Women and Politics

Yesterday’s primaries brought huge victories for women across the country—many who succeeded against great odds, such as Sen. Blanche Lincoln in Arkansas and victim of egregious misogyny and racism, Nikki Haley, in South Carolina.

But the biggest headline we’re still seeing is how many of yesterday’s victorious women belong to the Republican party. Winning the GOP nomination last night were Carly Fiorina for U.S. Senate in California, Meg Whitman for California Governor, and anti-establishment candidate Sharron Angle for U.S. Senate in Nevada.

Though some of these women don’t share WCF’s views on reproductive health choices, I am encouraged. This sudden deluge of victories has forced the country to stand up and take notice of women’s political power.

That said, I want to ask these candidates one question: If elected, what will you do to advance women’s rights?

Many of you prevailed in spite of the Political Establishment. Now, it is my great hope that you will use your hard-earned collective power to help us break up the Good Ol’ Boys’ Club and change the many existing harmful views against women.

It is my firm belief that we need more women in government—but it’s essential that they use their leadership to protect and empower all women in America.

That means working to turn the tide of the Establishment, which continually looks to restrict women’s freedoms across the board.

We all know how difficult it is for Republican women to defend reproductive health choices. The party’s vicious attacks against Dede Scozzafava last year were a prime example of this.

In fact, RNC member Bill Crocker said in January,

“No more Scozzafavas, please. No more Specters, please. No more Chafees, please.”

Well at WCF, we want many more Scozzafavas, please. At WCF, we constantly look for Republican candidates who do support health choices, work to provide a safe haven for those women, and find new ways to recruit pro-choice Republican women.

Moderate Republican Woman shouldn’t be a bad word. We want both parties to acknowledge that most Americans believe health choices should be left up to the individual, not the government or a politician.

So as the country lies in wait to see how many new GOP women will be elected this November, I challenge  these women to take a stand for their gender—not work against it.

This week in Oklahoma, two radical anti-choice laws were passed by the legislature over the Governor’s veto—and the collective outcry of women across the country. These shocking laws invade women’s privacy and clearly violate medical ethics.

And they would never have passed if Oklahoma had more women in their state government.

Oklahoma ranks 49th in the nation for women’s representation in their State Legislature. There are only 12 women serving out of 149 Oklahoma State Representatives and Senators. These numbers make even the paltry representation of women in U.S. Congress seem progressive.

With only 12 female voices in the state government, what hope did women in Oklahoma have that their human right to responsible medical care would be respected?

The first of these laws is a classic move from the anti-choice playbook. Women seeking an abortion in Oklahoma not only have to undergo an invasive ultrasound, they must also listen to a coercive lecture on the fetus’s development. If the pregnancy is still in the earliest stages, the ultrasound must be performed vaginally, which is an intrusive and often painful procedure. No exception is made for survivors of rape or incest. Laws like this do not educate: They only try to shame women, put up barriers to choice, and impinge upon a doctor’s discretion as to the best ways to inform her patients.

The next law is even more horrifying: Doctors in Oklahoma are now protected from malpractice suits if they withhold information about fetal birth defects from their patients.

Let me repeat that: A doctor can lie to a patient and purposefully withhold life-changing medical facts with NO repercussions. According to the state legislature, women in Oklahoma cannot be trusted to make their own medical decisions, and they must be subject to the personal beliefs of their doctors. This law is medically and morally unethical in the extreme.

Would it be acceptable for a doctor to withhold information from a patient in any other setting? Why do pregnant women lose their human rights? I stand with Oklahoma Governor Brad Henry, who said,

“It is unconscionable to grant a physician legal protection to mislead or misinform pregnant women in an effort to impose his or her personal beliefs on a patient.”

It’s crystal clear that women cannot expect anyone else to defend our rights: We must stand up and represent ourselves. Changing the political climate in Oklahoma will start with ensuring that a critical mass of women are on the ballot each election year. Only when women have equality in public office will our voices be heard over the din of politics as usual.

By: Jen Nedeau
Crossposted from Women’s Media Center

Fully understanding the importance of health care for all Americans, the author, who manages the WMC Not Under the Bus campaign, describes a sense of betrayal shared by many—and how to move forward.

