Most of Obama's "Controversial" Birth Control Rule Was Law During Bush Years

[deminks]

http://motherjones.com/politics/2012/02/controversial-obama-birth-control-rule-already-law

President Barack Obama's decision to require most employers to cover birth control and insurers to offer it at no cost has created a firestorm of controversy. But the central mandate—that most employers have to cover preventative care for women—has been law for over a decade. This point has been completely lost in the current controversy, as Republican presidential candidates and social conservatives claim that Obama has launched a war on religious liberty and the Catholic Church.

Despite the longstanding precedent, "no one screamed" until now, said Sara Rosenbaum, a health law expert at George Washington University.

In December 2000, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ruled that companies that provided prescription drugs to their employees but didn't provide birth control were in violation of Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, which prevents discrimination on the basis of sex. That opinion, which the George W. Bush administration did nothing to alter or withdraw when it took office the next month, is still in effect today—and because it relies on Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, it applies to all employers with 15 or more employees. Employers that don't offer prescription coverage or don't offer insurance at all are exempt, because they treat men and women equally—but under the EEOC's interpretation of the law, you can't offer other preventative care coverage without offering birth control coverage, too.

"It was, we thought at the time, a fairly straightforward application of Title VII principles," a top former EEOC official who was involved in the decision told Mother Jones. "All of these plans covered Viagra immediately, without thinking, and they were still declining to cover prescription contraceptives. It's a little bit jaw-dropping to see what is going on now…There was some press at the time but we issued guidances that were far, far more controversial."

(end snip)

[spanone]

1. k&r...

[madrchsod]

2. it`s been a long time but i kin`a remember someone named bush.

oh wait... was`t he a president or something? i

[deminks]

3. Kick for Morning Jerk, who for the 4th day in a row persists in telling lies

[MisterP]

4. conservative puds lying? who'da thunk?

[PRETZEL]

5. So basically this has all boiled down to this

HHS has decided to impliment existing law.

And who in their infinite wisdom within the administration didn't realize that this single talking point pretty much ends the debate as it stands?