E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSS
Mark Wilson / Getty Images
Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius defended the Obama administration's ruling that religious-affiliated institutions must include birth control as part of their health insurance plans.
Testifying before the Senate Finance Committee Wednesday, Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius defended the Obama administration’s ruling that religious-affiliated institutions must include birth control as part of their health insurance plans.
On Friday the administration announced a modification that allows religiously-affiliated employers to shift contraceptive costs to insurance companies. For some Democrats, such as Sen. Ben Nelson of Nebraska, President Obama still hasn’t settled the question of how to treat the employers who self-insure and do not contract with an insurance company to cover their employees.
Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius comments on the latest announcement regarding the details of the White House's contraception rule.
But Obama seems to have quieted at least some dissident Democrats by issuing last week's adjustment. And that may be all he needs to do in order to defuse the political problem in his own party that the HHS contraceptive mandate created.
Related: Obama revamps contraceptive policy
With the election-year furor over contraceptives seemingly abating, Sebelius and Obama face a far larger imponderable: whether they will be able to implement the highly complex health care law -- even if it survives a Supreme Court decision on its constitutionality, which will come this June.
Three days of oral arguments before the high court begin March 26.
Meanwhile, Sebelius and her department are working with state governments to set up the new state-based insurance marketplaces, or “exchanges” in which uninsured American will be able to buy coverage, beginning in 2014.
According to the National Conference of State Legislatures, at least 22 states have legislation pending to establish a health insurance exchange. But some states are refusing to set them up, and others have joined the litigation to overturn the health care law.
“Right now I think it’s impossible to tell you exactly how many states will have a state-based exchange” Sebelius told Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus, D- Mont., “What I am confident about,” she said, is the states will begin enrolling individuals in fall of 2013 so the exchanges can be operating by 2014.
Recommended: New defense cuts threaten bases, shipyards
One Finance Committee Democrat, Sen. Jeff Bingaman of New Mexico, told Sebelius he was worried about states setting up information technology systems to run their exchanges that will be unable to communicate with each other and unable to provide data for the HHS. Bingaman said he was concerned about “everyone inventing the wheel in every state in the union.”
Sebelius replied, “Your concern is well-placed and well-founded” and described steps HHS is taking to ensure IT compatibility and more uniformity across state lines.
Another Democrat on the committee, Sen. Bob Menendez of New Jersey, illustrated the complexity of the 2010 law when he complained to Sebelius about three problems that he said HHS was slow in resolving: defining behavioral treatment to cover treatments for autism (New Jersey has the highest incidence of autism of any state), a program for treating post-partum depression for mothers, and a waiver for the state’s Medicaid program from certain federal regulations.
Menendez told Sebelius it was “frustrating” to be kept in the dark about the Medicaid waiver because the process “goes on behind closed doors without public notice and certainly without public input.”
After the hearing Menendez said of his three concerns: “I am waiting for them to act upon them and I am concerned in some ways about how they are acting upon them,” he said. Sebelius’s answers “are not totally satisfactory.”
And not surprisingly, Republicans continued their strategy of predicting failure for Obama’s health care overhaul, which every Republican senator voted against in 2010.
Sen. John Cornyn, R- Texas, told Sebelius that “the administration has grossly underestimated the number of employers who will drop their employees from coverage” and “the costs will explode” for the health care exchanges. But Sebelius cited the insurance overhaul signed into law by former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney as evidence that when insurance buying exchanges are set up, employers do not drop workers’ coverage.
Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, the ranking Republican on the Finance Committee, told reporters after the Sebelius hearing: “She’s pretty well admitted that they’re way behind on their regulations, they’re way behind on implementation, they’re way behind on exchanges.”
The most significant and intricate features of the law, such as the exchanges and the requirement for virtually all Americans to buy insurance, if they’re not already covered, will take effect in 2014.
“That bill is going to be almost impossible to implement and I think they are starting to realize that,” Hatch said.
Leave a Comment:
All the more reason to not have health insurance connected with employment. If it wasn't, this discussion would not be happening.
