The state House voted Thursday to let any employer refuse to provide contraceptive coverage based on its religious beliefs.
Thursday’s 39-18 vote came over objections from lawmakers who said the existing objection for churches is sufficient. That included Rep. Lela Alston, D-Phoenix, who said that as a woman, mother and grandmother, she was “appalled” at the legislation.
“You men have no business lecturing the women of Arizona about the use of birth control and whether or not it is a crime,” she said. And Alston said while HB 2625 deals only with who pays for the drugs, Alston said letting any employer opt out is “blatantly unconstitutional.”
But Rep. John Kavanagh, R-Fountain Hills, said it is wrong for state government to mandate activities that violate an individual’s religious beliefs.
He specifically mentioned the “morning-after” pill which is available to those who have had unprotected sex. While some say the pill works by preventing ovulation, others say it prevents a fertilized egg from implanting in the womb.
“When it involves killing a fertilized egg, it is killing a human being,” Kavanagh said.
“Under that principle, people who are Catholic believe that they are committing a wrong by doing this. And, in our society, you have to respect that.”
The fight playing out at the Capitol parallels the objections the Catholic Church and some other religious groups have raised to rules by the Obama administration to require coverage for contraceptives. Foes contend there needs to be a broader exemption for religious organizations which are not churches themselves.
But this legislation actually goes farther, allowing any corporation or business — even one without a stated religious purpose — to opt out based on a declared religious objection.
State lawmakers voted in 2002 to spell out that employers who provide health insurance for their workers that includes prescriptions cannot exclude contraceptives that are available only by prescription.
Lawmakers agreed at that time to craft an exemption for religions whose tenets preclude the use of birth control. But Rep. Debbie Lesko, R-Glendale, said that exception is too narrow. In essence, it is limited to churches and to nonprofit service affiliates, but only if they primarily employ and serve people of the same faith.
Ron Johnson, lobbyist for the Arizona Catholic Conference, said that leaves out other church-owned or operated organizations, ranging from Catholic hospitals to St. Vincent de Paul Society. He said they are entitled to the same protection.
Johnson acknowledged, however, this legislation expands it to any business which claims that birth control, morning-after pills, abortion or sterilization is contrary to its religious belief. And that would be accomplished solely by filing an affidavit with that claim.
Rep. Bruce Wheeler, D-Tucson, called the legislation an attempt by lawmakers to interfere with the private lives of individuals.
“Over 90 percent, by anybody’s measurement, of American women, including Catholics, use or have used contraception,” he said. “I stand here to say this is a right guaranteed by our constitution.”
Johnson, however, does not see it that way.
“It’s a religious liberty issue,” he said. And Johnson said those who argue that women will be denied access to contraceptives are ignoring economic reality.
Johnson said he checked with various pharmacies, including those at grocery stores, about the price of contraceptives. He said the charge for a month of pills was as low as $4 for a generic version.
“It was cheaper than the co-pay” that an insurance company would require its policyholders to pay, he said.
And Johnson said while some businesses might choose to opt out of contraceptive coverage, he doubts that will be the case for major national corporations.
“They’d face a backlash from all these protests,” he said, making them adverse to changing insurance coverage in ways that their female customers might find objectionable.
The legislation also contains language which allows insurance companies themselves to claim a religious exemption.
Deborah Sheasby, an attorney with the Center for Arizona Policy, said that was inserted in the wake of a “compromise” President Obama offered when his first contraceptive plan drew fire.
His alternative instead said the coverage would still have to be provided, but the religious employer would not have to pay. Instead, the cost would be shouldered by the insurance company under a premise that birth control ultimately costs less than prenatal coverage.
But Sheasby said that’s no compromise at all.
“You’re still paying for it by way of paying your insurance premiums,” she said. “So it’s not really an acceptable solution to the problem.”
Kavanagh said he was surprised that anyone would oppose a law that allows companies to refuse to fund a practice they find morally objectionable.
“It’s amazing how people who preach tolerance all the time become unbelievably intolerant of other people when they disagree with what they should be doing,” he said.
DrJCA1 posted at 11:41 am on Mon, Mar 5, 2012.
To the phonies that vote for stuff like this: what if your company does not want to pay for STD treatment? Is that also OK not to pay for, since pre or extra- marital sex is not acceptable by religious organizations? I don't care what anyone believes in or how they live their own lives. When you start shoving it down my throat, then it becomes my business to intervene. The holier-than-thou religious right is pushing many of us otherwise conservative thinkers away from the entire conservative viewpoint with this phoney garbage. I say "phoney" because I know very well that not one of yo holy-rollers live the 100% pure and decent lifestyle 100% of the time. Until yo are perect in every way, shut up and mind your own business. Normal folks are getting tired of hearing about what you believe.
samkat posted at 5:08 pm on Sun, Mar 4, 2012.
"Kavanagh said he was surprised that anyone would oppose a law that allows companies to refuse to fund a practice they find morally objectionable."
I find parceling out tax dollars to charter schools and allowing overly generous tax dollars to the same objectionable but do the conservative legislators listen to me? Nope.
Dale Whiting posted at 7:58 pm on Sat, Mar 3, 2012.
Ask not for whom the bell tolls, House Republicans. This coming November 6th it tolls for thee!
lauraaz posted at 6:32 pm on Sat, Mar 3, 2012.
Every vote for a republican is a vote against women! The GOP has declared war on women's rights. Its time for every woman to stop voting for republicans!
mwmike posted at 2:09 pm on Sat, Mar 3, 2012.
How did that work out for the fat, uneducated, drug addict?
DrJCA1 posted at 12:00 pm on Sat, Mar 3, 2012.
This is the most stupid thing I've ever read about. What if you had a business that was owned by Jehovas Wittnesses? Would they not have to pay for or help with any medications since "god will heal us by himself"? Or what about an orthodox Jewish business that won't have to pay for medications in capsule form because many capsules are made from animal parts (gelatin). In this day and age, with the countries that are religiously run having so much death and destruction, I don't understand us Americans wanting the same. There are hundreds of religions in this country with different beleifs and rules. These morons who push for this agenda would then allow every one of them to determine what they will cover for employees, or does that only apply to christian religons?
andys posted at 11:57 am on Sat, Mar 3, 2012.
Don't these idiots know that the morning after pill is the same pill one takes on a daily basis. If this is a religious issue let the churches and synagogues and mosques decide what is right for the faithful. Some asked if they could refuse Viagra... or HIV medications, or vaccinations, where do you draw the line. This is insane.
Juggernaut8000 posted at 8:16 am on Sat, Mar 3, 2012.
What a bunch of nonsense. Don't people realize that this mudball called earth cannot support more of us.
Religion is a bunch of nonsense and causes normally rational thinking people do irrational things, such as have more children than they and this planet can support.
Catholics, mormons and the filthy illegals are gonna breed us into extinction.
wdgnas posted at 7:41 am on Sat, Mar 3, 2012.
does that mean they will let any employer refuse to provide VIAGRA based on its religious beliefs?
davidflucier posted at 6:03 am on Sat, Mar 3, 2012.
What's next...legislation allowing corporation to ignore child labor laws?
Where are the jobs? Where is a budget that reflects the advancement of Arizona in the areas of education, jobs, and wellness?
No where because our legislative leaders are busy chasing vapor, counter productive policies and re election.
asuaguila posted at 10:44 pm on Fri, Mar 2, 2012.
Is the legislature purposely ignoring the economy or is there some other idiotic reason that they are not doing their job?