Senators Patty Murray and Hillary Clinton are speaking out against Bush’s proposed attack on women’s reproductive rights. They are calling on the secretary of Health and Human Services to block Bush’s plan to put ideology over science.
The text of their letter reads:
Secretary Michael O. Leavitt
The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services
200 Independence Avenue, S.W.
Washington, D.C. 20201
Dear Mr. Secretary:
It has come to our attention that the Department of Health and Human Services may be preparing draft regulations that would create new obstacles for women seeking contraceptive services.
One of the most troubling aspects of the proposed rules is the overly-broad definition of “abortion.” This definition would allow health-care corporations or individuals to classify many common forms of contraception – including the birth control pill, emergency contraception and IUDs – “abortions” and therefore to refuse to provide contraception to women who need it.
As a consequence, these draft regulations could disrupt state laws securing women’s access to birth control. They could jeopardize federal programs like Medicaid and Title X that provide family-planning services to millions of women. They could even undermine state laws that ensure survivors of sexual assault and rape receive emergency contraception in hospital emergency rooms.
We strongly urge you to reconsider these regulations before they are released. We are extremely concerned by this proposal’s potential to affect millions of women’s reproductive health.
Thank you for your attention to this matter.
Sincerely yours,
Senator Patty Murray
Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-NY)
Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi added her voice to the charge:
If the Administration goes through with this draft proposal, it will launch a dangerous assault on women’s health.
The majority of Americans oppose this out of touch position that redefines contraception as abortion and represents a sustained pattern of the Bush Administration to reject medical and sound science in favor of a misguided ideology that has no place in our government.
I urge the President to reject this policy and join with Democrats to focus on preventing unintended pregnancies and reducing the need for abortion through increasing access to family planning services and access to affordable birth control.
Bush should make up his mind whether or not he thinks individuals are smart enough to make our own decisions or not. Just last week he said that he wasn’t urging Americans to conserve fuel because we’re smart enough to make our own decisions. Right. Unless you’re a woman and your reproductive health is involved. Then he has no problem interfering.
UPDATE: Hillary Clinton has a guest blog piece up at RH Reality Check.
Shakesville has a great series going called “Impossibly Beautiful,” highlighting the photoshopping that goes in to making women fit into an unrealistic ideal of beauty.
I especially like numbers three (shrinking Kelly Clarkson’s lower half), four (airbrushing fake boobs onto Keira Knightly), thirteen (bobblehead Rachel Bilson), Vanessa Williams (no wrinkles at 45?), and of course, eighteen (Jennifer Hudson’s ridiculously impossible waist).
Check out PhotoshopDisasters for a lot more bad photoshopping. Maybe it will train your eye to catch the crazy photoshopping that goes on in the ads you see every day.
UPDATE: On a related note, check out this article about teenage girls’ feeling pressure to live up to sexual ideals (The Guardian).
The Bush administration is proposing that recipients of federal health money be required to sign written certifications that they will not discriminate against applicants who are morally opposed to abortion and birth control. Read the complete NY Times article here.
In the proposal, obtained by The New York Times, the administration says it could cut off federal aid to individuals or entities that discriminate against people who object to abortion on the basis of ‘religious beliefs or moral convictions.’
RH Reality Check points out that this proposal redefines pregnancy in such a way that it may cut off women’s access to forms of birth control used by 40% of women.
Up until now, the federal government followed the definition of pregnancy accepted by the American Medical Association and our nation’s pregnancy experts, the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, which is: pregnancy begins at implantation. With this proposal, however, HHS is dismissing medical experts and opting instead to accept a definition of pregnancy based on polling data. It now claims that pregnancy begins at some biologically unknowable moment (there’s no test to determine if a woman’s egg has been fertilized). Under these new standards there would be no way for a woman to prove she’s not pregnant. Thus, any woman could be denied contraception under HHS’ new science. The other rarely discussed issue here is whether hormonal contraception even does what the religious right claims. There is no scientific evidence that hormonal methods of birth control can prevent a fertilized egg from implanting in the womb. This argument is the basis upon which the religious right hopes to include the 40% of the birth control methods Americans use, such as the pill, the patch, the shot, the ring, the IUD, and emergency contraception, under the classification “abortion.” Even the “pro-life” movement’s most respected physicians cautioned the movement about making these claims.
And the result of these changes? Reduced access for low-income women.