Those of us that are below, at, or near a poverty line existance make up a group of about 49.1 million Americans the GAO reported last fall. There is no way our group will pay for health insurance. If we had the money we already would be purchasing health insurance. We have no money. The $6500 mandate amount would be about 65% of our gross income before taxes and social security is taken out.
Other Americans, those with incomes above $10,300 a year, will have to cover us.
Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius defended the Obama administration's ruling that religious-affiliated institutions must include birth control as part of their health insurance plans
Religion is just an excuse. They do not want to pay to insure the women. Too bad they have to cough up the money one way or another. Too many lawsuits for the "fathers"who molested children.
The catholic church needs to be adjusted to the 21st century. They need to have a new pope that brings new ideas. How about allowing priests to marry and women in the clergy? That may actually bring some people back into the church.
Couldn't agree with you more, a farce religion that took up the news spotlight so they could CRY their religious freedoms are being infringed on and waist our time listening to FOX news wail about Obama taking away religious liberties, what a joke! Actually what the church of Jesus Christ, protestant & catholic need right now is intense persecution to refine it and make it grow, the church always grows when their lives are at risk so they don't get all militant about worthless issues like birth control. Or whether they can recite prayers in public schools, how about if they turn off the TV and quit watching reality TV and start praying at home first, start by praying for our President, 1 Timothy 2:1-5, instead of whether a illegitimate child will be born or not.
Garbage legislation from the get go...even if this is upheld by the SCOTUS it will be an administrative disaster along the lines of Medicare/Medicaid x10,000.
more like the 'cash-for-clunkers' program that was mismanaged by the administration. It is a proven fact that government can't administer anything correctly.
The Obama Administration is using this issue for selfish political purposes only. Why not wait for the Supreme Court to rule on the ACA before trying to force some of their ideas on the public. When you can't run on your accomplishments you use deflective tactics like this controversy.
Further President Obama is using this to pander to the female voting base. Why should contraceptives be free for those that can afford to purchase their own?
I'm a man, so to be fair can the governemnt pay for my monthly PopTarts.
Oh well gee, if it's going to be hard to do we should just give up, I mean we don't want to work hard to create a system that will benefit tens of millions of Americans. Big surprise that the Republicants are dragging their feet.
Drewster-4378715
Yep, if it drives the country into insolvency then we will just have to live with it,
Dude I'm dreading my birthday because then I'll have medicare but I will also have hundreds less to buy food with. Gee no insurance hope I don't get sick or don't eat and not have to worry about it anyway.
I do not get why this is such an issue. Religion's running businesses are breaking the law by refusing to put contraception on their insurance plans by denying insurance options to their employees. Religions in the business of, well, business cannot cling to their religious platitudes at the same time. Businesses have to be run like businesses, which means they have to follow the laws regardless of political stances.
Boehner and Santorum are also doing the GOP no favors by turning this into a Battle of the Bulge scenario because they are on the minority side of the issue and will drive women to vote against them. You cannot legislate your own brand of morality in America, you can only do so in a theocracy.
Totally agree now if we could get the left from doing just that.
I think the whole plan is wrong on its face. You are forcing people to pay for something they have been skipping because they can't afford it anyway.
That's why the government subsidizes it based on your income.
Rick,
how has the right not also been doing this though? Let's take abortion.
The right says no one has the right to an abortion without first getting a prob up their vagina to show them the fetus.
Is this not legislating morality? How is stating that a women who does think abortion is murder will not get an abortion and a women who does not think abortion is murder will get one equal to moral legislation?
Most liberals state that it is the women's choice to get an abortion or not with no requirements before the abortion can take place (not meaning no restrictions on abortion such as trimester limits).
I think your point is not a moral issue but one of taxes. You probably mean that those who view abortion as murder do not want their taxes used to fund abortions for those that cannot afford them. That is not a moral issue, not directly, but one of finance.
Right now many churches make insurance companies take contraception and abortion off of their health plans. The church pays nothing for the health plans except maybe a renewal fee when it comes time to resign. Employers pay nothing out of pocket for the individual's health care. A monthly fee is taken out of the pay check and the employee pays out of pocket for the deductible.
