[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 158 (2012), Part 1]
[Senate]
[Pages 956-957]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                           RELIGIOUS FREEDOM

  Mr. JOHANNS. Mr. President, I come to the floor today to talk about 
an issue of paramount importance to our country--the issue of religious 
freedom. Our great Nation was founded on religious freedom. This 
liberty is at the very core of our government. It has been a 
significant part of our heritage since this land was first settled, and 
it is a freedom that sets us apart from many countries around the 
globe.
  The Framers of our Constitution rightfully recognized an individual's 
religious liberty and conscience is above any regulation, any 
legislation. One of the chief authors of that guiding document, James 
Madison, declared:

       Conscience is the most sacred of all property.

  Thomas Jefferson said:

       No provision in our Constitution ought to be dearer to man 
     than that which protects the rights of conscience against the 
     enterprises of the civil authority.

  These fundamental values are a part of the fabric of this great 
Nation. It is no coincidence it is the first freedom in the Bill of 
Rights. It is a core value. It is an inalienable right. So that means, 
as public servants, it is our utmost duty to protect this American 
freedom.
  When I was sworn in as a Senator, I--as my colleagues did--took an 
oath to uphold the Constitution. We all believe strongly in that oath. 
I take seriously my commitment to uphold the values and the freedoms 
our forefathers fought to establish and that generations of heroes have 
died defending.
  That is why today I am devastated to see this very freedom, the heart 
of our Constitution, being so completely ignored. The President has 
taken an unprecedented step in the wrong direction, grossly misusing 
authority to implement the new health care law. This administration has 
refused to exempt religious institutions that serve the public good 
from mandates of the law that go against their strong beliefs and their 
values, and the values of our Nation.
  Last August, in an interim final rule, the Department of Health and 
Human Services announced what free preventive services all new health 
insurance plans would be required to provide under the law, and that 
those services must include contraceptives and controversial drugs, 
such as the so-called morning-after pill.
  With that mandate, the agency included a supposed religious exemption 
but, upon reading that, it was clear that was simply unacceptable. It 
is so narrow that the vast majority of religious hospitals and 
universities, businesses, social services, and charities are still, 
very clearly, required by law to comply with the mandate.
  Many of these organizations have strong faith-based missions and 
deeply held convictions. Yet they don't fall under the exemption. In 
other words, their government is compelling Americans to act against 
their constitutionally protected moral and religious convictions.
  Since that announcement, hundreds of religious organizations have 
raised their voices, and I have heard from countless Nebraskans. I held 
a roundtable back in Nebraska where this was the topic of discussion.
  Twenty-six of my colleagues joined Senator Hatch and me in sending a 
letter to the administration condemning this sweeping mandate. We asked 
them to redraft the regulation so it is consistent with longstanding 
constitutional principles.
  Despite these strong efforts, just recently we learned that our 
passionate concerns had been dismissed. Very disappointingly, the 
administration has announced that they will move forward with the 
August interim rule. Under the guise of compromise, they announced that 
religious organizations would have an additional year before the 
mandate was enforced; in other words, after election day.
  The head of the Diocese of Lincoln, a man I have great admiration 
for, Bishop Fabian Bruskewitz, called the administration's extension an 
``act of mockery.''
  Americans are not fooled by this nonsensical extension. The issue is 
not that religious groups have time to comply. That is not the issue. 
It is that they are being forced to provide coverage that goes against 
their conscience, their religious beliefs, their moral beliefs.
  Bishop Bruskewitz went on to warn ``our American religious liberty is 
in grave jeopardy.''
  The bottom line is that by issuing this decision, this administration 
has ignored the most sacred of all American freedoms.
  Just a week before this announcement, the Supreme Court unanimously 
affirmed the core constitutional principle of religious liberty in its 
Hosanna-Tabor decision. The court held that churches and other 
religious groups must be free to choose their leaders without 
government interference. Yet the administration has clearly come out on 
the other side of our Constitution.
  During the health care debate, we heard something vastly different. 
The President repeatedly promised the opposite. He pledged that the new 
health care law would not weaken long-held life and conscience 
protections. In his public statements about the health overhaul, he 
vowed ``Federal conscience laws would remain in place.'' He even issued 
an Executive order where he stated that ``longstanding Federal laws to 
protect conscience will remain intact.''
  Many of us--myself included--during the health care debate warned 
that the Executive order was just window dressing to get votes and 
would do nothing to protect life in matters of conscience.
  While supporters of the bill echoed the President's promise, I spoke 
on the Senate floor--once in November and again in March--warning 
Americans that they should not be fooled by hollow promises, and I 
urged my pro-life colleagues to join me in opposing this dangerous 
policy.
  Two years after the law's passage, the truth behind the 
administration's priorities has been revealed. The President has, 
regrettably, punted the implementation of this controversial mandate 
until after the election. So now many religious organizations are 
forced to face two options: act against their convictions or drop 
health care coverage altogether. This decision comes from an 
administration that granted over 1,700 health plans with waivers from 
the law's major provisions, many of those to unions. A total of 4 
million people, including select businesses and unions, have benefited 
from the waiver process. The administration has gone out of its way to 
guide

[[Page 957]]

its friends around the onerous mandates of this flawed policy. Yet this 
same administration is unwilling to protect a fundamental 
constitutional freedom by simply crafting a reasonable exemption for 
religious organizations.
  Would Presidents Thomas Jefferson or James Madison have forced vast 
swaths of society to take action against their conscience? The answer 
is a resounding and obvious no. This political posturing is obvious, 
and it is appalling. This political maneuvering comes at a heavy cost 
for many Americans; it is a breach of values and beliefs. It runs 
counter to the very core of our identity as Americans.
  Never before has the Federal Government required that individuals 
provide a product that violates their conscience.
  Many Americans are questioning what will come next. They recognize 
that other strongly held beliefs could also be compromised.
  I am not alone in being deeply troubled by this administration's 
complete disregard of the liberties in our Constitution. It is these 
liberties that make our country great.
  I am a cosponsor of the Respect for Rights of Conscience Act 
introduced by my colleague Senator Blunt. This legislation would 
reverse the administration's massive overstep and ensure that all 
conscience rights are protected. I will do everything in my power to 
push this to a vote. We must act to right this wrong. We must ensure 
that America's values are not compromised. We must protect religious 
liberty. We all took an oath to do so. I am confident that, with prayer 
and persistence, we can reverse this course.
  I yield the floor and I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The clerk will call the roll.
  The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. BOOZMAN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order 
for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Without objection, it is so 
ordered.

                          ____________________