On the recordFebruary 29, 2012
I rise to oppose the Blunt amendment which simply goes way too far. The President has struck the right balance in his decision to address religious institutions' concerns when it comes to providing women's health services, but this amendment gives all employers shockingly broad discretion to make moral decisions for their employees, fundamental decisions about some of the most personal issues an individual faces--the health care needs of themselves and their families, a woman's decision about contraception and family planning, decisions about whether their child gets a blood transfusion for deadly disease, decisions regarding the use of prescription drugs, decisions on who to treat and how to treat them-- based entirely on an employer's moral views, not an individual's moral beliefs. The bottom line is health services should not be provided at the moral discretion of an employer but on the medical determination of the employee and their doctor. According to the Department of Health and Human Services, 1.7 million New Jerseyans, almost 500,000 children, over 600,000 women and over 600,000 men benefit from the expanded preventive service coverage from their private insurers that we created under the law: screenings for colon cancer, mammograms for women, well child visits, flu shots, a host of other routine procedures. All these could be taken away under this proposed amendment should their employer determine it is against their personal beliefs or convictions.…
Source
govinfo.gov