Mary Jane Gallagher, president of the National Family Planning and Reproductive Health Association, which represents providers, said, ‘The proposed definition of abortion is so broad that it would cover many types of birth control, including oral contraceptives and emergency contraception.’
‘We worry that under the proposal, contraceptive services would become less available to low-income and uninsured women,’ Ms. Gallagher said.
Indeed, among other things the proposal expresses concern about state laws that require hospitals to provide emergency contraception to rape victims who request it.
Nancy Keenan, president of Naral Pro-Choice America, said, ‘Why on earth is the Bush administration trying to discourage doctors and clinics from providing contraception to women who need it?’ (NY Times)
Even the global gag rule has exceptions for the case of rape. This new domestic gag rule appears even more severe. The majority of this country supports the Supreme Court’s decision about Roe v Wade, more people identify as ‘pro-choice’ than not, so why is this administration injecting its narrow religious views into the field of medicine? Stop withholding money from organizations that provide necessary health care to women and families based politics and ideology.
Despite the campaign’s attempts to blame slips of the tongue or nitpicking of verb tenses, it has become painfully obvious that John McCain just doesn’t know where he stands on a number of important issues.
Of course the Obama campaign would want to be careful and polite about criticizing McCain. Obama should not be seen as making fun of McCain for having a lesser education than a guy who was president of the Harvard Law Review and graduated magna cum laude. Or for not being as sharp as he might have been a couple of decades ago.
Indeed, there are plenty of sharp policy wonks on the wrong side of any issue. The President doesn’t have to be a master of detail. He has advisors. But he has to at least learn enough from his advisors to be able to make an informed decision. McCain doesn’t seem to be able to do this, and his mistakes seem to be more about ideological blindness and political deception than a lack of education.
I would argue that it’s not just ideological or political, but personal. John McCain is simply arrogant. He hasn’t taken the time to learn about the issues that are most important to the people he wants to represent. Heck, he doesn’t even bother showing up for his job more than half the time. He had four months to brush up on his talking points while the media virtually ignored his campaign. What was he doing? Does he not think that my health care or our Veterans’ educational benefits are worth his time? To me, this is personal.
Let’s take the kid gloves off. Start asking the tough questions, and don’t settle for “I don’t want to talk about that issue,” or “I’ll get back to you.” No one is buying this “straight talk” business. We will not settle for another dumb, arrogant president.
During this past week: McCain called the most important entitlement program in the U.S. a disgrace, his top economic adviser called the American people whiners, McCain released an economic plan that no one thought was serious, he flip flopped on Iraq, joked about the deaths of Iranian citizens, and denied making comments that he clearly made — TWICE. All this and it is not even Friday! Yet watching and reading the mainstream press you would think McCain was having a pretty decent political week, I mean at least Jesse Jackson didn’t say anything about him.
On Monday, McCain unveiled his “plan” to eliminate a $410 billion deficit in just four years. The plan was immediately panned as incoherent nonsense, bolstered by the realization that McCain’s plan didn’t actually include any numbers.
On Tuesday, Iraqi officials, including Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, publicly speculated about the need for a U.S. withdrawal from Iraq, the opposite of McCain’s message of an indefinite war followed by an indefinite “presence.”
On Wednesday, we learned that McCain had described the Social Security system as a “total disgrace.” We also learned about McCain’s latest odd attempts at comedy, which included joking about killing Iranians. On Wednesday afternoon, there were then reports that some of the 300 economists who had “endorsed” McCain’s economic plan don’t actually support it after all.
On Thursday, we learned that McCain’s top economic advisor, former Sen. Phil Gramm, believes the current economic downturn is a “mental recession,” and that the U.S. is a “nation of whiners.” The same day, we watched McCain humiliate himself when trying to describe his record and policy when it comes insurance companies and birth control.
And on Friday, McCain’s personal life — which, in this case, includes adultery and lies about adultery — finally got picked up by a major domestic newspaper.
Mark Halperin thinks McCain won the week? Unless Barack Obama was filmed aiming his car at small, defenseless puppies, I don’t see how that’s even remotely possible.
And did I mention that John McCain was the ONLY U.S. Senator to miss the vote on Medicare? Ted Kennedy, who is battling a brain tumor, was there.
I heard Riane Eisler speak in Monterey at a forum about violence against women and she made many of the points she makes in this Alternet article. She discusses how “women’s issues” are too often viewed as special interest items, rather than problems of the majority. She also talks about how traditional gender roles encourage violence as a means of maintaining power, and how this equates to the current political situation in the U.S. and abroad.
