Democrats on the House Oversight Committee complained loudly about the Republican majority’s refusal to allow minority witnesses at a hearing on the Administration’s birth control access rules. The panel, which is happening live right now, was announced by Chairman Darrell Issa with the participation of nine panelists, all of whom oppose the new rules, including a member of the US Conference of Catholic Bishops.
In a letter to Issa yesterday, ranking member Elijah Cummings objected to Issa disallowing a minority witness. Here’s an excerpt:
When my staff inquired about requesting minority witnesses for this hearing, we were informed that you would allow only one. 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 response, your staff relayed that you had decided as follows:
“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.”
It is inconceivable to me that you believe tomorrow’s hearing has no bearing on the reproductive rights of women. This Committee commits a massive injustice by trying to pretend that the views of millions of women across this country are meaningless, worthless, or irrelevant to this debate.
In the end, Barry Lynn of Americans United for Separation of Church and State was invited to testify. He will be opposed by six witnesses invited by the majority, on the second panel of the day. The majority also added additional witnesses at the last minute, making it an 11-1 stacked panel. In an opening statement, Rep. Carolyn Maloney railed against the majority for their behavior on scheduling the hearing:
What I want to know is, where are the women? I look at this panel, and I don’t one single individual representing the tens of millions of women across the country who want and need insurance coverage for basic preventive health care services, including family planning. Where are the women?
Mr. Chairman, I was deeply disturbed that you rejected our request to hear from a woman, a third year student at Georgetown law school named Sandra Fluke.
She hoped to tell this Committee about a classmate of hers, who was diagnosed with a syndrome that causes ovarian cysts. Her doctor prescribed the pill to treat this disease, but her student insurance didn’t cover it. Over several months – she paid out hundreds of dollars in out-of-pocket costs, until she could no longer afford her medication. And she eventually ended up losing her ovary.
Fluke showed up at the hearing, and Maloney appealed again to have her testify. She was refused.
For his part, Cummings said in his opening statement, “In my opinion, this Committee commits a massive injustice by trying to pretend that the views of millions of women across this country are meaningless, or worthless, or irrelevant to this debate.”
I’ll be monitoring the meeting for any notable outbursts. But the stacked deck and the lack of any women on a panel about birth control is really kind of unconscionable.




87 Comments

Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About FDL News Desk
Democratic Women Boycott House Contraception Hearing After Republicans Prevent Women From Testifying
In much the same way that the ocean is kind of damp…
LOL!!
This hearing is the biggest load of crap in a long time. And, considering the recent loads of crap, that is saying a lot.
The War against women proceeds full steam ahead. The GOP is picking a fight it ultimately can’t win. However, as we all know that won’t stop them.
Yeah, I didn’t know cobags came in industrial sizes. Trust Congress to prove me wrong.
The GOP merely wishes to reinforce support among its core constituency, the middle aged white males who resent women, immigrants, and other groups who are not “Them”. Subjugation is their watchword, for these other people are “threats to
theirthe American way of life”, don’t you know?Anything, and I do mean anything, is on the table as long as it empowers the “Most discriminated against group in the US”-the white middle aged male. The majority of these people feed at the trough of Fox “News” exclusively, and accordingly, are the least informed-albeit most heavily propagandized- segment of our population.
Why, this is yet more evidence of the ever ongoing Librul “War on Religion”, especially that peculiar to the God Fearin’ Religious Right, where women are supposedly commanded to subjugate themselves utterly to their husbands. Given a chance, these reprobates would roll back the 19th amendment, disenfranchise any whom dare disagree with their self serving plaint, plaster over the words etched upon the Statue of Liberty, and run this Country for their exclusive benefit. I gotta tell you, these people scare the hell out of me!
Republicans know how to capitalize on using a “bully pulpit” when they have the opportunity. They are always “catapulting the propaganda.”
How about a sexual boycott of these neanderthals that reject any sex except to procreate themselves.
The women have the power to turn balls blue , use it..
I’m getting confused, help me out. What I just read in this article is actually happening in the House of Representatives in the United States in the year 2012?? Surely you all jest.
