Women in AZ: Be prepared to hand over information about your reproductive health to your bosses...

[cynatnite]

Arizona legislators have advanced an unprecedented bill that would require women who wish to have their contraception covered by their health insurance plans to prove to their employers that they are taking it to treat medical conditions. The bill also makes it easier for Arizona employers to fire a woman for using birth control to prevent pregnancy despite the employer's moral objection.

Under current law, health plans in Arizona that cover other prescription medications must also cover contraception. House Bill 2625, which the state House of Representatives passed earlier this month and the Senate Judiciary Committee endorsed on Monday, repeals that law and allows any employer to refuse to cover contraception that will be used "for contraceptive, abortifacient, abortion or sterilization purposes." If a woman wants the cost of her contraception covered, she has to "submit a claim" to her employer providing evidence of a medical condition, such as endometriosis or polycystic ovarian syndrome, that can be treated with birth control.

Moreover, according to the American Civil Liberties Union, the law would give Arizona employers the green light to fire a woman upon finding out that she took birth control for the purpose of preventing pregnancy.

"The bill goes beyond guaranteeing a person's rights to express and practice their faith," Anjali Abraham, a lobbyist for the ACLU, told the Senate panel, "and instead lets employers prioritize their beliefs over the beliefs, the interests, the needs of their employees, in this case, particularly, female employees."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/03/14/arizona-birth-control-bill-contraception-medical-reasons_n_1344557.html

This is the new McCarthyism. I fucking hate these people.

[SheilaT]

1. Explain to me again how this

is small government, and how it creates jobs?

[southernyankeebelle]

4. I am so F**kin mad I can't see straight. I sure hope the women of AZ are going to stand up for

their rights. Where the hell are the wives of these politicans? My husband suggested that if a young women gets pregnant by this law or even raped because she couldn't have coverage then I suggestion she drop the baby and the bill to the employer and the state government.

Americans we are fools because you didn't see this coming all along. These religious rights people are taking away your rights and you sit at home enjoying your coffee and candy while they are destroying your daughters and granddaughters futures.

I will never step foot in AZ.


WOMEN OF AZ UNITE AND CUT YOUR HUSBAND OFF WHERE IT WILL HURT. LET THEM CLEAN THE HOUSE. TAKE CARE OF THE CHILDREN. AND MAKE SURE YOU CUT THEM OFF IN THE BEDROOM.

[jillan]

6. Don't take it out on me because there are crazy people in my state legislature!

Many of us work harder than most to try and get democrats elected - but with the gerrymandering of districts, it's been impossible.

And yes - we are united and protesting against this

[southernyankeebelle]

17. LOL, well how come we aren't seeing it. Get your kids, husbands, parents and pots & pans and start

banging harder. I feel such outrage for you all. Sorry if I am worked up I can't help it. Because if this passes in your state then god knows we here in TN will get the same thing. OMG am all worked up. SORRY SORRY. I really feel for you. See if the Maddow show can cover your group.

[cynatnite]

18. I expect to see it throughout the South...

Were it not for my children and grandchildren living here, I'd leave this part of the country.

[southernyankeebelle]

19. Same for me. I live in TN.

[cynatnite]

20. TN here, too...

I'm in Kingsport.

[southernyankeebelle]

21. McMinnville

[socialist_n_TN]

33. I agree with my fellow Tennesseans here......

(Nashville area). This will be brought up in the batshit crazy Legislature here soon.

[southernyankeebelle]

35. Your right. They are like lemmings. It's crazy train for sure.

[Fawke Em]

48. Knoxville, here.

Howdy neighbors!

[obxhead]

27. Because the M$M has been ordered not to show it.

Think back to the protests of the wars in DC. Hundreds of thousands gathered in DC and not a peep, while 20 gathered for a teahadist rally gets coverage all day.

Please don't try to blame the people actively fighting these laws of hate.

[southernyankeebelle]

31. I know we don't have a free press anymore. I understand that. That is why I tune in to Link

TV or Democracy Now or Current TV. Even BBC America I'll watch. We aren't getting the truth out and I find it doesn't matter who is in the white house. Wouldn't it be great when this country finallly wakes the hell up and realizes there are not blue states or red states that we all need to unite. Our politicans would crap in their pants when some people start realizing united we state and divided we fall as a country. Am 64 yrs old. I want my grandkids to experience the wonderful childhood I had.

