Category: Updates

2011 – The Number of Abortion Restrictions At An All Time High

According to a new Guttmacher Report, in the last six months—from the beginning of January through the end of June—states across the country have enacted a record breaking 162 new laws or changes to current law that impact our reproductive health care and rights. Of those, 49% (80 new laws!) are targeted at restricting access to abortion. The 80 new laws are more than double the record set in 2005 of 34 enacted restrictions, and triple last year’s number of 23.

New laws in five states seek to ban abortion completely after 20 weeks, and Ohio wants to ban it as soon as a fetal heartbeat can be detected, at approximately eight weeks. (All of this appears to conflict with existing Supreme Court precedent that prohibits bans on abortion prior to viability, which occurs  several weeks later—but with today’s Supreme Court, who knows.) These 2011 changes have all occurred in just 19 states.

New York?
The bad news is that it can and is happening here in New York.

Just last week, a Federal Court judge for the Southern District of New York, Federal Judge William Pauley, blocked New York City from enforcing its new law requiring Crisis Pregnancy Centers (CPCs)* to disclose what services they do and do not provide. The focus of the law was/is transparency. It had been carefully studied to ensure protection of First Amendment rights of all involved.

The meaning inherent in the judge’s decision is that it is okay to trick women, and to mislead us about to the full range of medical services of which we might legally avail ourselves.

In Albany every year, we battle back against anti-choice legislation. This past May, Assemblyman Katz, newly elected to represent the 99 A.D., introduced a bill, A07841, that calls for “no state aid allocated, transferred, or given to the organization known as Planned Parenthood or any of such organization’s affiliated entities or any organization which performs abortions.”  Our pro-choice elected officials were waiting!

Even under a Democratically controlled State Senate in 2009, we could not get a vote to pass the much needed Reproductive Health Act that would update New York State’s abortion law, establish a fundamental right to reproductive privacy, treat the regulation of  abortion as an issue of public health and medical practice, and remove it from the penal code provisions.

The Vote
We are represented by those whom we elect. Last November, voters across the country turned out in droves to vote for anyone promising to reduce taxes and who was not an incumbent—no questions asked. No questions about Choice, about Jobs, about the Environment-nothing. Candidates only needed to disparage the then-office holders and all existing programs. They were not asked to offer a single concrete course of action.

And it worked. Disguised as concerned citizens, extremists with right-wing anti-social agendas were able to get elected to State and Federal government. The key was to avoid discussion about social issues but to promise key supporters to advance their ultra-conservative agendas.

That is exactly how we ended up with this record-breaking number of anti-abortion restrictions. Our rights are too hard to come by to allow this to happen again, not in Albany, not in Westchester County and not in Washington D.C.

Betty Ford: Abortion is NOT a Partisan Issue

Coming of age when Betty Ford and her husband found themselves accidental occupants of the White House, all I knew of Betty Ford was that she had big hair, and, subsequently, breast cancer and addiction issues.

Now I say, “What an amazing role model for women of all ages and political parties!” She did not let her marriage or her party affiliation or the time in which she lived define her.

Using her powerful position as First Lady, Betty Ford spoke her own views with her own voice, and, in turn, spoke for women everywhere. Not since Eleanor Roosevelt has a First Lady made such an open commitment to the American public—and Betty Ford made that commitment to the well-being of American women.

She said, “I do not believe that being First Lady should prevent me from expressing my ideas” and meant it!

Betty Ford openly declared her support for Roe v Wade, stating in a television interview that the decision took the issue “out of the backwoods and put [it] in the hospital where it belongs.”

She spoke out and lobbied in support of the passage of the Equal Rights Amendment.  Betty Ford spoke frankly about premarital sex, at a time when her statement that she would sleep in the same bed with her husband while they lived in the White House shocked many.

Betty Ford was diagnosed with breast cancer within days of moving into the White House. Instead of remaining mute or hiding in shame—both of which were the expected conduct of the day—she made the breastin breast cancer meaningful. She encouraged women everywhere to get mammograms, and many did.

After leaving the White House, she spoke publicly about her addiction issues.  She expressed the difficulties of being a wife and mother, and how vulnerable women are to depression and insecurity.

