Found: Lost Congressman Searching for Tea Party District

By Sarah Burris on 11/29/2011 @ 12:15 PM

Tags: Why Women, Tammy Duckworth

Poor, poor Joe Walsh. He just can’t decide on a home! With new lines drawn, Illinois’ 8th Congressional district just became a heck of a lot more Democratic – in 2008, 61.8% of voters cast their ballots for Obama, and in 2010, 53.54% voted for Giannoulias in 2010. It’s not surprising that Walsh took one look at this district and decided to bail, turning his attention to Illinois’ 14th district, a seat that Rep. Randy Hultgren now holds. But Walsh is having second thoughts, and the Tea Party favorite is hinting that he may come back to the 8th district, where EMILY’s List candidate Tammy Duckworth is vying for the Democratic nomination.

Walsh has had a tough first term in Congress with his temper flaring in the face of constituents at town hall meetings and personal battles over his ex-wife’s $117,000 in unpaid child support suit. Walsh also supported the Ryan budget that would gut Medicare for seniors struggling to get by in the tough economy. He’s also an ally to the Family Research Council with votes to “repeal Obamacare, de-fund Planned Parenthood, end government funding for abortion within the health care law, uphold the Defense of Marriage Act, and continue support for school choice.” FRC President Tony Perkins said of Walsh and other members of Congress they support, “I applaud their commitment to uphold the institutions of marriage and family.” With this record, it’s no surprise Walsh is worried how voters will respond!

We’re lucky that we’ve got Tammy Duckworth in this race. In a match-up against Joe Walsh, Tammy is the clear choice. While Walsh has pushed an extremist tea party agenda, Tammy has been a leader for her country, helping soldiers who return home get what they need to heal and move forward with their lives. We’re doing all we can to help Tammy win her primary and Joe Walsh’s record will be a great help for Tammy in the general election.

Related Blog Posts:
What "Pro-Life" REALLY Means for Women in the US

Hey Scott Brown-Take a Stance!

Child Care & Paid Family Leave are Worse in Bad Economy

What “Pro-Life” Really Means for Women in the US

By Miriam Vishniac on 11/28/2011 @ 12:15 PM

Tags: Why Women, Women's rights

When the GOP puts out "pro-life" ads, they don’t show the real consequences of denying women the right to control their reproductive destinies. They don’t show the staggering number of women who are not healthy enough for pregnancy, or suffer from complications. They show you sugary images of smiling families and healthy babies. "Pro-life" as pro-family is a blatant lie, and it’s time the GOP fessed up.

Amnesty International has released a study (PDF) of the statistics for maternal health care in the US, and the results are more than a little disturbing. As the same Tea Party Republicans who call themselves "pro-life" condemn birth control and Planned Parenthood, they stand against Obama’s much needed health care reform that would bring health insurance to millions. The United States currently ranks 50th in the world for maternal deaths. This is worse than most European countries, Canada, and some countries in Asia and the Middle East. In fact, the number of maternal deaths grew in the US from 1990 to 2008, while 147 foreign countries experienced a decline.

The biggest problem for women was a lack of access to healthcare resulting in women becoming pregnant while having untreated health issues and a lack of pre-natal and post-partum care. Uninsured women are less likely to be in good health when they become pregnant, yet the GOP doesn’t see fit to extend them healthcare. The cost of maternal healthcare is incredibly high but most providers do not accept Medicaid, and it is incredibly difficult to get Medicaid once pregnant.

The number of women who die during childbirth is still frighteningly high, and is at a 20 year peak. The number increases significantly for any minority. The number of women who suffer from severe complications has increased by 25%, and the report also

“found a lack of comprehensive and accurate data on maternal mortality, morbidity, and health care practices; a lack of coordinated oversight needed to improve the maternal care system and research; inadequate review of data; and a lack of concerted efforts to eliminate disparities.”

In a time when costs related to pregnancy and birth make up 25% of all charges to Medicaid, why is the GOP not increasing access to family planning for women instead of slashing the Medicaid budget? When it has been proven that a child whose mother dies is 3-10 times more likely to die, why are none of the GOP leaders calling for better healthcare for pregnant mothers and oversight boards for the statistics? When the GOP uses every opportunity to claim it supports families, why is it driving them to poverty by trying to force women to have children they may not be able to afford or may not be healthy enough to have? Why when the GOP says it stands with families, is it doing everything it can to break them apart?

It’s time to tell the GOP that healthy families need healthy women, and family planning is a key part of this goal.

Related Blog Posts:
Hey Scott Brown-Take a Stance!

Straight Talk: Keep Family Planning Accessible to All Women, Not Just Some.

Child Care & Paid Family Leave are Worse in Bad Economy

Feminism rages on

By Karyn Bruggeman on 11/22/2011 @ 05:15 PM

Tags: Women's rights

It’s mind-boggling how feminism is oftentimes portrayed in the mainstream media. If someone doesn’t naturally keep up with feminist blogs, publications, or women’s organizations- it would be all too easy to believe that young feminists don’t exist, don’t appreciate the gains of the women’s movement, or are rejecting feminism entirely. Examples of the stories that perpetuate this range from the iconic 1998 TIME magazine cover asking, “Is Feminism Dead?” to the recent article in USA Today with the headline, “As NOW marks 45 years, is feminism over the hill?” One blogger pointed out that a big part of the problem is that young feminists don’t operate in the same spaces as second wave feminists. So much of our activism is built on-line, and reporters just aren’t looking for it in the right places. But that got me thinking that maybe the problem isn’t that simple, and the only real solution is to start telling stories ourselves.

The USA Today piece featured commentary from a handful of girls in the same sorority in Rollins College in Florida. Most of the girls did not identify as feminists, and expressed skepticism towards what feminism meant for their personal lives or for their generation. This made me think back to my own experience in a sorority while in college in the South and compelled me to tell my own story. Because if USA Today had asked the same questions to a few girls at Alpha Chi Omega at the College of William and Mary, I imagine that headline would have been something more akin to, “As NOW marks 45 years, feminism rages on,” because my sorority was brimming with proud, self-identified feminists. As I thought back to this I realized that this isn’t a story that I would ever expect a journalist to magically uncover, either. The only solution? To tell it myself.

Five years ago, I joined a sorority because the girls struck me as strong, hilarious, compassionate, intelligent, and best of all, unabashedly feminist. They went to feminist dance parties that were packed with students and served as fundraisers for VOX: Voices of Planned Parenthood, the campus pro-choice organization. These fundraisers enabled VOX to host emergency contraception drives, organize students to attend pro-choice lobby days in Richmond, put on annual productions of The Vagina Monologues, and bring great feminist speakers and performances to campus, each one attended by dozens of students.

Every year, at least a handful of Alpha Chis served on the executive board of Every 2 Minutes, the sexual assault awareness group, and others served as Sexual Assault Peer Advocates. In my women’s studies classes, I could always count on seeing at least one other Alpha Chi. Each year, more than 5,000 undergrads voted to elect sixteen student senators to represent them in the Student Assembly. One year, three of those students hailed from my sorority. Strong, young women leaders sure don't signal the death of feminism to me.

The support and motivation that this group of girls gave each other, and the positive culture built around women’s issues, feminism, and women’s rights, was powerful. SO powerful. I wouldn’t be who I am today, I wouldn’t care about the things that I do, and I wouldn’t feel so damn sure that a life spent fighting for equality is a life worth living, if it weren’t in part for these young women. To find inspiration all I had to do was look around me. The best part is that their activism didn’t stop at graduation. Nowadays, these ladies can be found passing bar exams, working on campaigns, working with the Women’s Rights Project at the ACLU, NARAL Pro-Choice New York, the Girl Scout Council of the Nation’s Capitol, international development agencies that focus on women’s issues, and interning and working at EMILY’s List. The list goes on.

It may seem hard to believe, but all of this is true, and all of the women mentioned here are under the age of 27. They understand where we’ve come from, but have their eyes set on where we have yet to go, and are willing to work hard -- really hard -- to get there. This is certainly only a small sampling, yet another slice of the pie, that is not necessarily relatable to every young woman out there. But it’s a story that doesn’t get told nearly as often as it should. The young women, the stories, the activism, the grit, and the determination, it’s all out there. And it’s strong. No matter what the media says. So I challenge everyone, go out and make your stories known!

Related Blog Posts:
Hey Scott Brown-Take a Stance!

Straight Talk: Keep Family Planning Accessible to All Women, Not Just Some.

Child Care & Paid Family Leave are Worse in Bad Economy

Hey Scott Brown – Take a Stance!

