[Congressional Record Volume 144, Number 139 (Wednesday, October 7, 1998)]
[Senate]
[Pages S11681-S11682]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




              PRESCRIPTION CONTRACEPTION EQUITY AMENDMENT

  Mr. REID. Mr. President, one of the distinct honors I have had is 
joining with the senior Senator from Maine in legislation that passed 
unanimously in this body and passed by an overwhelming margin in the 
House. It was an amendment we placed in the Treasury-Postal Service 
bill. It was a bill that we had introduced on the floor.
  On this occasion, we decided to limit it just to Federal employees, 
which we did. We were elated that we were able to make great strides on 
this issue about which we felt so strongly. And we were contemplating 
the day when this bill would be signed and become law, because 
certainly it should. It passed over here unanimously; passed the House 
by an overwhelming margin.
  I cannot speak for my colleague from Maine, but I am sure she feels 
just as disappointed as I am that this bill was stripped during the 
conference of the Treasury-Postal Service bill for really no reason. 
There was no debate among the conferees. It was just taken from the 
bill.
  It would be easy for me to be partisan here and say this is some 
cabal by the Republicans. The fact of the matter is, Mr. President, 
this bill had bipartisan support. It was not a Democratic bill; it was 
not a Democratic amendment. It was not a Republican bill, a Republican 
amendment.
  So I am here to complain about the process. This should not have 
happened. I am not going to point fingers as to why it happened, but it 
happened. I am tremendously disappointed.
  What am I talking about? I am talking about a bill that the senior 
Senator from Maine and I have been working on for over a year, a bill 
that has 35 cosponsors in the Senate. It is a bill that recognizes that 
each year in this country there are 3.6 million unintended pregnancies. 
Forty-four percent of those pregnancies wind up with abortion. We find 
that insurance companies' health care providers routinely pay for 
abortions, vasectomies, tubal ligations, but they don't pay for the 
simple contraceptives that are approved by the Food and Drug 
Administration. There are only five. They don't pay for them.

  We are saying it should be done. Women pay almost 70 percent more for 
health care than men. It seems unusual that when Viagra came out there 
was a mad rush to make sure that there was insurance coverage and every 
other kind of coverage for Viagra. We said at that time, the Senator 
from Maine and I, shouldn't we recognize the fact that women pay more, 
that insurance companies and health maintenance agencies do not pay for 
contraceptives and they should? We would save huge amounts of money. We 
would have healthier mothers and healthier babies. But it doesn't 
appear we are going to have it this year.
  Our bill, called the Prescription Contraceptive Fairness Act, would 
apply this to Federal health care plans. There are 374 different health 
care plans under the Federal system that would cover these pills or the 
other four devices. It would save money.
  It was killed in conference based upon some illusion that it had 
something to do with abortion. It has nothing to do with abortion. In 
fact, it would cut down on abortions. We are not forcing anyone to use 
contraceptives if they don't want to. We think they should be made 
available.
  I was on a talk show. A woman called in and said, ``I'm pregnant with 
our third child. I'm a diabetic. I would prefer I were not pregnant. 
I'm going to carry the baby to term but it could endanger my health. I 
hope the baby is healthy. My husband's insurance company does not cover 
contraceptives, and as a result of that, I'm pregnant because the stuff 
we used doesn't work very well.'' There are a multitude of stories just 
like this. Remember, there are 3.6 million unintended pregnancies in 
our country every year. Not every 10 years--every year.
  I am embarrassed this was stripped from the bill for some reason that 
is not justifiable. The Federal Government serves as a role model for 
other employers across the Nation. This would have been a great start. 
It has received support from the American College of Obstetricians and 
Gynecologists. We have received little static from the insurance 
companies. Why? It creates an even playing field. If they all have to 
do the same thing, it doesn't hurt anyone. In the long run, people in 
the plans would save money.
  Individuals who led the effort to strip this historic amendment from 
this Treasury-Postal Service bill are ignoring the will of both the 
House and the Senate. The House voted in favor of this amendment in 
July; the Senate accepted our amendment in July, also. I don't think it 
is fair. I think these individuals who feel they have the authority to 
ignore the decision already made in both Houses should consider why 
they did this. They had no good reason to do it. It has nothing to do 
with abortion, which is supposedly the reason it was done.
  Politics aside, the real losers in this battle are the 1.2 million 
women covered under the FEHBP system who will continue to be denied the 
quality in health care coverage they deserve. People who fought behind 
closed doors to strip this amendment from the bill are using the anti-
abortion statement as a defense. That is wrong. They shouldn't do that. 
This argument is unfounded.
  As I said, this bill would lead to healthier mothers, healthier 
babies, and lower health care costs for all Americans. This legislation 
doesn't require any woman to use contraceptives, but it gives them a 
choice.
  I see my colleague on the floor. It has been an honor for me to work 
with her on this legislation. She has been the driving force in getting 
this legislation to the point we thought we were.

[[Page S11682]]

  I will yield the floor.

                          ____________________