House Democrats Walk Out Of One-Sided Hearing On Contraception, Calling It An 'Autocratic Regime'

Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Calif.), chair of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee.

WASHINGTON -- Three Democrats walked out of a House Oversight and Government Reform hearing on religious liberty and the birth control rule on Thursday to protest Chairman Darrell Issa's (R-Calif.) refusal to allow a progressive woman to testify in favor of the Obama administration's contraception rule. The morning panel at the hearing consisted exclusively of men from conservative religious organizations.

"What I want to know is, where are the women?" Rep. Carolyn Maloney (D-N.Y.) asked Issa before walking out of the hearing after the first panel. "I look at this panel, and I don't see one single individual representing the tens of millions of women across the country who want and need insurance coverage for basic preventative health care services, including family planning. Where are the women?"

Delegate Eleanor Holmes Norton (D-D.C.), told reporters in the hallway outside the hearing that she marched out because it was being conducted like an "autocratic regime." The other members who left were Maloney and Rep. Mike Quigley (D-Ill.).

There are 10 witnesses testifying at Thursday's hearing. None of those individuals -- listed as testifying prior to hearing -- is in favor of the Obama administration's birth control rule, and few are women.

Photo of the morning's panel, via Planned Parenthood:

Barry Lynn, executive director of Americans United for Separation of Church and State, was listed as a witness for the hearing, but Simon Brown, a spokesman for Americans United, told The Huffington Post that Lynn will not be testifying. (He will, however, be submitting written testimony to the committee.)

Democrats say they tried to invite another witness -- a young woman -- to testify, but were blocked by Republicans.

Issa said at the hearing that he rejected the Democrats' female witness, Sandra Fluke, because, as a Georgetown University law student who "appears to have become energized over this issue," she was "not appropriate or qualified." He said that in lieu of allowing her to speak at the hearing, he instructed his staff to post a video online of Fluke speaking at a previous press conference.

Ranking Member Elijah Cummings (D-Md.) complained about the matter in a letter to Issa on Wednesday.

"When my staff inquired about requesting minority witnesses for this hearing, we were informed that you would allow only one," Cummings wrote. "Based on your decision, we requested as our minority witness a third-year Georgetown University Law Center student named Sandra Fluke. I believed it was critical to have at least one woman at the witness table who could discuss the repercussions that denying coverage for contraceptives has on women across this country."

In his letter, Cummings wrote that Issa's staff told Democrats that the chair had decided, “As the hearing is not about reproductive rights and contraception but instead about the Administration's actions as they relate to freedom of religion and conscience, he believes that Ms. Fluke is not an appropriate witness."

Fluke has been a vocal supporter of the Obama administration's decision not to exempt religiously-affiliated employers from having to offer contraception, without a co-pay, to their employees under their health insurance. The White House recently rolled out a compromise, where insurance companies would have to pick up the cost of the contraception if an organization determined the requirement violated its religious sensibilities.

After walking out of the hearing Thursday, Holmes Norton pulled Fluke into the hallway to allow her to speak to reporters. Fluke began to cry as she told the story of her 32-year-old friend who was diagnosed with ovarian cysts and prescribed birth control pills as the only remedy for her condition that could save her from becoming infertile. Because her student insurance did not cover contraception, Fluke's friend could not afford her medication, and she eventually lost her ovary and began experiencing symptoms of early menopause.

"Those are the consequences of this policy, and those are the voices the chairman silenced today," Fluke said.

Cummings stated in his Wednesday letter that Issa had violated Committee rules in regards to the witnesses at the hearing.

"Instead of inviting Ms. Fluke to testify, your staff informed us that you planned to invite a different witness who was no longer available [Lynn] after being informed of your decision to limit the minority to a single witness," Cummings added. "Compounding this insult, this afternoon you added two more witnesses of your own, in violation of Committee rules requiring three days notice for witnesses called by the majority."

Becca Watkins, Issa's press secretary, disputed Cummings' charges in a statement to The Huffington Post on Wednesday evening.

