A popular topic straddling politics and healthcare is the proposed mandate forcing certain groups, such as churches, religious hospitals and universities to provide birth control free of charge. The Obama Administration proposed the bill in August of 2011 in the hopes of promoting the prevention of certain feminine diseases. However, various religious organizations have come out vehemently against this and are fighting to end the measure.

What makes this topic sensational is that it involves several current social issues that are plaguing the nation, including women’s rights, religion, and the evolution of health care reform. During President Obama’s re-election campaign David Axelrod said, “We certainly don’t want to abridge anyone’s religious freedoms, so we’re going to look for a way to move forward that both provides women with the preventative care that they need and respects the prerogatives of religious institutions.” Recently as an effort to compromise, the Obama Administration has conceded and stated that certain religious organizations would not have to pay for coverage of contraceptives, but rather there would be an additional insurance plan that would cover contraceptives instead. The proposed compromise still forces “for-profit secular employers” to provide coverage, even in the presence of a religious objection.

Those who are in favor for free coverage of contraceptives argue that this is a necessary step towards improving women’s health. Supporters argue that prevention will help reduce healthcare costs in the long run. On the other hand, contractors argue that the extra cost of coverage will inevitably be passed onto the consumers. This is a tough topic for congress since the line is blurred for how much government can and should intervene in healthcare without overstepping its boundaries.