Why Federal Mandate Threatens Religious Liberty
The White House’s announcement on February 10, that it would require insurers instead of employers to pay for contraception, sterilization and abortifacients has not changed the very narrow definition of religious employer contained in the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) regulations. The rule states that to be a religious employer an organization must "serve primarily persons who share the[ir] religious tenets."
In fact, the effort to remedy the situation announced by President Obama last week not only finalized the HSS rule but left unanswered critical questions, such as how self-insured organizations can comply if the mandate violates their religious beliefs. Many Catholic organizations – dioceses, hospitals and schools – are self-insured to avoid such conflicts with government mandates. Also open: how would HHS determine if an institution is “religious” enough to qualify as a religious employer? What other mandates might be imposed further down the road? How will insurance companies pay for coverage without passing costs on to employers?
1. The mandate does not exempt Catholic charities, schools, universities, or hospitals. These institutions are vital to the mission of the Church, but HHS does not deem them "religious employers" worthy of conscience protection, because they do not "serve primarily persons who share the[ir] religious tenets." HHS denies these organizations religious freedom precisely because their purpose is to serve the common good of society—a purpose that government should encourage, not punish.
Regulatory changes limited and unclear