Results tagged “Bush administration” from Blog for Choice

Nearly a month ago, we blogged about the importance of showing our strong support for the repeal of the Federal Refusal Rule and now the deadline for speaking your mind is almost here.

DEADLINE: April 9, 2009

So, if you haven't already, view the full (and official) details here. If you choose to submit a comment online, we realize that it's a little tricky to navigate to the proper place. We suggest clicking here, and then clicking on the icon next to "add comments" so that you can add your comment.

And of course, to learn more about why it's important to leave your comments and make sure President Obama repeals this dangerous rule, read Nancy Keenan's piece over at The Huffington Post!

In case you missed it, there was a terrific editorial in Saturday's New York Times about the progress in family-planning funding that is reflected in the recent spending bill:

Tucked into the big spending bill just signed by President Obama is a welcome provision designed to make affordable birth control available to millions of women across the country...

This victory for common sense follows a string of positive steps already taken by President Obama to dismantle his predecessor's assault on women's reproductive health and freedom. For example, since taking office the president has lifted the odious gag rule that former President George W. Bush imposed on international family-planning groups and moved to rescind an 11th-hour Bush regulation aimed at hindering women's access to abortion, contraceptives and the information necessary to make decisions about their own health.

And that, my friends, is what we call "hitting the nail on its head."

Happy Monday, all.

I have a post up over at Huffington Post, about the Federal Refusal Rule, and I wanted to make sure that everyone takes a look. Here's a quick snippet:

After enduring eight long, long years of unrelenting attacks on women's freedom and privacy from the anti-choice Bush administration, it's incredible to continue to receive good news from the Obama administration, and we should all take a moment to thank President Obama so that he knows he has the support of pro-choice America behind him.

Believe me; I understand that winning the election was a huge step forward - HUGE! - but right now, we need an activist's "conscience cause." That means that we have to act on our values and be partners in power in supporting a pro-choice president in the same way we helped elect him.

Read the full post and let me know what you think.

What do these two headlines have in common?

Obama Aims to Shield Science From Politics

Obama moves to strengthen role of science in policy

The Washington Post, Los Angeles Times, and other news outlets have been covering this "wild-and-crazy" phenomenon of the Obama administration keeping ideology out of science and public health. I know it doesn't sound "wild-and-crazy" at face value, but given the last eight years, it's a relatively new occurrence for a president. NARAL Pro-Choice America has an outstanding document that, um, documents President Bush's pattern of putting his anti-choice political ideology into science:

Since his first months in office, President Bush and his administration have politicized public health and subverted science in favor of an ideological agenda on a range of health issues. President Bush has used all the powers of his presidency to obstruct scientific research, censor factual medical information, and stack scientific advisory committees with right‐wing ideologues.

Medical evidence, not politics, should form the underpinnings of scientific and public-health-related policies. Scientific credentials, not ideology, should govern appointments to scientific advisory committees. The Bush administration's history of censorship, misleading statements, unabashed scientific revisionism, and targeted intrusions into scientific decision‐making processes casts doubt on the credibility of American science and compromises our ability to understand, prevent, and treat diseases. The growing influence of ideology on science is cause for grave concern. Simply put: the Bush administration is playing politics with people's health.

Well, thank goodness those years are over, right?

The Obama administration has indicated their desire to put the science back in... science. Melody C. Barnes, director of Obama's Domestic Policy Council, told the Washington Post:

The president believes that it's particularly important to sign this memorandum so that we can put science and technology back at the heart of pursuing a broad range of national goals.

I hope that this as a sign that other medically-accurate programs such as comprehensive sex education will finally replace the dangerous and disproven "abstinence-only" programs that President Bush and his anti-choice allies were so fond of funding? I'm being quite optimistic right now, but check out what happened last night regarding "abstinence-only" programs. 

On Friday, we told you that the Obama administration moved to repeal the Federal Refusal Rule and today, the official notice announcing their intention to repeal the Federal Refusal Rule is officially up. Now, for the next 30 days, the public is invited to comment on the Federal Refusal Rule, and we want to make sure that your voice, your strong pro-choice support, is heard.

So... on your mark, get set, speak up!