"After days of asking the minority for a witness suggestion, at 1:04 pm today the minority requested that two witnesses be invited," she wrote in an email. "Only three hours later, at 4:18 pm the majority staff informed the minority staff that the Chairman was extending an invite to one of the witnesses the minority had requested -- it has long been a common practice at the committee for the minority to recommend a single witness. After the Chairman agreed to issue an invitation, the minority then objected saying the witness they had requested just three hours earlier was no longer their request."

"As part of his efforts to obstruct the committee's oversight, Mr. Cummings continues to press the idea that he is entitled to special treatment that Democrats did not afford to Republicans when they were in the majority," she added. "Mr. Cummings' whining is a distortion of the reality that the majority quickly approved and issued an invitation to a witness selected by the minority."

The issue of witnesses at committee hearings has been a sore subject between Issa and Cummings for some time. For instance, all administration officials who testify before the committee are considered minority witnesses, even if the Democratic members didn't invite them and don't agree with their position. Issa and Democrats have also argued over when staff members are allowed to accompany members on trips.

Watch video of an exchange during the hearing, via ThinkProgress:

This is a developing story and will be updated.

Comments

[brennasmom]

10:51 PM on 03/01/2012

I'm on Fluke's side, and even I think this is ridiculous. Her 32 year old friend had enough money to have health insurance but she couldn't afford to buy her own birth control? And this was so devastating to Fluke that she broke down crying while talking about it? This is ridiculous. I'M ON HER SIDE and I think it's ridiculous. Why are people wasting so much time talking about this? I didn't have insurance and I drug my butt to Planned Parenthood and shelled out a whopping $30 a month for the pill. Why can't everyone else do the same?

[Becca Lester]

06:31 PM on 03/03/2012

I think the focus shouldn't be on the cost (because as you say, it's not necessarily prohibitively expensive,) but on why it isn't covered. No one would refute why antibiotics are covered, as they treat infections which are a serious health hazard. I don't think anyone would refute heart medication that lowers the risk of heart attack or stroke, because it's a serious health hazard. So why is it such a taboo that contraceptives would not be covered, as in my cases, birth control pills are used to deal with very serious health issues. I use birth control, not as a contraceptive, but as a major preventative measure for uterine cancer. Why should my health be seriously compromised because society [Republicans, radio talk show hosts, insert any number of applicable groups] chooses to associate contraceptives solely with sex?

[gsmith9072]

07:52 PM on 03/05/2012

This is an honest question, I don't use any birth control, am I at a huge risk for ovarian cancer? Because I'm confused, a quick search shows that birth control can actually increase the risk for other cancers. Are you at increased risk for ovarian cancer for some reason, or are you insinuating that it would make sense for all females to be on birth control?

[colliesue]

08:34 PM on 03/07/2012

Most of those medications you mention - are covered -- with a deductible. Nothing is 'free'. You pay for it in your premium or with your deductible.
If a woman wants birth control - for whatever reason -- it is available - and cheap.
Many Planned Parenthood locations offer it for free.
A MONTH OF BIRTH CONTROL PILLS IS CHEAPER THAN A GALLON OF GAS!

[Veneita]

01:35 PM on 03/05/2012

graduate student insurance is very basic and very cheap. graduate students are poorly paid. (I was a grad student with grad student insurance and wages). $30/month could be a lot especially if one attends a private school where the cost to attend is very high. I don't know if there are income qualifications for pills at Planned Parenthood, then there is the question of whether her friend even knew about that option if they were available at low cost.

[colliesue]

08:38 PM on 03/07/2012

She never mentioned if her 'friend' even attended Georgetown University. By the way tuition at Georgetown Law School is $46,847.00/year. What's a ovary worth (and yes, you can have children with only one)? If it was all-important, she might consider changing schools.

