News Law and Policy

Domino’s Pizza Founder Latest To Try And Block Contraception Mandate

Jessica Mason Pieklo

Another for-profit business looks to render religious freedom meaningless.

On Friday Tom Monaghan, the founder of Domino’s Pizza, filed suit in federal court in Michigan, challening the federal government over the contraception mandate. Domino’s Farms, a Michigan office park complex that Monaghan owns is also a named plaintiff in the suit.

Monaghan, a devout Roman Catholic, believes contraception is a “gravely immoral” practice that has nothing to do with healthcare. According to reports, Monaghan currently offers health insurance plans to employees that excludes coverage for contraception and abortion.

Like the almost countless number of lawsuits before this one, Monahgan alleges the birth control benefit violates his religious exercise rights and is asking a federal judge to strike it down. A judge has not yet been assigned to the matter nor has it been set for hearing yet.

Like This Story?

Your $10 tax-deductible contribution helps support our research, reporting, and analysis.

Donate Now

News Law and Policy

Federal Judge Rules Obama Administration Didn’t Go Far Enough to Accommodate Opponents of Birth Control Benefit

Jessica Mason Pieklo

A federal judge in Florida ruled Ave Maria University did not have to comply with the Obama administration's latest accommodation process for religiously affiliated nonprofits that object to coverage of contraception in insurance plans.

Read more of our articles on challenges to the Affordable Care Act’s birth control benefit here.

The Obama administration’s latest efforts to appease religious conservatives who object to insurance coverage for contraception don’t go far enough, ruled a federal judge in Florida last week.

U.S. District Judge James S. Moody Jr. issued a temporary injunction blocking enforcement of the contraception coverage requirement against Ave Maria University, a Roman Catholic College in Ave Maria, Florida, a planned community founded in part by Domino’s Pizza founder and Catholic philanthropist Tom Monaghan.

The order is the first to block the administration’s most recent efforts to amend the process for religiously affiliated nonprofits to opt out of providing contraception coverage in their employee health insurance plans following the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling last summer in Wheaton College.

Like This Story?

Your $10 tax-deductible contribution helps support our research, reporting, and analysis.

Donate Now

That case, involving an evangelical college in Illinois, called into question the form developed to allow religiously affiliated nonprofits to opt out of the Affordable Care Act’s contraception coverage benefit by ruling that completing the government’s paperwork unduly burdened Wheaton College’s religious rights under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA).

The Obama administration, in response to that decision and the Supreme Court’s controversial ruling in Hobby Lobby v. Burwell that closely-held corporations were entitled to some kind of exemption from the coverage requirement, announced in August it would issue new rules designed to modify the law to fit the Supreme Court’s rulings.

Those new rules state that religiously affiliated nonprofits that want the accommodation need only notify the Department of Health and Human Services in writing that they are claiming a religious exemption, and provide the government identification of its health coverage plan for employees and contact information to the insurer operating the plan so the administration could step in and coordinate coverage for those employees who wish to have it.

But according to the religiously affiliated nonprofits challenging the contraception benefit, any act, no matter how remote, that facilities its employees from being able to access contraception is tantamount to providing that contraception directly and therefore a violation of their religious beliefs.

Instead, religious conservatives charge they should qualify for the same exemption from coverage provided to churches and synagogues that would leave employees who want or need access to insurance coverage for contraception on their own.

Moody, in comparing the previous accommodation process with the latest tweak, ruled the distinction between the two processes “is not so significant” to justify making Ave Maria comply now.

Moody’s order will remain in effect while Ave Maria’s challenge proceeds to trial. The Obama administration could appeal the ruling to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit.

The Roberts Court could once again step into the dispute over the sufficiency of the accommodation process. Attorneys for the University of Notre Dame have asked the Roberts Court to overturn an appellate court ruling requiring them to comply with the accommodation process in order to avoid offering contraceptive coverage for university students and employees.

The Obama administration’s response is due to the Roberts Court later this week.

News Law and Policy

Pennsylvania’s Proposed Budget Funnels Even More Tax Dollars to Crisis Pregnancy Centers (Updated)

Tara Murtha

Even with a disastrous deficit of $1.4 billion, the proposed 2014-15 Pennsylvania budget is pouring more money into an anti-choice crisis pregnancy center network that recently made headlines for "failing to see a single client" in another state, despite a significant government contract there.

Update, July 14, 2:10 p.m.: After a nasty budget battle that deepened rifts between state Republicans and Democrats and even Republican Gov. Tom Corbett and fellow conservative Republicans, the Pennsylvania state legislature signed off on spending plan “which no one seems terribly proud of.”

Indeed, there are few winners in the budget produced under the gun of a $1.5 billion deficit. The Philadelphia school system, already gutted down to the bones, recently sent out 342 layoff notices; if a plan to tax cigarettes to generate funding for the district isn’t approved in Harrisburg soon, an additional 1,300 more workers could be out of a job.

Even the specter of schoolchildren literally dying at underfunded and understaffed public schools, though, did not deter the legislature from funneling millions of dollars to centers known to lie to women trying to navigate unplanned pregnancies. The legislature bumped the total amount even higher than the governor’s proposal of $5,644,000: The enacted 2014-2015 budget allocates $5,694,000 of taxpayer dollars to Real Alternatives, an increase of 2.7 percent from the previous year.

