Senate Nears Showdown on Contraception Policy

By ROBERT PEAR

WASHINGTON — The Senate on Tuesday headed toward a showdown over President Obama’s policy requiring health insurance coverage of contraceptives for women, even as Republicans appeared to be divided over the wisdom of pressing for a vote any time soon.

Senate Republican leaders sought an immediate vote on legislation to overturn the president’s policy and allow a broad exemption for certain insurers and employers that have religious or moral objections to such coverage.

But other Republicans said that the party had other priorities and that they wanted more information about how the new requirement would work.

“I don’t know where we are going with this issue,” said Senator Lisa Murkowski, Republican of Alaska.

Ms. Murkowski said she did not want a vote on the issue this week. “We’ve got way too much else to be doing,” Ms. Murkowski said, adding that her constituents were more concerned about energy policy.

The Senate majority leader, Harry Reid, Democrat of Nevada, announced that the Senate would vote on the issue on Thursday.

The proposal, offered by Senator Roy Blunt, Republican of Missouri, as an amendment to a highway bill, says that health insurance plans and employers may refuse to provide or pay for coverage of “specific items or services” if the coverage would be “contrary to the religious beliefs or moral convictions of the sponsor, issuer or other entity offering the plan.”

Mr. Reid denounced the proposal, saying it “would allow any employer anywhere in our country to deny coverage for virtually any health service for virtually any reason.”

The 2010 health care law requires most insurers to cover preventive services without co-payments or deductibles. Under the administration policy, most health plans must cover birth control for women — all contraceptive drugs and devices approved by the Food and Drug Administration — as well as sterilization procedures.

Church-affiliated universities, hospitals and charities would not have to provide or pay for such coverage. Instead, the White House says, coverage for birth control could be offered to women directly by their employers’ insurance companies, “with no role for religious employers who oppose contraception.”

Mr. Blunt said, “The president’s so-called compromise is nothing more than an accounting gimmick.”

Senator Susan Collins, Republican of Maine, said that before voting on Mr. Blunt’s proposal, she wanted the administration to explain how its policy would work for “self-insured faith-based institutions.”

Such institutions, including many Roman Catholic hospitals, “act as both the employer and the insurer,” Ms. Collins said.

More than 20 national organizations weighed in on Tuesday against Mr. Blunt’s proposal. The groups include the March of Dimes, Easter Seals, the American Academy of Pediatrics and the American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists.

Under Mr. Blunt’s proposal, they said in a letter to lawmakers, “a small employer or health plan could ban maternity care for women due to religious convictions regarding out-of-wedlock pregnancies.” Likewise, they said, a health plan or a small employer that objects to childhood immunizations or screening of newborns for genetic disorders could deny coverage for those services.

More than 200 House members have signed up as co-sponsors of the House version of Mr. Blunt’s proposal. But Representative Judy Biggert, Republican of Illinois, said lawmakers should focus on the economy and job creation, “instead of getting sidetracked by issues that can divide us.”

House Republican leaders plan to emphasize that the requirement for contraceptive coverage is traceable to the health care overhaul championed by Mr. Obama — an initiative that they believe is unpopular with independent voters in battleground states.

Representative Ann Marie Buerkle, Republican of New York, who is a nurse and a health care lawyer, said Democrats portrayed the president’s directive as a question of contraception or women’s health.

But she said she saw it in broader terms, as “a violation of conscience, a fundamental assault on First Amendment rights.”

Senator Barbara Boxer, Democrat of California, said she was dismayed that “we have to have a vote on birth control” to move forward on a transportation bill.

“We’re supposed to be on the highway bill, which will protect 1.8 million jobs and create an additional million jobs,” Mrs. Boxer said. “So 2.8 million jobs are hanging in the balance.”