Kristin Koch is Deputy Director of Communications for Online Strategies for NARAL Pro-Choice America.

Bush's administration is feeling the heat on the recent attacks on birth control - and Bush is making it clear he's not going to touch the issue with a 10-foot pole. So instead he's sending Secretary Mike Leavitt in front of the firing squad.

Leavitt's response to the onslaught of editorials and leaders on Capitol Hill who oppose the regulation?

He flat-out denied the attack:

An early draft of the regulations found its way into public circulation before it had reached my review. It contained words that lead some to conclude my intent is to deal with the subject of contraceptives, somehow defining them as abortion. Not true.

And we're supposed to believe him? Coming from the administration that's canceled funding for family-planning programs that serve the world's poorest women and bans teachers from discussing birth control in the classroom - I don't think so.

And it looks like we're not alone in our skepticism (check out the Oregonian, The Seattle Post-Intelligencer, and the Houston Chronicle as well as MyDD, Women's Health News, RH Reality Check, and the Iowa Independent).  

But wait, there's one group that is in Leavitt's court: Concerned Women for America. Shocker! Concerned Women is coming to Leavitt's defense by calling on their members to post supportive comments on Leavitt's blog.

And I hate to say it, but they are flooding his blog with comments.

So I hope you take a moment to post your thoughts on Secretary Leavitt's blog about why protecting women's access to birth control is so important.

There is really good news out of this. According to Leavitt, "The Department is still contemplating if it will issue a regulation or not."

That means the Bush administration knows the attack goes too far. Now we need to keep the heat on Leavitt so that these draft regulations stay on the shelf where they belong. Pro-choice leaders in Congress are doing everything they can to stop the regulation, but the fact is, Bush can put it into place if he wants. That's why this is one issue you need to speak up about.

Nancy Keenan served as a member of the platform committee and participated in the committee's meeting this past weekend in Pittsburgh. She also presented testimony at the platform drafting committee meeting two weeks ago in Cleveland.

The language in this platform reaffirms, in the strongest of terms, the Democratic Party's solid commitment to a woman's right to choose as defined by Roe v. Wade. We are pleased that the party adopted language that is consistent with NARAL Pro-Choice America's work to ensure that women have access to a full range of reproductive-health options, including preventing unintended pregnancy, bearing healthy children, and choosing safe, legal abortion. We are also pleased that, during the full platform, no debates, changes, or amendments were raised related to a woman's right to choose.

Read it online.

What do you think about the language?

 

South Dakota has an abortion ban on the ballot this November...am I having déjà vu?

 

Unfortunately not. But South Dakotans rejected a version of it in 2006, and we're going to do all we can to make sure that happens again this fall.

 

To launch this effort, NARAL Pro-Choice South Dakota Executive Director Casey Murschel flew to DC and came together today with NARAL Pro-Choice America and several wonderful partners: South Dakota Campaign for Healthy Families, Planned Parenthood, ACLU, and Physicians for Reproductive Choice and Health.

 

As Nancy Keenan said this afternoon, this effort threatens the entire country, because those behind the ban want to see it lead to the overturn of Roe v. Wade. Today's Wall Street Journal article echoes Nancy's sentiments:

 

"Ban proponents hope it would be challenged in court and eventually entice the Supreme Court to revisit Roe. That is where the presidential race comes in. Democratic Sen. Barack Obama has said abortion should remain legal and wants to preserve Roe, while Republican Sen. John McCain wants Roe to be overturned."

 

There's a lot of great organizations fighting this ban, but that doesn't mean they don't need help. Make sure you check out NARAL Pro-Choice South Dakota and South Dakota Campaign for Healthy Families to see what you can do to get involved and spread the word.

 

Let's have good déjà vu this year - South Dakota firmly rejecting the ban.

With Bush and McCain attacking choice so much lately, it's nice to know we still have someone on our side: the Democratic party.

