Will GOPs Back Jindal’s Push to Put the Pill OTC?
At American pharmacies, a woman can get the controversial morning-after pill without a prescription but not the basic daily pill for issues ranging from birth control to painful periods.
One conservative Republican says it’s time to put contraception over the counter, in accordance with recent guidance from the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, eliminating the mandate that has angered religious employers and taking the wind out of the Democrats’ sails on “birth-control politics.”
As a Roman Catholic, Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal understands why groups have filed suit against the Obama administration’s mandate to provide birth control without co-payment.
“As a conservative Republican, I believe that we have been stupid to let the Democrats demagogue the contraceptives issue and pretend, during debates about health-care insurance, that Republicans are somehow against birth control. It’s a disingenuous political argument they make,” Jindal wrote last week in the Wall Street Journal.
“As an unapologetic pro-life Republican, I also believe that every adult (18 years old and over) who wants contraception should be able to purchase it. But anyone who has a religious objection to contraception should not be forced by government health-care edicts to purchase it for others. And parents who believe, as I do, that their teenage children shouldn’t be involved with sex at all do not deserve ridicule,” he added.
Jindal contends that continuing the status quo would needlessly add to healthcare costs while lining the pockets of pharmaceutical companies.
“Contraception is a personal matter — the government shouldn’t be in the business of banning it or requiring a woman’s employer to keep tabs on her use of it. If an insurance company or those purchasing insurance want to cover birth control, they should be free to do so. If a consumer wants to buy birth control on her own, she should be free to do so,” he wrote.
But will the GOP sign on to this plan to defuse a combustible Dem talking point (see most of the 2012 DNC)?
It’s difficult to tell right now. Jindal’s op-ed was published mere hours before the Newtown, Conn., school shooting seized the headlines — and the attention of every lawmaker on Capitol Hill, turning the lame-duck narrative toward a gun control debate.
Liberals are split on Jindal’s call, simultaneously praising him for an enlightened viewpoint and accusing him of pandering to independent and Democratic voters while not-so-secretly wanting to torpedo the controversial ObamaCare mandate.
“Jindal understands that, like it or not, Democrats were quite successful at demagoguing Republicans this year over their opposition to the contraception mandate. And yet, the Republican base is still dead set against the idea that ‘religious institutions’ should be required to pay for contraceptives for their employees. How to square this circle?” wrote Kevin Drum at Mother Jones. “Easy: if contraceptives are sold over the counter, then the issue disappears.”
Putting the pill over the counter gives contraception advocates the universal access they wanted – more women would use it without a doctor’s visit being required. But some argue that access will be restricted if there’s any out-of-pocket expense – even if going over the counter knocks the price down as expected and is comparable to buying a box of Pepcid or Claritin. They also contend that other, more expensive contraceptives such as IUDs should still be covered through a government mandate, and that kids under 18 should have access to the pill, too. See Sandra Fluke for this train of thought.
“The idea here is that, oh, OK, now we have to pay for it again? To me that sounds like thanks but no thanks. We won the election, thanks,” Christina Page, author of How the Pro-Choice Movement Saved America, told the Daily Beast in reaction to Jindal’s op-ed.
One can’t imagine that opposing OTC contraceptives would look good to voters in either party who want convenience and savings and would cheer at the idea of not having to go through a doctor to get a pill they may have been using for years.
Not to say that opposition won’t come from Jindal’s side, though, in the form of social conservatives who just wouldn’t want wider access to birth control.
I would have to read the “guidance from the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists” first to have any opinion. The pill ‘can’ be both moderately dangerous and non effective in some circumstances for any numbers of women. Just not sure that its something to be considered OTC without a physcians consultation. Imagine the concept and consequences of selling clinical testosterone OTC!
Not withstanding my clinical concerns I am in agreement with the general concept.
As for the social and political variables, I see no instance where birth control should be a matter of any insurance or government control other than FDA safety considerations. The ‘general’ use of such BC is a matter of personal choice and should be marketed and or prescribed just as condoms and foams, etc., unless there are other clinical considerations for its use. As such, it would remove all religioius and government politicization.
Not withstanding my clinical concerns I am in agreement with the general concept.
I am not. Birth control is a matter of matching the right strength etc to the body of the patient and requires a physician’s knowledge to be able to prescribe that which will work. There are a variety of formulations. Birth control isn’t one size fits all. It’s not aspirin.
