August, 01 2011, 04:33pm EDT
Victory for Women's Health: HHS Announces that Birth Control Will Be Covered with No Co-Pays
Planned Parenthood Praises Commonsense Decision That Will Help Prevent Unintended Pregnancy
WASHINGTON
Planned Parenthood applauds the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) decision to include the full range of FDA-approved contraceptive methods as a women's preventive health service, making it available without co-pays or cost sharing. The HHS announcement follows a strong recommendation from the Institute of Medicine, an independent, nonpartisan medical body.
"Today is a historic victory for women's health and women across the country," said Cecile Richards, president of Planned Parenthood Federation of America. "The decision by HHS is monumental for millions of women who have struggled with the cost of birth control and other essential health-care services such as cervical cancer and HIV screening."
HHS has designated eight specific services as women's preventive health care, including:
* contraceptive methods and counseling
* annual well-woman preventive visit
* screening for cervical cancer/HPV
* counseling for sexually transmitted infections
* counseling and screening for HIV
* screening and counseling for interpersonal and domestic violence
* breastfeeding support, supplies, and counseling
* screening for gestational diabetes
This means that new insurance plans must offer these preventive services without additional out-of-pocket expenses or co-pays.
Eliminating co-pays for preventive health care will help reduce unintended pregnancies in the United States. The unintended pregnancy rate in the United States ranks among the highest in the developed world. In the U.S., nearly half of all pregnancies are unintended.
Birth control is also used to control and manage a wide range of health problems. Among other things, it can protect women against debilitating symptoms of endometriosis and reduce the risk of ovarian cancer.
Most importantly, birth control allows women to plan and space their pregnancies, thus improving maternal, infant, and family health.
"There is no doubt that birth control is basic health care for women," said Dr. Vanessa Cullins, vice president for medical affairs at Planned Parenthood Federation of America. "Covering birth control without co-pays is one of the most important steps we can take to prevent unintended pregnancy and keep women and children healthy."
Co-pays for birth control pills typically range between $15 and $50 per month. Other methods, such as IUDs, often cost several hundred dollars, even with health insurance.
To ensure that women's voices were part of this national conversation, Planned Parenthood launched Birth Control Matters, an awareness campaign that has helped demonstrate widespread support for covering birth control without co-pays.
According to a recent Thomson Reuters-NPR Health poll, 77 percent of Americans believe that private medical insurance should provide no-cost birth control and 74 percent believe that government-sponsored plans should do the same.
While this announcement is a victory for women's health, Planned Parenthood is disappointed HHS is considering proposals that would limit this protection for some women. Planned Parenthood will continue to work hard to ensure that all women, regardless of their employer or insurer, have access to the health care they need, including affordable birth control.
Birth control use is normative, even among religious women. According to a 2011 Guttmacher report, among all women who have had sex, 99 percent had used contraception. Among Catholic women, 98 percent who have had sex had used contraception. Sixty-eight percent of Catholic women and 74 percent of Evangelicals used a "highly effective method*," such as the pill or the IUD.
In addition, local newspaper editorials from across the country have spoken out in support of covering birth control with no co-pays.
Below, please find a roundup of newspaper editorials in support of covering preventive health care, including birth control, with no co-pays:
New York Times editorial: Sound Medical Advice. "In an encouraging development for women's health, an advisory panel of leading experts has recommended that all insurers be required to offer contraceptives as well as other preventive services free of charge under the new health care law. The Obama administration seems inclined to follow the advice, which is even better news". (New York Times, July 20, 2011)
https://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/21/opinion/21thu3.html?_r=2
St. Louis Post-Dispatch editorial: New Rules Guarantee Access to Women's Health Programs. "The headlines focused on the recommendation that insurers be required to cover 'the full range of Food and Drug Administration-approved contraceptive methods' without requiring a copay. The institute's experts noted that nearly half of all pregnancies in the United States are unplanned, and that 40 percent of them end in abortion. Thus, the panel said, more widespread use of contraception should result in fewer abortions." (St. Louis Post-Dispatch, July 22, 2011)
https://www.stltoday.com/news/opinion/columns/the-platform/article_8f5d8c79-40b2-59a4-904c-b23e06c1d212.html
Baltimore Sun editorial: A Cost-Effective Approach To Women's Health. "Why should any of these be available without co-pay? Because, as the panel reported, not only would these services greatly contribute to the health and well-being of women but because not providing them is so outrageously expensive to society and the health care system." (Baltimore Sun, July 27, 2011)