[haele]

47. What's worse is that many of the "people" sponsoring such bills are women.

And they've got a particular hate for any woman who doesn't submit to the same craziness they have -They're "Mean Girls" who have an overwhelming fear of hell and "different people" combined with the equally overwhelming need to be the extra-special Princess in their particularly scripted reality where they are taken care of properly and live happily ever after.
They get really pissed when they don't get their way, and they'll take it out on everyone who is weaker than they are.
Some women (and men) just want to see the world burn when they're upset and feel the need to prove a point, and they don't care who they're hurting so long as they're hurting someone they feel deserves it.

Sociopathic Drama Queens.

Haele

[southernyankeebelle]

49. You make many good points.

[Aerows]

45. I'm pretty sure the thinking here

Is that it creates jobs for men. Women get fired and stay at home "where they belong". That's what all of this shit is about.

[HockeyMom]

2. Will they pay for 10 labors and deliveries too?

A bit more expensive than BC, don't ya think? Suppose the employer thinks it is immoral for unmarried women to have a baby? Sorry, no pills, no childbrith expenses.

[adigal]

41. That is interesting - birth control is immoral; unwed pregnancy: immoral

And abortion: immoral. We women are screwed (pun intended) no matter what we do. So what is the most moral choice among the three immoral ones for women?? Just keep your legs shut, women, no sex allowed!! LOL!! Wonder how long that would last???

[RKP5637]

3. It would be interesting to know how many people are moving out of nutty states (or plan to) for

better places to live. Eventually, one has to look down the road and wonder where it's all headed and if they really want to make an investment to live in a place repressing people more and more.

I know I would never accept a job in Arizona no matter how much it paid unless really mega-bucks.

Agree!!! "This is the new McCarthyism. I fucking hate these people."

[southernyankeebelle]

5. Where is the ACLU? Surely they can win this as unconstitutional

[sharp_stick]

7. That's my guess

as to where this idiocy is headed.

I wouldn't put it past these fundie pukes to actually front bills like this to make their moronic base happy knowing full well that the law doesn't pass the first smell test of the Constitution.

[southernyankeebelle]

16. This is crazy. I would get a bunch of women in front of that state house and protest. My goodness

what the hell is wrong with that drunk governor who is a woman. If these women don't stand up for themselves then shame on them. Organize women of AZ.

[sharp_stick]

38. I'm amazed at how docile

people are down there, it's truly disgusting to watch.

[southernyankeebelle]

40. I'm amazed how docile people are all over this country. What the heck do they think? Freedom

doesn't come cheaply. I know the red states people seem to be happy having their pickup trucks and their rifles. Love to go mudbogging and eat their moon pies and RC colas. As long as they can just get by they seem happy.

[tanyev]

8. Does the bill also require employers to fully disclose this during interviews?

Not that that would make it all acceptable, but it would be funny if a$$hat employers had trouble finding people to work for them.

[ceile]

11. Nice!

Hadn't thought of that...

[TheMadMonk]

24. Here's something else you haven't thought of. It will help drive women...

...out of the workplace and put them back in front of their sinks where they belong.

And because it will be "voluntary" on the part of women, gender discrimination won't enter into it.

[Lars39]

32. Propert ownership won't be far behind.

No job, can't pay for property. It would be an end run around passing laws to forbid women owning property. Kinda like the way they try to gut abortion laws.

[ceile]

9. I think I'm going to throw up.

Even here in TX the pols are not that crazy. This is just beyond the pale...
I honestly hope employers will stand up for their employees and bad mouth the shit out of this. It would be in their best interests too. As stated above, it's cheaper to provide BC than pay for childbirth.

[Initech]

10. McCarthy was a lightweight compared to these assholes

[Ruby the Liberal]

12. See, this is why Single Payer had to come off the table.

Wasn't enough to ensure the Insurance Companys retained their profit margins, it was necessary to make sure that employers controlled the care received based on the EMPLOYER'S RELIGIOUS BELIEFS.

[cynatnite]

13. I wonder how much insurance company money is going to fund this garbage?

They'd love to get women's reproductive health problems off their books.

[felix_numinous]

14. Refuse

Women should just not comply--en masse.

[socialist_n_TN]

36. I agree. If there was ever a place for civil disobedience.......

this is it.

[etherealtruth]

15. How the F*CK is this even possible?

Seriously .... I realize this hasn't passed into to law .... but , how the f*ck could this even become a bill....?

[TNLib]

22. What the hell? Are we in medievel times?

I just wish they passed a law at the federal level Insurers be it Empoyer or otherwise have to provider coverage for birth control. Birth control isn't that expensive. Why is this becoming such an issue?

The only religious institution that I am aware of that doesn't approve of birth control is the Catholic Church. Why are all these politicians pandering to the Catholic Church?