Here's how:

DATES: Submit written or electronic comment on the regulatory changes
proposed by this document by April 9, 2009.
ADDRESSES: In commenting, please refer to "Rescission Proposal." To
better manage the comment process, we will not accept comments by
facsimile (FAX) transmission. You may submit comments in one of four ways (no duplicates, please):

1. Electronically. You may submit electronic comments on this regulation here or via e-mail. To submit electronic comments to http://www.Regulations.gov, go to the Web site and click on the link "Comment or Submission" and enter the keywords "Rescission Proposal." [Attachments should be in Microsoft Word, WordPerfect, or Excel; however, we prefer Microsoft Word.]

2. By regular mail. You may mail written comments (one original and two copies) to the following address only:
Office of Public Health and Science
Department of Health and Human Services
Attention: Rescission Proposal Comments
Hubert H. Humphrey Building
200 Independence Avenue, SW
Room 716G, Washington, DC 20201

3. By express or overnight mail. You may send written comments (one original and two copies) to the following address only:
Office of Public Health and Science
Department of Health and Human Services
Attention: Rescission Proposal Comments
Hubert H. Humphrey Building
200 Independence Avenue, SW.
Room 716G, Washington, DC 20201

4. By hand or courier. If you prefer, you may deliver (by hand or courier) your written comments (one original and two copies) before the close of the comment period to the following address:
Room 716G
Hubert H. Humphrey Building
200 Independence Avenue, SW.
Washington, DC 20201
(Because access to the interior of the Hubert H. Humphrey Building is not readily available to persons without federal government identification, commenters are encouraged to leave their comments in the mail drop slots located in the main lobby of the building. A stamp-in clock is available for persons wishing to retain proof of filing by stamping in and retaining an extra copy of the documents being filed.)

Full (and official) details here. So have at it, and let your voice be heard! The deadline is April 9, 2009.

UPDATE: If you choose to submit a comment online, we realize that it's a little tricky to navigate to the proper place.

We suggest clicking here, and then clicking on the icon next to "add a comment" so that you can add your comment.  

For your consideration, a short play:

[fade in Western music. A tumbleweed blows across the dusty street.]

Obama: This town ain't big enough for the both of us, Bushy.

Bush: I guess it's time for me to be hittin' the ol' dusty trail...peace out.

Obama: I reckon I'll be fixin' all the anti-choice policies you put in place. Now go on, git!

The End. 

I'm feeling a little Western today, clearly. But the point is that we were all psyched for Bush to leave town and take his anti-choice nonsense with him, but he couldn't resist hacking away at our rights just one more time. (Or at least this had better be the last thing he does, ugh).

Learn all about Dubya's newest - and hopefully final - outrageous attack against choice in this week's Liberty Lowdown. 

Bush's regulation to the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) is almost the perfect way for him to go out. With this regulation, women all over the country would quietly be denied reproductive health care - and wouldn't be able to do anything about it. They could be denied birth control, emergency contraception, and even referrals from their doctors, hospitals, even the clinic's front desk. NOT GOOD.

Take your first action to incoming President Obama (yay!) and tell him to reverse Bush's last stand against choice. Go'on now, ya hear?

There was a great piece that appeared in the Hartford Courant in late December. I know we're all forward thinking, conjuring images of hope and change as we keep our eye on Obama's Inauguration Day, but it is important to remember exactly what we've dealt with the past eight years so we can look forward to the next four:

The story of Bush's eight-year assault on reproductive rights is worth a book, and a week and a half ago, Bush wrote the painful last chapter when he issued an eleventh-hour regulation through the Department of Health and Human Services. The ruling -- with dramatic and drastic results -- allows federally funded health-care providers and others to refuse to give referrals or information about medical procedures, such as abortion, with which they disagree. It's a so-called "conscience rule" and affects nearly 600,000 entities -- including doctors, pharmacies, hospitals, insurers, medical and nursing schools and labs, among others.

The ruling goes into effect Jan. 20, right before Barack Obama takes the oath of office.

The Bush administration tried to seek that one in, but pro-choice America took notice and will not let it go without a fight. We know the regulation is outrageous and out-of-touch, but the good news is that President-elect Obama can reverse it once he gets into office.

So please take a moment to click here and show Obama that you'll support his efforts to restore women's reproductive freedom.