Betty Ford lived in a time when women—prominent or otherwise—of all parties stood silent. Because of the tenor of our time, people today focus on the fact that she was a Republican First Lady. The truth is that Democrats and Republicans alike were not speaking out—but Betty Ford was!

Today, sadly, we are back to that time. Many Democrats stand mute as women’s reproductive rights are being eradicated. We must demand more. Where were Barbara Bush, Laura Bush and Michele Obama when their husbands passed legislation that took another big bite out of our rights to control our own bodies? (Just look at the damage caused by the Nelson Amendment in Healthcare or the current refusal to make contraception part of preventive care.)

We need another Betty Ford in the White House! Next time—hopefully—as President!

Betty Ford was a woman first, and everything else second!

http://www.christianpost.com/news/westboro-baptist-church-to-protest-at-betty-ford-funeral-52178/

http://www.jillstanek.com/2011/07/betty-fords-pro-abortion-legacy/

In Ohio, Hope Springs Eternal—Despite the Right to Life’s Incessant Opposition

On Wednesday, a bill—the Ohio Prevention First Act—which focuses on reducing unintended pregnancies through different steps including education and requiring Emergency Contraception to be available to rape victims, was introduced.  The sponsors of the Ohio Prevention First Act are two State Democratic representatives, Rep. Nickie Antonio and Sen. Capri Cafaro.

The Ohio Right to Life is opposing the bill. (One can only assume that the Right to Life groups all over the country  believe that education, i.e. an informed public, and protecting rape victims are bad things.)

The bill includes “…provisions such as reproductive health education, giving sexual assault victims access to emergency contraception (i.e., the “morning after pill”), creating a state teen pregnancy prevention task force, preventing a health insurance company from limiting or excluding coverage for FDA-approved prescription contraception and requiring a pharmacy to dispense any prescribed drug, device or over-the-counter medications.”**

The Right to Life argument claims that “[t]he abortion industry” is putting this logical bill forward and it will “decrease access to health care.”

Sponsors Rep. Nickie Antonio and Sen. Capri Cafaro say the bill is exactly about insuring health care and well-being.

“I invite members of the General Assembly to join us in supporting women as fully responsible and capable citizens who are entitled to full access to contraceptives, comprehensive reproductive health information and compassionate assistance for rape victims,” said Rep. Antonio in a press release. “Doctors take an oath to ‘first do no harm’ and I believe we legislators can apply ‘Prevention First’ as an important strategy to reduce unintended pregnancies and promote the health and well-being of all Ohioans.”**

The sponsors are introducing identical legislation in the Ohio House and Senate.

**newsnet5.com,6/24/2011

“You Can’t Be Pro-Choice Unless You Support Equal Access”

From one of the most important organizations in the nation, National Network of Abortion Funds,  written by Stephanie Poggi.

Stephanie Poggi provides a clear, historically accurate account of  the Obama Administration’s failure to advocate for women’s reproductive rights.

“If recent statements are any indication, the Obama Administration would very much like to rewrite what it means to be “pro-choice.” The Administration continues to claim that it supports the right of a woman to make her own decision about whether and when to have a child. But it turns out that the Administration only stands firm when that woman has economic resources.

It’s more than a contradiction in terms and much more than a “compromise” to deny access to abortion care to a low-income woman. The 120,000 women who called our abortion funding hotline for help last year can tell you what it really means. Not having enough food for the children you already have. Having the electricity shut off because you need that money to pay for an abortion. Selling your car, even though you need it to get to work. Not being able to return to college next semester.

Yes, we understand that many in Congress would like to end the legal status of abortion altogether. Because funding restrictions are a step toward that goal, capitulation will only embolden our opponents and get us even more onerous obstacles blocking a low-income woman’s path to an abortion.

The reproductive rights, health, and justice communities will fight – until we win – for the ability of every single woman to make the decision she feels is best for herself and her family. We will keep working until we have restored federal Medicaid coverage of abortion – and ensured it is once again available on the same terms as coverage for women continuing a pregnancy. Because nothing less will guarantee that a woman can make this fundamental decision for herself. Our commitment to the lives and futures of women and families prompted us to express our concern and disappointment when Secretary Sebelius recently went out of her way to disavow public funding. Joined by over 50 organizations in the reproductive rights and justice communities, the National Network of Abortion Funds and Catholics for Choice wrote to the Secretary after she was quoted in the press as saying that, “Federal funds have never supported abortion, do not support abortion, will not support abortion.”