https://articles.baltimoresun.com/2011-07-27/news/bs-ed-birth-control-20110727_1_health-care-contraception-preventive-care
Register-Guard (OR) editorial: A Reasonable Solution. "There are still too many unintended pregnancies in this country that end up creating unnecessary human suffering, even without considering the added cost to taxpayers. And there's also the issue of basic fairness." (Register Guard, July 26, 2011)
https://www.registerguard.com/web/opinion/26582152-47/pregnancies-unintended-health-care-contraceptives.html.csp
Star-Ledger (NJ) editorial: Cost Should Not Matter When Deciding Birth Control. "The pill is one of the most common contraceptives, used by more than 80 percent of American women. Because there isn't a co-pay under the new health reform law for other standard preventative care, like pap smears, screenings for STDs or immunizations, there shouldn't be one for oral contraceptives, either. They rival immunization in dollars saved for every dollar invested, medical experts say." (Star-Ledger, July 25, 2011)
https://blog.nj.com/njv_editorial_page/2011/07/cost_should_not_matter_when_de.html
Houston Chronicle editorial: A Good Plan. "But even with such wide use of birth control, about half of all pregnancies are unplanned. This is why contraception is the most important of its recommendations, stressed the report. We're convinced. What took so long?" (Houston Chronicle, July 24, 2011)
https://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/editorial/7667819.html
The Record (NJ) editorial: Women's Choices. "Talk about a great step forward. Just 50 years ago, the brand-new birth control pill was illegal in some states, and women were often cowed into lying to their doctors to get a prescription. Contraception has become more easily available in the years since, allowing women to plan their pregnancies and helping shrink the nation's abortion rate. But it is still too expensive for many, especially low-income and young women." (The Record, July 21, 2011)
https://www.northjersey.com/news/opinions/125999023_Women_s_choices.html
Akron Beacon Journal editorial: Act of Prevention. "At a time when there appears to be an aggressive effort in conservative legislatures to restrict funding and access to reproductive services, including abortion, the priority should be to increase women's options to avoid unwanted pregnancies." (Akron Beacon Journal, July 20, 2011)
https://www.ohio.com/editorial/editorials/act-of-prevention-1.226036
*NOTE: Guttmacher's definition of "highly effective method" includes: sterilization, the pill or another hormonal method, or the IUD.
Planned Parenthood Federation of America (PPFA) is many things to many people. We are a trusted health care provider, an informed educator, a passionate advocate, and a global partner helping similar organizations around the world. Planned Parenthood delivers vital health care services, sex education, and sexual health information to millions of women, men, and young people.
LATEST NEWS
US Voter Registrations Surge as Republicans Try to Limit Ballot Access
One group said it has registered over 100,000 new voters since U.S. President Joe Biden dropped out of the 2024 race.
Jul 26, 2024
The group behind a popular get-out-the-vote technology platform said Friday that it's registered more than 100,000 new U.S. voters since President Joe Biden withdrew from the 2024 presidential race, a surge that came amid mounting Republican efforts to make it harder to register and vote.
Vote.org said that 84% of voters registered in the new wave are under age 35. Nearly 1 in 5 new registrees is 18 years old. Andrea Hailey, the group's CEO, said that "since 2020, we have led the largest voter registration drive in U.S. history," with more than 7.8 million people registered.
After dropping out, Biden endorsed Vice President Kamala Harris to face former Republican President Donald Trump and Sen. JD Vance (R-Ohio) in the November election. The new presumptive Democratic candidate has already earned endorsements from many Democrats in Congress and groups advocating on issues including climate, labor, and reproductive rights.
Vote.org's success comes as Republicans at the federal level are proposing and passing legislation creating obstacles to the ballot box.
Earlier this month, U.S. House Republicans passed Rep. Chip Roy's (R-Texas)
Safeguard American Voter Eligibility (SAVE) Act, which would require proof of American citizenship to vote in federal elections. Republicans claim the bill is meant to fix the virtually nonexistent "problem" of noncitizen voter fraud.
However, Rep. Summer Lee (D-Pa.)
slammed the bill as a "xenophobic attack" meant to silence "Black voices, brown voices, LBGTQIA+ voices, [and] young voices."
Lee said the SAVE Act underscores the need to pass her recently introduced Right to Vote Act, "which would establish the first-ever affirmative federal voting rights guarantee, ensuring every citizen may exercise their fundamental right to cast a ballot."
Earlier this year, U.S. Senate Democrats also reintroduced the John R. Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act, legislation its sponsors say will "update and restore critical safeguards of the original Voting Rights Act."
Meanwhile, Republican-controlled state legislatures and red-state governors are enacting laws imposing tough restrictions on voter registration, with violations punishable by stiff fines that critics say are meant to dissuade people from registration drives and similar efforts.
Again under the guise of preventing fraud, Republican Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis last year signed legislation limiting voter registration drives, with fines of up to $250,000 for violators.