Just this morning, the AP reported that the Democratic National Committee's platform committee has incorporated the strongest pro-choice language yet:

"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."

View Liberty Lowdown on YouTube.

This is thanks to our 37,000+ activists who spoke up and signed petitions asking the party to continue standing up for choice.

Remember, the 2008 Democratic National Convention starts in just two weeks on August 25th. NARAL Pro-Choice America will be there in force, but we need your help before and during the convention!

Check out our convention site to sign up to host a convention watch party and find out what else you can do. 

Elisabeth Bumiller with The New York Times has an article out today where she discusses Sen. McCain's plans for his week "alone" on the campaign trail (Sen. Obama is on vacation in Hawaii). 

So why do we care? Well, Bumiller reports that:

Mr. McCain no longer spends hours in the back of his campaign bus in talkathons with national reporters, instead reserving the sessions for short bursts with the local news media...

Last week Mr. McCain had only one news conference, in Rogers, Ark., at a politically dead time, 5:30 p.m. on a Friday, that seemed designed to bury anything troublesome he might say. The idea is to keep the candidate on point and not expose him to situations like one that occurred last month in Ohio in which he was asked whether he thought it fair that some health insurance companies covered Viagra but not birth control. (Mr. McCain told reporters he would get back to them on that.)

Ahh yes. "The situation" that was covered extensively in both the blogosphere and mainstream media. "The situation" that still stumped McCain a couple weeks after the fact when he was asked for his opinion... AGAIN!

Yeah, I can see why the McCain campaign wouldn't want a "situation" like that to happen again... too bad pro-choice Americans are on the case, and will continue to expose McCain's anti-choice record.

My name is Julianne Bukey. I'm a senior at Scripps College, and I'm working for the summer at NARAL Pro-Choice Wisconsin. You may have seen this video of me asking John McCain a question about insurance coverage for birth control at a McCain Town Hall meeting in Racine, Wisconsin on Thursday, July 31, 2008.
 

Once again, Sen. McCain demonstrated how out of touch he is when it comes to insurance coverage for basic health care. Recently, a reporter had asked him about this subject, and he had no answer. In a news story on CNN that followed, his campaign is quoted as saying insurance coverage of contraception should be "up to the individual." I read that to mean that he believes that if an individual wants coverage, she should be able to choose it. Wait a minute - that's what we want! But McCain has voted against legislation to ensure insurance companies cover birth control the same way they cover other prescription medications.
 
Now, he's saying that it's up to the entity paying for the health insurance. Does this mean that depending on who my employer is, THEY get to decide whether I can get birth control? That's not "up to the individual" - that's saying it's up to a bureaucrat who pays the health insurance bill. So, if an adult college student (like me), is on her parents' insurance (like me), should my doctor have to check with my parents' boss at work to find out if my birth control is covered?
 
In any case, McCain is standing by his extreme record of being against access to birth control. He's clearly okay with the idea that insurance companies cover Viagra for men, but not birth control for women.
 
Since birth control is essential not only to help woman plan their pregnancies, but also necessary to treat a range of health conditions, this is an incredibly backward position. Access to affordable birth control prevents unintended pregnancy and the need for abortion.
 
I guess the thing that worries me most is his clear lack of interest in even discussing the issue (witness his really short answer and how quick he moves to another subject). Not only does it show he simply doesn't get it, he almost acts squeamish - do we really need a president who's too squeamish to talk about birth control? Tens of millions of American women rely on birth control - in fact, access to birth control is widely believed to be the number-one factor in women being able to make gains towards equity in the workplace. Time and time again, candidate McCain shows us why a President McCain would be a disaster for women's health and privacy.

McCain's view on birth control?

"I certainly do not want to discuss that issue."

Well, we do! The second installment of our "McCain Playing Games with Choice" series focuses on McCain's anti-birth-control record. (No matter how much he might not remember or care to discuss it).

View video on YouTube here.

