Feminists For Choice

Today, by an overwhelming majority vote of 61-39, the Senate passed the Mikulski Amendment to the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. Thanks to the hard work of Sen. Barbara Mikulski (D-MD), health care plans will be required to cover comprehensive women’s preventative care, related screenings, and even better… at no additional charge. On top of mammograms, counseling, family planning, and testing for sexually transmitted infections, there is a possibility that the amendment could also include coverage for birth control. Tait Sye, spokesperson for Planned Parenthood Federation of America states that,

“It allows Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA) to recommend what should be covered, so HRSA can/could recommend birth control to be covered.”

“More than 90 percent of the care Planned Parenthood affiliate health centers provide is primary and preventive, and the doctors and nurses who deliver that care witness on a daily basis the real need to ensure that women have access to critical tests, screenings, and regular checkups,” said Cecile Richards, president of Planned Parenthood Federation of America.

It’s nice to know that women’s health is finally getting a little support in the health care debate. As I’m sure many of you know, women of childbearing age spend near to 68 percent more in out-of-pocket health care expenses than men. (I think it’s worth noting that men’s health care needs are already covered by everyone, including women.) But apparently having a uterus means your on your own.

On top of providing much-needed preventative care to numerous women in the United States, this particular amendment would have an enormous impact on low-to-middle income women who, in the status quo, are opting out of basic care because of the additional costs associated with being a woman.

Unfortunately, yet not surprisingly, the amendment has been met with opposition. Republican senator Lisa Murkowski, from Alaska, offered an alternative to the Mikulski Amendment that was defeated today by a 41-59 vote. Amie Newman at RH Reality Check elaborations,

Murkowki’s women’s health amendment would allow private insurers to set these same guidelines, deciding which preventive services for women will or won’t be exempt from co-pays. But this is obviously problematic because, as Suzy Khimm writes at The New Republic, “as a for-profit industry, insurers naturally have the incentive to offer less generous benefit packages that would require customers to shoulder more out-of-pockets expenses like co-pays.”

Although I can’t help but jump with joy, I also understand the concern in allowing a government agency to determine these guidelines. Of course, not for the same reasons anti-choice nut jobs do. Regardless, putting this decision entirely in the hands of the government leaves women’s health vulnerable to the ideology of a different administration. With that being said, I highly doubt things could get much worse for women than the health care industry as is.

Although the Mikulski Amendment to the Senate health care reform bill didn’t include the word abortion, opponents allege the amendment would leave the door wide open for the Health Resources and Services Administration to include abortion as “preventative care.” As much as I would like to believe this were true, being the pro-choice advocate that I am, it sounds a little more like hyperbole to me. On top of that, I doubt the abortion debacle in the health care debate is going to get resolved that easily.

In the end, I think this is overall pretty welcoming news for women, particularly considering the possibility that the Stupak-Pitts Amendment may very well screw over women’s health care tremendously. I’m still hoping for the best.