2016: Schweikert Voted To Prohibit Funding From Being Used To Implement Washington D.C.'s Reproductive Health Non-Discrimination Amendment Act. In July 2016, Schweikert voted for an amendment that would have, according to Congressional Quarterly, "prohibit[ed] funds from being used to implement the District of Columbia's Reproductive Health Non-Discrimination Amendment Act." The underlying legislation was an FY 2017 financial services appropriations bill. The vote was on the amendment. The House adopted the amendment by a vote of 223 to 192. The House later passed the underlying bill, but the Senate took no substantive action on the legislation. [House Vote 390, 7/7/16; Congressional Quarterly, 7/7/16; Congressional Actions, H. Amdt. 1259; Congressional Actions, H.R. 5485]
DC's Legislation Would Bar Employees, Their Spouses And Dependents From Being Fired Based On Their Birth Control Decisions. According to Congressional Quarterly, "The D.C. legislation would bar employees, their spouses and dependents from being fired based on their decisions regarding birth control, fertility treatments, abortion and other reproductive health services." [Congressional Quarterly, 4/30/15]
Reproductive Health Non-Discrimination Amendment Act Broadened The Definition Of Discrimination In The District To Include An Employee's Reproductive Health Decisions. According to the Washington Post, "The Reproductive Health Non-Discrimination Amendment Act broadens the definition of discrimination in the District to include an employee's reproductive health decisions. Under the law, employers will not be able to discriminate against employees who seek contraception or family planning services. Employers also cannot act against an employee when they know she has used medical treatments to initiate or terminate a pregnancy." [Washington Post, 4/30/15]
Statement Of Administration Policy On A Bill Overturning The Act: D.C. Law Preserves Exceptions For Religious Entities And "Does Not Impose Additional Requirements On Employers, Contrary To Their Personal Beliefs." According to a Statement of Administration Policy, "The Administration strongly opposes H.J. Res. 43, which would overturn the District of Columbia's Reproductive Health Non-Discrimination Amendment Act of 2014 (the Act). The Act added reproductive health decisions to the list of employment non-discrimination protections included under the basis of sex, which had previously included pregnancy, childbirth, related medical conditions, and breastfeeding. The Act preserves the current exception in the District's Human Rights Law for religious entities and does not impose additional requirements on employers, contrary to their personal beliefs, to provide insurance coverage related to reproductive health decisions. [...] If the President were presented with H.J. Res. 43, his senior advisors would recommend that he veto this resolution." [Statement of Administration Policy, 4/30/15]
Opponents To The D.C. Law Said That It Would Unfairly Require Employers To Support Abortion And Violate Their Religious Beliefs. According to Congressional Quarterly, "Congressional Republicans said the bill would unfairly require some employers to support abortion against their religious beliefs. The conservative group Heritage Action said it supports the disapproval resolution and would include it as a key vote on its legislative scorecard. 'The resolution would ensure pro-life individuals and organizations in the District of Columbia would not be forced to violate their religious beliefs or organizational missions,' Heritage Action said in a statement." [Congressional Quarterly, 4/30/15]
2015: Schweikert Voted To Disapprove Washington D.C.'s Reproductive Health Non-Discrimination Amendment Act Of 2014, Which Prohibited Employers From Discriminating Based On Individual's Reproductive Health Decisions. In April 2015, Schweikert voted for a joint resolution that would have, according to Congressional Quarterly, "provide[d] for disapproval and repeal of the District of Columbia's Reproductive Health Non-Discrimination Amendment Act of 2014, which prohibits employers from discriminating based on an individual's reproductive health decisions." The vote was on the joint resolution. The House passed the joint resolution by a vote of 228 to 192. The Senate took no substantive action on the legislation, which because of a 30 day deadline Congress has to overturn D.C. Council-passed bills, renders the legislation moot. [House Vote 194, 4/30/15; Congressional Quarterly, 4/30/15; Congressional Quarterly, 4/30/15; Congressional Actions, H. J. Res. 43]
DC's Legislation Would Bar Employees, Their Spouses And Dependents From Being Fired Based On Their Birth Control Decisions. According to Congressional Quarterly, "The D.C. legislation would bar employees, their spouses and dependents from being fired based on their decisions regarding birth control, fertility treatments, abortion and other reproductive health services." [Congressional Quarterly, 4/30/15]
Reproductive Health Non-Discrimination Amendment Act Broadened The Definition Of Discrimination In The District To Include An Employee's Reproductive Health Decisions. According to the Washington Post, "The Reproductive Health Non-Discrimination Amendment Act broadens the definition of discrimination in the District to include an employee's reproductive health decisions. Under the law, employers will not be able to discriminate against employees who seek contraception or family planning services. Employers also cannot act against an employee when they know she has used medical treatments to initiate or terminate a pregnancy." [Washington Post, 4/30/15]
D.C. Home Rule Gave Congress 30 Days, Or Until May 2, To Overturn D.C. Council-Passed Bills. According to Congressional Quarterly, "House leaders added the resolution to the floor schedule at the last minute at the urging of conservative members. Under D.C. home rule, Congress has 30 days to overturn D.C. Council-passed bills with the support of both chambers and the White House. Lawmakers have until May 2 to repeal the bill." [Congressional Quarterly, 4/30/15]
Statement Of Administration Policy: D.C. Law Preserves Exceptions For Religious Entities And "Does Not Impose Additional Requirements On Employers, Contrary To Their Personal Beliefs." According to a Statement of Administration Policy, "The Administration strongly opposes H.J. Res. 43, which would overturn the District of Columbia's Reproductive Health Non-Discrimination Amendment Act of 2014 (the Act). The Act added reproductive health decisions to the list of employment non-discrimination protections included under the basis of sex, which had previously included pregnancy, childbirth, related medical conditions, and breastfeeding. The Act preserves the current exception in the District's Human Rights Law for religious entities and does not impose additional requirements on employers, contrary to their personal beliefs, to provide insurance coverage related to reproductive health decisions. [...] If the President were presented with H.J. Res. 43, his senior advisors would recommend that he veto this resolution." [Statement of Administration Policy, 4/30/15]
Opponents To The D.C. Law Said That It Would Unfairly Require Employers To Support Abortion And Violate Their Religious Beliefs. According to Congressional Quarterly, "Congressional Republicans said the bill would unfairly require some employers to support abortion against their religious beliefs. The conservative group Heritage Action said it supports the disapproval resolution and would include it as a key vote on its legislative scorecard. 'The resolution would ensure pro-life individuals and organizations in the District of Columbia would not be forced to violate their religious beliefs or organizational missions,' Heritage Action said in a statement." [Congressional Quarterly, 4/30/15]