Real Alternatives, a Pennsylvania-based anti-choice crisis pregnancy center network, made headlines last week when Michigan state government reporters noticed that their legislature funneled $800,000 to the organization, despite its failure to fulfill the terms of last year’s state contract.

Like This Story?

Your $10 tax-deductible contribution helps support our research, reporting, and analysis.

Donate Now

From the Detroit News:

The Michigan Legislature won’t fix the roads. It hasn’t shown much interest in the state’s shockingly high rate of unplanned pregnancy, and infant and maternal death, especially in Detroit.

Yet this month, it approved an $800,000 contract in the 2014-15 budget “to promote childbirth,” alternatives to abortion and abstinence education at crisis pregnancy centers.

The no-bid contract goes solely to Real Alternatives Inc., a Pennsylvania nonprofit that helps anti-abortion, mostly faith-based centers comply with separation of church and state regulations and receive government funding.

That didn’t happen last year, however. Real Alternatives failed to see a single client or sign up one Michigan provider during the first eight months of the $700,000 contract, according to the Michigan Department of Community Health (MDCH). Although Real Alternatives says it recently signed three providers, MDCH is unaware of them.

Despite “failing to see a single client,” the organization received a $100,000 increase in Michigan state funds, even as last year’s allocation sat largely unspent.

$800,000 is roughly equal to the amount of state money Michigan spends on pregnancy prevention education and family planning services, a number that has been steadily going down for at least a decade, according to Lori Lamerand, president and CEO of Planned Parenthood Mid and South Michigan.

“Family planning can’t get any money, but we’re going to hold out $1.5 million allocated for this program that has not been able to spend the grant appropriately,” Lamerand told Rewire.

Despite a disastrous deficit of at least $1.4 billion, Pennsylvania is also pouring more money into Real Alternatives.

Like Michigan, the state’s proposed 2014-15 budget carves out an additional $100,000 for the organization over last year’s allocation. Unlike Michigan, though, Pennsylvania’s funding bump has gone unnoticed amid daily chaotic reports over the deficit and missed budget deadline—and perhaps because it’s deceptively coded in the budget as a line item called “Expanded Medical Services for Women.”

In all, Pennsylvania’s proposed 2014-15 budget allocates $5,644,000 for Real Alternatives, an 1.8 percent increase over last year.

According to a budget request submitted by the Pennsylvania Department of Public Welfare, the state also diverts $1 million of the federal funds received through the TANF (Temporary Assistance for Needy Families) program to Real Alternatives, bringing total taxpayer funding up to $6,644,000.

Historically, Pennsylvania has led the charge to use taxpayer money to fund anti-choice crisis pregnancy centers (CPCs).

In the early 1990s, Pennsylvania became the first state to allocate funding for CPCs in the state budget. In 2002, it became the first state to also divert federal TANF funds to the crisis pregnancy network, an effort initiated by then U.S. Sen. Rick Santorum (R).

Funding CPCs with taxpayer money is a radical departure from years past, when state officials across the country openly criticized such organizations as a danger to citizens.

In 1986, Texas’ attorney general challenged CPCs in court, charging “deceptive trade practices.” He said, “women are being emotionally harmed when they go to the center seeking abortions and instead are shown films of aborted fetuses.”

In 1987, a Pennsylvania woman duped into an appointment at such a clinic alleged “lacerating psychological attack.”

From the Philadelphia Inquirer:

“When I told them on the phone that I wanted to terminate the pregnancy, the woman on the other end of the line said, ‘No problem – just come in and see us,’ ” she said. And so she made an appointment for the free pregnancy test Abode offers.

“By the time I left that place, I was so nauseated I just wanted to die,” she recalled.

The CPC business model is built on deception.

A handbook written by the founder of what were once called “problem pregnancy centers” recommends that anti-choice activists open such centers near abortion clinics and employ a “dual naming” strategy, meaning adopt a name similar to a nearby abortion clinic or regulated health center. The centers counsel against birth control, even recommending abstinence for married women who do not want to become pregnant. They give women false information regarding pregnancy and abortion.

“It is deeply disappointing to see this unregulated program receive additional funds,” Sari Stevens, executive director at Planned Parenthood Pennsylvania Advocates, told Rewire. “Any federal and state funding for crisis pregnancy centers results in tax dollars being used to support deception and lies rather than comprehensive and medically accurate information.”

Today, at least ten states fund such clinics directly. Real Alternatives prides itself on training organizations in other states to replicate their business model.

Tax dollars have fueled rapid expansion. Nationwide, there are an estimated 2,300 to 3,500 CPCs, compared to 1,800 abortion clinics. Pennsylvania currently has 13 health centers that offer surgical abortion services, and at least 95 crisis pregnancy centers.

Meanwhile, Healthy PA, the governor’s proposed alternative to Medicaid expansion currently under consideration by the federal government, is also likely to reduce access to contraception; Pennsylvania does not require that private insurance plans cover contraception.

Last year, a report revealed that pregnant women and newborns in Philadelphia fare worse than in the rest of the state and country. The United Nations Population Fund estimates that one in three deaths related to pregnancy and childbirth could be avoided if all women had access to contraceptive services.