“So this isn’t radical reform.  But it is major reform.  This legislation will not fix everything that ails our health care system.  But it moves us decisively in the right direction.  This is what change looks like.”—President Obama

So this is what change looks like? Throwing women’s rights under the bus in exchange for health care?

Something about this doesn’t feel like change. Something about this feels all too familiar. Once again, women’s rights are being used as a bargaining chip for political gain. Once again, the right to choose is not left in the hands of women, but left in the hands of male politicians who will never be faced with an unwanted pregnancy.

Yes, it is true that Speaker Nancy Pelosi worked incredibly hard to get the votes to pass the bill that now makes it illegal for insurance companies to discriminate against women with higher premiums than men or deny coverage to women who have had Caesarean sections or survived domestic violence.

Yes, it is true that bill will make health care more accessible for women and families across America by controlling costs and offering a public marketplace where those without insurance can buy their own affordable coverage.

However, these very important advancements cannot disguise two major attacks on women’s choice.

The first attack was passing a bill that contained Ben Nelson’s Manager’s Amendment.

The second attack is the Executive Order from the White House reaffirming the Hyde Amendment ban on federal funding of abortion and effectively extending it beyond its current application. In the Daily Beast, Dana Goldstein discusses how the “executive order enshrined the Hyde Amendment and expanded its reach into the new private insurance exchanges created by the health-care bill.”

At the end of the day, more than 30 million uninsured Americans can now have access to health reform, but it is abundantly clear women’s health is not considered a priority.

If you are a pro-choice advocate, this is not the change we hoped to see, particularly from a Democratic President and Democratic Majority Congress.

The bill that was passed contains language that has the potential to create a nation completely divided by access to abortion.  With the Nelson language intact, it is possible for abortion rights to be completely stripped from the hands of low-income women, who are disproportionately non-white, by the predominantly male-led state legislatures.

According to the Guttmacher Institute , “nearly half of all pregnancies to American women are unintended and four in 10 of these end in abortion.” Guttmacher also reports that unintended pregnancies have increased by 29 percent among poor women while decreasing 20 percent among higher-income women.

As the bill stands at this point, if a state opts out of abortion coverage in the exchange, women who cannot afford a private insurance plan would have few viable options for seeking access to abortion. That means reproductive choice is no longer left with women individually, but given to the state. After last night’s historic vote, it may feel like the health care reform battle is over. But for millions of women across America, it has really just begun.

Today CREDO launched an action taking a firm stand against anti-choice Democrats who betrayed women across America saying, “It’s time for pro-choice donors and members of Congress to stop funneling money to the anti-choice candidates via the DCCC.”

You can sign CREDO’s petition and take the momentum of ”Yes We Can” pass health care to “Yes We Can” repeal the Hyde Amendment.

It is time to finally give women across America—not just those who can afford private health care, but every woman—a real choice when it comes to their body, their destiny and their future.

Will there ever come a day where historic legislation is passed and women aren’t thrown under the bus?

While the House passing the healthcare reform bill is the first step on the long road to improving the lives of women and children, it still came at their expense.

Instead of focusing on improving the healthcare needs of all Americans, U.S. Congress debated further restrictions to reproductive health. Once again, we watch as women’s health falls to the cutting room floor—being used as a bargaining chip and kicked around like a political football.

Not only should this serve as a wake-up call on the second-class status of women in our country, but also how critical women’s representation in government truly is. If women held 50 percent of the seats in Congress, amendments like Stupak-Pitts and Nelson-Hatch would not be passed.

It’s 2010, and still women are not valued in our society. We aren’t trusted to make our own medical decisions. We allow members of Congress to spout the ideals of non-invasive government as they propose increased government interference into our health decisions.

How will this end? More women in government. You want to make sure we don’t lose pro-choice seats this November? Support pro-reproductive rights female candidates today. Ask a woman to think about running for office.

If we want to crawl out from underneath the bus, we need more women in public office to lend us a hand.