Business do not have the right to not allow access for their employees to buy certain health care options because they go against their personal rules of conduct. Churches are expecting their employees to follow their views if they work there.
Republicans need to stay the hell out of a woman's private business and get down to what really matters to most americans!!!!! Jobs,Economy,Rebuilding america,fair trade practices,ETC.ETC.ETC. No one is forcing women to take birth control,As it should be.Separation of church & state.
Thats why Obama will win a second term. The only adult in the room.
Yvonne: you're missing the whole point...republicans don't give a rat's ass about "woman's private business"...they don't care if a woman takes contraception etc...we just think that Obama does not have the power to mandate that all insurances should provide them for free...why should I or anyone else pay for some else's birith control? The gov't under the constitution cannot mandate what services or products that a private company provides...it has nothing to do with woman's rights. Don't get sucked in with what is reported by the main stream media...it will dummy you down...wise up Yvonne.
Hear ye, Hear ye!! Your probably right!!
Umm, this power is not an issue at all. The only portions of the bill that are even a little questionable is the personal mandate. Requiring particular services be provided aer entirely within the governments power.
Because in the long run it REDUCES your healthcare costs. Covering the pill results in lower overall expenditures.
Yes they can. And they do, regularly.
It's not complicated....."no person shall be excluded from any pre-existing condition". What do some Politicians, Bishops, Repblicans, and Insurers not understand about that??? Whether; Behaviorial, Medical, including prophylactic. No neccessary treatment shall be denied by some form of coverage for the condition. The problem is Conservatives and Coporations are dragging their feet. If the law goes into effect...and I know it will. Those breaking the law should face legal consequences.......
Since when is a normal condition ( being sexually active) a pre-existing condition. Before I'll bow to you on this one I'd go to jail. Then you will not only give me medical coverage but save me $600 in housing and utilities and $200 in food.Which is more than my check will be after October.
Here in Hawaii we already have healthcare laws that work. I don't see the big deal, why so many states are being problematic. But fine if it becomes too difficult to mandate your employers to provide health care, then it is the health care providers that may need to be over hauled. The truth is more would have health insurance if it were more affordable. Problem is there is such a huge lobbying effort by health providers that they probably thought it would be easier to go after the employers. I also think it should be an approach of both the employers being made to provide healthcare, but the costs implemented by healthcare providers need to me controlled as well. Maybe if it wasn't so expensive more employers would be more favorable to it. It i not imposible to have national healthcare, other countries prove that.
Missy...yeah, sure other countries have national healthcare...and wow, it really has gotten them a long way...European countries are a great example...they all have huge deficits...yeah, Missy good idea.
Missy, that's your states decision and if it works for your state then great. I agree that the closest we need to come to national healthcare is for all states to implement their own healthcare laws and the federal govt' needs to stay out of it. It is a whole lot easier to watch your states finances then the nations finances (15.6 Trillion in debt). We are evolving into a society that knows we all need healthcare and that not all can afford it, however there are too many who expect FREE healthcare and get it without contributing and most definitely without being grateful for receiving services at taxpayers expense. Those minds are what keep us from evolving further into an equal society. Too many takers and now we have too many sick of giving to the takers. This has become a time to push against those who do not wish to contribute to society and stand up for OUR equality and to say no more takers. Stand up and PUSH BACK!
1) their overall health is much better than America (according to longevity and overall satisfaction with health and health care)
2) Countries with a single payer system generally have lower deficits than the US because we spend WAY more money on blowing people up rather than giving them health care.
Hey,
I know what we can do. Go to the nearest 7-11 and buy some condoms. And pay for them yourself. What a great idea.
Is getting horney a pre-existing condition?? LOL Sure used to be when I wore a younger man's shoes. LOLOL
Joseph E. Parent,
Conception is a medical condition. It's called pregnancy....Bozo. The lack of any effective contraceptive results in the expensive medical condition, and it's treatment with labor and delivery. Just because your interpretation of sex is cheap does not mean the body, and child birth is not held sacred to others. Now we know, your personal interpretation of conception is in the back seat of a Chevy, and a 40oz. of Old English 800........
