FW: HHS Mandate Creates Absurd Results, Bishop Lori Tells House Judiciary Committee

February 29, 2012

From: USCCB Pro-Life Secretariat Sent: Wednesday, February 29, 2012 9:53 AMTo: hannaklaus@...Subject: HHS Mandate Creates Absurd Results, Bishop Lori Tells House Judiciary Committee DATE: February 28, 2012 FROM: Sr. Ann Walsh O: M: mwalsh@... FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE HHS MANDATE CREATES ABSURD RESULTS, BISHOP LORI TELLS HOUSE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE 'Without change' suddenly means 'with change''Choice' means 'force'Liberalism becomes illiberalSterilization, contraception, abortifacients essential; 'essential health benefits' not WASHINGTON - The Department of Health and Human Services mandate that would force virtually all employers to pay for sterilization and contraceptives, including abortion-inducing drugs to employees has " absurd consequences, " Bishop E. Lori said February 28. Bishop Lori of Bridgeport, Connecticut, chair of the US bishops' Ad Hoc Committee on Religious Liberty, made his comments in testimony about the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act before the House of Representatives Judiciary Committee. His written and oral testimony can be found at http://www.usccb.org/issues-and-action/religious-liberty/upload/02-28-12-Lori-Testimony-for-House-Judiciary-long-form.pdf and http://www.usccb.org/issues-and-action/religious-liberty/upload/Oral-Testimony-of-Most-Reverend--E-short-version.pdf Bishop Lori voiced concern for an " accommodation " President Obama described February 10, which suggested a way around moral concerns the church outlined in the health care reform act. " This 'accommodation' would not change the scope of the mandate and its exemption, " he said. " Instead, it would take the form of additional regulations whose precise contours are yet unknown and that may not issue until August 2013. " " For present purposes, the 'accommodation' is just a legally unenforceable promise to alter the way the mandate would still apply to those who are still not exempt from it, " he said. He added that " the promised alteration appears logically impossible. " He said that despite discussions on an accommodation the President has already finalized the controversial mandate that was proposed months earlier " without change, " thereby " excluding in advance any expansion of the 'religious employer' exemption. Somehow, this situation of 'no change,' is heralded as 'great change,' for which the Administration has been widely congratulated. " Bishop Lori underlined the government's forcing a religious body to violate its beliefs. " I emphasize this word - 'force' - precisely because it is one of the key differences between a mere dispute over reproductive health policy and a dispute over religious freedom. This is not a matter of whether contraception may be prohibited by the government. This is not even a matter of whether contraception may be supported by the government. Instead, it is a matter of whether religious people and institutions may be forced by the government to provide coverage for contraception or sterilization, even if that violates their religious beliefs, " he said. " It is not a matter of 'repackaging' or 'framing' this as a religious freedom dispute. It is a matter of acknowledging the basic fact that government is forcing religious people and groups to do something that violates their consciences, " he said. Bishop Lori noted that earlier " people and groups of all political stripes - left, right, and center - came forward to join us in opposing it. But now, the mere prospect of the 'accommodation' described above has caused some simply to abandon their prior objection. In so doing, they undermine the basic American values that they would otherwise espouse. " " Only in the post-mandate world might it be considered 'liberal' for the government to coerce people into violating their religious beliefs; to justify that coercion based on the minority status of those beliefs; to intrude into the internal affairs of religious organizations; to crush out religious diversity in the private sector; and to incentivize religious groups to serve fewer of the needy. " He questioned why sterilization, contraception, and abortifacients are requirements of the health care act while decisions on prescription drugs and hospitalization that are supposed to be " essential " are " handed off to each state. " " HHS will brook no dissent regarding whether sterilization, contraception, and abortifacients must be covered as 'preventive services,' " he said. " HHS is essentially indifferent regarding what is - or is not - mandated as an 'essential health benefit.' As a result, genuinely beneficial items may well be omitted from coverage, state-by-state. By contrast, states have no such discretion with respect to sterilization, contraception, and abortifacients. " He asked the committee for support for the Respect for Rights of Conscience Act (H.R.1179, S. 1467) to " help bring the world aright again. " " This legislation would not expand religious freedom beyond its present limits, but simply retain Americans' longstanding freedom not to be forced by the federal government to violate their convictions, " he said.---Keywords: Bishop Lori, US Bishops, United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, USCCB, Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, Health and Human Services, House Judiciary Committee, sterilization, contraceptives, abortifacients# # # # #12-034DD,SEC,PRNewswire, CathPress,Congress,PoliReporters,HealthCare,Radio-Religion USCCB Pro-Life SecretariatIf you no longer wish to receive messages from us, please email prolife@... and place " remove " in the subject line.