"These draconian laws and rules are like taking a sledgehammer to hit a flea," Cecile Scoon, an attorney and president of the Florida chapter of the League of Women Voters,
toldThe New York Times in an article published Friday.
Three years after Kansas passed a law making "false representation" of an election official a crime, campaigners say it's become extremely difficult to sign up new voters.
"In 2020, even with the pandemic, we had registered nearly 10,000 Kansans to vote. Now, we haven't been able to register anyone," Davis Hammet, president of the youth voter mobilization group Loud Light, told the Times.
In Louisiana, Republican state lawmakers quietly passed legislation making it easier for election officials to toss out absentee ballots with missing details, limiting how people can mail in other voters' ballots, and restricting the ability to assist people with disabilities with their ballots.
"What we've found is that these measures have a disproportionate impact on voters with disabilities, both Black and white," NAACP Legal Defense Fund senior policy counsel Jared Evans
toldNola.com earlier this week.
"It's clear that their goal is to make it harder to vote, harder for specific communities to vote especially," Evans added. "What they don't realize is that these laws hurt white voters, too."
In Nebraska, Republican Secretary of State Bob Evnen last week
ordered county election offices to stop registering voters with past felony convictions who have not received official pardons. The move came after the state's unicameral Legislature passed a bill granting voting eligibility to felons immediately after they have completed their sentences instead of waiting two years.
"We refuse to accept thousands of Nebraskans having their voting rights stripped away," ACLU of Nebraska legal and policy fellow Jane Seu said in a statement. "We are confident in the constitutionality of these laws, and we are exploring every option to ensure that Nebraskans who have done their time can vote."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Critics Warn Manchin-Barrasso Permitting Bill 'Is Taken Straight From Project 2025'
"You thought Project 2025 was just a threat after the election? It's actually happening *right now,*" said one climate campaigner.
Jul 26, 2024
Climate and environmental defenders on this week implored U.S. senators to block a permitting reform bill introduced this week by Sens. Joe Manchin and John Barrasso that campaigners linked to Project 2025, a conservative coalition's agenda for a far-right overhaul of the federal government.
Common Dreamsreported Monday that Manchin (I-W.Va.) and Barrasso (R-Wyo.)—respectively the chair and ranking member of the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee—introduced the Energy Permitting Reform Act of 2024.
The Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) noted that although the proposal "includes several positive reforms for the accelerated development of transmission projects," it also advocates "limiting opportunities for communities to challenge projects, loosening oversight for drilling and mining projects, extending drilling permits and fast-tracking [liquified natural gas] permits, and several other provisions friendly to fossil fuel giants."
"This dangerous bill doesn't deserve a floor vote."
These are nearly identical policies to what's proposed in Project 2025's Mandate for Leadership. The plan, which was spearheaded by the Heritage Foundation, calls for "unleashing all of America's energy resources," including by ending federal restrictions on fossil fuel drilling on public lands; limiting investments in renewable energy; and rolling back environmental permitting restrictions for new oil, gas, and coal projects, including power plants.
While Manchin has been trying—and failing—to pass fossil fuel-friendly permitting reform legislation for years, Brett Hartl, director of public affairs at the Center for Biological Diversity, said that his "Frankenstein legislation is taken straight from Project 2025, and it's the biggest giveaway in decades to the fossil fuel industry."
Hartl said the bill "deprives communities of the power to defend themselves and gives that power to Big Oil by making it harder for communities to challenge polluting projects in court," and "prioritizes the profits of coal barons over public health."
"And it mandates oil and gas extraction in our oceans," he continued. "The insignificant crumbs thrown at renewable energy do nothing to address the climate emergency."
"Monday was the hottest day in recorded history," Hartl noted. "It's shocking that as the climate emergency continues to break records around us, the Senate continues to fast-track the fossil fuel expansion that is killing us. This dangerous bill doesn't deserve a floor vote."
Hartl added that "to preserve a livable planet," Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) "must squash this legislation now."
Manchin—who has said this will be his last term in office—has been a steadfast supporter of the fossil fuel industry, partly because his family owns a coal company. The senator says his permitting reform bill "will advance American energy once again to bring down prices, create domestic jobs, and allow us to continue in our role as a global energy leader."
However, Allie Rosenbluth, Oil Change International's U.S. manager, warned Thursday that "this bill is yet another dangerous attempt by Sen. Manchin to line the pockets of his fossil fuel donors, sacrificing communities and our climate along the way."
"Don't be fooled: The Energy Permitting Reform Act is another dirty deal to fast-track fossil fuels above all else," she continued. "It would unleash more drilling on federal lands and waters, unnecessarily rush the review of proposed oil and gas export projects, and lift the Biden administration's pause on new LNG exports."
