Copyright 1999 Times Mirror Company
Los Angeles
Times
View Related Topics
March 10, 1999, Wednesday, Home Edition
SECTION: Part A; Page 3; Metro Desk
LENGTH: 529 words
HEADLINE:
CALIFORNIA AND THE WEST;
LEGISLATORS RENEW BID TO REQUIRE COVERAGE OF
CONTRACEPTIVES
BYLINE: AMY PYLE, TIMES STAFF
WRITER
DATELINE: SACRAMENTO
BODY:
Accusing
medical plans of discriminating against women, state legislators on Tuesday for
the fifth time in as many years gave initial approval to a bill requiring
insurers to cover contraceptives.
This year, the idea--which previously
cleared the Legislature only to face repeated vetoes by then-Gov. Pete
Wilson--has a stronger chance of becoming law. During his gubernatorial
campaign, Gov. Gray Davis said he favored mandating insurance coverage of birth
control.
The first of two similar bills, which cleared the Assembly
Health Committee on a 10-4 vote Tuesday, was given the number 39--as in AB
39--to commemorate the number of years since the U.S. Food and Drug
Administration approved birth control pills.
"For 39 years there has
been an injustice," said Assemblyman Bob Hertzberg (D-Sherman Oaks), whose
introduction of the bill marks his third attempt at changing state law.
Hertzberg's bill would require prescription contraceptives to be covered
by all health maintenance organizations that cover other prescription drugs. A
companion Senate bill, SB 41, that has not yet come up for committee vote would
extend that requirement to all other health insurers.
The Senate bill's
author, Sen. Jackie Speier (D-Daly City), who as an assemblywoman in 1995 and
1996 had handled similar birth control bills, said the issue is a matter of
equity for women.
Contraceptives, she told the committee, are the only
category of drugs excluded by some medical insurance plans.
"This drug
was discovered 39 years ago and we're still fighting to include it in
prescription drug benefits," she said. "Viagra was discovered six months ago and
guess what? It's already there."
According to the American College of
Obstetricians and Gynecologists, birth control pill coverage is offered by 71%
of HMOs but just 36% of fee-for-service plans. The organization, which is
co-sponsoring the bills along with Planned Parenthood, suggests that lack of
coverage is a major reason women's out of pocket health costs are two-thirds
higher than men's.
Debate about the Assembly bill was heated Tuesday,
resurrecting the two main employer-centered opposition arguments of the past:
The cost of expanding drug coverage would unfairly fall to employers, and the
bill would put employers who oppose birth control for religious reasons into a
difficult bind.
Hertzberg said recent tallies suggest that the average
cost of contraceptive coverage is about $ 16 a year.
However, Poway Assemblywoman Charlene Zettel, the only Republican to
vote for the Assembly bill, said that as a small-business owner she was more
concerned about the cost of an employee's unplanned pregnancy.
"It might
be penny-wise and a pound-foolish if we don't support this prevention," she
said.
Representatives of the Catholic Church pushed for exempting bona
fide religious organizations that oppose birth control.
"This society
should respect our different religious beliefs," said Edward Dolejski, executive
director of the California Catholic Conference.
Hertzberg and Speier
said they were willing to consider such a change as long as employees can obtain
the coverage elsewhere.
LANGUAGE: English
LOAD-DATE: March 10, 1999 