March 1, 2012

Can anyone direct me to the link for the IOM report on the scientific evidence "in favor of" contraceptives the Obama administration said it used as the rationale for crafting the HHS mandate?

Sincerely yours,

Dominic M. Pedulla MD, FACC, CNFPMC, ABVM, ACPh

Interventional Cardiologist, Endovascular Diplomate, Varicose Vein Specialist, Noncontraceptive Family Planning Consultant, Family Planning Researcher

Medical Director, The Oklahoma Vein and Endovascular Center (www.noveinok.com, veininfo@...)

Executive Director, The Edith Stein Foundation (www.theedithsteinfoundation.com)

(office)

(cell)

(FAX)

pedullad@...

HHS Mandate Creates Absurd Results, Bishop Lori Tells House Judiciary Committee

DATE: February 28, 2012

& n

bsp; FROM: Sr. Ann Walsh

& nb

sp; O:

& nb

sp; M:

mwalsh@...

&

nbsp; FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

HHS MANDATE CREATES ABSURD RESULTS, BISHOP LORI TELLS HOUSE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE

'Without change' suddenly means 'with change'

'Choice' means 'force'

Liberalism becomes illiberal

Sterilization, contraception, abortifacients essential; 'essential health benefits' not

WASHINGTON - The Department of Health and Human Services mandate that would force virtually all employers to pay for sterilization and contraceptives, including abortion-inducing drugs to employees has "absurd consequences," Bishop E. Lori said February 28.

Bishop Lori of Bridgeport, Connecticut, chair of the US bishops' Ad Hoc Committee on Religious Liberty, made his comments in testimony about the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act before the House of Representatives Judiciary Committee.

His written and oral testimony can be found at http://www.usccb.org/issues-and-action/religious-liberty/upload/02-28-12-Lori-Testimony-for-House-Judiciary-long-form.pdf and http://www.usccb.org/issues-and-action/religious-liberty/upload/Oral-Testimony-of-Most-Reverend--E-short-version.pdf

Bishop Lori voiced concern for an "accommodation" President Obama described February 10, which suggested a way around moral concerns the church outlined in the health care reform act.

& nb

sp; "This 'accommodation' would not change the scope of the mandate and its exemption," he said. "Instead, it would take the form of additional regulations whose precise contours are yet unknown and that may not issue until August 2013."

"For present purposes, the 'accommodation' is just a legally unenforceable promise to alter the way the mandate would still apply to those who are still not exempt from it," he said. He added that "the promised alteration appears logically impossible." He said that despite discussions on an accommodation the President has already finalized the controversial mandate that was proposed months earlier "without change," thereby "excluding in advance any expansion of the 'religious employer' exemption. Somehow, this situation of 'no change,' is

heralded as 'great change,' for which the Administration has been widely congratulated."

Bishop Lori underlined the government's forcing a religious body to violate its beliefs.

"I emphasize this word - 'force' - precisely because it is one of the key differences between a mere dispute over reproductive health policy and a dispute over religious freedom. This is not a matter of whether contraception may be prohibited by the government. This is not even a matter of whether contraception may be supported by the government. Instead, it is a matter of whether religious people and institutions may be forced by the government to provide coverage for contraception or sterilization, even if that violates their religious beliefs," he said.

"It is not a matter of 'repackaging' or 'framing' this as a religious freedom dispute. It is a matter of acknowledging the basic fact that government is forcing religious people and groups to do something that violates their consciences," he said.

