on 02/09/2012
Republicans move with lightning speed to block women's access to legal medication and procedures, but when it comes to passing legislation to help women/men get back on their feet or aid opening up pathways to employment they can't be bothered...

This is just another wedge issue to distract the public from focusing on the do nothing republicans in congress.

John Boehner....where are the JOBS!
02:21 PM on 02/09/2012
Gee. Why don't we blame Bush or has that cop out worn out. Why are democrats always blaming someone else?? They screwed up again
03:02 PM on 02/09/2012
Did you think that up all by yourself. Fact is the Democrats blame Bush because he was to blame for much of the deficit, job loss, and recession, as for blaming the bishops of the Catholic Church on this one for dissimating false info again they are and so blame is rightly placed on them.
03:22 PM on 02/09/2012
Wrong.