Listening to the repub reps gives me the creeps this is like what the star chamber was peopled with.
This country is in deep trouble.
Kabuki Show plain ‘n simple.
Easy to get the rightwing fundies behind this one. Doug Coe’s “Family” of “churches” all preach the subjugation of women to men, who sit “on the right of hand God.”
These “Christiany Churches” have been using their bully pulpits to push the notion that contraception is another form of “abortion” for about the past 10 years or so (perhaps longer).
Yes, yes, it’s all about the subjugation of women to men. Anything, and I do mean ANYTHING, to pit one portion of the 99% against another portion of the 99%, plus ANYTHING to keep women “in their place” is a very good thing! Booyah!
Duly noted that known CRIMINAL Darryl Issa is the chair of this committee. No doubt it gives him a real hard-on to stick it to women. You can take that any way you want. I have no proof, but a low life scum like Issa has probably had his share of sexytime with women other than his wife. They almost all do. Ptoui!!
So essentially you all are comfortable with the idea of forcing someone to provide drugs they consider immoral?
Left-wing authoritarianism rears it’s ugly head yet again.
Well, regardless what happens wont the dem controlled senate and the dem president still have to sign or not sign off on what the repubs did in the house?
If Darrel Issa insists on declaring this a hearing about religious freedom and religious rights, then I think thousand upon thousands of us should flood his office with emails and phone calls and whatever other kinds of contact as is possible (perhaps a march on his offices with signs declaring him a religious bigot?), all throwing his offensive abuse of our religious freedom in that he is trying to allow certain groups to impose their religion and sense of morality on us. We should add that the fact is nobody pays extra for contraception because it actually saves the insurance company money because it does not result in a medical condition known as pregnancy, it does not result in live birth or abortion, any of which are far more costly to insurance companies. Therefore, one must draw the conclusion that if anyone is trying to abuse religious freedom, it is those that insist on imposing their religious beliefs on others. It should also be pointed out to Mr. Issa and the other members of his committee that are colluding with him on this issue that we are in the majority in the population, that it is they who are in the minority outside of congress, and that they are a disgrace in trying to pervert this issue and they will pay at the polls!
Yes. I am a type 1 diabetic who takes an insulin that is genetically engineered human rDNA sampling. I’m certain some moronic idiot could come along and determine that this drug is somehow equivalent to mass murder or bordering on human cloning or some such nonsense. Anyone can consider anything immoral. End of story. Just stop. I believe all insureres should provide this drug to me regardless of any manufactured ideas of immorality they determine in the drug. And no one should be required to take the drug I take if they have moral objections as this law doesn’t stop that right.
So you are you in line with the committee/panels characterization of the issue as religious freedom? That’s the thrust of the kabuki; to distract from the contraception objection based on “morals” and to focus on the “religious liberty” swmokescreen for controlling women (and arguably all of us). Then why are you falling back on the pre ‘accommodation’ fix which removed the religious objection?
More of answer/question than your tendentious comment deserves.
More simply, yes. I do not suffer fools gladly regarding health care at all. You tire and bore me. As someone with a pre-existing condition I take it all very seriously. You are an assinine fool.
Yessir, barefoot and pregnant they used to call it. Women who are kept barefoot and pregnant have no control over their lives, or so goes the theory!
Shooter is our resident troll. Pay no attention to his/her bullshit.
Shorter Answer: Yes.
Somewhat longer answer: if anyone considers some drug “immoral,” then here’s a free clue: that person doesn’t have to take it.
The end.
PS there’s nothing “authoritarian” about this. It’s about the freedom of choice. No one’s forcing anyone to take contraceptives, in case you are confused about that.
Yes. very tediously boring, too, but I answer sometimes for the benefit of others who may lurk about reading such nonsense.
Wrong.
The Catholic Church isn’t preventing anyone from buying or using contraception. They just aren’t going to be a provider of it. They are not imposing anything, it’s Obama doing the imposing.
withdrawal of a service/treatment/medication is an imposition of YOUR values, that’s not freedom.
