[Congressional Record Volume 160, Number 110 (Tuesday, July 15, 2014)]
[Senate]
[Pages S4467-S4468]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
PROTECT WOMEN'S HEALTH
Mrs. HAGAN. Mr. President, I rise in support of the Protect Women's
Health From Corporate Interference Act, to stand up for what I thought
was a commonly shared value--that a woman's health care decisions are
between her and her doctor, not her and her boss. I thought that was
well-established, straightforward--simple, even.
But it turns out that the majority of the Supreme Court thought
differently when it came to certain kinds of health care decisions:
whether a woman would have access to contraceptives without copays as
guaranteed by Federal law. As we all know now, 2 weeks ago the Supreme
Court held in Hobby Lobby that an employer's personal beliefs can trump
some of the most private and significant health care decisions a woman
makes.
So let me be very clear on where I stand: What kind of birth control
a female employee uses is not her boss's business.
I have heard some of the supporters of the Supreme Court decision
argue that ruling is a narrow ruling, and that it only applies to
closely held family businesses. That doesn't tell the whole story
because just 3 days after this ruling in Hobby Lobby the Court said
that a nonprofit religious college didn't have to comply with a
contraceptive coverage requirement even though it had already had an
accommodation that allowed it to avoid paying for such coverage itself.
The majority even pointed to this accommodation in the Hobby Lobby
ruling as an example of a less restrictive alternative that could be
open to for-profit businesses. A few days later that same accommodation
wasn't good enough.
In her dissent Justice Sotomayor wrote:
Those who are bound by our decisions usually believe that
they can take us at our word. Not so today.
In other words, in less than a week the Supreme Court's conservative
majority went from issuing a supposedly narrow ruling to potentially
broadening it to encompass a new class of institutions. The impact of
the ruling in Hobby Lobby will most definitely not be limited to those
closely held businesses, as some say. I have heard others argue, in
essence: Don't worry. The ruling doesn't expressly ban access to
contraceptives. It just shifts the additional cost of the coverage back
to the women.
But those who say erecting a barrier of cost between a woman and
birth control will give her the same access she had before the decision
don't understand what women have to go through to get covered and don't
understand the many reasons why women use birth control. Since the
coverage requirement went into effect last year, the number of women
who got their birth
[[Page S4468]]
control without a copay jumped from 14 percent to 56 percent. That
means some serious costs were avoided for many women.
The average annual savings for women last year was $269. In total,
women in the United States saved $483 million on contraceptives, thanks
to the Affordable Care Act. Among those women were 917,000 in North
Carolina alone who were eligible for preventive services without
additional copays. Many of these women sought and used birth control
medications for reasons that had absolutely nothing to do with planning
pregnancy. In fact, oral contraceptives are a key treatment for at
least three major medical conditions that affect women. Polycystic
ovary syndrome affects 5 to 10 percent of women of reproductive age,
and if left untreated can lead to the development of ovarian cysts or
infertility. In addition, 11 percent of women are affected by
endometriosis in their lifetime, and 40,000 women each year are
diagnosed with endometrial cancer. Many women are at risk of developing
ovarian cancer--one of the most deadly cancers in the United States--
and women with ovarian cancer also can receive treatment via birth
control. And yes, one of the best known ways to reduce the risk of
these conditions is birth control.
Employers who make their female employees pay out of pocket for
contraceptives aren't just imposing their personal beliefs, they are
also making it more difficult for women to access important lifesaving
medical treatment.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator's time has expired.
Mrs. HAGAN. Mr. President, I would like to ask for another 45
seconds.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Hearing no objection, it is so ordered.
Mrs. HAGAN. That is why I believe it is so important to debate and to
pass the Protect Women's Health From Corporate Interference Act. This
bill would fix the Hobby Lobby decision by making it illegal for any
company to deny their workers specific health benefits, including birth
control, that would be required to be covered. It would make clear that
bosses cannot discriminate against their female workers and would
ensure equal treatment under the law for tens of thousands of workers
for which coverage hangs in the balance. It would preserve and codify
the existing accommodation for our nonprofit religious employees.
It is troubling to me that in 2014 we are even debating women's
access to contraception. Nearly all women--99 percent--will use it at
some point in their lives, and they should have access to safe,
effective birth control if they choose to use it--plain and simple.
This bill would ensure that those decisions about an employee's
health can stay between the woman and her doctor, not between the woman
and her boss. I urge my colleagues to support the bill.
Thank you, Mr. President, and I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Ohio.
____________________