COLUMBIA, S.C. (AP) - Supporters of a bill requiring insurance companies to cover a year’s worth of birth control pills say it will prevent unintended pregnancies and save the state money.
The legislation approved 64-38 by the House on Tuesday is intended to make it easier for women to get the contraceptives their doctors prescribe.
Although doctors typically write a yearlong prescription, insurance companies generally pay for either a month or three-month supply at a time, depending on the policy.
They won’t pay even a few days early, and it can be difficult for working women to get to the pharmacy on the day their next month’s supply will be covered, which can lead to missed pills, said Rep. Robert Ridgeway, D-Manning, the Legislature’s only gynecologist.
House Minority Leader Todd Rutherford, D-Columbia, said that’s particularly an issue for women in rural South Carolina.
But the bill’s Republican opponents pointed to its $2.2 million estimated cost to the state’s Medicaid program - $218,400 from state coffers and $2 million provided by the federal government.
State economic advisers estimate that Medicaid would pay for an additional 112,000 months’ worth of birth control annually because patients could get a year’s supply of contraceptives when they would otherwise lose coverage at some point in the year. If their wages increase, they’d lose eligibility for the government’s insurance program for the poor, and Medicaid wouldn’t be paying.
The bill’s supporters argued the fiscal impact statement doesn’t take into account what the state saves by women being able to stay on birth control.
In South Carolina, about half of all births are paid for by Medicaid.
Rep. Beth Bernstein, D-Columbia, said a woman who loses coverage and then gets pregnant would “get right back on Medicaid rolls,” since wage limits for eligibility are higher for pregnant women. Those costs far exceed the $15-$30 birth control packet, she said.
“You end up with two people on Medicaid instead of one, because the newborn’s on Medicaid,” Ridgeway said.
Rep. Patsy Knight, D-St. George, said opponents need to consider the benefits for women who are traveling, whether they’re deployed in the military, on missionary trips, students on foreign exchange programs or vacationing.
“I struggle to understand why we would limit access to this,” said Rep. Kirkman Finlay, R-Columbia, the bill’s chief sponsor. “I just don’t get it.”
But opponents argued legislators shouldn’t tell insurance companies what to do. The federal health care law already requires insurers to provide contraceptives at no cost to the woman.
Opponents also questioned whether women would lose the packets if they get so many at once.
Rep. Bill Crosby, R-North Charleston, said even with a three-month supply of pills, by the time one or two months are consumed, patients forget where they’ve put the third bottle.
“I wonder how many will be thrown away,” he said.
Other states to pass laws requiring insurers to pay for a year’s worth of birth control include Hawaii and Oregon, as well as the District of Columbia, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures.
Please read our comment policy before commenting.