This post was submitted by Caitlin O’Brien, WCF Development Fellow

It has been a long and tiring year for health care legislation. And just when we thought the Senate bill would make its way to President Obama’s desk for signing, the Stupak Amendment rears its ugly head, once again.

Rep. Bart Stupak (D-MI) announced yesterday that he will vote against the Senate health care bill with its current reproductive rights language—which, by the way, already makes it nearly impossible for insurance companies to provide abortion coverage. He, along with 11 other members of Congress, has vowed not to back down on his anti-choice decision. But guess what? Neither will we.

And by ‘we’ I really mean ‘the American people.’

In a recent study done by the Women’s Donor Network, 56% of the American public agreed that people should be allowed to buy plans that cover abortion even if they bought said plan with partial government subsidies.

What’s more, 47% of people said that the reproductive rights debate should not keep us from passing important health care legislation.

So, when Congressman Stupak claims that this is what the American people want, he is flat out lying. What the people want is a more thorough conversation on reproductive health issues. In the same Women’s Donor Network study, 89% of the American public agreed that,

“There is a much broader discussion that needs to happen that includes issues such as birth control, comprehensive sex education, maternal health and childbirth issues.”

Interestingly enough, this same poll suggests that over 40% of people would not be pleased with their member of Congress if they voted a piece of legislation like the Stupak Amendment through. But Rep. Stupak and his band of loyal followers are so determined to restrict a woman’s control over her own body that they think it’s worth risking their congressional careers.

Even if health care is passed without Stupak’s own brand of anti-choice language, it is possible that the Congressman will attempt to pass a separate piece of restrictive legislation.

So this is where you come in. We need to band together to make sure that Stupak does not have the opportunity to pass a piece of legislation that is not only oppressive, but unpopular. Vanessa at Feminsting.com makes a compelling call for action:

Someone, anyone has got to be courageous here and call Stupak out on exactly what he’s trying to do: use health care reform as a vehicle to make abortion even more difficult and more inaccessible than it already is for millions of women. If no one does, we may have ourselves a brand, spanking new restriction to access on our hands.

Here is a list of the 11 ‘no’ voters on the health care bill. Flood their inboxes, overflow their mailbox, and ring their phones right off of their hooks. Urge them to reconsider their vote on health care and their position on reproductive justice:

Joe Cao (R-LA)
Jerry Costello (D-IL)
Kathy Dahlkemper (D-PA)
Joe Donnelly (D-IN)
Steve Dreihaus (D-OH)
Brad Ellsworth (D-IN)
Marcy Kaptur (D-OH)
Dale Kildee (D-MI)
Dan Lipinski (D-IL)
Jim Oberstar (D-MN)
Charlie Wilson (D-OH)

Also take action via NARAL Pro-Choice America by MIDNIGHT Sunday. Enough is enough!

This post was submitted by Ann McLane Kuster, Candidate for Congress (NH-02)

Next week I’m headed down to New York for WCF’s “Parties of Your Choice” Gala, and I thought it would be a good time to share here one of the reasons I chose to run for Congress this year – and why I think more women should run.

I’ve worked here in New Hampshire as an attorney and a public policy advocate my whole life, focusing on improving access to health care and affordable higher education.  But I’ve also worked as an adoption attorney for the past twenty-five years, and in doing so I have been reminded hundreds of times about the importance of trusting women to have autonomy over their lives.  It’s a lesson that has sadly often fallen on deaf ears in Washington.

As an adoption attorney I have dedicated my career to the autonomy of women - young and old, rich and poor, educated and illiterate - who have faced the daunting decision of an unplanned pregnancy.  I have represented birthmothers from age 14 to 44, from junior high school to a junior at a prestigious college, from living in a car to the nicest neighborhoods in town. I have witnessed the courage and grace of teenagers facing emergency Caesarians and women showing up at the emergency room in labor having never told anyone about being pregnant. I have represented women pregnant from date rape, incest and abusive relationships and women who thought pregnancy would bring happiness to a failed relationship.  We laugh together, we cry together and in the end, we make our way together to another day.

