Women in the state senate are on both sides of the so-called “conscience” bill as it clears the senate and heads to the House. 

This is the bill that says Missouri employers can ignore any federal mandate that they provide employees with healthcare coverage that violates their religious or moral positions on abortion, contraception, and sterilization. 

The sponsor says the bill is a restatement of Missouri’s freedom of religion law.  Some of the women senators say it’s an anti-woman bill.  Chesterfield Senator Jane Cunningham strongly disagrees. “I as a woman stand here…and say…this is a First Amendment religious liberty issue,” she tells the senate.

But Kansas City Senator Jolie Justus says she speaks for thousands of Missouri women who are tired of being used as political pawns: “I have thousands of citizens who feel this is not an issue of religious freedom, but that this is typical election year politics.”

Another woman senator charges the bill is part of a trend in discriminatory legislation pushed by Republicans this year.   But Cunningham says it protects pro-life  employers and religious institutions who otherwise would be forced by federal rules to provide insurance for procedures that terminate life. She says it does not keep anybody from having an abortion, get contraception, or be sterilized to prevent pregnancy.

Both Republican women senators voted for the bill. All four Democrat women senators voted against it.   Two Democrats joined 24 Republicans in passing the bill 26-5.

The bill is SB748

 AUDIO: Senate debate 25:11

One side says the bill clarifies a religious freedom issue for Missouri employers and workers in the face of an Obama administration edict about employer-provided health care insurance.  The other side says it’s a useless piece of anti-woman legislation.

Senator John Lamping of St. Louis  says the Affordable Care Act had the support of Catholic Bishops and other religious leaders until the January 20th announcement by the Obama administration that coverage of birth control services would be required in employers’ healthcare plans. 

He says his bill is needed to clarify Missouri’s existing law that says employers cannot be forced to provide that coverage if it conflicts with their religious or moral standards. 

But St. Louis Senator Maria Chapelle-Nadal says if the protections already are on the books, there’s no need for Lamping’s bill. “If Missourians want a bill that does nothing, here you go, here’s a bill that does absolutely nothing,” she says.

Lamping says the bill does add sterilization to avoid pregnancy to the list of things healthcare plans do not have to cover.   The bill does allow coverage for sterilization and contraception as medical treatments or procedures not connected with avoiding pregnancy.                                       

He says the Affordable Healthcare Act and the January 20th announcement concentrate enormous and arbitrary power in the hands of the Secretary of Health and Human Services. He says his bill is necessary to protect the state and its employers from the excessive use of that power.

Another favorable vote sends the bill to the House.

AUDIO: Lamping/Chappelle-Nadal debate 54:00