How far away is our current technology (in terms of years) from using
the DNA from two women to conceive a child? How soon before this will
be available to the general public and what is the estimated cost of
such a procedure? Will this be covered by insurance?

If you remembered the story of Dolly,
http://www.roslin.ac.uk/public/cloning.html you would know that this
is already possible, in principle.  Many animals have been cloned by a
process called somatic cell nuclear transfer, where instead of DNA
coming from sperm, it came from the nucleus of a somatic cell.  In the
case of Dolly, it was a mammary cell, hence the name Dolly (as in
Pardon).  The oocyte had its nucleus removed, the somatic nucleus was
implanted, and after treatment which included electrical stimulation,
the oocyte began to divide and act as if it had been fertilized.

Application to humans is still a long way off.  Dolly died at a human
equivalent age of about 40-45.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/2764039.stm  It's not clear if she
just got sick from natural causes or if the cloning process
predisposed her to disease, but the evidence suggests that she simply
got sick.  That said, most cloning attempts fail, resulting in
non-viable embryos, so something is going wrong.  Of course, most in
vitro fertilizations fail as well.  Even in vivo fertilizations, i.e.
like they do it on the discovery channel,
don't have a perfect track record.

There is only one group that was seriously attempting to develop the
technology to allow reproduction to occur despite infertility, and
that was Panayiotis Zavos's group.  http://www.zavos.org I haven't
heard anything from them in years.  It's illegal in many countries
including the U.S. and the U.K.

So it's not in the forseeable future, and in the current legislative
climate, I can't even make a guess as to how long until it will be
available.

If it were available and legal now, it whouldn't be substantially more
expensive than IVF, and would fall into the same insurance category.

This can't happen.  The reason is because of genetic imprinting. 
Basically, when DNA is replicated it is also methylated in a specific
pattern.  Cells can read this methylation pattern and will abort a
pregnancy if the methylation patterns are both from females and or
males.  What williamgunn-ga is referring to in his answer is cloning. 
This is taking DNA from a somatic cell (2 copies of the genome) rather
than combining two sets of a genome from 2 different gametes (1 copy
of genome).  That isn't the same thing as what you are referring to. 
Hope this helps.

Despite technological advances, you won't be able to do this in your
lifetime for sure.  Why?  First, the idea is only somewhat possible. 
To perform this procedure, a doctor would simply replicate the DNA
contained in sperm cells.  So even if you don't technically have a
male interacting or donating, you have the replication of a man.  This
all goes back to X and Y chromosomes.  Second, and the more important
reason this won't happen in your lifetime, is that scientists involved
in cloning and biogenetic construction are not concerned with letting
two males or two females procreate in this way.  There are far more
important items that our attention can be focused on.  Lastly, even if
the technology were to exist, the US government would find a way to
ban this procedure throughout the entire world--just like partial
birth abortions.