New Obama proposal gives religious groups more say in birth control mandate
The Obama administration is offering to expand the number of
faith-based groups that can be exempt from the controversial
contraception mandate and is proposing that third-party companies
administer coverage for self-insured faith-based groups at no cost.
At
its heart, the newest offering from the White House would allow
religious groups—dioceses, denominations and others—to decide which
affiliated institutions are "religious" and therefore exempt from the
new requirement that employers offer free contraception coverage as part
of employee insurance plans.
Read our latest issue or browse back issues.
The proposals are an effort by the
administration to blunt criticisms of the controversial regulation,
especially by the nation's Catholic bishops, who have been at
loggerheads with the White House since President Obama announced the
contraception mandate in January.
Having been sharply criticized
by faith groups for not providing a sufficiently broad exemption for
religious groups, on February 10 Obama outlined an "accommodation" that
tried to circumvent most of the problems by having insurance
companies—rather than religious employers—provide the birth control
coverage through a separate rider and at no cost to the employer.
While
that move appeased some concerns, Catholic bishops and others argued
that the religious exemption was still too narrow and could set a
dangerous precedent by appearing to allow the government to determine
what groups within a faith should be considered religious.
Others
objected that many religious groups self-insure in order to save money,
and so having the insurer pay for contraception coverage rather than the
employer made no difference because insurer and employer are one and
the same.
The 32-page proposal, published March 16 in the Federal
Register, goes out of its way to state that "this religious exemption is
intended solely for purposes of the contraceptive coverage requirement"
and does not "set a precedent for any other purpose."
"Whether an
employer is designated as 'religious' for these purposes is not
intended as a judgment about the mission, sincerity, or commitment of
the employer, and the use of such designation is limited to defining the
class that qualifies for this specific exemption," states the proposed
rule.
The other main innovation in the new proposal is to have a
"third-party administrator of the group health plan or some other
independent entity" assume responsibility for the contraception coverage
for self-insured organizations, with various proposals for ensuring
that self-insured groups with religious objections would not directly or
indirectly pay for the birth control policy.
Whether any of these ideas will satisfy the die-hard critics of the contraception mandate is unclear, and perhaps unlikely.
"At
the end of the day, no accounting gimmick changes the fact that the
mandate forces religious organizations to pay health insurance companies
for coverage to their employees with drugs and services that simply
violate their religious convictions," said Jeanne Monahan, director of
the Center for Human Dignity at the Family Research Council.
Sister Mary Ann Walsh, the spokeswoman for the U.S. bishops' conference, told National Catholic Reporter
she was "surprised that such important information would be announced
late Friday of St. Patrick's Day weekend and as we prepare for the
fourth Sunday of Lent."
Others involved in the negotiations said
it would take time to review the proposals properly. Sister Carol
Keehan, the head of the Catholic Health Association, which represents
hundreds of Catholic hospitals, said she and her members "will have to
give it a careful review" before responding.
Some critics charge
that the latest proposals are an effort to "kick the can down the road"
so that the administration does not have to issue a final determination
until after the November election. Yet the delay in finalizing the
regulations could also serve to prolong the debate.
Others believe
that the 90-day open- comment period on the proposal, known as an
"Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking," or ANPR, could actually
function as a kind of cooling-off mechanism for this issue, which has
exploded into an election-year debate that poses risks and rewards for
all sides.
The ANPR at several points sets out a variety of
possible solutions to religious objections and invites "input on these
options, particularly how to enable religious organizations to avoid
such objectionable cooperation when it comes to the funding of
contraceptive coverage, as well as new ideas to inform the next stage of
the rule-making process."
By providing new details and extending
the opportunity for dialogue, the Obama administration can now begin to
shift discussions to the nuts and bolts of addressing the religious
freedom concerns and away from rhetorical broadsides claiming that the
White House is launching a "war on religion" and can't be trusted.
Staff
members from the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops were involved in
initial discussions to work out a deal, but those ground to a halt when
bishops accused the White House of negotiating in bad faith, a charge
the administration strongly rejects. —RNS
