[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 160 (2014), Part 8]
[Senate]
[Pages 11961-11962]
[From the U.S. 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 11962]]

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.

                          ____________________