Surely we can learn a lesson from this history: that progressives urgently need a political agenda that no longer relegates “women’s issues” to a secondary — indeed, invisible — place. We need a politics of partnership that recognizes that questioning “traditional” gender roles and relations is foundational to the movement to more democratic and egalitarian relations across the board.
The equal valuing of the two halves of humanity — women and men — will obviously vastly improve girls’ and women’s quality of life. But it’s also essential if we are to move to a more democratic, peaceful, and sustainable future for us all.
Fresno State University (in California) thought it could get away with discriminating against three female coaches based on their genders and sexual orientations. It happens all the time without recourse, so why would this time be any different? Turns out they were wrong in a big way, to the tune of several million dollars.
There have been many victories under Title IX — the 1972 legislation that commanded federally funded educational institutions not to sex-discriminate in any area, including sports — but the three cases that rocked Fresno State University’s sports department last year stand out for their enormity.
First of all, John McCain is the most absent senator, showing up for his job less than 40% of the time. Second, he can’t seem to remember the rare votes he makes when he is there. So why exactly would we want to elect him to an even more important office?
As you probably heard, Carly Fiorina made a gaffe today by bringing up the issue of health insurance coverage for contraceptives, which McCain does not support. She also mentioned that women would like to have a “choice,” which McCain also opposes.
When asked about the incident, McCain responded:
“I certainly do not want to discuss that issue,” the presidential candidate said when a reporter asked him about it on his campaign bus, the “Straight Talk Express.”
That’s funny, John McCain, because it’s an issue that many women (and men) care deeply about. Even Fiorina admits she’s been hearing about the issue “from a lot of women.”
When pressed further on the issue, McCain pulled out the ol’ reliable “I don’t recall,” which seems to have worked well for him in the past.
When asked Wednesday if he had voted in the Senate against a proposal to require insurance companies to cover contraceptive products, McCain replied, “I don’t know enough about it to give you an informed answer because I don’t recall the vote… I don’t usually duck an issue, but I’ll try to get back to you.” (Read the full article from AP here)
Since when is “I don’t know” an acceptable answer? I guess if I had changed my mind this many times, I’d have a hard time remembering where I stand as well.
That’s it, John, keep playing dumb. It worked for Bush.
UPDATE: This video makes me think he’s not playing dumb. He honestly has no idea what his opinion is on the issue.
A man at a town hall meeting wants to know why McCain didn’t vote to increase health care funding for returning Vets. McCain first talks about the GI Bill, which he also didn’t support, but never gets around to answering the man’s question about health care for returning Vets. McCain goes on to claim he’s received every award from every major Veterans organization in America, a claim that the guest rebuts with facts and figures, and McCain proceeds to essentially call the man a liar in front of a room full of people.
McCain has made the exact same claim before — and it is just a false today as it was then. As ThinkProgress documented, McCain’s so-called “perfect” record has been roundly criticized by prominent veterans groups: He received a grade of D from the Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America and a 20 percent vote rating from the Disabled Veterans of America; Vietnam Veterans of America noted McCain had “voted against us” in 15 “key votes.”
As for the American Legion and the Veterans of Foreign Wars — with whom McCain claims to have a “perfect voting record” — both groups vigorouslysupported Sen. Jim Webb’s (D-VA) GI Bill that McCain tirelesslyopposed.
Later in the town hall, McCain admitted he does “not have a perfect voting record,” but then declared that questions about veterans issues were off limits: “I will be glad to debate a lot of things, but not that one,” McCain said. (Think Progress)
McCain never thanks the man, who appears to be a Veteran, for his service to our country, despite the fact that the man recognizes McCain’s service. Way to support our troops, McCain. Calling them liars when they bring up questions about your voting record, pretending not to know what they’re referring to because it will catch you in a lie, and not acknowledging their service after they’ve applauded yours isn’t the way you’re going to get their votes.
For a man who claims to thrive in the town hall format, scolding guests for speaking out of turn and suddenly declaring question topics “off limits” doesn’t make you seem very approachable or open.
And these are just the people that get in to the “public” townhall meetings. Imagine what kinds of questions McCain would be butchering if his townhall guests weren’t screened to make sure the dissenting 61-year-old librarians didn’t “trespass.”
Noticing the Gap 