The Executive Office of the President quickly followed Secretary Sebelius’s remarks with a “Statement of Administration Policy” promising that the Administration “will strongly oppose legislation that unnecessarily restricts women’s reproductive freedoms and consumers’ private insurance options,” but it simultaneously outlined all of the steps the Administration has taken to bolster “[l]ongstanding Federal policy [that] prohibits federal funds from being used for abortions” – in other words, all of the Administration’s actions to shore up the federal ban on Medicaid funding for abortion. These actions include accepting a ban on funding in the health reform law and reinforcing that ban by issuing an Executive Order. Apparently the Administration believes that only women with private insurance are entitled to full “reproductive freedom and access to health care” – otherwise, how can restrictions on funding for low-income women not “unnecessarily” restrict women’s rights?

This Statement of Administration Policy recalls President Obama’s claim during the health care debate that, “I’m pro-choice, but I think we also have the tradition in this town, historically, of not financing abortions as part of government-funded health care.” There are many traditions in the nation’s capital and the United States that our elected officials now rightly reject, including racial segregation and blatant sex discrimination.

Setting the Record Straight
Secretary Sebelius is wrong when she insists that federal funds “have never supported abortion.” After the U. S. Supreme Court decriminalized abortion in 1973, Medicaid included abortion in its health care services. After all, Medicaid exists to provide health care to low-income families and individuals and abortion is a legal medical procedure. At that time, Medicaid paid for about one-third of all abortions, clearly demonstrating the need for federal funding of abortion. Looking at the situation today, we know that lower-income women seek abortions at higher rates, a reflection of the greater barriers they face to affordable contraception and also the enormous challenge of raising children in a tight job market. This reality underscores the continuing need for federal funding of both contraception and abortion for women living in poverty.

It was only after Representative Henry Hyde (R-IL) introduced the amendment that now bears his name that Congress rescinded payments for abortion under Medicaid, absent one of a few circumstances: rape, incest, or a life-threatening pregnancy. As the years went by, conservative lawmakers attached riders to virtually every appropriations bill containing a federally-funded health care program, restricting access to abortion for millions of women. Once Congress cut off funding, a majority of states eventually followed suit. Today, only a third of the states cover abortion care for women enrolled in Medicaid, for which they receive no federal reimbursement.

When health care experts make decisions about what types of health services to cover, abortion is usually included, as seen in the early years of federal Medicaid coverage as well as the 80 percent of private insurance plans that cover abortion care. When conservative politicians make those decisions, abortion is excluded.

Connecting Rights to Resources
The Obama Administration did take one step toward dismantling economic barriers to abortion, when it restored the right of home rule to the District of Columbia so that the District could use its own local tax revenues to pay for abortions under Medicaid. This funding was a lifeline for many of the District’s low-income and downright poor residents, faced with the worst recession in decades. But the Administration bargained away even this measure of progress in the recent negotiations over the FY 2011 spending bill. When Congress reinstated the ban on funding in D.C., clinics saw a rash of cancelled appointments by women who had just had the financial rug pulled out from under them.

A woman enrolled in Medicaid in D.C. represents exactly the groups of women hit hardest by funding bans – low-income, disproportionately of color, and often young. While every woman deserves access to the full range of reproductive health care no matter the source of her insurance, it is low-income women who suffer the most when health insurance excludes abortion. It is these women who really need the President and his Administration to stand up for their rights. Federal funding is a key ingredient to ensure that every woman, rich or poor, can make the decision that is right for her and her family, given the life circumstances she knows best.

The Democratic Party acknowledges as much, stating that “The Democratic Party strongly and unequivocally supports Roe v. Wade and a woman’s right to choose a safe and legal abortion, regardless of ability to pay, and we oppose any and all efforts to weaken or undermine that right.”