I could respond by saying the poor person who can’t afford contraception who works as an orderly at the local catholic hospital who didn’t take a vow of celibacy like the bishops and really wants to avoid the abortion decision with all of her being should be provided that care in any employment in a great run on sentence, but you would respond by saying then she damn well shouldn’t work at her local catholic hospital even if that was the only job she could get. And I would respond by saying that is the only job she could find and she took it to avoid the welfare you probably despise so much, and on and on it goes.
I don’t understand people like you at all.
Oh brother.
You don’t have a right to demand anyone provide you with anything. Don’t like the Catholic perspective? Fine, go elsewhere. You aren’t being deprived.
Should I be denied my drugs if someone develops a moral objection to them at my place of employment?? That is not a hard question to answer, do it you moron.
Congratulations. I don’t understand people like Shooter either.
It says a lot of good things about you.
There is no understanding to be had.
I take it you think it would be fine for a Christian Science organization to open and run a hospital? No drugs would be provided and no surgeries would be done, but they would have prayer groups go around to the dying and pray over them, because that is their religious belief. Perhaps you think Scientologists should open a pharmaceutical firm that does not dispense any drugs. They just have members of their church preach against drug use, because that is what they believe in. Maybe you would like a Santerian sect or Voodoo practitioners to open an insurance company: they would only pay for exorcisms that are done within their religious rites, as is their right? Because that’s what you are implying leads to.
Gad. Catholic groups aren’t telling you you can’t ever have something, they are just saying they aren’t going to be providers. That’s their freedom.
I’ll share this story again, for people who may not have read it before. I’ll keep it to the very short version.
In response to Christy Hardin Smith’s suggestion that people visit their reps during the summer break, I met our fellow firepup Loo Hoo at Darryl Issa’s office. His chief of staff met with us and it was a meeting that basically just got our blood pressure up. One of the things he said was that Mr. Issa is just another bored millionaire.
Why do people like you have to be jerks? Limited vocabulary?
Yes. If Muslims buy your company, you can’t force them to continue selling ham sandwiches in the cafeteria.
Duh.
You’re so supportive of the Catholic church’s stance I’m betting that if you had a 13 year old daughter who was raped you’d ensure she had no access to the morning after pill or an abortion, right?
i’m not asking you about ham sandwiches. Should I be denied coverage for my drugs which I would die without taking because of a moral objection by somebody? Why is that question so hard to answer?? Answer it.
????
So what? Anyone is free to try that business, doesn’t affect me in the least. If you don’t like the way Catholics conduct themselves, you free to go elsewhere.
I would not die if the Muslims who took over my place of employment stopped selling ham sandiches. I would either die or be in financial ruin if insurance stopped covering my drug on “moral objections.” Should I be denied coverage for that reason??
If organizations are allowed to avoid issuing drugs based on them or the actions that led to them being required being “immoral”, where does it end? If someone develops AIDS will the organization be allowed to say they won’t pay for drug therapy, because they consider IV drug use/gay sex to be “immoral” actions that resulted in the disease? Some religions consider alcohol use to be immoral – so if someone develops liver failure from alcoholism, can they say they won’t cover the drugs/organ transplant necessary?
Fine. I have moral objections to providing anything to trolls. Go back under your bridge.
Also, this is, in case you can’t understand the newspapers, the blog posts, and the TV stories, the Catholic bishops wanting to impose their church’s views on NON-MEMBERS.
???? What is the matter with you people? Are you entirely without the brains to find an alternative source? If I had said daughter go through that trauma, I personally would find a doctor to prescribe said drug, go down to
the pharmacy and buy it.
Aren’t you capable of doing the same thing?
why so reticent shooter?? I need a drug to continue to live. That is a pure and simple fact. Should any employer be allowed to deny me that drug on moral objections?? That is an incredibly simple question to answer.
Took your handler(s) long enough to come up with an answer.
We definitely need better quality trolls. This one fills up a Troll Bingo card too fast.
The distinction has to be between legal and illegal, not moral and immoral.