As I see it this is Jindal doing the anti-Akin Akin thing, i.e. going out in public with an utterly stupid opinion on a subject he knows dick about trying to make political points. Jindal equates the pill and norplant and IUD and so on with aspirin. All it does is highlight his scientific ignorance; it’s yet another idiot statement that effectively that cedes the scientific high ground to the left, which is suicidal in a technological society that increasingly relies on science. And it’s exacerbated by the general perception played by the left that the republicans are scientifically ignorant on good days and flat out anti-science the rest of the time.
Scratch Jindal as any sort of viable candidate for anything. He’s no more electable than Akin.
“Birth control is a matter of matching the right strength etc to the body of the patien”
that’s not true. the way they match the “right strength” to the body is give you a prescription, if you have problems they change the strength until you quit having problems.
Hey random read this before you open your Pie Hole, you might become a little more informed. Jindal is just going along with what professionals are already saying.
http://www.acog.org/Resources_And_Publications/Committee_Opinions/Committee_on_Gynecologic_Practice/Over-the-Counter_Access_to_Oral_Contraceptives
So our resident “libertarian” shows his statist stripes…
Joe –
…and as new formulations appear the landscape becomes more complex, not less. My comment stands as-is.
Windsor —
Idealogues like you exhibit a remarkable lack of understanding where ideology meets nuance. True enough on some issues I may seem libertarian yet on others, full bore leftist, on still others, quite conservative. Where it concerns birth control the statistically viable solution is to rely on the medical professionals. This is especially true for newer formulations and/or devices. If birth control solutions were simple I’d support OTC. One day when drug delivery is controlled by nanotech with built-in analytical systems to safeguard the user, this is when discussion of OTC birth control makes sense.
Random – Thats why I stated the concerns and included the comment about a physcians consultation. I could agree with the practicality of such OTC concept by the science renders it invalid — at least to date.
Now I know you’re academically accomplished well enough to know and understand the chemistry complexities of most drugs, including oral contraceptives, being ‘prescribed’ by physicians. Somehow, “strength” has been mentioned more than once as the prescriptive protocol for oral contraceptives. Strength as its being referred to is way down on the protocol list.
Hey, everyday is a bad brain day for me so I guess you’re entitled to one occasionally. :
“..by the science” = **but** the science
Zeke
I mentioned strength etc where “etc.” reasonably equates to efficacy, compatibility, suitability, and so on. Strength is one of many variables, and not necessarily the most important. Agreed.
Try buying otc cold pills in Louisiana. This country has insane drug laws. I have no issue with birth control being otc. But we should talk about all the medications that should be otc. My guess is Obamacare will change many drugs to otc, in an effort to reduce Dr visits.
However birth control is not really safe. It can cause all sorts of hormonal havoc. Long term use makes getting pregnant much harder.
How long-term is long-term? I didn’t have any trouble once my body had time to re-adjust itself. A lot of women don’t understand that it takes time for your natural rhythms to re-assert themselves, and they get upset and think they’re infertile in the meantime.
Not that I’m a big pill advocate because it made my migraines worse, and I haven’t gone back to it after getting off it to have my son and realizing during that time that my headaches dropped another notch in frequency.
“Long term use makes getting pregnant much harder.”
not true
Jindal’s solution is really more of a libertarian one. Get the government out of it as much as possible and let the individual decide. I can’t really say as I’m against it if it keeps me from having to pay for everyone else’s.
Yes – Make Sudafed, birth control, and marijuana all over the counter (for adults). Please have the government stay out of my life.
Why shouldn’t all drugs be OTC?
If I know what’s wrong and what pharmaceutical is needed to correct it, why should I not be able to purchase it? Shouldn’t I have the freedom to consult a medical professional only when I need that? And shouldn’t I be the one to decide when I do or do not need such a consultation? I’ve looked at the PDR. Guess what–it aint rocket science.
This has nothing whatsoever to do with my personal opinion about abortion.
Okay, you’re a well educated and seasoned diagnostic physcian who can evaluate your biological and chemical history and utilize the PDR accordingly but still with no guaranteed warranties. Most people aren’t physcians like yourself! You have a great idea that would get rid of idiots well before their time, but I wonder at what economic cost to society in the end.
Perhaps we should start treating adults like adults. There are consequences for doing stupid things.
“There are consequences for doing stupid things.”
Yep, stupid should hurt is a great philosophy for learning however, in all to many cases it is we the people who pay for the consequences of others stupidity.
Why shouldn’t all drugs be OTC?
Because 85 IQ imbeciles will give them to their kids. Not all credentials are part of the credentialism problem. Only those of the soft sciences.