"We urge Congress to reject this proposal and commit to action that protects frontline communities from the impacts of fossil fuel development and the climate crisis," Rosenbluth added.
"Don't be fooled: The Energy Permitting Reform Act is another dirty deal to fast-track fossil fuels above all else."
NRDC managing director of government affairs Alexandra Adams said Wednesday that "this bill is a giveaway for the oil and gas industry that will ramp up drilling and environmental destruction at a time when we need to be putting a hard stop to fossil fuels."
"We cannot afford to roll back so many of our bedrock environmental and community legal protections and offer a blank check to the oil and gas industry," she stressed. "We need new solutions for permitting if we are going to meet our clean energy potential and address the climate challenge. But this is not it."
"This bill would altogether be a leap backward on climate, health, and justice if passed into law," Adams added. "The Senate should reject it and look toward alternative solutions already being considered."
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Nothing To Eat': War-Torn Sudan Faces Mass Famine as Military Delays Aid
Both parties in Sudan's civil war are to blame for a looming mass famine, experts say, and the military's blocking of U.N. aid at a border crossing with Chad exacerbates the problem.
Jul 26, 2024
Sudan's military is blocking United Nations aid trucks from entering at a key border crossing, causing severe disruptions in aid in a country that experts fear may be on the brink of one of the worst famines the world has seen in decades, The New York Timesreported Friday.
The border city of Adré in eastern Chad is the main international crossing into the Darfur region of Sudan, but the Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF), the state's official military, which is engaged in a civil war with a paramilitary group called the Rapid Support Forces (RSF), has refused to issue permits for U.N. trucks to enter there, as it's an RSF-controlled area.
U.S. and international officials have issued increasingly alarmed calls for steady aid access to help feed the millions of severely malnourished people in Darfur and other areas of Sudan.
Last week, Linda Thomas-Greenfield, the United States ambassador to the U.N., said that the SAF's obstruction of the border was "completely unacceptable."
Both warring parties in Sudan continue to perpetrate brazen atrocities, including starvation of civilians as a method of warfare. This piece focuses on the SAF's ongoing obstruction of essential aid. The situation is catastrophic. The policy is criminal. https://t.co/FKhqQh3EI9.
— Tom Dannenbaum (@tomdannenbaum) July 26, 2024
The Sudanese who've made it out of the country and into Adré reported dire and unsafe conditions in their home country.
"We had nothing to eat," Bahja Muhakar, a Sudenese mother of three, told the Times after she crossed into Chad, following a harrowing six-day journey from Al-Fashir, a major city in Darfur. She said the family often had to live off of one shared pancake per day.
Another mother, Dahabaya Ibet, said that her 20-month-old boy had to bear witness to his grandfather being shot and killed in front of his eyes when the family home in Darfur was attacked by gunmen late last year.
Now the mothers and their families are refugees in Adré, where 200,000 Sudanese are living in an overcrowded, under-resourced transit camp.
In addition to those that have made it out of the country, there are 11 million people internally displaced within Sudan, most of whom have become displaced since the civil war began in April 2023.
An unnamed senior American official told the Times that the looming famine in Sudan could be as bad as the 2011 famine in Somalia or even the great Ethiopian famine of the 1980s.
In April, Reutersreported that people in Sudan were eating soil and leaves to survive, and The Washington Postcalled it a nation in "chaos," reporting that World Food Program trucks had been "blocked, hijacked, attacked, looted, and detained."
In late June, a coalition of U.N. agencies, aid groups, and governments warned that 755,000 people in Sudan faced famine in the coming months.
The U.S. last week announced $203 million in additional aid to Sudan—part of a $2.1 billion pledge that world leaders made in April, which some countries have not yet delivered on.
Some officials including Thomas-Greenfield, who has dubbed the situation in Sudan "the worst humanitarian crisis in the world," have called for the U.N. Security Council to allow aid delivery into the country even in the absence of SAF approval; it's believed that Russia would veto such a measure.
Sudan's civil war has seen a great deal of international interference. Amnesty International on Thursday published an investigatory briefing showing that weapons from Russia, China, Serbia, Turkey, Yemen, and the United Arab Emirates (UAE) had been identified in the country. And The Guardian on Friday reported that the passports of Emirati citizens had been found among wreckage in Sudan, indicating the UAE may have troops or intelligence officers on the ground, though the UAE denied the accusation.
The International Service for Human Rights on Friday warned that both the SAF and RSF were engaged in wrongful killings and arrests, especially targeted at lawyers, doctors, and activists. The group called for an immediate cease-fire.
The SAF and Sudanese government figures have cast doubt on international experts' claims about famine in the country.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular