ProgressOhio

Not to paint Stupak with a broad brush, but after being proved completely wrong on his "interpretation of the language in the Senate Bill" which passed with a super majority on Dec. 24th, he seems to be coming around:

TAWAS CITY, Mich. – Prospects are good for resolving a dispute over abortion that has led some House Democrats to threaten to withhold support of President Barack Obama's health care overhaul, a key Michigan Democrat said Monday.

Rep. Bart Stupak said he expects to resume talks with House leaders this week in a quest for wording that would impose no new limits on abortion rights but also would not allow use of federal money for the procedure.

"I'm more optimistic than I was a week ago," Stupak told The Associated Press between meetings with constituents in his northern Michigan district, including a crowded town hall gathering where opinions on health care and the abortion issue were plentiful and varied.

"The president says he doesn't want to expand or restrict current law (on abortion). Neither do I," Stupak said. "That's never been our position. So is there some language that we can agree on that hits both points — we don't restrict, we don't expand abortion rights? I think we can get there."

 From the Diamondback, the Univeristy of Maryland's student newspaper:

 "The War on Women"

Drug war has disproportionate impact on females, SSDP panel says

With more than 2 million Americans in jail, a growing number of them women, four advocates yesterday pointed to the criminal justice system’s “prejudiced” and “insensitive” drug policy as the culprit in a panel at Stamp Student Union last night.

Since the 1990s, with the introduction of conspiracy law — which allow the government to prosecute individuals for their associations with drug offenders — the number of women in prison has skyrocketed. Women, who often are not directly involved in drug deals, are especially vulnerable to the laws, representatives from the Drug Policy Alliance, Americans for Safe Access and the Sentencing Project said.

“Women are held under the full weight of the crime, even if they haven’t seen, touched or distributed [drugs],” Drug Policy Alliance representative Jasmine Tyler said. “She answers the phone, uses the money to pay the bills, she may have went shopping.”

The panel said conspiracy laws, along with other drug policies, can result in girlfriends facing longer sentences than their drug king boyfriends, mothers losing custody of their children, low income families losing housing and welfare and a staggering amount of broken families.

“Women and youth are the new populations that are being targeted,” Tyler said. “The men are gone and the rate of women in jail is skyrocketing. This is the next population to exploit.”

Read the rest here.

In our current health care system, women often face higher health costs than men and multiple other barriers to health insurance. Fewer women are eligible for employer-based coverage, and comprehensive coverage in the individual health care market is often unavailable or prohibitively expensive. In the individual insurance market, women face discrimination – being charged substantially higher premiums for the same coverage as men or being denied coverage for such “pre-existing conditions” as pregnancy, having had a C-section, or being a victim of domestic violence. In a recent study, more than half of women — compared with 39% of men — reported delaying needed medical care due to cost. And just last fall, the Joint Economic Committee released a report finding that since the recession began, American women have lost 1.6 million jobs — many seeing their health insurance disappear with their jobs — and over a million women have lost insurance because their husband lost his job.

At today’s meeting with President Obama at the Blair House, Chairwoman Louise Slaughter discussed the need for health insurance reform, particularly for women.

Watch It:

All Americans should be treated the same. Let me give you a little history on that. Eight states in this country right now have declared that domestic violence is a pre-existing condition on the grounds, I assume, that if you have been unlucky enough to get yourself beaten up once, you might go around and do it again. 48% is the higher cost for women, in many cases, to buy their own insurance. Believe you me that is really discriminatory. In 1991, women were not included in any of the trials at the NIH because we had hormones. It wasn’t until we had a critical mass of women here that said this will not do for more than half the population of the United States who pay taxes and we made certain that diseases like osteoporosis, mainly a women’s disease, and cervical cancer, only a women’s disease, and uterine cancer and others were really looked at. Up to that point, 1991, all research at the Institutes of Health was done on white males. Now think about that for a minute, if you will. We couldn’t do that because we said, ‘kindly, will you stop doing that?’ It took legislation. Doing this will take legislation.

Women will continue to face discrimination in both coverage and cost if health reform fails. Our health insurance reform legislation is vital for women, making it illegal for insurance companies to use “gender rating” – charging women more than men for the same coverage – and makes it against the law for insurance companies to deny coverage or charge higher premiums on the basis of a “pre-existing condition”.

Learn more about women and health insurance reform»

I received a superb email today from Planned Parenthood, regarding the anti-choice TV ad that is to air during this year's Super Bowl. The message from Planned Parenthood President Cecile Richards got to the heart of what it means to be pro-choice (see below).