/
If any coporation, insurer, and/or employer breaks the law by not following the Affordable Health Care Act....they should be prosecuted for breaking the law....period. This should help them understand the simple law more clearly. Their confusion will then difuse. Further, if any Church has designated themselves into a role of Insurer, and Employer to profit, by choice, while filing for a tax exemption, as a religious institution. They should be the last people on earth to proclaim Individual rights of the Patient for proven effective treatments available. Shame on those Bishops and Republicans........
The Right of religious freedom does not supercede on the Right of the Individual for Medical treatment. It's a ," no brainer ".
Sebilius is doing a great job, and evidence mounts every day that the ACA will save Americans a lot of money and make health care much more efficient. The Republicans can't support their contentions and just spout the same tired talking points they have been spouting for more than two years.
If employers drop group health insurance plans they have to pay a $2000 penalty for every employee. It will actually be good for employees if an employer drops their plan. They can purchase affordable insurance from a state run exchange and will no longer rely on an employer for health insurance. The employer will have to raise salaries to compensate employees for the lost benefit. Both employer and employee will be better off.
Man of Knowledge: you may know something about music...but you've demonstrated your ignorance on how Obamacare is the greatest piece of crap legislation ever passed into law. You sir, have been dummied down by the main stream (lack of any journalistic skills) media.
Suppose you educate me. Exactly what is it that makes it crap? I've read the law. I keep a copy of it handy. Where do you get your knowledge of it?
There is another choice not refuse the insurance close the business only liberals think that is not an option.
Ignorants in the catholic church want to keep the erectile dysfunction medications flowing but don't want any control at the other end. Just because a man can medicate to get it up and dribble a little sperm does not mean a woman has to be so proud of him to carry a baby to term. The Pope has to get over himself and the Bishops should quit making folks kiss their feet.
Patriarchal institutions are basically old idiot men hiding places.
Where in the health care law does it give the President the power to dictate policy to churches? It seems to me that such new presidential powers abridge the constitution. The President promised to go over the health care law "line by line" with my congressman and that all proceedings would be broadcast on CSPAN. Does anyone know when these broadcasts are scheduled to begin? Of course the President always keeps his promises because, after all, he is the President of the United States of America. God bless our President.
He doesn't. Maybe you should do a little research before you comment. Church's don't have to pay for birth control the insurance companies do if the woman wants it.
D-nice if you believe that there is a bridge for sale in NYC.
Apparently "separation of church and state" has a lot to do with your perspective.
But on the other hand as long as these leftest (&&%#% are paying for it why should I care?
"Testifying before the Senate Finance Committee Wednesday, Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius defended the Obama administration’s ruling that religious-affiliated institutions must include birth control as part of their health insurance plans"
Ruling? Can someone please explain how this administration can claim power it obviously doesn't have under the U.S. Constitution?
Tracy: that's exactly the question that I have as well...evidently that darned constitutional issue doesn't bother most of the people posting here...which is even scarier.
The only thing that should happen in this election is that every candidate including the incumbent should be forced to sit and listen to George Will read them the Constitution word for word on TV. Then we could be sure they knew what they were taking the oath to protect and defend. Something I'm sure the incumbent hasn't read since 5th grade and didn't pay attention to then.
That doesn't mean the they would automatically understand it or care for that matter. I think the Obama administration knows what the constitution says they just don't care what it says.
...if only Prez-0's parents would have practiced what he's preachin'....
Ha, ha, ha, that's a good one, if only President Bush wouldn't have been born, we wouldn't have fell to an near depression and 10.5 trillions dollars in debt, and 2 wars were urgently seeking an end too!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Think about it, the bigger the government gets, the poorer the taxpayer gets.
Your doing fine, shut up!
Given that 98% of Catholic women use birth control, I don't understand the "furor". A bunch of old out-of-touch men are the ones that are making this a big deal. Another manufactured crisis by the GOP.
D-Nice, well said. I think Romney and Santorum should each take an oath that he will not accept any donations from any individual who has ever used, is now using, or ever plans to use any form of birth control. They should, but somehow I don’t think either one of them has that much integrity.