[SOSTED]

11:18 AM on 03/01/2012

To the fools that don't understand the argument: This is not about contraceptives, it's about separation of church and state. The statists say the church should pay for and provide free contraceptives which is contrary to the church's doctrine.. The Constitution, however broadly defined, cleary states that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the the free exercise therof" If you force someone to do something against thier free will then that imposes a prohibition of freely exercising your religious choices. Pretty simple to me! It's unconstitutional in every respect but what else you expect from a Pesident that was trained as an intellectually superior constitutional lawyer....or is it an agenda to unravel the constitution to it his ideology? Makes you wonder what the true agenda is?

[sdtrueman]

12:21 PM on 03/01/2012

There's no wondering where your ideology is...anything the President does, as far as your concerned, is bad. As far as the rest of us being fools, because you seem to think its all so simple, then you go ahead and explain how 89% of practicing Catholics use birth control in open defiance of the Church. Secondly, when an organization, such as a Catholic church, opens a hospital and hires NON-Catholics as staff, they are forbidden by law from discriminating against them because they are non-Catholics. Withholding a benefit based upon religion is called "illegal discrimination." In my opinion, all churches are hypocrites and if they want to operate freely, then they should pay taxes. As for you, one doesn't have to wonder if you're a fool, you've proven it.

[SOSTED]

02:33 PM on 03/01/2012

"The danger to America is not Barack Obama but a citizenry capable of entrusting a man like him with the Presidency. It will be far easier to limit and undo the follies of an Obama presidency than to restore the necessary common sense and good judgment to a depraved electorate willing to have such a man for their president. The problem is much deeper and far more serious than Mr. Obama, who is a mere symptom of what ails America . Blaming the prince of the fools should not blind anyone to the vast confederacy of fools that made him their prince. The Republic can survive a Barack Obama, who is, after all, merely a fool. It is less likely to survive a multitude of fools such as those who made him their president

[ever4union6]

09:59 PM on 03/01/2012

Is that the same "depraved electorate" that elected all those republican candidates?

[joleone]

12:15 AM on 03/11/2012

THANK YOU!!!

[RMosesNJ]

10:17 AM on 03/01/2012

Smoke and mirrors by GOP, no tax reform, no jobs bills, NO WORK TO ACTUALLY GET THE COUNTRY ON TRACK, just trying to turn back the clock a bit and make us the next cheap labor market with a thinly veiled plutocracy.

[politicsathome]

08:04 PM on 02/21/2012

Don't the Republicans keep telling us they are the party of greater individual liberty, intent on keeping government out of our lives wherever possible? Yet this panel of men has no problem intruding into women's reproductive rights--rights that are fundamental to our health and well-being. Let's make a deal guys: You keep your hands off our contraception and we'll keep our hands off your Viagra.

[lazykats7]

01:03 PM on 09/20/2012

Only with the parts that they want out of government like taking away anything that benefits from DADDY BIG BUCKS...anything else to do about your lives they must have a say so in.

[Rachel Snowling]

12:23 PM on 02/21/2012

Birth control should be available to every woman in this country, regardless of their religion. Not all women use birth control to prevent pregnancy. I'm one of them. If I didn't have access to birth control, I would have to deal with PMDD every month...severe depression, excruciatingly painful cramps, anemia from blood loss, etc. Anti depressants can't control all the symptoms. Men could never EVER know what it is like and how helpful birth control is.

[SOSTED]

08:49 AM on 03/01/2012

Birth control is available to every woman in the U.S. , the problem is that you want me to pay for your birth control....................Ther are already free or low cost womens clinics in nearly every city that provides these services through donations................just type in your search engine "birth control (your city)" This college student just wants to avoid pregnancy to continue her unabated sexual activity on the taxpayers bill.......There are medical conditions that warrant the prescribed medical hormones in birth control pills but that still does not protect against STD's..............A college student spends 4 years in college that equates to 1460 days less 4 days per month which sex is not desirable. That equals 1220 days that sex may be desirable....If she has sex every other day that would be 610 days... Nationally known brands of Condoms online sell for 35 cents each online if you purchase 1000. The condom cost for a student would be $287.00 for 4 years compared to $1200 per year for birth control pills and she should insist that her partner split the cost so her actual cost should be $143.50 for more protection. Birth control pills do not protect her from STD so which is more cost effective?

