Washington state health officials appeal contraception ruling

 abercrombie and fitch outlet SEATTLE (Reuters) - Washington state health officials asked an appeals court on Wednesday to reinstate a rule requiring that pharmacists dispense emergency contraceptives even when doing so violates their religious beliefs.District Judge Ronald Leighton blocked the regulation last month, finding it trampled on the pharmacists' right to "conscientious objection" in violation of the Constitution.Leighton's ruling in a case brought by a drugstore owner and two of his pharmacists in the state capital, Olympia, comes amid a national political debate over a federal policy mandating free coverage for women's contraceptives through employer-sponsored health plans.Several universities with religious affiliations have sued to block that regulation, using arguments similar to those that prevailed in the pharmacy case -- namely that the government has no right to compel individuals to violate sincerely held religious beliefs.But the state's Department of Health and Board of Pharmacy asked the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals to overturn the trial court's determination that the requirement targets religious opposition to certain medications."This isn't about religious objections," health department spokesman Tim Church said. "This rule is meant to ensure that people have access to time-sensitive medications."The morning-after pill, available under the brands Plan B One-Step, ella and Next Choice, can be taken up to 5 days after unprotected sex,

 abercrombie and fitch uk State officials said that particularly in rural areas of eastern Washington, where pharmacies may be more than 20 miles apart, a patient denied service by one pharmacist would not be able to go elsewhere for the medication in time.GOVERNOR WEIGHS INThe case stems from a rule adopted by the Washington State Pharmacy Board in 2007 requiring pharmacies to stock and dispense legal medications for which there is a demonstrated community need. abercrombie and fitch uk The drugstore owner and two pharmacists who brought the lawsuit said they believed that emergency contraceptives were tantamount to abortion because they could theoretically stop an already-fertilized egg from implanting in the uterus.As conservative Christians, they refused to dispense the medication, then sued to block the regulation.After a 12-day trial, the court found overwhelming evidence that the regulations allow pharmacies to refer patients elsewhere for all sorts of business, economic, and convenience reasons, but not for reasons of conscience."The Constitution does not allow the state to single out religious conduct for unfavorable treatment," said Luke Goodrich, an attorney with the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, which served as co-counsel for the pharmacists.Washington Governor Chris Gregoire, a Democrat in her last year of office, issued a statement supporting the appeal.

 abercrombie uk outlet "Any decision that puts patients at risk by delaying or denying them lawful and lawfully prescribed medications should be carefully reviewed by a higher court," she said.Planned Parenthood of the Great Northwest also plans to join in the state's appeal of Leighton's verdict." abercrombie uk outlet We really feel that this could set a dangerous precedent and allow other health care providers to refuse to dispense emergency contraception or any other drug they personally disagree with," said Kristen Glundberg-Prossor, spokeswoman for Planned Parenthood of the Great Northwest.Last spring, a state judge in Illinois struck down a similar law requiring pharmacies to dispense emergency contraception.A handful of other states, including California, New Jersey and Wisconsin, have laws requiring pharmacies to fill all valid prescriptions, but loopholes allow pharmacists with moral objections to refer the patient to another drugstore.Six states explicitly allow pharmacists to refuse to dispense contraceptives, and several more have broad right-to-conscience laws that provide some protection to pharmacists as well as to other health care professionals.WASHINGTON (Reuters) - A federal watchdog faulted Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the mortgage finance companies propped up with taxpayer funds, for "questionable" spending on a mortgage industry conference last year, in a report released on Thursday.

 cheap abercrombie outlet uk Almost half of the $600,000 that the two companies spent for a conference held by the Mortgage Bankers Association in October "was of questionable value," the inspector general for the companies' federal regulator said.The inspector general cited $140,000 spent to help sponsor the conference, saying it "did not find sufficient justification" for the sponsorship. It also cited the $140,415 spent to host dinners and business meals, saying the companies could have accomplished the same amount of business at a "substantially lower cost."The inspector general at the Federal Housing Finance Agency also faulted the companies, the two largest sources of U.S. housing finance, for acting without FHFA's approval.In January, the FHFA directed Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to stop spending money on conference sponsorships and said coverage of employees' food expenses should be reined in, according to the report.FHFA has tightened its scrutiny of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac's expenditures, which have been criticized by lawmakers.Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac defended their spending on the conference. They told the inspector general that they scheduled more than 200 meetings with customers, including small lenders and financial institutions involved in mortgage lending,

 abercrombie outlet The annual Mortgage Bankers Association event attracts thousands of industry executives and others who work in the mortgage industry. Ninety Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac employees attended last year, the report said.Both Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac said it was "entirely within the authorities delegated" to each of them by the FHFA to make the decision to attend the conference and sponsor it. FHFA had a similar view at the time, the report stated.The watchdog did say, however, that the $256,458 in travel-related costs and registration fees was comparable to expenses that would be allowable for federal employees.The inspector general said FHFA still needs to look more closely at how much Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac spend on travel and entertainment, and look for ways to curtail future spending."FHFA should ensure that (Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac) conduct a comprehensive review of their travel and entertainment policies, and revise them," FHFA Deputy Inspector General George Grob said in a memo accompanying the report.An FHFA official said in a written response to the report that the agency agreed with its recommendations and is taking steps to change the way it monitors spending at the two firms.