Copyright 1999 The Seattle Times Company
The
Seattle Times
March 10, 1999, Wednesday Final Edition
SECTION: LOCAL NEWS; Pg. B6
LENGTH: 436 words
HEADLINE:
CONTRACEPTIVES BILL NOW GOES TO HOUSE -- INSURERS WOULD BE FORCED TO PAY FOR
BIRTH CONTROL
BYLINE: JULIA KINGREY; SEATTLE TIMES
OLYMPIA BUREAU
DATELINE: OLYMPIA
BODY:
OLYMPIA - A controversial
bill requiring health insurers to pay for contraceptives faces a chilly
reception in the evenly divided state House of Representatives.
The
bill, which passed the Senate yesterday, would require health plans that cover
prescription drugs to also pay for the five FDA-approved prescription
contraceptives: birth-control pills, diaphragms, intrauterine devices,
Depo-Provera injections and Norplant.
Supporters say health insurers
discriminate against women. While many health plans cover Viagra and male
pattern baldness, most do not pay for contraceptives.
According to a
state Health Department study, women pay two-thirds more than men in
out-of-pocket health-care costs, primarily for contraceptives.
A House
version of the bill died in committee. Rep. Bill Grant, D-Walla Walla,
Democratic caucus chair, said the Senate version may have a chance of squeaking
through the House.
But not a very big chance, said Rep. Tom Huff, R-Gig
Harbor, co-chairman of the Appropriations Committee, which effectively killed
the House version. He said House Republicans are concerned about the bill's cost
and oppose insurance mandates that, cumulatively, might cripple the
health-insurance industry.
Requiring contraceptive
coverage would increase premiums by $ 21 a year per employee, according
to a Health Department study. Employers would pay $ 17 of that, employees $ 4
In the Senate yesterday, debate centered on what legislators called a
"conscience clause" in the bill that allows religious employers, such as the
Catholic archdiocese, to buy health insurance that doesn't cover birth control.
Instead, employees could purchase contraception coverage directly from the
employer's insurance carrier.
Sen. Larry Sheahan, R-Spokane, said that
exception wouldn't go far enough. He proposed an unsuccessful amendment that
would have exempted any employer with a moral objection to contraceptives.
"It is simply unconscionable to force employers in our state to go
against their consciences in this way," he said.
Democrats argued
contraceptives have valid medical purposes beyond preventing pregnancy, such as
regulating menstrual cycles and deterring ovarian cysts.
Sen. Val
Stevens, R-Arlington, another opponent, said that "promoting contraceptives
among sexually active teenagers increases pregnancy."
The bill passed
the Senate 28 to 20. Just one Democrat, Jim Hargrove of Hoquiam, voted against
it; just two Republicans, Jim Horn of Mercer Island and Shirley Winsley of
Fircrest, supported it.
Julia Kingrey's phone message number is
360-943-9882.
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
LOAD-DATE: March 11, 1999 