We've said it before, but we'll say it again: The new regulation is a tremendous step backward for women's access to reproductive-health care, including birth control. It means our reproductive freedom is moving further into the hands of everyone but ourselves. Insurance companies could deny claims for the pill, hospitals could refuse emergency contraceptives to rape survivors, and clinics that receive federal funding to care for low-income women could even refuse their patients advice about birth control.

Ninety-eight percent of women use birth control at some point in their lives, and this regulation could affect any of us. We cannot afford to wait until it does. So take action today.

Jillian Gilchrest, executive director of NARAL Pro-Choice Connecticut, had this to say on Bush's last-minute rule and the idea of commonground solutions:

"If you are against abortion, you are against abortion. We support that right, and that's a fundamental difference we will not be able to bridge. I would hope, though, that we can come together on the fact that we need to do something about pregnancies that are unintended.

"There is common ground, but it's things like this -- the way this regulation was passed -- that divide us more."

In the coming months, as activists, doctors, policy makers and others seek to clean up this mess, look to see more of Gilchrist. Oh, and be sure to congratulate her. She and her husband are expecting their first baby in May.

Congratulations Jillian, and onward to a pro-choice 2009!

I'm one of the millions of people that adores the heck out of Rachel Maddow. It's true. Her weeknight show on MSNBC is a must watch.

So after a long, long day using Bush's dangerous rule as my motivation (though a holiday vacation is just days way), I was thrilled to pieces to see this segment on the Rachel Maddow show:

I love that the Rachel Maddow show gave this dangerous, divisive rule over seven minutes of airtime, and had pro-choice Rep. Diane DeGette (CO-01) as their guest for the segment. I think they did a great job of explaining the rule and showing just how broad and far-reaching this horrifying rule really is.

In today's Washington Post, Rob Stein has a great article about the rule which really demonstrated the focus of the opposing sides:

Donna Crane, policy director for NARAL Pro-Choice America, noted that Congress has a limited window to act. "Right now our efforts are focused on the executive branch."

The regulation's supporters, including some members of Congress, vowed to defend it.

"We will marshal a nonpartisan, grass-roots coalition to prevent any weakening of current conscience protections," said Tony Perkins, president of the Family Research Council, a socially conservative group that opposes abortion.

David Stevens of the Christian Medical Association said: "We will do all in our power to ensure that health-care professionals have the same civil rights enjoyed by all Americans. These regulations are needed, do not change the law but simply stop religious discrimination 

In other words, the anti-choice groups are going to give all they've got to make sure the rule stays in place.

Let's make sure we stay vigilant, shall we?

Extreme disappointment doesn't even begin to describe how I feel about Bush's latest desperate move to appease his far-right base.

What did he do now? Ugh.

Today the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) issued the final Bush administration rule that could undermine women's access to essential health-care services, including birth control. I know I should be used to the Bush administration's shennanigans like this, but I'm not. Exactly how many more days until the Obama Inauguration?

Anyway, here's a bit of Nancy Keenan's, president of NARAL Pro-Choice America, statement:

President Bush's campaign promise was to unite Americans and he certainly did, as Americans are united in their opposition to this dangerous last-minute rule. This last-ditch effort to undermine women's health and privacy is a transparent payoff to the right-wing pressure groups. In the 2008 election, voters clearly rejected the use of government authority to advance divisive policies. We look forward to working with the incoming Obama administration to reverse this divisive rule and change the tone of the debate over reproductive rights by protecting women's access to contraception, which actually helps prevent unintended pregnancies.

Back in September our fantastic members and activists sprang into action, sending 2,500 birth-control packs to HHS. The packs, which are replicas of the pill pack, represent the thousands of activists who signed a petition to protest the Bush administration's proposal that could undermine women's access to essential health-care services, including birth control.

Now, with the election of pro-choice President-elect Obama, we can all look forward to working with the incoming Obama administration to reverse this divisive rule and change the tone of the debate over reproductive rights by protecting women's access to contraception, which actually helps prevent unintended pregnancies.

Countdown to a pro-choice administration: 33 days (I think). 

The headline of the Los Angeles Times blog, Countdown to Crawford, reads: Birth control regulation draws lots of comment. Many of us in the reproductive-health movement see that as a bit of an understatement, but none-the-less true. The comments have been OOC (that's "out of control" in case you don't watch Gossip Girl with the frequency that I do).