Yes, I am perfectly comfortable with the idea of forcing any employer to provide health care coverage that includes access to drugs that are legal.
Better yet, let’s just take the employer out of the picture and go to a single-payer system in which all Americans get health care coverage that includes access to drugs that are legal.
The best I could translate was shooters response to whether any employer had the right to deny me drugs I need to live on “moral objections” was when Muslims take over my business they don’t have to sell ham sandwiches. That’s simply outstanding.
Darrell Issa is half MORMON and half Eastern Orthodox Christian. In his early years he was raised in a Jewish neighborhood and worked for a rabbi.
That should tell you all you need to know about him!
Absolutely. Don’t like it? Work somewhere else.
Any questions?
Two:
How far up your ass have you stuck your head?
How long has it been up there?
You’ll never make a decent troll, you’re too lame. Best go back under your bridge and ask your mama to teach you how to catch cockroaches with your tongue.
YEs, you do have empathy. You just said I absolutely should have coverage by anyone for my drugs needed for survival!! By stating I should work somewhere else you are implying that they SHOULD provide coverage. Which brings back the question, if they should why should one deny or be allowed to deny??
If so, your hospitals and universities wouldn’t have enough employees in some cases to serve. We are talking about employers who provide insurance to their employees but want to impose their religious beliefs on them. As I said, your employer does not pay extra for coverage of contraception because it’s cheaper to provide contraception than to cover the results of lack of contraception. BTW, it costs the universities and hospitals extra also, because of pregnancy and maternal leave. To me, the point is, if the catholic church and/or the evangelicals can’t take the heat, they should stay out of the kitchen. If they feel the need to provide insurance for their employees, many, possibly most of whom are not catholic, then they should provide what those employees need, or not provide it. Then those employees would feel the need to go elsewhere for employment where there are not strings attached to their benefits.
WOW. Must be a real “battle royale” in his brain a good bit of the time.
So you are essentially comfortable with locking up someone using drugs someone else considers immoral, right ?
Going out of your way to be a dick?
I appreciate the effort, you’re doing a fine job.
Look asshole, they are imposing their views on their employees.
No, he feels anyone should buy any drug they need out of their own pockets or they are losers if they don’t have enough cash on hand to do that. Drugs are cheap you know!! Or if you don’t like your current employee’s morals, go find one whose morals you like. It’s all very, very simple in shooters world. I’m catching on to how to translate him or her.
No effort at all when it comes to trolls like you.
That’s beyond his IQ ability , quit picking on the mentally challenged.
To 2 fer 2 @ 39
No it’s what’s the matter with people like you , BUDDY !
Must not be easy having an IQ of 3 below plant life.
Are you really this obtuse? Every employer offers a different benefit package or none at all. Let me assume the best, and think that you are going to ask an employer about drug coverage before you take the job. If your employer drops coverage for your drug, I presume you’ll look for another job. Yes?
Which part of that are you having trouble understanding?
Yes they are. So what?
If you don’t like it, leave. They have no obligation to you, other than what’s in the employment agreement.
Don’t you have any mirrors in your house ?
I frickin trapped you beyond comprehension. You said I should be denied a life saving drug BUT find an employer who would give it to me, which shows me your extreme empathy for my condition. You absolutely believe someone should cover it. You absoutely believe it. You do. Do you see the danger in allowing moral exemptions however??
People like this person use the word ‘moral’ to advance nonsensical and totally immoral positions. The troll has no idea was morality is, much less legality.
Do you believe in the law shooter that pre-existing conditions should not exempt you from health care coverage? Obviously in describing my conditions in detail I do, what about you??
Well, we let ya hijack the thread but you just keep repeating yourself.
You really should go back to your mama under the bridge.
I’m outta here. My cats are smarter than this troll.
That’s why priests should be allowed to screw alter boys, there’s nothing in their contract prohibiting that action ?
Would you quit your job as a troll if you found out your employer was providing benefits that included covering contraception to your fellow co-workers?
The society that would emerge in a system you’re imagining would not be a good one.
Btw, you might want to read up on Equal Employment Opportunity.
