On Friday, the administration proposed a rule, which would go into effect immediately, to address the concerns of nonprofit groups. Under the proposal, a religious college or other nonprofit group could inform the Department of Health and Human Services of its religious objections and the department would then contact insurance companies and arrange the birth control coverage at no cost to the employer or its employees.
Previously, the organizations were required to notify the insurance companies directly, a step that some organizations said still made them complicit in providing drugs they objected to.
In addition, the government issued a proposed rule for private companies that would provide accommodations for a company if it met the definition of a small, privately held company as defined by the Supreme Court. In the proposed rule, such a company would be defined as having a small number of owners or a minimum percentage of ownership concentrated among a small number of people. The company could not be publicly traded.
Under the proposed rule for the private companies, owners with religious objections to providing birth control would also be able to contact the government to express their religious objections.
So does adding another middle man to the mix satisfy anyone’s objection to providing birth control coverage?
It all seems rather contrived to me. If you object to notifying an insurance company so they can cover the contraceptives isn’t is also likely that you will object to notifying HHS so that they can notify the insurance company so that they can cover contraceptives?