Tweet
Adding another to a string of small victories as we begin this election year, the Obama Administration’s Department of Health and Human Services announced that employers will need to cover contraception in their health insurance plans, ensuring close to universal contraceptive coverage. Earlier, the Administration added birth control to the essential benefits package on the insurance exchanges, without a co-pay. So they have now covered the employer and individual markets, where a majority of people get their health insurance coverage. In addition, most states offer contraceptive coverage in their Medicaid plans, though not enough (“Of the 44 states responding to the survey,
30 states and DC always consider condoms a family planning service, as do 31 states and DC
for spermicide, and 30 states and DC for sponges”). So with this announcement, almost all Americans will have access to contraceptives, mostly free of charge. And it’s not just FDA-approved birth control that gets this treatment, but also counseling and screening for STDs, breastfeeding and other post-natal support, and an annual women’s preventive care visit. All of that will need to be part of employer health plans going forward.
Like with most of the family planning announcements over the past few years, there is a religious exemption added to this, but only churches and religious non-profits will be exempt, and other religiously-affiliated employers have just one year to transition to coverage that offers contraception.
Rep. Lois Capps, a leader on women’s health issues in the House, applauded the action. “Especially in tough economic times like we are experiencing now, women and their partners often have to choose between high contraceptive costs and paying the bills. Today’s announcement will go a long way in making sure that cost does not prohibit women from planning their pregnancies,” she said in a statement. The Administration engendered some bad feelings from women’s health advocates by restricting access to the morning-after pill. At least they don’t get the same cooties with family planning prior to sex, although it does highlight the absurdity of the morning-after objection.
Many health care plans cover Viagra. Now, at least, they will cover birth control pills to the same extent.
31 Comments
Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About FDL News Desk
Amazing! Women’s ability to protect themselves against unwanted pregnancies is now on a par with men’s ability to achieve drug-induced erections.
It is a victory, nonetheless, and a very important one. (I would add a hard-won one, but I think I’ll leave that pun alone for today.)
SCOTUS has Obamacare on its next docket, so we’ll see what’s what later.
I’ve reached the point where my reaction to good news is “OK–what’s his game?”
Something for women? Show me to the fainting couch.
Well, whaddya know. Sigh. It’s an election year, and Rahm’s no longer around to say “you don’t gotta do nuttin’ for the libs and the women; they gonna vote for Gingrich/Romney?”
Still, I’ll take any victory, however small. Especially after Dana Milbank’s atrocity of a column telling women to shut up and quit bitchin’ about such little s–t as attacks on our ability to control our own reproduction.
Thx for posting this note.
If successfully implemented, this would be a small but good result from having an Obama administration – no Republican president would do this.
You’re right but we’re all getting crumbs when we need at least half a loaf. This was an easy choice for Obama.
Ding. Electioneering crumbs.
Good…..
Great. Only took, what? Like 3 years and election coming to get these paltry crumbs.
Yes, this IS very very important, but why should I be so “grateful” that Obama decided to toss a bone in our general direction?? He held out until the last possible second to “provide” something that allegedly a putative “Republican” would not.
Cue the Kabuki Show. Not one whit of gratitude towards the poseur in the White House.
Well the earlier post here about the attempt to force a completely inadequate settlement of the foreclosure crisis comes the same day as this. Obama is kind of willing when push comes to shove to allow movement on social issues. He is never willing to give when it comes to money for the big boys.
These social moves are all nice enough, but if the economy keeps diving you can be sure that the neanderthals will be back in power and most of what has been accomplished in the social area will go the way of the Dodo bird.
All right. I agree with this. But why in the hell are the insurance companies and, us eventually in higher premiums, paying for boner pills??
Good things done by t he Obama administrations…that’s one in a row. Two total with DADT.
As Muhammad Ali got older, he developed a strategy that involved ‘stealing the round’ by coasting the first 2 minutes, then fighting aggressively for the last minute since that’s what the judges would remember.
This is exactly what Obama is doing now.
No kidding. So Zero finally gets offa his butt and pushes through something that should’ve been done loooong ago. But his record overall is so horrific that some putative “Republican” gets back in and can reverse the few “good” things that Zero did, stat.