Bishop Lori noted that earlier "people and groups of all political stripes - left, right, and center - came forward to join us in opposing it. But now, the mere prospect of the 'accommodation' described above has caused some simply to abandon their prior objection. In so doing, they undermine the basic American values that they would otherwise espouse."

"Only in the post-mandate world might it be considered 'liberal' for the government to coerce people into violating their religious beliefs; to justify that coercion based on the minority status of those beliefs; to intrude into the internal affairs of religious organizations; to crush out religious diversity in the private sector; and to incentivize religious groups to serve fewer of the needy."

He questioned why sterilization, contraception, and abortifacients are requirements of the health care act while decisions on prescription drugs and hospitalization that are supposed to be "essential" are "handed off to each state."

"HHS will brook no dissent regarding whether sterilization, contraception, and abortifacients must be covered as 'preventive services,'" he said. "HHS is essentially indifferent regarding what is - or is not - mandated as an 'essential health benefit.' As a result, genuinely beneficial items may well be omitted from coverage, state-by-state. By contrast, states have no such discretion with respect to sterilization, contraception, and abortifacients."

He asked the committee for support for the Respect for Rights of Conscience Act (H.R.1179, S. 1467) to "help bring the world aright again."

"This legislation would not expand religious freedom beyond its present limits, but simply retain Americans' longstanding freedom not to be forced by the federal government to violate their convictions," he said.

---

Keywords: Bishop Lori, US Bishops, United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, USCCB, Pa

tient Protection and Affordable Care Act, Health and Human Services, House Judiciary Committee, sterilization, contraceptives, abortifacients

# # # # #

12-034

DD,SEC,PRNewswire, CathPress,Congress,PoliReporters,HealthCare,Radio-Religion

USCCB Pro-Life Secretariat

If you no longer wish to receive messages from us, please email prolife@... and place "remove" in the subject line.

