Obama administration makes another proposal for mandated contraceptive coverage by religious employers
July 10, 2015
The Obama administration has released a new proposal to resolve a conflict with religious institutions that object in principle to the mandated coverage of contraceptives in the "Obamacare" health-insurance program.
The new policy would allow qualified religious institutions to opt out of the contraceptive coverage. Female employees at these organizations would then receive contraceptive coverage directly from insurers, without any direct payment by the employer. However, the new proposal still requires the religious institutions to notify the Department of Health and Human Services that they are opting out, thus triggering the coverage for their employees. To date, religious institutions have objected to that provision, saying that it requires them, in effect, to take an action that provides the objectionable coverage.
Following up on a Supreme Court ruling that privately owned corporations must be allowed to uphold the religious principles of their owners, the Obama administration has also offered an opt-out provision for corporations. The proposed rules would apply only to corporations held by no more than five owners, and not traded on public exchanges.
This latest proposal from the White House is unlikely to quell the objections of religious employees, who have consistently opposed any requirement for subsidized contraceptive coverage. The fact that the proposal was made public on a Friday afternoon in the summer-- the time recommended by publicists for release of damaging stories-- indicates that the Obama administration anticipated a negative response.
For all current news, visit our News home page.
Further information:
All comments are moderated. To lighten our editing burden, only current donors are allowed to Sound Off. If you are a current donor, log in to see the comment form; otherwise please support our work, and Sound Off!
-
Posted by: TheJournalist64 -
Jul. 10, 2015 10:03 PM ET USA
This is totally illogical. If the insurers have a deal like the one my employer has, the insurer processes the claim but the employer is responsible for the costs, and so pays for the coverage, whatever it may be. If it is "true insurance," then everyone is paying for the costs. The insurer doesn't just eat the cost. No free lunch.
-
Posted by: ElizabethD -
Jul. 10, 2015 3:20 PM ET USA
What about the people being insured? Why are women denied the right to opt out of this morally offensive insurance coverage?