Most birthmothers come to me late in the pregnancy, often just a few weeks before delivery. My role is to offer them legal support and guidance through the adoption process. Most birthmothers choose to receive counseling about their decision to place their baby for adoption. All of the birthmothers choose the prospective adoptive family who will parent their child and many choose to meet the parents before the birth. Some birthparents and adoptive families choose to visit in the hospital and exchange photos and letters as the baby grows up. Occasionally, they may even meet again later in life and now, after 25 years, I am asked to arrange birthparent reunions with grown children.

Witnessing these courageous women make difficult life decisions, and supporting them through the adoption process, has been the honor of my life.  When I hear politicians in Washington argue over how far they can restrict reproductive rights in pending health care legislation – and when I see special interests poised to kill reform entirely – I can’t help but think that having a Congress made up of only 17% women is, in effect, shortchanging the American people.  We deserve to have our entire nation, and all of its challenges and experiences, represented in Washington.

So I’m putting my money where my mouth is – I’m running for Congress.

Running for office for the first time isn’t easy, but more than 1,600 supporters have contributed to my campaign since I began last summer, helping raise over $650,000 and making our race one of the most competitive races in the nation.  We have a long way to go, but I know that I am doing my part to amplify women’s voices in Washington, and I know that more than 1,600 supporters are doing their part as well.  Please join us! Together, we can make a difference.

In honor of the 37th Anniversary of Roe v. Wade, I am Blogging for Choice - a NARAL Pro-Choice America tradition. TOPIC: What does Trust Women mean to you?

Trust. It’s a tricky thing—very difficult to earn, but extremely easy to lose.

It’s a concept most often applied to close personal relationships. You need to trust your family, partner, doctor, friends, auto mechanic, co-workers, etc.

But what about when we think of trust on a larger scale—our government, elected officials, and world leaders? We’re supposed to trust them to protect us and make decisions in our best interests.

In America, we’re granted the freedom to make many personal decisions. Because of this, we’re in essence saying that we trust our fellow Americans to carry out their actions in a careful and harmless manner. Be it with their gun ownership, raising children, public safety, etc.

However, it’s become increasingly clear that some members of our society and even our elected officials don’t trust certain groups of people—be it based on race, sexual orientation, religion, ethnicity, or gender.

Women, over half of the US population, certainly don’t seem to be trusted. Sure, it’s better than it was…we’re now trusted to work outside the home, vote, drive a car, and start a business.

But when it comes to the most deeply personal of actions, we don’t trust women to take care of themselves. We don’t trust them to make their own decisions regarding their bodies, health, and reproductive options.

Men’s reproductive systems are completely left alone—we trust them to make their own decisions about sex, health, vasectomies, and cancer prevention.

But women…oh, no. They’re a different story. We must regulate every aspect of the reproductive health—from birth control to pregnancy to cancer screenings. Because they, clearly, cannot be trusted to make decisions for themselves.

They couldn’t possibly decide when to have sex, when to have children, or how to protect themselves. They wouldn’t take these things seriously.

What? If we can’t trust women to take care of their most critical health needs, how are we even trusting them to be in public and function in society? They must be so irrational, frail, and unintelligent—how do we even allow them outside the home?

Despite how damaging it is for anyone to harbor this opinion, the problem is that it’s not just normal individuals—many elected officials don’t trust women, and are constantly working to pass laws that restrict our ability to make personal, private medical decisions.

Though it’s doubly devastating for a woman public official to work against women’s health choices, the current problem is that we don’t have enough women in our government. A pitiful 17% of Congress is women. Some states have never even seen a female Governor or Senator.

I promise you that if we had more women in government, a woman’s right to make her own health decisions wouldn’t even be up for discussion. We could focus on things like the economy, environment, and national security, instead of what a woman does with her doctor.

This is why in addition to fighting the ridiculous legislation coming at us from anti-choice, anti-women officials, we also have to work to elect more pro-choice women, immediately. (First step: Getting more women thinking about running for office). This will be the only permanent way to end the vicious attacks on women’s reproductive freedoms.

We have to start trusting women. Trust them to choose, trust them to run, and trust them to lead. Or we may never see the day when our personal health decisions are truly our own.