March 1, 2012

I went to their site and actually find a statement issued Dec 2011 warning of the increased risk of breast cancer...I could not find a statement suggesting what the President stated. I also found that this group of doctors that rates different topics related to preventative health never listed contraceptives as an A or B topic (or even C or D). They concentrate on the A and B topics they identify when they meet 3 times a year. Can we get some of our doctors named to this committee?Sent from my Verizon Wireless Phone FW: HHS Mandate Creates Absurd Results, Bishop Lori Tells House Judiciary Committee From: USCCB Pro-Life Secretariat Sent: Wednesday, February 29, 2012 9:53 AMTo: hannaklaus@...Subject: HHS Mandate Creates Absurd Results, Bishop Lori Tells House Judiciary Committee DATE: February 28, 2012 & nbsp; FROM: Sr. Ann Walsh & nbsp; O: & nbsp; M: mwalsh@... & nbsp; FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE HHS MANDATE CREATES ABSURD RESULTS, BISHOP LORI TELLS HOUSE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE 'Without change' suddenly means 'with change''Choice' means 'force'Liberalism becomes illiberalSterilization, contraception, abortifacients essential; 'essential health benefits' not WASHINGTON - The Department of Health and Human Services mandate that would force virtually all employers to pay for sterilization and contraceptives, including abortion-inducing drugs to employees has "absurd consequences," Bishop E. Lori said February 28. Bishop Lori of Bridgeport, Connecticut, chair of the US bishops' Ad Hoc Committee on Religious Liberty, made his comments in testimony about the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act before the House of Representatives Judiciary Committee. His written and oral testimony can be found at http://www.usccb.org/issues-and-action/religious-liberty/upload/02-28-12-Lori-Testimony-for-House-Judiciary-long-form.pdf and http://www.usccb.org/issues-and-action/religious-liberty/upload/Oral-Testimony-of-Most-Reverend--E-short-version.pdf Bishop Lori voiced concern for an "accommodation" President Obama described February 10, which suggested a way around moral concerns the church outlined in the health care reform act. & nbsp; "This 'accommodation' would not change the scope of the mandate and its exemption," he said. "Instead, it would take the form of additional regulations whose precise contours are yet unknown and that may not issue until August 2013." "For present purposes, the 'accommodation' is just a legally unenforceable promise to alter the way the mandate would still apply to those who are still not exempt from it," he said. He added that "the promised alteration appears logically impossible." He said that despite discussions on an accommodation the President has already finalized the controversial mandate that was proposed months earlier "without change," thereby "excluding in advance any expansion of the 'religious employer' exemption. Somehow, this situation of 'no change,' isheralded as 'great change,' for which the Administration has been widely congratulated." Bishop Lori underlined the government's forcing a religious body to violate its beliefs. "I emphasize this word - 'force' - precisely because it is one of the key differences between a mere dispute over reproductive health policy and a dispute over religious freedom. This is not a matter of whether contraception may be prohibited by the government. This is not even a matter of whether contraception may be supported by the government. Instead, it is a matter of whether religious people and institutions may be forced by the government to provide coverage for contraception or sterilization, even if that violates their religious beliefs," he said. "It is not a matter of 'repackaging' or 'framing' this as a religious freedom dispute. It is a matter of acknowledging the basic fact that government is forcing religious people and groups to do something that violates their consciences," he said. Bishop Lori noted that earlier "people and groups of all political stripes - left, right, and center - came forward to join us in opposing it. But now, the mere prospect of the 'accommodation' described above has caused some simply to abandon their prior objection. In so doing, they undermine the basic American values that they would otherwise espouse." "Only in the post-mandate world might it be considered 'liberal' for the government to coerce people into violating their religious beliefs; to justify that coercion based on the minority status of those beliefs; to intrude into the internal affairs of religious organizations; to crush out religious diversity in the private sector; and to incentivize religious groups to serve fewer of the needy." He questioned why sterilization, contraception, and abortifacients are requirements of the health care act while decisions on prescription drugs and hospitalization that are supposed to be "essential" are "handed off to each state." "HHS will brook no dissent regarding whether sterilization, contraception, and abortifacients must be covered as 'preventive services,'" he said. "HHS is essentially indifferent regarding what is - or is not - mandated as an 'essential health benefit.' As a result, genuinely beneficial items may well be omitted from coverage, state-by-state. By contrast, states have no such discretion with respect to sterilization, contraception, and abortifacients." He asked the committee for support for the Respect for Rights of Conscience Act (H.R.1179, S. 1467) to "help bring the world aright again." "This legislation would not expand religious freedom beyond its present limits, but simply retain Americans' longstanding freedom not to be forced by the federal government to violate their convictions," he said.---Keywords: Bishop Lori, US Bishops, United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, USCCB, Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, Health and Human Services, House Judiciary Committee, sterilization, contraceptives, abortifacients# # # # #12-034DD,SEC,PRNewswire, CathPress,Congress,PoliReporters,HealthCare,Radio-Religion USCCB Pro-Life SecretariatIf you no longer wish to receive messages from us, please email prolife@... and place "remove" in the subject line.