You obviously don’t like Firedog Lake and the views espoused here. Why don’t YOU leave?
He’s following his employment contract, doing the work of his Masters.
If he didn’t like it he would find a new job, tomorrow, they’re so plentiful you know.
I’m pretty sure shooter watched Shawshank Redemption recently, hence he called me “obtuse”!! He was rootin’ for the guy who put the bullet in his brain.
What law is that? If you go to work at McDonalds, do you think you’re getting the full boat medical? Of course not.
Even Obama care has rationing. Some people won’t get all the things conceivable to keep them alive.
Welcome to the real world.
Will you loan me some money when my coverage dries up, you are obviously a millionaire after all!! Funny enough, I’m catholic and have lots of kids to feed still, the only reason I have money to feed them is my coverage for my disease. The most hilarious thing of all is my wife was prescribed contracaption to allow us to actually have kids!! True story.
It is in the framing of the question, again!
Why does the Misogynist Catholic Church get to dictate US law?
Separation of church and state, does not mean, “the church gets to approve or disapprove the laws passed by congress”! (Remember, the congress passed the Health Care Act). In fact, more the opposite. The stipulation was to guarantee that the church had no say in our laws.
(The Catholic Church had ruled Europe for centuries, and later the Church of England sponsored murdering sprees during King Henry the 8th,and Queen Elizabeth’s reigns).
The mere idea that a law would be put to the test of the Catholic Church should be having the founders rolling over in their graves!
Go fucking away, bagger.
Well, shooterdude. Many here have been telling you to go and take your nasty, mean comments elsewhere. You can certainly do that easier than a person who actually Has a JOB to leave their Catholic Hospital job and find one somewhere else.
What I hearing and reading and ohbytheway Living…jobs are scare.
You seems to have a lot of time to come here and argue with commenters.
You’re either paid by someone to do so, or, you’re really bored and get a stiffy (since we are talking about women’s right, birth control And separation of church and state. I have to ask you if you get mr.stiffy by doing this, if you’re not getting paid.
So, gonna spill that Onan seed, that is the basis for many of the conservatards argument? Gotta bag? ‘Cause there are many lakers who hold barf bags around and we could hand you one.
No really. What do you get out of cuming here to spew? It totallyt takes the Voom out of everything you say.
I apologize for feeding it so much, I usually minimize my postings, but I had no clue shooter was such a proponent of single payer health care as that is simply what he was arguing unbeknwonst to him.
Totally understandable. Worry not…from me anyway. :)
MY taxdollars are being used to fund these organizations(faith based program funding is federal thanks to your buddy Bush.)
So YES I feel completely comfortable telling them they don’t get to selectively decide what medical treatments their employees can have access to.
Let me know when they go to being completely funded by donations from their flock, then get back to me. Otherwise your statement is garbage. Of course taxpayers get to decide where the money goes…..duh…..that’s called democracy(and yes the majority support funding BCPs)
Actually they do. You don’t get to revise history. We have employment laws that prohibit discrimination.
The GOP doesn’t even have a firewall in the Senate. Collins and Snowe have both come out in favor of the compromise. That’s at least 2 defections.
This comes on the same day that the Congressional Coalition’s roundtable on international adoption snubbed the inclusion of adoptees and birth parents from its discussion of adoption. (They were only including those that benefit from the industry.) It really seems as if women are really being boxed into a corner here. Have the baby and if you can’t deal, just give it up.
Don’t have a problem with it any more than I have a problem with JW’s having to cover blood transfusions.
If these rump-wrangling pedophiles believed in Peter Pan they would have a hearing about flying and invite the croc to testify. All show and no substance. Just tell the bishops to SDSTFU already.
Wasn’t that nice of Issa, not taking women away from their baking and household duties, to discuss, let’s face it, some thing which has very little to do with them, their reproductive choices.
/snark
No one is being forced. If they don’t like the rules that apply to the public sector then they can get out of it. A church is a religious institution, a hospital is not.
As if a ham sandwich is an essential part of the spectrum preventative health available to women according to medical experts. Try making a reasonable comparison if you want to be taken seriously.