Governments in other countries increasingly recognize the need to ensure that women can exercise their reproductive rights by allocating funding to pay for the implementation of those rights. For example, when the legislative assembly in Mexico City adopted a new policy to legalize abortion, it made sure that women in need would be able to access care regardless of their financial situation.

And as one woman who described her decision to join the Network’s national fundraising campaign put it, “The right to choose without federal funding for abortion is like the right to an education without a public school system” – in other words, a privilege of those with economic resources, not a right at all.

It is well past time for the federal government to restore funding of abortion. Access for low-income women demands government action; women without economic resources are the ones who most need public policies to guarantee their rights. Along with our allies in the reproductive health, rights, and justice movements, we will press forward to expand access to abortion for lower-income women, and to persuade the Obama Administration to do its part.”

Westchester Magazine Perpetuates Rep Hayworth Deception

In response to Westchester Magazine’s June article  claiming Hayworth is pro-choice (click here to read)

Nan Hayworth is not pro-choice. Prior to her election, she expressed support for restricting Choice, and support for the Stupak Amendment. After her election she has voted against reproductive rights multiple times:

– She voted for the Pence bill to cut all funding to Planned Parenthood and all of their cancer screenings, STI testing, birth control and more even though she knows that no federal funds go to abortion now because of the Hyde Amendment;
– She voted to cut all Title X funding and thus the family planning services provided to approximately five million women and men;
– She voted to overturn the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act.

The fact that she calls herself pro-choice would be baffling if we did not know she simply does it because the voters in her district (19 CD) would never have elected her if they had known she was anti-choice.

And another point, the Westchester Magazine article portrays Nan and her husband as this cute couple in a relationship where she goes to Washington and he stays home with the kids. The truth is that he is also a Washington player. He is Chair of the Board of Directors of the American Medical Group Association — a group that lobbies Congress, and thus his wife. I find the idea of a representative from our area being married to a lobbyist, voting on healthcare issues to be troubling.

Posted byJaney Lee, Board Member, WCLA-Choice Matters
(In Westchester County, WCLA-Choice Matters is the organization that actually does the homework to see if a candidate’s claim to be pro-choice is true or not. )

County Executive Astorino ‘Blesses’ Sexual Harassment Email

The Sequence of Events
**Tuesday, May 10th, George Oros, who is County Executive (CE) Rob Astorino’s Chief of Staff, and the CE’s Liaison to the Board of Legislators (BOL) and a former County Legislator himself, watched a live in-house broadcast of a BOL Committee on Community Services meeting at which closure of mental health facilities was being discussed.  The closure of these centers affects thousands of Westchester residents and is being proposed by the CE.

**While Legislator Judy Myers, who is a Democrat representing Rye City, Mamaroneck Town, Larchmont, and parts of the Village of Mamaroneck, New Rochelle and Rye Town and is the only woman in a leadership position on the BOL, was discussing the impact the closures will have on mental health patients, Chief of Staff George Oros expressed his response to her comments with the following email:

“Judy sounds so breathless – “ooooohhhhh yeeeeesssss.”

**Oros, at 4:02 p.m., emailed the above to Legislator Myers. Some say he did this accidentally—maybe yes, maybe no.

Oros – Disrespecting and Insulting ALL Women
As Phil Reisman pointed out, George Oros’ email was “… practically a direct quote from Meg Ryan’s fake orgasm scene in “When Harry Met Sally.” (Click here to read Reisman’s comments.)
Oros was not responding to what Legislator Myers was saying. Oros was sexualizing Legislator Myers. He took away her mental capacity and saw only a sexual object.

Legislator Myers was elected by thousands of constituents in her district to represent them on the Westchester County Board.  They thought of her as a bright, articulate individual capable of looking out for their best interests.

Chief of Staff Oros stripped away all of that respect and replaced it with nothing more than the Old Boys Club idea that women serve only as subservient sexual entities.

The Role Modeling of CE Astorino
CE Astorino’s response to this sequence of events was to laugh it off and call it “silly.”

His explanation was that at one time Oros and Myers worked together as legislators and that that somehow made this okay.

Clearly Mr. Astorino does not understand that “harassment in the workplace” means exactly that—harassment by a co-worker in the workplace.