Just curious, Random: Do you consider economics (specifically, the Austrian variety) a “soft science”…or not a “science” at all? If so, what role if any has the formal study or even cursory skimming of economic literature played in forming your libertarian convictions?
(Please don’t read this as a chip-on-shoulder challenge, please believe me it’s not! I just want a sane, intelligent, non-economist’s opinion on the percieved value — if any — of “The Dismal Science” to….errrr, “real ” scientists.)
Just curious, Random: Do you consider economics (specifically, the Austrian variety) a “soft science”…or not a “science” at all?
If you’re dealing with orbital mechanics or physics or biology etc it’s science else it’s a field of study. I’m using science here in the strict sense of reproducible experiments and hard data.
Von Mises et al as I understand their arguments seem to deliberately ignore technology and the resultant impact on man and his behavioural changes. Lew Rockwell is fond of crapping on Lincoln and claiming arrogation of power, as if this happened in a vacuum of solely politics. Everything but technological upheaval. Yet in that time period Lincoln was confronted with the power of the telegraph which for the first time in human history allowed relatively instantaneous communication from remote locations. Whether or not Lincoln wrote or spoke of this (and/or other simultaneous rapid broad spectrum changes) specifically is immaterial to the notion that this had to have an influence on decisions made. And so on. I can’t regard what they do as any sort of science.
Why the HELL am I supposed to be concerned about birth control? And what is with all of this CONTROL crap anyways? How about we all just manage our own “control” issues and leave the government and the media OUT of it???
Way cheaoer than a “free” abortion. Fact is I don’t care what you boomers do. Have fun.
When I have a plumbing problem, I evaluate the situation and make a decision as to whether I should handle the problem myself or pay a person with greater expertise than mine to handle the problem for me.
There have been times when I consulted a plumber to help me just to make the decision about doing the work myself or paying someone else to do it. Plumbers love guys like me. Sometimes they get paid for their advice without doing any actual work.
Why should healthcare be different?
Just hope some internet wag doesn’t start a rumor about free-basing contraceptives. Politicians would instantly and mindlessly panic en masse. I bet a lot of mischief could be gotten up to with hormones nevertheless…..
Still, Jindal got chided by the church even though he made his personal views clear. “The Archdiocese of New Orleans disagrees with Governor Jindal’s stance on this issue, as the use of birth control and contraceptives are against Catholic Church teaching,” Sarah Comiskey McDonald, communications director for the Archdiocese of New Orleans, told EWTN News Dec. 14.
The catholic church really should STFU about this.
The availability of birth control otc vs via prescription has nothing to do with the morality of using birth control.
Why is the Communications Director saying this, anyway? It should be the bishop making a statement like that, so that there is no confusion.
Yeah shut up! Because they disagreed with your libertarian opinion on how things should be done! Regardless, if you think availability of birth control has nothing to do with the morality of such, you’re wrong. If you think birth control pills is morally wrong, then it would be a morally wrong thing to do to make it more available for everyone. The fact that you said that pretty much means you think that birth control is not morally wrong. Now that’s your prerogative, but don’t be surprised that traditional churches (like the Catholic Church) would call you out on it and disagree with you.
mythbuster: The Communications Director is the one saying this because she is the spokeswoman for the bishop. I thought it was simple.
No, he is right. It is fine for the Church to speak out against contraceptives, as a matter of morality and Church doctrine, but that message he offered was one of banning it entirely for all of society, even for those who are not Catholics.
It’s funny how God allows free will, but the Catholic Church would rather He not, it seems. The Catholic Church is very much a Statist organization. That’s why Catholic-dominated countries tend to be Statist and poor, while Protestant-dominated countries tend to be free and prosperous. (Islam-dominated countries also tend to be Statist and poor. for the same reason.)
I didn’t see anything in the quote about banning contraceptives.
And.. the Catholic Church has every right, and duty, to speak up about what it views as proper or wrong. If you aren’t a Catholic, you are free to ignore it. Or, you might learn something once in a while, even if you disagree with most of it.
If you think birth control pills is morally wrong, then it would be a morally wrong thing to do to make it more available for everyone.
The catholic church isn’t in charge of determining what is or is not moral and proper for the US population. If as a catholic you don’t want to buy contraceptives, then don’t.
I hope this means he is changing his position on several of the more personal issues. Creationism isn’t one of them but I could never vote for someone who supports it.
I’m proud to have voted for Jindal twice. I’ll vote for him again if given the opportunity.