By Sarah Burris on 11/18/2011 @ 05:15 PM

Tags: Women's rights, Elizabeth Warren

If Scott Brown was endorsed by Massachusetts Citizens for Life, what does he have to hide about his position in H.R. 358, also known as the “Let Women Die” act? When a constituent emailed him to ask his stance on this dangerous bill, he gave this response:

“…I am opposed to the use of federal funds to provide or pay for abortions. I believe we can and should do more to promote abstinence programs and provide women with more services and options that will not only reduce the number of unwanted pregnancies, but also abortions.

As you know, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act [P.L.111-148], which I did not support, does not explicitly prevent public funding of abortions; instead it relies on the renewal of the 'Hyde Amendment' each year. While the Hyde Amendment is typically renewed, to ensure that federal dollars are not used to pay for abortions, President Obama signed Executive Order 13535, which maintained the existing Hyde Amendment restrictions governing abortion policy. Specifically, the order extends these restrictions to the newly created health insurance exchanges that become operational in 2014, except in cases of rape or incest, or when the life of the woman would be endangered. While I appreciate the President's efforts to clarify this long-standing policy, I share your concern that an Executive Order by itself may not properly safeguard the historic prohibition on federal funding of abortions. . .”

Scott Brown is concerned that “an Executive Order by itself may not properly safeguard the historic prohibition on federal funding of abortions.” Is he saying he’s concerned the Hyde Amendment isn’t enough? We don’t know! Come on, Scott Brown, are you for H.R. 358 or against it? Take a stance!

Related Blog Posts:
Top 5 Reasons Scott Brown is Bad for Women and Families

Straight Talk: Keep Family Planning Accessible to All Women, Not Just Some.

Tammy Duckworth: The Sacrifice of our Veterans

Straight Talk: Keep Family Planning Accessible to All Women, Not Just Some.

By Stephanie Schriock on 11/17/2011 @ 09:15 AM

Tags: Women leaders, Women's Rights, Why Women, Stephanie's Take

Where I come from, in Butte, Montana, we don’t mince words. So I’m going to be straight up here: there is nothing more common sense than making sure all women have access to the full range of health care, including birth control, and nothing more contrary to our American spirit than putting a thumb on the scale and tipping it in favor of some folks, at the expense of others.

Which is, unfortunately, what could happen if an expansion clause as wide as Montana is inserted into health care reform – allowing a bigger and bigger swath of employers to deny women coverage for things like the Pill. Here’s the lay of the land: over the last year, we all fought so hard to make sure that birth control was covered by health insurance providers. Some employers were allowed to opt out – for example, churches. If you are actually employed by a church, your insurance can opt out of covering your birth control. Now, folks are trying to broaden that opt-out rule – allowing huge numbers of “religious employers” to take birth control coverage away from their employees. The number of workers and students who would lose their birth control coverage is huge: nearly three million.

First, let’s be clear. Just because your health insurance covers birth control doesn’t mean you have to use it, any more than I have to get a root canal every year just because my dental insurance would pay for it. Having full, fair health care coverage lets women and their families have choices, that’s all. Second – again, a little clarity will go a long way here – this isn’t about abortion. This is about allowing women to have access to birth control – something used by 99% of American women at some point.

See what I’m getting at here? This isn’t a fight about abortion. This isn’t a fight over government mandates. This is a fight about whether nearly three million employees and students – many of whom currently have insurance coverage for their birth control – will be denied that health care coverage because of their job.

This is a fight about whether an adjunct professor at a university will have to pay out of pocket for birth control pills – when that same insurance plan covers the guy in the office next door’s Viagra.

This is a fight about whether a minimum-wage worker, say a single mother working as a janitor in a hospital to support her kids, will have to decide between paying full-freight for her birth control or having that extra $60 bucks a month for her kids’ school books and after-school snacks.

This is a fight about whether employers, aided by the federal government, get to impose their beliefs on their workers – creating a system that allows some women to be treated like second class citizens.

Our community here at EMILY’s List was so proud when together we worked, advocated, voted for health care reform that would level the economic playing field for families and keep them healthier.

Our Democratic women are working hard to make sure we keep family planning accessible for all women, not just some. Consider lending your voice to help make theirs louder.


Related Blogs
Child Care & Family Leave Worse in Bad Economy

You're beat up, but not beaten"