The expression a fish rots from the head applies here and the head is CE Astorino.  He has made it clear that in this administration women are to be second class citizens. There is not one woman—not a single one—in a decision-making position working in the County Executive’s Office.

Oros’ frat house behavior cannot simply be dismissed as boys-will-be-boys. It is not simply silliness, but instead a serious offense.  No one should be permitted to refer to another individual in such a derogatory and demeaning manner.

If it is okay when it happens to an elected official, then it will be okay when it happens to our daughters, sisters, mothers, partners, or aunts. We must be outraged now, before it hits any closer to home.

Take Action
Contact CE Astorino’s office and say, “We will not tolerate that behavior.”

Demand Mr. Oros’s immediate resignation.   Contact the County Executive’s office at 914-995-2800 or by email at ce@westchestergov.com.

Republicans Vote Unanimously (along with 16 Dems) – Pass “Stupak on Steriods”

This week, ALL House Republicans, with the help of 16 Democrats, voted successfully to pass the greatest assault on women’s health to date—H.R. 3, the “Stupak on Steriods” bill .  It is a horrific expansion of government insertion in women’s health though mandates and tax penalties for families and small businesses which use private funds to buy insurance plans that include abortion coverage. House Republicans were unanimous in their assault on women.

Note: Nan Hayworth (R-19 CD) voted in support of this direct attack on women. (Voters must remember that next Election Day!) (You can see a record of who voted how here.)
To Hear From Leaders who Believe in Women:
Click here to hear Congressman Engel’s (D-17 C.D.) and Congresswoman Lowey (D-18 C.D.) speak out in support of women and against H.R. 3.

H.R. 3 is actually an extreme attempt to eliminate access to and coverage of abortion services by: 1. Prohibiting federal and military employees from buying coverage (even with their own money); 2. Initiating rape audits if insurance is used to cover the procedure; 3. Limiting coverage of rape victims to only those who can prove forcible rape; 4. Allowing hospitals to watch women die if saving them means performing an abortion; and 5. Implementing financial barriers to cripple small businesses that offer employees health plans that include abortion coverage.

Only we–you and I–stand between Stupak on Steroids and the Senate. Click here to Support our Fight! We Must Fight Back with Everything We’ve Got!

In the Senate, extremist Republicans are already working to ensure H.R. 3 comes to the Senate floor.We, their constituents, must make our opposition to H.R.3 heard. CLICK HERE to contact your Senators. Tell them to oppose H.R. 3

New Yorkers:   To contact Senator Schumer:
Call 202-224-6542
To send him a message, click here.
To contact Senator Gillibrand:
Call (202) 224-4451
To send her a message, click here.

The Tea Party Congressional Reps Attack Women, Seniors and the Poor ALL in One Go!

On Friday, Tea Party favorite Republican Rep. of Wisconsin Paul D. Ryan’s budget was passed by a vote of 235 to 193. All Democrats and seven Republicans voted against it.

This budget attacks Medicare programs that serve those 65 and older, Medicaid health programs for the poor, and any funding for Planned Parenthood and Title X–WHILE CUTTING CORPORATE AND PERSONAL INCOME TAX RATES!

Clearly it was not enough to hit the poor with the Hyde Amendment and the slashing of funds to DC City residents, now they have to attack Planned Parenthood by cutting all of their funding.  Perhaps these extremists relish the idea of the poor not being able to get cancer screenings, breast exams and birth control.

This Tea Party-controlled Congress is showing the world that Social Darwinism rules. They are targeting the most vulnerable–the elderly, the poor, and women–while empowering corporations and the most wealthy.

Read more in The New York Times

New York’s Senator Kirsten Gillibrand Joins Forces with Other Female Senators to Protect Women’s Health

And They Say it Soooo Well!

GILLIBRAND, SENATE DEMOCRATIC WOMEN CALL ON REPUBLICANS TO END CONTINUED ASSAULT ON WOMEN’S HEALTH

Washington, DC—Senator Kirsten Gillibrand, together with Senate Democratic women, urged their Republican colleagues to vote against the upcoming resolutions that would eliminate funding for Planned Parenthood and roll back health care reform, and to end a continued legislative assault on women’s health care options. The Senators highlighted the devastating impacts these resolutions would have on women and families across the country.