I've signed on to the Planned Parenthood statement and I hope other members of the Progress Ohio community will too. Locally, click here to check out the advocacy campaigns led by Planned Parenthood Affiliates of Ohio Action Network.

Dear Lorraine,

By now you've most likely heard all about it — the anti-choice group Focus on the Family is spending millions to run an ad during the Super Bowl featuring football player Tim Tebow and his mom talking about a deeply personal medical decision she made years ago. She decided to continue her pregnancy against medical advice, due to what had been diagnosed as a high-risk pregnancy.

People have been asking us at Planned Parenthood what we think about the ad and Mrs. Tebow's decision. It's simple. Planned Parenthood respects the right of every woman to make important medical decisions for herself.

Mrs. Tebow weighed medical and moral considerations and decided what was right for her. She made her choice in private, and without government interference. That's exactly what we want every woman to be able to do.

The truth is, the Tebows' experience is completely consistent with what Planned Parenthood doctors and nurses have learned from the millions of women they've served over nearly a century. Women take decisions about their health very seriously. They consider their doctors' advice, they talk with their loved ones and people they trust, including religious leaders, and they carefully weigh all considerations before making the best decision for themselves and their families.

That's the way it should be. And that should be our shared goal — on Super Bowl Sunday and every day.

I hope you'll show your support for ensuring that every woman makes her own personal medical decisions by adding your name to a brief statement from Planned Parenthood.

Thank you for joining with us today.

Sincerely,
 
Cecile Richards, President
Planned Parenthood Federation of America

One year ago today, the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act became the first major act of Congress signed into law by President Barack Obama.

The Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act restored employees rights to challenge pay discrimination. In the year since the law took effect, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission reviewed over 1,100 cases where people were denied wage compensation, and some 4,800 charges alleging wage discrimination were filed with the Commission. Numerous court cases have cited the law in an effort to win compensation for back-earnings. 

Watch It:

Women are still treated unfairly in the workplace. Wage disparity persists, and women still earn, on average, only 77 cents for every dollar earned by men. If the wage gap was eliminated, annual family incomes would increase by $4,000--and the poverty rate would be cut in half. Paycheck fairness for our country's working women would in of itself act as an economic stimulus package.

For all of these reasons (and more), we must strengthen laws against wage discrimination. But don't just take my word for it --hear what Lilly Ledbetter herself thinks we can do to keep women in the workforce from being discriminated against:

"We need to pass the Paycheck Fairness Act....The bill would empower women to negotiate for equal pay, create stronger incentives for employers to follow the law, and strengthen federal outreach and enforcement efforts. It would also strengthen penalties for equal pay violations.

[...] "One of the most important aspects of the Paycheck Fairness Act is a provision that would prohibit retaliation against workers who ask about employers' wage practices or disclose their own wages to co-workers. This would have been particularly helpful to me, because Goodyear prohibited my colleagues and me from talking about our wages. This policy delayed my discovery of the pay inequities between my male counterparts and me by -- literally -- decades."

It's high past the time for women to have the same rights, the same opportunities and the same freedom to pursue their dreams as men do. If we don't get this legislation passed, our daughters could end up having to fight for fair treatment and pay in the workplace--just like their mothers and grandmothers.

The Paycheck Fairness Act is now pending in the Senate.  Senator Sherrod Brown  is a co-sponsor of the Paycheck Fairness Act (S. 182).  Take action now and tell George Voinovich to support the Paycheck Fairness Act.

Received via email from our friends at Americans United For Change:

What happened in Massachusetts yesterday is a call to action, not a cause for retreat.

The people of Massachusetts voted for change and they are frustrated with the seeming lack thereof. They are hurting and they have not yet seen Congress come forward to ease their pain, punish those who caused this crisis or make sure it cannot happen again.

Unfortunately, they picked the wrong side to blame. Regardless of how you feel about the way the health insurance reform effort has played out, it's important to note that most Democrats in Congress, and certainly the White House, supported swift, bold and effective change. The majority of Democrats in the Senate, for example, support the public health insurance option. But they couldn't get it done because the minority Republicans blocked an up-or-down vote.

When it comes to financial reform, the Obama Administration and Senate Banking Committee Chair Chris Dodd proposed strong legislation to reign in the abuses of the big banks that led to this mess in the first place. The banking committee's Republican leader, Senator Richard Shelby said "no way, no how, not ever."  

You get the idea: Lack of change is not for lack of trying on the part of the majority of congressional Democrats. But despite being the majority, the Republicans have blocked them from voting.

