• The Heritage Network
    • Resize:
    • A
    • A
    • A
  • Donate
  • The Obamacare Second Anniversary: No Gift for Women

    This week, Obamacare will have its second birthday, but there’s little reason to celebrate. Throughout the week, Obamacare advocates will be emphasizing the law’s supposed benefits on specific groups of Americans, but as Heritage’s research over the past two years has shown, Obamacare harms Americans—even the groups showcased by the left.

    Today, the focus is on the law’s impact on American women. Advocates will be highlighting better benefits and free preventive care, but Heritage research shows that the health law’s new requirements will reduce patient choice, increase costs, and violate religious liberty—for women and everyone else, too.

    Less Choice

    Obamacare determines which preventive services must be covered by all insurers, with no cost-sharing, using the recommendations made by the United States Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF). The USPSTF uses a rating system of A through D (or I for insufficient evidence) to recommend services. Under Obamacare, services that receive a rating of A or B will be required coverage and those with C, D, or I will not be. This turns otherwise harmless and good-intentioned recommendations into requirements, distorting the USPSTF’s original purpose.

    Though these requirements are intended to create a “floor” for Americans’ covered benefits, they may have the opposite effect. The mandated benefits could instead create a “ceiling” because of their high cost, which will place pressure on insurers to cover only the preventive services required. This could lead to the exclusion of services that are “recommended” but are nevertheless crucial for specific patients.

    For example, in 2009, the task force changed its recommendation for breast cancer screenings for women between the ages of 40 and 50 from B to C. Controversy ensued, which led Congress to overturn the recommendation in 2010. Prior to Obamacare, a change in recommendation ranking might have carried little weight; under the health care law, it may be the difference between coverage and no coverage.

    In addition, the USPSTF is one of few government agencies legally allowed to take cost into consideration when deciding whether to recommend a medical service. As health care costs rise and the government’s role in health care grows, this may mean that cost will more strongly influence coverage.

    Higher Costs

    In addition, mandated coverage of preventive services with no cost-sharing will increase health care costs, since cost of services will simply be passed from the insurer to the patient through higher premiums. Moreover, as Heritage expert Ed Haislmaier explains, “Prohibiting enrollee cost-sharing for specific services will stimulate greater use of those services, further increasing premiums.” Even the Administration admits that these mandates will increase premiums on average by 1.5 percent.

    A Violation of Religious Freedom

    Among the women-specific preventive services required by Obamacare is a mandate that insurance cover, with no cost-sharing, abortion-related drugs, contraceptives, and sterilization. The mandate has a very narrow exemption for churches but does not exclude religious hospitals, schools, and charities that find such products morally objectionable on religious grounds. This violates the First Amendment right to freedom of religion for all Americans—regardless of gender or faith.

    The best way to bring down costs and protect quality in the health care system is to give patients more choice, not to reduce it. Check out Heritage’s Saving the American Dream proposal to learn about some of the reforms needed to move in this direction.

    Posted in Featured, Obamacare [slideshow_deploy]

    5 Responses to The Obamacare Second Anniversary: No Gift for Women

    1. Bobbie says:

      once Obama's nationalized health care intentionally misinterpreted the constitution to interfere with freedom, there is no benefit! Obama is making health care intimidating, difficult, confusing, costly and rudely intruding where he doesn't constitutionally belong. He won't respect the true interpretation of the peoples constitution while continuing his unconstitutional way. (T)He(y) took advantage of all America that got him (they) the positions (t)he(y) could easily destroy America by his (their) own free will. Please stop it, him and them!

    2. Fred says:

      Dig it. But have you ever thought about wearing a suit? ;-)

    3. Janice says:

      Obama care means no care for all. It will mean that the government will dictate what treatment will be done because the government is the "pay or". Nobody wants that. Make sure you vote.

    4. Excuse me, but... says:

      No offense, but read more than something that, as a conservative think tank, of course only gives you conservative views, not objective analysis of issues.
      I'm not trying to spout hate here, I'm just saying – please make sure you know and consider all sides of all issues before you vote.

    Comments are subject to approval and moderation. We remind everyone that The Heritage Foundation promotes a civil society where ideas and debate flourish. Please be respectful of each other and the subjects of any criticism. While we may not always agree on policy, we should all agree that being appropriately informed is everyone's intention visiting this site. Profanity, lewdness, personal attacks, and other forms of incivility will not be tolerated. Please keep your thoughts brief and avoid ALL CAPS. While we respect your first amendment rights, we are obligated to our readers to maintain these standards. Thanks for joining the conversation.

    Big Government Is NOT the Answer

    Your tax dollars are being spent on programs that we really don't need.

    I Agree I Disagree ×

    Get Heritage In Your Inbox — FREE!

    Heritage Foundation e-mails keep you updated on the ongoing policy battles in Washington and around the country.

    ×