D-nice just because a bunch of people who only go to church because their parents took them and haven't thought about anything they heard and don't follow church laws does not change a thing. The Catholic church is not a democracy. The arbriter of faith and morals lives in his own country not the United States.
Because, their being persecuted,their age old faith is on the line, while over 50% of all catholic marriages end in divorce, and 10% of their clergy are molesting children, and 80% of them don't know how to pray, they have to pick a BIG issue to have a fit over.
The anti-abortion zealots may be making the biggest mistake possible. Simply put, legal consistency comes into play. If a fetus is declared a person, it receives the same rights (and legal limitations) as anyone after birth. Under current laws no person is entitled to the use of another’s body, or its parts, without consent; if my daughter needs a transfusion, the doctors can’t even test my blood for compatibility; I can’t be forced to donate my plasma, bone marrow, a kidney, or any part of myself, for any reason, to save her life (this sounds bad, but it’s true); consequently, if a fetus is given personhood, by law, it would certainly have no right to nine months occupancy of an unwilling woman’s body. Its inability to survive outside of those specific conditions would be legally irrelevant. The “baby” would have to be removed whenever the woman chose to no longer donate her body. It's the law.
<b>Ten observations about Obama:
1) Obama does not compromise and focuses instead on perpetuating mistrust in our government
2) Obama's liberal policies appear unconstitutional
3) An aim of Obama is to convince the population that his own democratically elected administration cannot do anything wrong, part of their plot is to increase taxes and government spending
4) A central goal of Obama is to increase the paranoia that high income earners are the greatest enemy and hinders our prosperity
5) The primary ignorance of Democrats and Liberals is the belief that president Obama isn't responsible at all of our national economic woes and that government isn't the main cause of your personal financial problems
6) It is a goal of Obama to make you believe that the he knows better than you concerning state rights.
7) The Obama administration wants to hide the fact that our entire government is a complete failure, part of his goal is to turn us against our Constitution and Conservative officials
8) A mission of the Obama administration is to deceive people into believing that government regulations don't undercut your privacy
9) The Obama administration wants the population to think that all government employees deserve over a 100k/yr
10) Several bipartisan polls show support for Obama is gradually decreasing and as people continue to learn more about his war on religion, Americans, and the Constitution. Support will continue to disappear for him</b>
NIce cut and paste from your tea party news letter. You better check number 10. Obama's poll numbers have been on the rise for the last month. Maybe you should try using more current partisan material.
D-nice good system you've got there the state with the most electoral votes is being held hostage and not allowed to vote in the primary by the federal judiciary. Is this so you can force us to accept whomever you choose? Or is it because as a southern state you think we won't support your candidate after the high handed tactics of your federal judiciary to restrict the freedom of speech of some of our younger citizens.
Take out Obama out of the big 10 and put Republicans in their and it sounds the same!!!
Let's see: Repubs don't want to pay for contraceptives, don't want to pay for abortion, don't want to pay welfare for all those babies born to unwed, unfit, no husband, no income woman....what exactly do they want....everyone being totally responsible for themselves....great in theory...not in real life...and there are PLENTY of Repubs that fall into the above categories.
Yep, they believe if the individual is left alone they and corporations will always do the right thing without government policy-Rush Limbaugh, except when in his case it comes to prescription narcotics, I think a little accountability will help the big mouth radio fat man.
You know Dragon - I don't know where you live or what you really know about much but I am a 70 years old female retired college teacher and I can attest that you fell off a turnip truck - my father was a Republican senator - all my extended family are Republicans - 99% of my friends are Republicans and none of us want the government telling us anything about contraception, or our genitals, or about abortions, or welfare - none of us are on welfare, get abortions, and consider sex a private matter between a husband and wife - we are hard working people mostly PhDs, MDs, school administrators, engineers, - educated, good citizens - we are typical of Republicans. I don't think we should be discussing anything about sex in public - some things we can't legislate - Obama is only looking for votes. What else is new these days - he's a joke and a ruse......