From the LAT blog:

Critics say the regulation is a back-door effort by the Bush administration, as it winds down its tenure, to restrict access to birth control. Nancy Keenan, president of NARAL Pro-Choice America, put it this way:

This Bush proposal has the potential to undermine state laws that guarantee rape survivors' access to contraception in the emergency room or require insurance companies to cover prescription birth control in the same way they pay for Viagra...This is yet another example of just how out of touch Bush is with the country's priorities -- and we will not give up in our fight to keep him from doing more damage as he prepares to leave the White House.

Supporters counter that the new regulation would simply enforce an old federal "conscience" provision that allows healthcare professionals to opt out of doing abortions or providing contraceptives if that violates their own beliefs.

From the NARAL Pro-Choice America release:

Today, NARAL Pro-Choice America's activists 2,500 birth-control packs to the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). The packs, which are replicas of the pill pack, represent the thousands of activists who signed a petition to protest the Bush administration's proposal that could undermine women's access to essential health-care services, including birth control.

Here's a picture of the packing and sending process: 

1. Empty pill packs, 2. Shipping label for pill boxes, 3. Lots of empty pill packs!, 4. Jennifer applies shipping label, 5. Label on boxes to Michael Levitt, 6. Jennifer and Corey wheel the boxes out for sending

The surge in comments is also mirrored on Sec. Leavitt's own blog, says HHS spokesman Kevin Schweers.

In any case, the deadline for public comments is tonight, so speak up if you haven't yet!

If you needed another reason why you should be counting down the days until Bush leaves office, you were handed another one with the Bush administration's proposed regulation that is written to discourage health-care plans from providing birth control to women.

In less than 48 hours, NARAL Pro-Choice America's activists sent 20,000 messages to Congress opposing this proposed regulation (thanks to those that took action!), the blogosphere erupted in post after post on the dangers of this regulation and why we need a pro-choice president. And, Sens. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-NY) and Patty Murray (D-WA) sent an immediate letter to Health and Human Services Secretary Mike Leavitt outlining how the proposed regulation would affect women's reproductive health, and urging him to reconsider.

And now, I'm pleased to report that Oregon House Speaker Jeff Merkley has been leading the way with a petition to stop this destructive and dangerous policy:

The president should be fighting to expand access to basic health care and provide more information to women, not limit it.

For nearly a decade, George Bush and Republicans in Washington D.C. have tried to force their conservative agenda on the American people. Now, within months of electing a Democratic President, the Bush Administration is considering a parting gift to extreme right wing special interests.

People in Oregon and across the country must make their voices heard and leaders in Congress must speak out. George Bush and the extreme right wing have controlled the agenda for far too long and it is time we protect basic health care rights in this country.

Speaker Merkley is challenging anti-choice Gordon Smith for the U.S. Senate in Oregon, and the latest poll conducted by Rasmussen shows Merkley is leading Smith 43-41 percent. That's great news, because Merkley is fully pro-choice and has a history of fighting to protect access to birth control. In 2007, Speaker Merkley was a sponsor of H.B. 2700, The Access to Birth Control (ABC) Act which ensures contraceptive equity by requiring health insurers to cover prescription birth control in a manner consistent with other prescription coverage. The bill also ensures survivors of sexual assault have access to emergency contraception in hospital emergency rooms in Oregon. (www.leg.state.or.us) Clearly, Speaker Merkley is no stranger to protecting a woman's right to choose.

So, what I'm saying is... if you live in Oregon or know someone who does - you know what you have to do! Spread the word and Merkley's pro-choice views and vote for Merkley for the U.S. Senate in Oregon!

Please, take a moment to sign Speaker Merkley's petition and read his blog post on Huffington Post which outlines Bush's attack on access to contraceptives.

Why would I try and re-invent the wheel, especially when it's a day after the long weekend, when I've got some perfectly awesome information all gathered in one place? That'd just be silly.

So with that in mind, do take a moment to read some top-notch commentary, analysis, and blog posts from our friends over at RH Reality Check:

Why did Dr. Susan Orr, former staffer at the Family Research Council (FRC), resign her post overseeing Title X just as the Bush administration considers re-imposing the domestic gag rule?