[Rick Kettenstock]

09:51 AM on 03/01/2012

How do you figure that you will be paying for it? This law is about requiring insurance which she and her employer (in this case a student union) pay for to include contraception in there policy,which She pays for not you. Keep your tired ideals out of other peoples business.

[brennasmom]

10:59 PM on 03/01/2012

Birth control is available to every woman in this country. You don't have to have insurance to get it. Every health department and Planned Parenthood offers it, and it's often free or reduced for those who can't afford it.

[April Squires]

02:07 AM on 02/21/2012

Why wasn't the head of the Episcopal Church, the Presiding Bishop Katherine Jefferts Schori, invited to speak?
April Squires
San Francisco

[APiusManNovel]

11:04 PM on 02/20/2012

Wow, such a nice set of lies. You see, there were women there -- three, actually. One registered nurses, and two with PhD after their names. But they don't count because they're pro-life, I suppose. You can see their transcripts and films testimony here: http://shar.es/gg23q

[ibkozi]

12:29 AM on 03/01/2012

to protest Chairman Darrell Issa's (R-Calif.) "refusal to allow a progressive woman to testify in favor" of the Obama administration's contraception rule.

Try reading comprehension next time.

[Pencyn]

09:51 PM on 02/20/2012

Who would have thought 2012 and the Taliban are alive and well in DC. What's next mr. isa? Perhaps you would like us to cover our faces and bodies. Or, better yet not leave our homes without our husbands!

[Iam12Vote]

06:38 PM on 02/20/2012

A position too weak to withstand a third year law student.

[CS Parish]

07:47 PM on 02/20/2012

That is really none of your business! What an ignorant thing to say....

[GuiltyUndertaker]

11:54 AM on 02/20/2012

Every sperm is sacred/every sperm is great
If a sperm gets wasted/God gets quite irate

[Joshua Kramarenko]

10:09 AM on 02/20/2012

Where are the suicide bombers when you need em, all these guys in ONE PLACE and it didn't explode? What a shame.

[Sophist FCD]

02:11 AM on 02/20/2012

A bunch of dried-up old white guys deciding what you can do with your lady-parts? Yeah, sounds like the Republican party to me...

[VinZenTexaN]

09:57 PM on 02/19/2012

The Commandments Moses forgot:1)Thou shalt not rape 2)Thou shalt not keep slaves 3)Thou shalt not have sex with children 4)Thou shalt not kill anyone for their religious beliefs. And...5)Thou shalt not profit from the beliefs of others...

With or without religion, you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion.

There once was a time when all people believed in God and the church ruled world. This time was called the Dark Ages.

[Dan Hydar]

01:46 AM on 02/20/2012

Wow. You really, REALLY have a cartoonish idea of history, don't you?

[VinZenTexaN]

09:54 AM on 02/20/2012

People who don't like their beliefs being laughed at shouldn't have such funny beliefs

Religious sounds dandy, but so do unicorns.

without ignorance god is nothing

If God exists, I hope he has a good excuse

[bdoug25000]

09:18 AM on 02/20/2012

"With or without religion, you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion." I don't know if that is an original, but I find that statement profoundly insightful and absolutely accurate, thank you.

[Oscaron]

11:24 AM on 02/20/2012

"Religion is an insult to human dignity. With or without it you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion."
- Steven Weinberg, April 1999

[Michael P Mitchell]

07:13 PM on 02/19/2012

The Republican men say that they stand up for the women on women issues and that the women agree with them. They believe that women agree with everything they say. That is why they don't allow the women to be on the panel. Yet, they will not allow any Democratic women on the panel. I wonder why.

[Lady1genius]

08:00 PM on 02/19/2012

I don't care what the republican men say. They are standing ON their women if they can't speak for themseves. A man has no way of knowing what is best for a woman unless he asks her. He doesn't get to tell her what's best. That way of life is gone. I have news. Most women, even their own, do NOT agree with them.

[GuiltyUndertaker]

11:51 AM on 02/20/2012

Uh, because they're full of ----?