Scott Brown is only going to make it harder to do what we need to do in America - like clean up Wall Street and provide good, affordable health care for all. He has shown on the campaign trail that he will stand firmly with his Republican colleagues in favor of the Bush-era policies and politics that got us into this mess in the first place.

And if that doesn't scare you into fighting even harder, I don't know what will.

Call your member of Congress at 202-225-3121 or write your Senators and Members of Congress through our website.

Tell them to fight hard against Wall Street, the insurance companies and those elected officials who carry their water.

Breaking a three-day stalemate, the Senate approved an amendment to its health care legislation that would require insurance companies to offer free mammograms and other preventive services to women.

The vote was 61 to 39, with three Republicans joining 56 Democrats and the two independents in favor.

The Republican senators voting in favor were the two women from Maine, Olympia J. Snowe and Susan Collins, and David Vitter of Louisiana. Among Democratic senators, Russ Feingold of Wisconsin and Ben Nelson of Nebraska opposed the proposal.

The Democrats’ legislation had already contained requirements that insurers cover a wide range of preventive care. The amendment, put forward by Senator Barbara Mikulski, Democrat of Maryland, goes further, mandating coverage for a broader package of services for women.

“The insurance companies take being a woman as a pre-existing condition,” Ms. Mikulski said. “We face so many issues and hurdles. We can’t get health care. We can’t get health insurance because of pre-existing conditions called a C-section.”

She added, “My amendment offers key preventive services, including an annual women’s health screening that would go to a comprehensive assessment, including the dangers to women in heart disease and in diabetes.”

In other Senate health reform voting news, the amendment proposed Monday by Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) to remove nearly $500 billion in Medicare cuts from the Senate bill was turned down in a 58 42 vote.

Had the proposal passed, the Senate bill would have had to be returned back to the Senate Finance Committee.

Chris Matthews corners Rhode Island Bishop Thomas Tobin, who has banned Rep. Patrick Kennedy, D-R.I., from receiving Holy Communion due to his views on abortion.

In the interview Mathews exposes the moral hypocrisy at the heart of the Church's abortion position: If it's really and truly murder, you're talking about prosecuting mothers, sisters, lovers and friends for having them. Mathews is quite aggressive with the bishop, demanding to know exactly what legal penalties he thinks should be legislated.

Watch It:

First Lady Michelle Obama speaks about the difficulties senior women face in today's health insurance market and the importance of reform.

Watch It:

http://www.ontheissues.org/oh/rob_portman.htm

Small sample below, the rancor of the right pushes Ohio to elect extreme right idealogues.

Voted YES on making it a crime to harm a fetus during another crime. (Feb 2004)
Voted YES on banning partial-birth abortion except to save mother’s life. (Oct 2003)
Voted YES on forbidding human cloning for reproduction & medical research. (Feb 2003)
Voted YES on funding for health providers who don't provide abortion info. (Sep 2002)
Voted YES on banning Family Planning funding in US aid abroad. (May 2001)
Voted YES on federal crime to harm fetus while committing other crimes. (Apr 2001)
Voted YES on barring transporting minors to get an abortion. (Jun 1999)
Rated 0% by NARAL, indicating a pro-life voting record. (Dec 2003)

Dear Time Warner corporate,

Congratulations on being named one of the 2009 Diversity Inc Top 50 Companies for Diversity (R)! You must be very proud!

Regarding your recent programming change in the Columbus area which brought scads of on-demand titles into my living room where formerly free network HD channels were, I am confident that you will address my complaint.

While I respect your First Amendment corporate right to sell Wife Swap & Screw, Slut Take It Hard, Dripping Wet Tramps and 69 Screamin Blondes for $11.99 each, well, as you might imagine, these movies aren't my cup of tea.

This kind of skewed programming doesn't seem to fit with your CEO Glenn Britt's vision of T-W as a company "that values diversity, with an open environment that allows us to blend the experiences, cultures, influences, languages, and perspectives of our employees and our customers."

Are we hetero women -- not a small minority, I might add -- supposed to be satisfied with 2 Big 2 Be True from the measly pickings of the Playgirl category? I mean, "MILF Party" is an entire genre of movies...so where's the pro-women adult movies?

Oh, I also want to congratulate T-W on being ranked #5 on the Top 10 Companies for Latinos. The stars of 100% Latin Sluts, All Latin Lust, All Sexed Up Latina and Argentinean Booty must be so proud!

Sincerely,

Your Customer

“I don’t want the government making my healthcare decisions.

I do want the government making a woman's healthcare decisions.”