Results tagged “Eleanor Holmes Norton” from Blog for Choice
Arizona Rep. Trent Franks (R) is capitalizing on the trial of Kermit Gosnell by attempting to push a bill through Congress that would ban abortion after 20 weeks for women in Washington, D.C.. Rep. Frank's proposed abortion ban contains no exceptions to protect a woman's health or her future ability to have children.
Rep. Franks wants to make it even harder for low-income women to access abortion care in the most heartbreaking of circumstances. Restricting access for abortion doesn't actually change a woman's decision to end her pregnancy. The restrictions do, however, make it more likely that she'll consider taking desperate measures, or be forced to seek out unsafe providers like Kermit Gosnell.
Let's get this straight - Rep. Franks is trying to impose his anti-choice agenda on women in D.C. who did not elect him as their representative. But that doesn't matter, since Rep. Franks apparently thinks he's the one anti-choice politician to rule them all...
"King" Franks has tried this before, and we defeated that bill in 2012. His abortion ban would truly endanger the health and future of low-income women in D.C. by limiting their reproductive options.
It doesn't take a rocket scientist to see how dangerous this proposed abortion ban would be for women and their families. And it completely contradicts efforts to protect women's health.
To make matters worse, anti-choice Utah Sen. Mike Lee (R) jumped on the intrusive bandwagon and recently introduced his own Senate version of the 20-week abortion ban in D.C.
Last year, the District's only representation in Congress, Del. Eleanor Holmes Norton, was denied the right to testify in opposition to the bill.
It's going to take all of us speaking out to make sure Congress hears our opposition to these overreaching bans on abortion. Please help us protect women in D.C. and voice your pro-choice values to your lawmaker.
Earlier this month, I told you about a new proposed abortion ban that specifically targets women in our nation's capital.
And when anti-choice Rep. Trent Franks (R-Ariz.) held a hearing on the bill, he didn't even allow Washington, D.C.'s elected representative, Congresswoman Eleanor Holmes Norton, to testify against it!
Today, Nancy Keenan, president of NARAL Pro-Choice America, spoke out at a news conference against these attacks on D.C. women's freedom and privacy.
She joined Rep. Norton, D.C. Mayor Vincent Gray, and other civil- and reproductive-rights leaders to amplify their opposition to anti-choice proposals that would undermine the ability of women in the city to make personal, private medical decisions with their doctors.
Unfortunately, too many members of Congress disagree with this core value--and they're using Washington, D.C. as a testing ground to interfere in the personal, private decisions that women make with their doctors. We have seen what happens to women in this city when some members of Congress try to play mayor or councilmember.
And since Rep. Franks is acting like D.C.'s mayor, some D.C. residents decided they'd take their problems to him.
Rats? Potholes? Let "Mayor Franks" take care of it!
Tell me if this sounds familiar.
This afternoon, a key subcommittee of the U.S. House of Representatives will hold a hearing on an anti-choice bill. The bill in question was introduced by anti-choice Rep. Trent Franks of Arizona, who's also the subcommittee's chairman.
When a pro-choice elected woman requested to testify at the hearing, Rep. Franks told her NO.
What am I talking about?
Is it a hearing on the "Arrest Grandma Act"?
Nope. It's a brand-new attack on women's freedom and privacy that combines some of the "greatest hits" of the past three months.
Rep. Franks is pushing a bill to ban abortion care at 20 weeks in Washington, D.C., without consideration for the woman's situation, including cases of rape, incest, or fetal anomaly.
(Hear one family's tragic story that makes clear just how cruel this sort of law really is.)
Why does a representative from Arizona get to do this?
Because the District of Columbia is not a state, and opponents of choice have long used it as their anti-choice proving ground. Rep. Franks' bill is a top priority of the anti-choice National Right to Life Committee and continues the anti-choice legacy of undermining home rule in Washington, D.C.
And the pro-choice woman who wanted to testify at the hearing? That's Rep. Eleanor Holmes Norton, whom D.C. citizens elected with 89 percent of the vote.
Rep. Norton is not allowed to vote on the House floor, and now, thanks to Rep. Franks, she's not allowed to speak out on a bill that will affect the women in her district, either.
Rep. Franks, by the way, got exactly zero percent of the vote in D.C., since he's from Arizona. But I guess he thinks he knows what's best for D.C. women.
This morning, the U.S. House of Representatives' Committee on Oversight and Government Reform held a hearing on President Obama's policy ensuring that all women can get contraceptive coverage without a copay.
The hearing featured an all-male witness panel that attacked insurance coverage of birth control.
Before the hearing, the committee's chairman, Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Calif.), refused to let a female law-school student to testify about the importance of birth control.
But let's leave the testimony to the experts--the eight men who want to take away women's contraception-coverage.
To draw attention to this farce of a hearing, several congresswomen on the committee walked out in protest.
Rep. Eleanor Holmes Norton (D-D.C.) said the hearing was being run "like an autocratic regime."
While women were cut out of the hearing, they did make their presence known outside the committee room. A group of NARAL Pro-Choice America employees joined pro-choice lawmakers for a press conference to highlight Rep. Issa's outrageous behavior in forbidding women from testifying at a hearing on birth control!
Are you appalled by what happened this morning? Let Rep. Issa know: (202) 225-3906 or tweet @DarrellIssa.
Once again, the so-called "small-government" politicians are interfering in D.C.'s local affairs as well as women's personal, private medical decisions.So, the question today for all of us who are frustrated with the current landscape is, "What's next?"As a national organization that helps elect pro-choice candidates and fights to advance pro-choice policies, we know that we must change who sits in the House of Representatives.We will fight until no woman's right to choose is dependent on her ZIP code or income.
This entire process has exposed just how far the anti-choice House leadership is willing to go to attack women's freedom and privacy. They are even willing to take our country to the brink of a government shutdown over issues that are unrelated to the budget deficit or other fiscal matters.
- This bill is not about public funding. Federal law is clear: federal funding of abortion is forbidden, except in very narrow circumstances.
- The legislation would force millions of American families to pay more taxes if their health plan covers abortion care, jeopardizing abortion coverage in the private market. About 87 percent of insurance plans on the market currently offer abortion coverage.
- The bill jeopardizes the ability of private citizens to use their own dollars to purchase abortion coverage in the new health system, and levies harsh financial penalties on businesses and families who choose comprehensive insurance coverage.