[Congressional Record Volume 158, Number 20 (Tuesday, February 7, 2012)]
[Senate]
[Pages S381-S382]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                   WOMEN'S PREVENTIVE HEALTH SERVICES

  Mr. HARKIN. Mr. President, I watched many of the statements made by 
so many of our women Senators who came to the floor in the past hour to 
talk about this issue of women's preventive health services. I was 
unable to get to the floor at the time. I want to be here now because, 
unfortunately, there is a lot of confusion about what the Affordable 
Care Act does and does not do with respect to women's preventive health 
services.
  As chairman of the Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee 
and as someone who is very much involved in crafting this legislation, 
especially the preventive services part of that legislation, I hope to 
explain the facts and debunk the myths and the misinformation that has 
recently arisen on this issue.
  First, women--nurses, teachers, professors, homemakers, attorneys--
everyone from all walks of life, all women in America now have the 
right to preventive health care services. Beginning this August, the 
Affordable Care Act guarantees that insured women will have access to 
expert recommended preventive health care services. These basic 
services include well-women visits, mammograms, prenatal care, cervical 
cancer screenings, and contraception.
  These critical services will be offered without any out-of-pocket 
costs such as copays or deductibles. It is the latter, the ability of 
women to have a health insurance plan that covers contraceptives that 
has led to this recent controversy, this outpouring, this outburst of 
political accusations.
  Here let me emphasize people of strong faith and good conscious have 
very different views when it comes to these matters. I understand that. 
I have great admiration for the many contributions that religious 
institutions make to our country. Catholic charities provide vital 
assistance to low-income Americans. Religious universities teach and 
prepare thousands of young people to be outstanding citizens and 
productive members of our society. In fact, I attended law school at 
Catholic University right up the street. I also attended Catholic 
elementary schools and Catholic high school.
  Catholic hospitals are instrumental in providing first-class health 
care to so many of our fellow citizens. I have spoken many times about 
the care that Mercy Hospital in Des Moines, a Catholic hospital, gave 
to my father when he was elderly and in bad health because of black 
lung disease and he had no money. They provided care for him at no 
cost. So I have very deep feelings about the generosity and the care 
that these religious hospitals provide.
  It is for this reason I would oppose any measure that threatens the 
fundamental religious liberties of these institutions. I believe, 
however, that the President properly balanced the essential health care 
needs of women with the rights of religious institutions. Let me 
clarify what this rule does, and most importantly does not do since 
folks, such as Governor Romney, are misleading the American people--
perhaps intentionally distorting the facts--using the issue for 
demagoguery.
  First, churches and other houses of worship are specifically exempt 
from the requirement that they carry insurance plans that provide 
contraception.
  Second, no individual health care provider, neither religious nor 
secular, will be forced to prescribe contraception. The President and 
his administration have previously and continue to express strong 
support for existing conscience protections. Moreover, other 
religiously affiliated organizations that employ people of different 
faiths--such as Catholic colleges and hospitals--can qualify for a 1-
year transition period as they prepare to comply with the new law.
  Let me point out, no individual will be forced to buy or use 
contraception. No individual will be forced to buy or use 
contraception. Under this policy, women who want contraception will 
have access to it through their insurance without having to pay a copay 
or deductible, but no one will be forced to buy or to use 
contraception. Let's make that clear.
  Drugs that cause abortion, such as RU486, the morning-after pill, are 
not covered by this policy. Let me repeat that. Drugs that cause 
abortion, such as RU486, the morning-after pill, are not covered by 
this policy and nothing about this policy changes the President's firm 
commitment to maintain strict limitations on Federal funding for 
abortions. No Federal tax dollars are used for elective abortions.
  Let me quote what Governor Romney said in Colorado just yesterday:

       Just this last week, this same administration said that in 
     churches and the institutions they run, such as schools, and 
     let's say adoption agencies, hospitals, that they have to 
     provide for their employees, free of charge, contraceptives, 
     morning-after pills--in other words abortive pills and the 
     like at no cost.
  Mr. Romney said.

       Think what that does to people in faiths without sharing 
     those views. This is a violation of conscience.

