Obama shift seeks to defuse birth-control fight

Fri Feb 10, 2012 6:25pm EST

President Barack Obama talks about providing states flexibility under reauthorization of the No Child Left Behind Act in the East Room of the White House in Washington, February 9, 2012. REUTERS/Larry Downing

President Barack Obama talks about providing states flexibility under reauthorization of the No Child Left Behind Act in the East Room of the White House in Washington, February 9, 2012.

Credit: Reuters/Larry Downing

Related Topics

(Reuters) - President Barack Obama, in an abrupt policy shift aimed at quelling an election-year firestorm, announced on Friday that religious employers would not be required to offer free birth control to workers and the onus would instead be put on insurers.

But Catholic Church leaders and Obama's Republican opponents, who had railed against the Democratic president's new rule on contraceptives as a violation of religious freedom, signaled that divisions remain over the hot-button social issue.

The compromise by the Obama administration sought to accommodate religious organizations, such as Catholic hospitals and universities, outraged by a new rule that would have required them to offer free contraceptive coverage to women employees.

Instead, the new approach puts the burden on insurance companies, ordering them to provide workers at religious-affiliated institutions with free family planning if they request it, without involving their employer at all, the White House said.

"Religious liberty will be protected, and a law that requires free preventive care will not discriminate against women," Obama told reporters in the White House briefing room as he sought to put the political furor to rest.

The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops called Obama's move a "first step in the right direction" but said it was still concerned about the issue and would reserve judgment.

Weighing in publicly on the issue for the first time, Obama acknowledged that religious groups had "genuine concerns" about the birth control rule, but he accused some of his opponents of a cynical effort to turn the issue into a "political football."

"The result will be that religious organizations won't have to pay for these services," Obama said. "But women who work at these institutions will have access to free contraceptives just like other women."

The rule had sparked an outcry not only from Catholic leaders but from social conservatives, including Republican presidential hopefuls on the campaign trail, and had also sown dissent among some of Obama's top advisers.

Health insurance giant Aetna Inc said it would comply with the policy but needed "to study the mechanics of this unprecedented decision before we can understand how it will be implemented and how it will impact our customers."

Republicans seized on the issue, seeing a chance to paint Obama as anti-religion and put him on the defensive as signs of economic recovery appear to have re-energized his re-election bid.

The policy shift was aimed at preventing the issue from becoming a liability for Obama with Catholic voters, while at the same time trying not to anger his liberal base.

(Additional reporting by Susan Heavey, Laura MacInnis, Thomas Ferraro; Writing by Matt Spetalnick; Editing by Mary Milliken and Todd Eastham)

We welcome comments that advance the story through relevant opinion, anecdotes, links and data. If you see a comment that you believe is irrelevant or inappropriate, you can flag it to our editors by using the report abuse links. Views expressed in the comments do not represent those of Reuters. For more information on our comment policy, see http://blogs.reuters.com/fulldisclosure/2010/09/27/toward-a-more-thoughtful-conversation-on-stories/
Comments (132)
NewsDebbie wrote:
So when Islamic business claim religious freedom and institute Sharia Law within their business I do not want to hear the GOP blame Obama!

Feb 09, 2012 9:06pm EST  --  Report as abuse
speaker12 wrote:
I thought Biden was a Catholic. Oh well, he works for Obama.

Feb 09, 2012 9:11pm EST  --  Report as abuse
PaulDonelson wrote:
Even though we may be against abortion, I believe that it is important for us to understand the concept of justice. A rich person who can afford to live without health insurance can also afford to get as many abortions as she wants, even if it is illegal where they happen to live. All they have to do is hop on a jet and fly to wherever it is legal — and safe. On the other hand, the average person who has to have insurance to pay for their medical problems doesn’t have this luxury. And where they work shouldn’t make any difference in what their health insurance should cover. If it does make a difference, then it becomes a matter of justice. And that matter of justice becomes even more acute when the person is poor. Instead of picking on the average and poor person when it comes to their insurance coverage, I wonder what the RC bishops are doing to keep rich people from getting abortions.

Feb 09, 2012 9:15pm EST  --  Report as abuse
This discussion is now closed. We welcome comments on our articles for a limited period after their publication.