This issue has been especially fun for McCain (OK well maybe just us) this past month - what with his top advisor being clueless about his record, and then McCain stammering when asked about his past vote favoring Viagra over birth control.

Since McCain can't seem to spit out a coherent thought on the subject, allow me to share his anti-birth control record with you. McCain:

• Has voted against birth control 22 times.
• Voted to terminate the Title X family planning program, which provides millions of women with birth control.
• Voted against funding teen-pregnancy prevention programs.
• Voted against requiring insurance companies that cover drugs like Viagra to also cover birth control.

Well, now that I think about it, he did manage to say one accurate thing about his birth control record:

"I don't know enough about it to give you a informed answer."

Now there's the Straight Talk Express. Sir, next time, please refrain from casting damaging votes on things you "don't know enough about."

--> Via RH Reality Check, Minnesota lawmakers fight proposed HHS regs:

"Last year, legislators on both sides of the debate over reproductive rights united behind a measure that provides rape survivors with the emergency contraception that could help prevent a pregnancy after a violent attack," said Linnea House, executive director of NARAL Pro-Choice Minnesota. "Gov. Pawlenty recognized the strong public support behind this common sense measure and signed it into law. Now, just one year after the law took effect, we are urging him to call on the Bush administration to stop an attack on birth control that would undermine this state law."

Well done NARAL Pro-Choice Minnesota. If you're from Minnesota, use this information to write to Gov. Pawlenty today... and for the rest of the non-Minnesota residents, you can take action here.

--> Via the The Denver Post, Issue advocates plan to preach to the crowds:

Most advocates say they want to use the convention to keep their issues burning in a fall election already crowded with voter worries of an ongoing war and a struggling economy... But does it have any effect?

A NARAL Pro-Choice America spokesman said the abortion-rights organization's membership grew by more than 4,000 people after an Internet drive during the 2004 Democratic convention in Boston.

I enjoyed this article so much because it made me excited for the great stuff NARAL Pro-Choice America, and the NARAL Pro-Choice Colorado affiliate, has in store for the Democratic National Convention!

--> Via the Los Angeles Times, more on Bush's attack on birth control: Abortion proposal sparks furious debate.

Remember a couple of weeks ago when Sen. McCain's advisor Carly Fiorina slipped-up on McCain's record on birth control? And then a reporter asked McCain about his position and he ducked the question after an excruciating 8 second pause? At a recent town hall, McCain was asked yet again about health insurance coverage of birth control. Here's what he had to say:

So he thinks...? Or maybe...? Huh? Some straight talk that was! I don't know what he meant at that town hall, but McCain's record speaks for itself.

If you're looking for a shorter version of McCain's record, this handy webpage shows where McCain stands on a variety of pro-choice issues.

I wrote about Speaker Merkley's efforts to fight back against Bush's attack on birth control last week, and now, you can checkout a video from the Democratic Party of Oregon, that asks the ever important question (especially during an election year), Who will stand up to Bush's attack on women's health?:

 

From their press release:

Merkley and 28 U.S. Senators are battling the Bush Administration's push to radically limit women's access to contraception.

Merkley is gathering supporters to oppose the plan and encouraging thousands of people to speak out.

Wyden and Obama are two of the 28 U.S. Senators urging the Bush Administration to drop the proposal.

While Merkley, Wyden and Obama are standing up for women's health, Gordon Smith, who has long opposed a woman's right to choose, is noticeably silent on this issue.

"A spokeswoman for Smith did not return an email or two phone calls asking for Smith's comment on the proposed rule change affecting abortion. UPDATE ON FRIDAY: Lindsay Gilbride, spokeswoman for Smith, said there was 'no real evidence it could be a reality ... so at this point, we aren't going to speculate on it.'"

(Willamette Week, 7-17-08, Updated on 7-18-08)

I think it's good news that these dangerous regulations are gaining ground... but it's up to you to make sure that Congress hears us. Take action today and tell your member of Congress that you support their efforts to get the Bush administration to reconsider this terrible idea.