  Mr. Romney, this does not cover morning-after pills. And the adoption 
agencies and the hospitals do not have to provide free of charge 
contraceptives. All they have to do is to make available, through the 
broad insurance coverage they have, for women who choose to use 
contraceptive services, that they can get those without any copays or 
deductibles. But this does not cover the morning-after pill. Yet I keep 
hearing it.
  I was working out this morning while watching CNN, and somebody else 
came on talking about how the Catholic Church is opposed to abortions; 
they should not be forced to fund abortions. This has nothing to do 
with that. All it says is, if you have a broad-based insurance policy 
and you are not a religious institution or a church and you are, let's 
say a hospital, and you have insurance that covers a broad array of 
people, we have said that insurance must cover a broad variety of 
preventive services: mammograms, cervical cancer screening, well-women 
visits--all of that--and contraception--and contraception, a preventive 
service.
  Mr. Romney is going around saying these things, but it is not true. 
It is simply not true. He is either misinformed or he is purposely 
trying to mislead the American people--neither of which is acceptable. 
As I said, churches and other houses of worship are specifically exempt 
from the requirement that they carry insurance plans that provide 
contraception.
  Second, no individual health care provider, neither religious nor 
secular, will be forced to prescribe contraception. No individual will 
be forced to buy or use contraception against her own conscience. All 
the rules the President announced ensure that all women, no matter 
who their employer, have the opportunity to enjoy the same insurance 
and the same vital preventive services--every woman. In fact, there is 
nothing radical about such a policy. Fifty percent of Americans 
currently live in 28 States that require insurance companies to cover 
contraception. Imagine that.

  Several of these States--such as Arizona, New York, Oregon, and 
California--have had this law in effect for years, saying if you have 
insurance

[[Page S382]]

coverage, you have to provide contraceptive services under that broad 
coverage of insurance, and these four States have identical religious 
employer exemptions as the rule the President announced.
  Let me repeat, Arizona, New York, Oregon and California have 
identical religious employer exemptions, the same as the rule the 
President announced. I did not hear Mr. Romney going after the 
Governors of Arizona or of New York or Oregon or California. This has 
now become a political issue, and it should not be. It should not be.
  Religious institutions continue to serve the public by providing 
exemplary health, education, and antipoverty services in these States, 
and I am hopeful that nothing will change in the rest of the country. 
Twenty-eight States, half the people who already live in those States 
that cover the same thing.
  The health of women in this Nation is far too important to become a 
sound bite on the evening news, a headline in the morning paper, or 
political rhetoric--again, to divide us. The President's policy and 
what we have done does not divide us. In fact, if anything it unifies 
the country. I do not think anyone thinks we should pass a law banning 
contraceptives. We did in the old days, you know. There was a Supreme 
Court case about that. As a matter of fact, I read it in law school 
when I was at Catholic University Law School: Griswold v. Connecticut, 
if I am not mistaken.
  The Supreme Court said, no; the State has no interest, no vital 
interest in telling women they cannot use contraceptive services and 
devices. That is an old case. If someone is conscience-bound and they 
say they don't want to--that is fine. No one is being forced to do 
anything against their consciences. No one is being forced to do 
anything we have not already done in this country in 28 States. But now 
it has become political rhetoric. How else do we explain Mr. Romney's 
total misinformation? To try to divide us as a country again.
  It is time to put this aside. It is time to put aside these 
differences, these divisions, and focus on giving people access to the 
affordable health care they deserve. That is what the Affordable Care 
Act does, and we should not let political rhetoric, political 
gamesmanship, a political campaign again try to tear us apart, try to 
misinform people to inflame passions that somehow we have gone off on a 
different path; that we are doing something totally different than what 
we have done before. We are not. We are not. To include in this the 
inflammatory rhetoric of abortion and all that it entails is doing a 
disservice to the women of this country.
  I hope the truth will get out, that this misinformation will fall by 
the wayside, and people will see this for the political rhetoric it is, 
and that we will move forward with a health care system that does 
provide broad preventive services to every woman in America. That is 
what this is about.
  I yield the floor. I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. REID. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Udall of Colorado). Without objection, it 
is so ordered.

                          ____________________