Pharmacists Say No
The following excerpts come from a February 22 Catholic News Agency story.
A new survey reveals that pharmacy directors across the country do not believe that a mandate requiring insurance companies to offer free contraceptives will cut costs as the Obama administration has predicted.
“It was interesting that no one thought the mandate would offset costs by preventing unintended pregnancies,” said Rhonda Greenapple, CEO of the firm that conducted the survey. “This is in direct opposition to the rationale for mandating these services.”
The survey, announced Feb. 17, was administered by Reimbursement Intelligence, a market research firm specializing in reimbursement issues for medical and pharmaceutical companies.
Fifteen pharmacy directors, “representing tens of millions of pharmacy-covered lives,” were asked about what impact they think the Obama administration’s new contraception mandate will have on their plans….
Under the revised policy, religious employers will not directly purchase the coverage but will instead be forced to purchase insurance plans from companies that are required to provide the coverage for free.
A White House fact sheet argued that requiring contraceptive coverage “saves money by keeping women healthy and preventing spending on other health services,” such as those associated with unintended pregnancies.
However, none of the firms surveyed believe that the new policy will lead to a net savings.
About 40 percent of survey participants think that the mandate will increase their costs thorough higher pharmacy expenditures.
Approximately seven percent believe it will increase pharmacy costs but decrease medical costs.
About 20 percent predict that their costs will not change because contraception is already embedded into their premiums, while about one-third of the participants are still unsure what effect the mandate will have.
Although survey participants were divided about the exact impact of the mandate, none believe that it will “lead to net cost savings by preventing unintended pregnancies among members.”
Click here to read entire story.
Posted Thursday, February 23, 2012 12:59 AM By Dan
It is my understanding that there is a direct variation between the increased use of artificial means of birth control and abortion due to the rise in promiscuity and normal failure rates associated with artficial means of brith control, both inherent in the means themselves and the human factor of carelessness inherent in the promiscuous mind-set. If so, then costs will most certainly rise, including the risks women undergo taking the pill.
Posted Thursday, February 23, 2012 3:20 AM By ANNE
Chemical and mechanical means of contraception damage women’s health. For a healthy woman to change her hormones is damaging. Read the warning labels on all packages of contraception. Obama lies.
Posted Thursday, February 23, 2012 3:57 AM By OSCAR
The more use of ‘free’ contraceptives the higher the cost to everyone who ends up paying for them. The more that use contraceptives the higher percentage of unhealthy side affects that require additional health care. The more contraceptives that fail, the more abortions that make abortionists rich. The more sex outside of marriage, the greater number of cases of Sexually Transmitted Deseases that requires more health care. The only healthy and 100% accurate method of birth control is ABSTAINANCE until married. – ALL parents must teach this to their children. CCC: ” 2399 The regulation of births represents one of the aspects of responsible fatherhood and motherhood. Legitimate intentions on the part of the spouses do not justify recourse to morally unacceptable means (for example, direct sterilization or contraception)”.
Posted Thursday, February 23, 2012 6:25 AM By Ted
We can count on either a statement or promise that comes from Barack Obama – to be false. Exceptions will be rare, and unintentional on his part. He’s a consistent and loyal follower of the “Father of Lies.”
Posted Thursday, February 23, 2012 8:45 AM By Harry
That is correct, Dan. In addition, there are the side affects that many contraceptives have, like strokes, breast cancer etc. It seems to me these will offset any real cost savings that result from fewer live births.
Posted Thursday, February 23, 2012 9:15 AM By Patrick
No such thing as free. Somebody is paying which in this case is the taxpayer.
Posted Thursday, February 23, 2012 9:37 AM By Abeca Christian
Birth control pills have side affects and woman will use them for years and years and thus causing other health issues that will cost more money to care for. It’s a cycle that never ends, the root of the problem is there and it just keeps growing over time. Not only health issues but also morally and spiritual issues are far greater!
Posted Thursday, February 23, 2012 9:43 AM By Tracy
Government mandates have never and will never cut cost.
Posted Friday, February 24, 2012 8:17 PM By Abeca Christian
Tracy that is true. They will use the cut on something else and the spending continues. Obama is excellent at spending our tax money especially on worthless programs, I’m sure there are some good ones but the bad ones outweigh the few good ones.
Posted Friday, February 24, 2012 10:35 PM By JLS
The federal govt does not need to cut costs, since Congress has Constitutional authority to create money out of thin air and define its value. Your taxes do not go to pay for anything at all; rather, they go to keep you manipulated.
Posted Wednesday, February 29, 2012 6:33 PM By JLS
I remain mystified that no one picks up this argument I keep making. Is it that hard to understand?