March 1, 2012

It looks like the IOM had a closed session of their committee on family planning on Jan 9-10 in DC. Shouldn't we be able to see the report as tax pauersSent from my Verizon Wireless Phone FW: HHS Mandate Creates Absurd Results, Bishop Lori Tells House Judiciary Committee From: USCCB Pro-Life Secretariat Sent: Wednesday, February 29, 2012 9:53 AMTo: hannaklaus@...Subject: HHS Mandate Creates Absurd Results, Bishop Lori Tells House Judiciary Committee DATE: February 28, 2012 & nbsp; FROM: Sr. Ann Walsh & nbsp; O: & nbsp; M: mwalsh@... & nbsp; FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE HHS MANDATE CREATES ABSURD RESULTS, BISHOP LORI TELLS HOUSE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE 'Without change' suddenly means 'with change''Choice' means 'force'Liberalism becomes illiberalSterilization, contraception, abortifacients essential; 'essential health benefits' not WASHINGTON - The Department of Health and Human Services mandate that would force virtually all employers to pay for sterilization and contraceptives, including abortion-inducing drugs to employees has "absurd consequences," Bishop E. Lori said February 28. Bishop Lori of Bridgeport, Connecticut, chair of the US bishops' Ad Hoc Committee on Religious Liberty, made his comments in testimony about the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act before the House of Representatives Judiciary Committee. His written and oral testimony can be found at http://www.usccb.org/issues-and-action/religious-liberty/upload/02-28-12-Lori-Testimony-for-House-Judiciary-long-form.pdf and http://www.usccb.org/issues-and-action/religious-liberty/upload/Oral-Testimony-of-Most-Reverend--E-short-version.pdf Bishop Lori voiced concern for an "accommodation" President Obama described February 10, which suggested a way around moral concerns the church outlined in the health care reform act. & nbsp; "This 'accommodation' would not change the scope of the mandate and its exemption," he said. "Instead, it would take the form of additional regulations whose precise contours are yet unknown and that may not issue until August 2013." "For present purposes, the 'accommodation' is just a legally unenforceable promise to alter the way the mandate would still apply to those who are still not exempt from it," he said. He added that "the promised alteration appears logically impossible." He said that despite discussions on an accommodation the President has already finalized the controversial mandate that was proposed months earlier "without change," thereby "excluding in advance any expansion of the 'religious employer' exemption. Somehow, this situation of 'no change,' isheralded as 'great change,' for which the Administration has been widely congratulated." Bishop Lori underlined the government's forcing a religious body to violate its beliefs. "I emphasize this word - 'force' - precisely because it is one of the key differences between a mere dispute over reproductive health policy and a dispute over religious freedom. This is not a matter of whether contraception may be prohibited by the government. This is not even a matter of whether contraception may be supported by the government. Instead, it is a matter of whether religious people and institutions may be forced by the government to provide coverage for contraception or sterilization, even if that violates their religious beliefs," he said. "It is not a matter of 'repackaging' or 'framing' this as a religious freedom dispute. It is a matter of acknowledging the basic fact that government is forcing religious people and groups to do something that violates their consciences," he said. Bishop Lori noted that earlier "people and groups of all political stripes - left, right, and center - came forward to join us in opposing it. But now, the mere prospect of the 'accommodation' described above has caused some simply to abandon their prior objection. In so doing, they undermine the basic American values that they would otherwise espouse." "Only in the post-mandate world might it be considered 'liberal' for the government to coerce people into violating their religious beliefs; to justify that coercion based on the minority status of those beliefs; to intrude into the internal affairs of religious organizations; to crush out religious diversity in the private sector; and to incentivize religious groups to serve fewer of the needy." He questioned why sterilization, contraception, and abortifacients are requirements of the health care act while decisions on prescription drugs and hospitalization that are supposed to be "essential" are "handed off to each state." "HHS will brook no dissent regarding whether sterilization, contraception, and abortifacients must be covered as 'preventive services,'" he said. "HHS is essentially indifferent regarding what is - or is not - mandated as an 'essential health benefit.' As a result, genuinely beneficial items may well be omitted from coverage, state-by-state. By contrast, states have no such discretion with respect to sterilization, contraception, and abortifacients." He asked the committee for support for the Respect for Rights of Conscience Act (H.R.1179, S. 1467) to "help bring the world aright again." "This legislation would not expand religious freedom beyond its present limits, but simply retain Americans' longstanding freedom not to be forced by the federal government to violate their convictions," he said.---Keywords: Bishop Lori, US Bishops, United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, USCCB, Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, Health and Human Services, House Judiciary Committee, sterilization, contraceptives, abortifacients# # # # #12-034DD,SEC,PRNewswire, CathPress,Congress,PoliReporters,HealthCare,Radio-Religion USCCB Pro-Life SecretariatIf you no longer wish to receive messages from us, please email prolife@... and place "remove" in the subject line.

March 1, 2012

,

What site did you go to that included a statement about the increase risk of breast cancer?

Also,l I assume the group of doctors that you refer to below that ranks preventive health services as an A-B-C or D is the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF), correct? THis is an independent group of primary care physicians that meets 4 times a year to review evidence regarding a variety of preventive health services to determine their effectiveness in preventing disease. Here is a link to all of the topics for which they provide recommendations:

http://epss.ahrq.gov/ePSS/Topics.do;jsessionid=1da5419c8c5ffbb231dc0ef385bb3575320d84e012aa6902d1a7c29d1d93eafc.e38OahaOc3mRc40Tb38KaheObN50n6jAmljGr5XDqQLvpAe

As you can see there is clearly no mention of contraception, because as we know it is not prevention. I am very familiar with the work of this group, because I have some physician colleagues that worked for the Agency for Health Care Research and Quality (AHRQ), the government organization that conducts and/or oversees the evidence reviews on the various preventive health services for the USPSTF.