[RC]

23. Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution

Its Equal Protection Clause requires each state to provide equal protection under the law to all people within its jurisdiction. This clause was the basis for Brown v. Board of Education (1954), the Supreme Court decision which precipitated the dismantling of racial segregation in United States education. In Reed v. Reed (1971), the Supreme Court ruled that laws arbitrarily requiring sex discrimination violated the Equal Protection Clause.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourteenth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution

Equal Protection Clause
The Equal Protection Clause, part of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution, provides that "no state shall ... deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."[1] The Equal Protection Clause can be seen as an attempt to secure the promise of the United States' professed commitment to the proposition that "all men are created equal"[2] by empowering the judiciary to enforce that principle against the states.[3] The Fourteenth Amendment Equal Protection Clause applies only to state governments, but the requirement of equal protection has been read to apply to the federal government as a component of Fifth Amendment due process.

More concretely, the Equal Protection Clause, along with the rest of the Fourteenth Amendment, marked a great shift in American constitutionalism. Before the enactment of the Fourteenth Amendment, the Bill of Rights protected individual rights only from invasion by the federal government. After the Fourteenth Amendment was enacted, the Constitution also protected rights from abridgment by state leaders and governments, even including some rights that arguably were not protected from abridgment by the federal government. In the wake of the Fourteenth Amendment, the states could not, among other things, deprive people of the equal protection of the laws. What exactly such a requirement means has been the subject of much debate, and the story of the Equal Protection Clause is the gradual explication of its meaning.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equal_Protection_Clause

The way I read this, Arizona is in violation of the US Constitution (again), not that they care.

[SomethingFishy]

25. This will be struck down eventually..

Not that that excuses any of it but there is no way they can make a law that allows employers to see medical records that is Constitutional.

Medical records are some of the most private documents there are. Even the cops and prosecutors can't see them without a court order.

That said I cannot believe a woman introduced this. I wonder what she got in return for throwing the Constitution and the women of Arizona under the bus.

[frylock]

26. isn't this in violation of HIPAA?

[uppityperson]

34. It certainly seems so to me. For that alone, they will not be able to legally do this.

It sucks though, seriously.

[pnwmom]

28. So if an employer would rather not have to hire women, or retain them

this seems like a good way to make them feel unwelcome.

[Ilsa]

29. Debbie Lesko is a TRAITOR to her gender and to the US.

Sponsoring a bill like this violates civil liberties. And Lesko obviously doesn't give a crap about women of childbearing age.

[NAO]

30. Pisses me off that this was not covered at all in our NBC local news

In Tucson the NBC affiliate is KVOA, and their local news broadcasts haven't mentioned a thing about this. They've got lots of fluff stories, stories about local crime, restaurant reviews, and coverage of violence in Syria - but nothing about this law, which is on a fast track in the AZ legislature. I found out about it through the ACLU website.

What good is news if it does't cover local politics?

[just1voice]

43. Local news orgs are small time propaganda providers, NOT NEWS

They are not going to provide anyone with news. The local news here in the D.C./Virginia area are the same worthless propaganda readers.

[WillowTree]

37. Did you actually read the proposed law?

I didn't think so.

[salin]

39. How does an employer *prove* that they have a moral objection?

There are high bars per conscientious objection (per religious beliefs) to avoid active military duty. Point being is that there is a long standing process per vetting the "belief system is violated by the public policy". Have a relative who was a life long Quaker who still had to provide a long track record that demonstrated the faith position that allowed the exemption (he was a Quaker) per getting an alternative assignment per the draft and the Vietnam war. Wasn't exempt from the draft, but was exempt from serving in positions that involved the chance of killing.

One of the perverse aspects of this bills is there is no requirement of verification of beliefs that would allow such discrimination (to disallow coverage at least, to give grounds for firing at most.)

So any miserly company owner can "claim" such exemption with no need to prove that this is their belief system.

Meanwhile as the same folks are calling for a new war that we can't possibly man without a draft. There is a very clear process for determining whether or not the religious beliefs really qualify for exemption for a draft.

Every proposed state or federal law that give employers the right to deny coverage (if the provide coverage) for birth control, or worse to fire women (and not their partners) for using birth control for reasons that are not medically documented, should put in place a process to demonstrate that the employer holds such beliefs *and* lives those same beliefs in their lives (otherwise disproving that they hold such beliefs.)

[Adsos Letter]

42. Madness...our nation is descending into madness. n/t

[just1voice]

44. Look for a (D) to introduce a bill firing any male who takes Viagra

That's the only way to act around insane repukes, make them suffer from their own types of abusive acts.

[Aerows]

46. How does this not

violate HIPAA laws?