Well good for you, go live in your retirement and have a good time, but were talking about 40-50 million Americans who are low middle income and poverty that has increased 120% since no manufacturing jobs exist, and not all 40-50 millions can be PhDs, MDs, school administrators, engineers,... or those fields would have no employment opportunities. Don't go to your university hospitals and observe children that some dogs are treated better than these poor children.
it is too bad your Union's ran up the wages and benefits to a level that was not reasonable or justified, therefore DRIVING all of our manufacturing jobs out of the US. Now you complain there are not jobs! Even if you are non-union, you back the Democratic party that IS the union, and they act like it too. Spend, Spend , Spend.
kansas,
Sure, blame the unions, but the CEO's in these corporations have risen to the top, while other schmucks are being laid off, all the while these clowns take their businesses out of the US.
Unions brought us a 40 hour work week, decent wages, and safer workplaces. Just like the rest of the GOP, you want to take us back to the 1950's!
Good ole boys!
Sebelius, Obama and some other idiot jerk-baits need to get their fannies out of the medical business. They and the federal government has no business messing with private enterprise. Everything they touch turns to crap. I am in the medical business and I have forgot more than these morons will ever know about the medical business. What I do know is that with every mandate they include and the more they mess around with things, the rates are going right out the roof. Obamacare has done nothing but cause rates to rise and they will continue to do so as long as these dimwits are screwing with private industry. The government needs to get out of the way of private enterprise. The medical business is not an entitlement. Sorry!
Obama care has not raised any rates. Obama care has hardly been launched, it's called your INSURANCE COMPANIES, they have raise premiums and co-pay 300% in the last 7 years, well before Obama ever came on the scene. The medical industry could not survive if you took out medicare and medicaid, govt. programs! If you took them out 70% of hospitals would go out of business. You people are so whinny, the rates have nothing to do with mandates, it has all to do with Aetna, Bluecross/Blueshield, not wanting to pay for that MRI or CT or Chemo drug and making you and I foot the freaking bill.
To the contrar my man, Obama needs to get in it nice and thick and start mandating patient responsible outcomes, and treatments that are expensive as all get out and then the patient dies 6 months later and the physician pads their wallets because this physician convinced the patient he could do chemo and radiation for pancreatic cancer at a cost of $175,000 and our pancreatic patient is 6 feet under. An Obama plan to control costs would mandate preventive health care and mandate patients lose weight for the 80% of Americans with an obesity problem, and really start to provide health care instead of what we have now which is DISEASE care that makes health care professionals rich and Americans not very healthy.
I am so sorry Obama is in office - every way we turn from our vaginas to our checkbook he has his hands on it. I lived in many countries and always loved our freedoms in the US but not anymore. Nobama ever again...
I'm so sorry I listened to 10 GOP debates and heard them articulate absolutely nothing, a bunch of George Bush surrogates, that interestingly never mention his name!
I can't believe how stupid some Americans are. Do you really believe the Insurance Companies are just going to go ahead and pay for this? Not! The Insurance Companies will pass the costs on to those that pay for their insurance. Which means the Middle-Class (you know the very ones that BHO claims he is protecting) will be affected the most. The rich won't notice the cost increase; the poor don't even have to pay for it. So, whose left to pay for it? You got it - the Middle-Class.
Exactly, but you know, it's that Obama Care that barely has gotten off the ground that can be blamed, it absolutely astounds me that you have this group mostly GOP people that would really like to keep medicine "as is" The U.S per capita income spends $6000 annually on health care, the next industrialized country in cost would be Japan at slightly over $3,000 and we're not any healthier and in some categories worst off!! Treatments of Cancer no better, worst in lung and rectal, because we smoke and eat junk, cardiovascular, way worse, diabetes way worse, due to most Americans being obese or FAT and incredibly out of shape. We do not have true health care in the US, we have disease care, with the most state of the art equipment that gouges peoples pocketbooks but doesn't make us healthier. MRI's, CT's, cardiovascular imaging, linear accelerators, and were in worse health, IMAGINE THAT. And guess what, the AMA wants to keep it that way, great force on capital hill in the ears of most GOP politicians.