Feh. Not impressed, albeit this measure is very good and way overdue.
Not to quibble, but somehow we went from:
to:
Is that really true?
Your insurance might cover the cost when (and if) you decide to use it, but you can be sure you’re paying for it on the front end in premiums. Unless you think the Insurance Companies are just going to be nice and give away something (anything) for free.
I do not know this for sure, not ever having been in the insurance game, but it seems to me that paying for condoms, BS pills, `morning after`pills, or *any* form of contraception has got to be much cheaper than paying for hospital care for baby delivery, etc. Can`t believe they would suck up that cost just to get another warm body to insure. Anyone here have real knowledge?
I’m critical of the Obama Admin and skeptical of his bona fides, but I offer Congrats on a job well done and a victory well deserved for US women. Why look a gift horse in the mouth?
MY wife was in the health insirance biz….. you’re right, a penny in prevention is worth a dollar in cure.
You sure can tell he’s running for re-election! Where has he been for the last threee years!
So, who or what is blocking this very reasonable inclusion, which makes much economic sense. Are the fundies really that strong? Will they take this as their crumb instead of criminalization of abortion? If so, I have to say to them, `Pikers!“
I agree with what you say about which is cheaper, 12 months of the pill, or a hospital birth. But I don’t think that’s how Insurance Companies do business (BTW, I’m not in insurance either). I think they pull out the spread sheet and figure out – on average – how many births they’ll have to pay for, and how much they cost and how many policies they’ll sell and then do the math and add in their profit and that’s how much you pay.
If forced to add birth control, that’s a number that gets added. If that results if some number of fewer births, that could get subtracted, but they’ll still take their profit and charge customers accordingly.
Also, just a guess here, but if we take the cost of all birth control used by everone in the country and put it up against the cost of the few “oops” hospital births, contraception costs might well be more.
It’s satisfying that coverage was granted, but now women will still have to find pharmacies where the “anti-choice” pharmacists won’t deny filling the prescriptions.
Considering that it costs approximately $220,000 to raise a child to the age of 18, you may want to reconsider your “guess”.
But that is exactly the question. Insurers do *not* have to pay for the $220,000, they only have to pay for the pre-natal and delivery. Then the baby is another bod, and another premium. When I was working with group insurance (as a company benefits adminstrator), contraception was covered no problem, for any member whether married or not, ditto fertility intervention, and of course pre-natal and delivery. *BUT* new babies were only covered by the company insurance once they had come home from the hospital. Otherwise, nada (eg, Gabriel Santorum — delivery costs covered but no life insurance).
Why are we not seeing lady pharmacists, or really religious pharmacists of any demographic, refusing to dispense erectile dysfunction pills? Clearly, they thwart the will of God, or the damn thing would just go up on its own.
In fact, any prescription for any purpose is defying the will o god.
Jeez. Is logic being taught in the schools nowadays? Or srsly, cant anyone just figure it out for themself?
What HF said at #24.
I was happy to pay for my own “fix” after my second kid was born. The insurance company couldn’t have cared less. They’d only have to pay about 3 days worth of that 18 year cost to raise more kids.
Does this mean that 14-15-16-and 17 year old girls get over-the-counter-access to the morning-after pill?
If not, excuse me (I have three granddaughters, the oldest, 15…) for not dancing the Obama Tango.
Not clear to me, Grandpa, if you are fur or agin.
Me, I am all for canoodling without kindering, but I was never very good at dancing. So — ???
You guys are not paying attention. As President Obama’s health care program installs itself, along with little add-ons like contraception, it will be harder and harder to unwind. The Republicans have to know this, and they are freaking out. Obama in 2012!
Tanbark@27, your kids will be having or experimenting with sex, with or without birth control, with or without your permission. Are you ready to be a grandparent?
.
Oh give us a fucking break, troll.
Not in there, and you know it. Obama already threw you assholes the red meat of no Plan B for minors, so stop trying to muddy the water and enjoy your illegitimate great-grandchildren and the teenage granddaughters you marched to forced birth.