To be honest, it is not easy to get physicians named to the USPSTF as they have to have a great deal of background in prevention and primary care. Also, it would not be worth it because they would never consider looking at contraception as a preventive health service, because they recognize it does not fit the criteria of a preventive health services. THis is in part why the HHS formed this separate committee to look at preven tive health services for women. It would have been more helpful if we could have gotten our colleagues appointed to the HHS committee, but as Hanna pointed out it was very heavily biased towards pro-choice / pro-abortion people.

I will say that the HHS Committee did hear testimony about the harms of contraception. I personally provided testimony, highlighting the increase risk of breast and cervical cancer, blood clots, strokes, etc. as did a number of others. Unfortunately, they seemed to completely ignore this information.

This is a tough battle, but we need to persevere and make sure our message is heard.

Sincerely,

Marguerite Duane

To: nfpprofessionals Sent: Thursday, March 1, 2012 11:31 AMSubject: Re: FW: HHS Mandate Creates Absurd Results, Bishop Lori Tells House Judiciary Committee

I went to their site and actually find a statement issued Dec 2011 warning of the increased risk of breast cancer...I could not find a statement suggesting what the President stated. I also found that this group of doctors that rates different topics related to preventative health never listed contraceptives as an A or B topic (or even C or D). They concentrate on the A and B topics they identify when they meet 3 times a year. Can we get some of our doctors named to this committee?Sent from my Verizon Wireless Phone FW: HHS Mandate Creates Absurd Results, Bishop Lori Tells House Judiciary Committee

From: USCCB Pro-Life Secretariat Sent: Wednesday, February 29, 2012 9:53 AMTo: hannaklaus@...Subject: HHS Mandate Creates Absurd Results, Bishop Lori Tells House Judiciary Committee

DATE: February 28, 2012

& n bsp; FROM: Sr. Ann Walsh

& nb sp; O:

& nb sp; M:

mwalsh@...

& nbsp; FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

HHS MANDATE CREATES ABSURD RESULTS, BISHOP LORI TELLS HOUSE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE

'Without change' suddenly means 'with change'

'Choice' means 'force'

Liberalism becomes illiberal

Sterilization, contraception, abortifacients essential; 'essential health benefits' not

WASHINGTON - The Department of Health and Human Services mandate that would force virtually all employers to pay for sterilization and contraceptives, including abortion-inducing drugs to employees has "absurd consequences," Bishop E. Lori said February 28.

Bishop Lori of Bridgeport, Connecticut, chair of the US bishops' Ad Hoc Committee on Religious Liberty, made his comments in testimony about the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act before the House of Representatives Judiciary Committee.

His written and oral testimony can be found at http://www.usccb.org/issues-and-action/religious-liberty/upload/02-28-12-Lori-Testimony-for-House-Judiciary-long-form.pdf and http://www.usccb.org/issues-and-action/religious-liberty/upload/Oral-Testimony-of-Most-Reverend--E-short-version.pdf

Bishop Lori voiced concern for an "accommodation" President Obama described February 10, which suggested a way around moral concerns the church outlined in the health care reform act.

& nb sp; "This 'accommodation' would not change the scope of the mandate and its exemption," he said. "Instead, it would take the form of additional regulations whose precise contours are yet unknown and that may not issue until August 2013."

"For present purposes, the 'accommodation' is just a legally unenforceable promise to alter the way the mandate would still apply to those who are still not exempt from it," he said. He added that "the promised alteration appears logically impossible." He said that despite discussions on an accommodation the President has already finalized the controversial mandate that was proposed months earlier "without change," thereby "excluding in advance any expansion of the 'religious employer' exemption. Somehow, this situation of 'no change,' is heralded as 'great change,' for which the Administration has been widely congratulated."