I don’t think that the pill should be OTC. Too many complications. I think a doctor that knows your body and the risks of bc should prescribe them. I like Jindal very much, but I don’t agree with him on this point.
If Jindal really does it as a way to circumscribe attempts to force religious institutions to fund someone’s birth control or abortion, why didn’t he just set the record straight? If the problem is really liberal demagoguery, then why don’t we just set the record straight? As it stands, Jindal is pretty much surrendering this issue in the hopes of scoring some independent/liberal political points. Nothing to see here.
At least we’ve gotten the leftist women to openly say that their goal is getting others to give them stuff for free, simply because they have a vagina and they want free stuff. It makes it a lot less easier for them to defend their position.
@Mickey: when a drug goes OTC, insurance isn’t required to pay for it, thus defanging the socialist feminist supremacists. The record has been set straight for some time, but when the press actively chooses sides and distorts the GOPs position, it doesn’t really matter.
And if you think doctors are diligent in prescribing medication, you are fooling yourselves. When I went in to establish my primary care Dr., he offered up psych drugs diagnosis free, before he had done any sort of physical exam
Id support OTC birth control. In fact, I think a lot of drugs should be converted to OTC. Remove the Doctor’s racket with regards to the prescription pad. As an aside, you are required to get an eye exam every 2 years for a prescription to purchase contacts, even if your prescription hasnt changed in 20 years, which is another racket.
My doctor wouldnt give me a prescription for Amoxicillin when I went on a 3 month walkabout to Southern Africa….because I have a long history of getting ear infections. I ended up bed ridden for a week, with a throbbing ear infection and no access to antibiotics. Did my best with hydrogen peroxide. The bastard.
Now I just order what I need from Mexico. Solved that problem quick, and the prices are right, too.
And you are a perfect example of why micro-organisms are quickly developing resistance to antibiotics because third world countries hand out all antibiotics like they are candy.
Somewhere, the man known as Whiskey should be applauding. This issue is probably what keeps those vaunted single young adult professional white women on the dem plantation. We also gave away the meth market to the cartels when we started the strict controls on pseudophydrine based medicines.
EV – I hear you on the antibiotic thing. Thank god my wife worked for a doctor in my threadbare HMO network.
Thank you, God … finally we have a conservative leader with a brain. Jindall in ’16!
Anyone who’s whining about contraceptives being too dangerous for OTC, I have one word: acetaminophen. We allow a drug for which many adequate alternatives exist, which can cause acute liver failure by exceeding recommended dose by only a factor of 2-3 or so, to be sold OTC.
And also, the hoo-hah about antibiotic over-prescription is not accurate, at least in community settings. The only place antibiotic use is creating superbugs is inside hospitals. The most valuable gift you can give yourself is the gift of staying way the heck away from a hospital.
Personally, I’d love birth control to go OTC.
One, insurance companies and businesses (and soon, my taxes) wouldn’t be forced to pay for it, and two, since it would be purchased by choice, all the currently ignored health risks would come out so that users could sue the crap out of the manufacturers in their need to avoid personal responsibility (since there would no longer be a doctor to sue and somebody has to pay them for the bad consequences of their own decisions).
I would be much in favor of making the Pill an over the counter drug.However,I would first want warnings, in bold print and typeface no smaller than 10 point,of ALL the risks associated with it use,together with warnings about its use,including not using it for long periods of time without a break,etc. As long as its users know what they are risking,OK,then. There should also be a requirement of proof of age,and parental/guardian consent for those under 18.
Because it is very difficult to set the record straight in today’s leftist media environment.
After all, the Obama campaign was able to take what was a clear and unprecedented attack by Democrats on religious liberty, and re-frame it so that millions of people thought it was all about a Republican attack on women.
When that sort of amazing lie is possible, and supported by the media, the Republicans have a very limited set of options.
The next time you hear a Democrat say “we won the election,” remind them that we don’t have a monarchy, but rather a tri-partite government.
*We* (Republicans) won the election for the House, which was considered the single most important governing body by the founders.
I think Jindal’s proposal is brilliant and the GOP would be idiots not to back it. His proposal represents the perfect “win-win” positive sum solution to a thorny political issue. It effectively “de-politicizes” reproduction politics once and for all.
The religious conservatives no longer face the threat of having to pay for it either through the social welfare system or through mandates on employer provided insurance. People who want complete access to contraceptives are able to do so conveniently and cost effectively. The proposal also fits within the GOP worldview of reducing government regulation and involvement in the marketplace.
Positive-sum solutions rarely emerge from the political process. I applaud Jindal for doing so in this case.