“The election last November was not a mandate for any one political party or ideology,” said Senator Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY). “It was a mandate for action – for solutions that will create jobs and get our country going again.  But what are the House Republicans focused on? Not creating jobs. Not growing our economy – but an assault on the rights of women, and health services for millions of American families. These votes to defund Planned Parenthood and repeal health care reform show a disregard for women. If Republicans continue their anti-woman agenda, they will continue to find a fight in the Senate.”

“Even though the Republicans want to take women back to the Dark Ages, we will not go,” Senator Barbara A. Mikulski (D-MD) said. “We will fight them with every legislative tool at our disposal. Make no mistake: This entire process has not been about reducing the debt or the deficit – it’s been about reducing opportunity. The major constituencies that bear this burden are the women and children”

“I am proud to stand here with my Democratic women colleagues to send the message that we are not going to allow women to be thrown under the bus in this – or any other – budget debate,” said Senator Patty Murray (D-WA). “As a woman and a mother, I am angry that women’s health care is even up for debate right now. I truly hope that once we win these votes and put the issues behind us, Republicans stop playing ideological political games, and work with us in good faith on the serious issues facing our country.”

“This is simply an opportunity for the right wing to turn back the clock and really sock it to American women,” said Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-CA). “To be clear, to end federal funding for Planned Parenthood is to stop providing critical health care to millions of American women, the majority of whom are poor and cannot afford the range of preventative health services provided in California and around the country.”

“While claiming to be focused solely on deficit reduction, Republicans have been pushing an extreme ideological agenda that threatens the health and lives of American women,” said Senator Barbara Boxer (D-CA), We will continue to stand up for the millions of women and families who rely on these preventive and life-saving health care services.”

“While our budget hangs in the balance, Republicans have chosen to wage a war on women’s health, and we are the last line of defense,” said Senator Maria Cantwell (D-WA). “We should not be diverted by an extremist social agenda not supported by the majority of Americans. Let’s get back to putting Americans back to work, creating new jobs, and moving our economy forward.”

“Votes on unrelated political issues are a distraction from the real debate over the budget, which itself is a distraction from what we should be talking about–creating jobs,” said Senator Debbie Stabenow (D-MI). “It’s very troubling that a vote to cut cancer screenings and routine care for women was what the Republicans demanded in exchange for not shutting down the government.”

“Just days after a bipartisan budget agreement, I am frustrated that the Senate will spend valuable time on a partisan measure that threatens to take away vital health services for millions of vulnerable American women,” Senator Kay Hagan (D-N.C.) said. “Last year, North Carolina Planned Parenthood facilities performed more than 11,000 breast and cervical cancer screenings and 18,000 STD tests for women who could not otherwise afford these services. I hope my colleagues will stop playing political Russian Roulette with women’s health services and instead focus on a bipartisan, comprehensive plan to reduce our long-term debt.”

“In some parts of New Hampshire, Planned Parenthood is the only provider of preventive health care services to low-income women,” said Senator Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.). “It’s going to be far worse for patients and more expensive for the government if we eliminate this funding.” (Press Release Issued 4/13/11)

Congress Trades Away DC Women’s Reproductive Rights (sounds like a slavery-like deal to me)

To avoid a government shutdown, our Congressional representatives agreed to deprive Washington DC women of city monies to fund abortion. Had it not been for the DC mayor and certain city council reps, this atrocity would never have come to light.

When all reproductive rights’ eyes were on the funding of Title X and Planned Parenthood, Congress pulled a fast one.  They included in the budget agreement a prohibition of the use of City funds–not Federal funds–but DC’s own money to pay for abortion.

DC residents did not have a problem with this allocation of funds.  The clear majority of the population support their mayor and his budget that respects the needs of the poor.

Because DC has special standing as a non-state, Congress could do this. DC women were the proverbial sacrificial lamb.

Only because the Mayor Vincent Gray of DC and six City Council people including the Chair demonstrated and were arrested did this horrific agreement ever get the attention of the media.

As Gray said so well, “If this isn’t taxation without representation, I don’t know what is!”