Why did her resignation happen suddenly, with little to no official notice and with a press office that was unresponsive when inquiries were made? To date there is no official announcement of her resignation in the form of a press release or statement on the agency web site or from The White House and several calls requesting information from the press office went unanswered. What is the Family Research Council and the Bush Administration hiding and why?

And why aren't more news outlets reporting on this?

RH Reality Check covers the whole story. From the Family Research Council's letter to President Bush urging him to impose a domestic gag rule that would prevent family planning centers from mentioning, discussing or providing referrals for abortion services to the "unholy" alliance of Dr. Susan Orr and the Family Research Council to Orr's sudden and, as of yet, unexplained resignation last week.

Read our commentary, analysis and blog posts below:

Swine Song: Bush Ally Orr Leaves Just as Gag Rule is Considered
By Cristina Page

Domestic Gag Rule? Déjà vu All Over Again
By Marilyn Keefe, National Partnership for Women and Families

Bush Ally Susan Orr Resigns Amid Controversy
By Emily Douglas

Anti-Family Planning Org's Unholy Alliance
By Amie Newman

Title X In Jeopardy From Anti-Abortion, er, Anti-Contraception Groups
By Amie Newman

Oh, and also, while I'm linking to some great posts, Rachel Walden at Women's Health News wrote a great post this AM, so be sure to check it out too: (Why) Did Susan Orr Resign from Population Affairs Post? Key piece?

I'd add to that list, in light of the resignation, "Did Susan Orr step down because her Family Research Council ties created a conflict of interest that would garner unwanted media attention for FRC's gag rule efforts and potentially hinder their proposed restrictions of Title X?" I'm just cynical enough to believe that it's entirely possible.

Hmmmm. What do YOU think?

Remember back in October when President Bush appointed anti-choice, right-wing, anti-birth-control activist Susan Orr as acting director of the federal family planning programs at the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS)? Yeah, well, news broke that Orr resigned after less than a year on the job.

RH Reality Check and Think Progress have more on some of the controversy. From RH Reality Check:

Why so controversial? Her position oversees the administration of Title X, the only federal funding program providing contraceptive services to low-income women and men, but she had applauded President Bush's proposal to eliminate the requirement that federal employees' health insurance provide coverage for a range of birth control methods, saying, "We're quite pleased because fertility is not a disease. It's not a medical necessity that you have [contraception]."

Just last week Amie pointed out that the Family Research Council was heading up a group of conservative political groups all pressuring President Bush to cut Title X family planning funding for clinics who also provide abortion services -- and their former employee, Dr. Orr, was the person to whom they made their request. Amie wrote, "Was this...strategy discussed with Susan Orr prior to the letter they recently sent? Isn't this a bit like the oil companies setting energy policy with Dick Cheney?"

You can click here to read the letter that 19 Senators sent to Secretary Leavitt regarding Orr's appointment.

While at the Family Research Council, Orr made this comment after Bush proposed cancelling federal employees' contraceptive coverage: "We're quite pleased because fertility is not a disease. It's not a medical necessity that you have it" (Washington Post, 4/12). [As reported by American Political Network, American Health Line, Volume 6 No. 9, April 12, 2001]

I wonder who will be appointed in her place... or do I even want to know?

Late last week, news broke that the world's largest reproductive health database blocked users from searching for topics related to abortion. Thankfully, Michael J. Klag, dean of the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, issued a statement on Friday in which he said abortion had been restored to the list of searchable terms. He also said he had launched an inquiry into this matter:

... [I] have directed that the POPLINE administrators restore "abortion" as a search term immediately. I will also launch an inquiry to determine why this change occurred.

The Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health is dedicated to the advancement and dissemination of knowledge and not its restriction.

NARAL Pro-Choice America applauded Dean Klag's decision and looks forward to hearing how and why such interference happened in the first place. Ted Miller, NARAL Pro-Choice America's communications director, was quoted in Saturday's New York Times saying:

The public has a right to know why someone would censor relevant medical information. The Bush administration has politicized science as part of an ideological agenda. So it's important to know if that occurred here.

The concern over political interference in such a decision is an unfortunate reality with the Bush administration. Since his first months in office, President Bush and his administration have politicized public health and subverted science in favor of an ideological agenda on a range of health issues. NARAL Pro-Choice America has catalogued the administration's actions here, so be sure take a look.