Results tagged “New Hampshire” from Blog for Choice

The first phase of President Obama's contraceptive-coverage policy is in effect!

What does this mean for women? One in three women struggles with the cost of birth control - but all that is about to come to an end. Preventive-health services -including birth control, breastfeeding support, and screening for gestational diabetes- are now available without a copay.

This is a huge step forward in women's health. But we aren't sitting back and relaxing.

Why? Because this important policy is under attack in Congress and across the country.

Yesterday, anti-choice politicians compared Obama's contraceptive-coverage policy to the attack on Pearl Harbor and 9/11. That's outrageous!

Yesterday, in celebration of this huge advancement for women, and to counter attacks on this fantastic policy, our affiliates hosted local events in Minnesota, New Hampshire, Ohio, Oregon, and Virginia.

In Minneapolis, Minnesota, our fabulous activists held a visibility event thanking President Obama for making this important advancement for women possible. Linnea House, executive director of NARAL Pro-Choice Minnesota, stood up for women during a TV appearance.

In Concord, New Hampshire, birth-control supporters gathered outside Rep. Charles Bass' office to trumpet the new policy. Bass has voted to repeal the Affordable Care Act and its birth-control policy.

In Columbus, Ohio, activists gathered outside of anti-choice Sen. Rob Portman's office to show him that his constituents support the contraceptive-coverage policy. Sen. Portman has been a high-profile opponent of birth control.

Our pro-choice activists must have been loud, because Ohio News Network and Progress Ohio covered the event.

Activists in Portland, Oregon gathered for a "Walk for Women's Health." Special guests included Senate Majority Speaker Diane Rosenbaum, state Representative Lew Frederick, and state Representative Elisa Kenny-Geyer.

In Richmond, Virginia, birth-control advocates took to Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli's office. Cuccinelli unsuccessfully challenged the constitutionality of the health-reform law - including the important birth-control policy - in court.

Watch our activists and NARAL Pro-Choice Virginia in this great TV interview.

Last week, I told you that members of the New Hampshire House of Representatives, led by anti-choice Speaker William O'Brien, had been busy, busy beavers pushing a slew of anti-choice bills.

Well, now some good news: the state Senate put the brakes on O'Brien's anti-choice agenda and rejected two bills that would have restricted women's access to reproductive-health care.

Elizabeth Hager, chairwoman of NARAL Pro-Choice New Hampshire PAC, said the Senate's votes were a clear sign that New Hampshirites are fed up with attacks on choice:

Today's votes are a clear rejection of the foolish crusade Speaker O'Brien has led this legislative session to restrict women's reproductive healthcare.

Like the majority of New Hampshire voters, we believe medical decisions should be made between a patient and her doctor, without governmental interference--and we're glad to see the New Hampshire state Senate agrees!

This legislative session has been marred by attacks on women's health and privacy, but today's votes signify a return to the Granite State's long, proud tradition of trusting women to make their own personal, private healthcare decisions in consultation with their doctors, family, and faith.

Bravo, NARAL Pro-Choice New Hampshire, for leading the fight to defeat these bad bills.

As we celebrate this victory, it's important to remember to stay on guard. Speaker O'Brien and his anti-choice cronies aren't done pushing their anti-choice agenda.

You can monitor the latest from the Granite State on Twitter by following the hashtag #EndOBriensFoolishness.

NARAL Pro-Choice New Hampshire will be ready to respond whenever attacks on choice arise.

Wonder what New Hampshire's House of Representatives has been up to over the past month?

If you said it passed one or two bills restricting a woman's right to choose, sorry--you're underestimating the anti-choice politicians in the Granite State.

In the past month, the New Hampshire House has passed three anti-choice bills.

These bills will now go on to the state Senate, which is under anti-choice control.

NARAL Pro-Choice New Hampshire has been leading the fight against these bills, and will mobilize to try to defeat them in the Senate.

The Granite State is a perfect example of how just one election can have devastating consequences for women's health. In 2011, New Hampshire received a grade of A- in our Who Decides? report. The Granite State had a history of strong bipartisan support for the right to choose.

In 2012, after anti-choice extremists spent a year pushing their agenda in both houses of the legislature, New Hampshire's Who Decides? grade fell to a B-.

And with a flurry of attacks on women's freedom and privacy, New Hampshire's grade on protecting pro-choice values could fall even further.

Fortunately, New Hampshire has a pro-choice governor, John Lynch. Last year, Gov. Lynch vetoed a dangerous parental-involvement mandate.

Unfortunately, anti-choice lawmakers in the New Hampshire House and Senate were able to override the governor's veto and enact a law endangering young women's health and safety anyway.

New Hampshirites are fed up with attacks on choice, and politicians pushing this extreme agenda are in for some serious trouble come this November.

Changing the New Hampshire legislature is an example of how we can end the War on Women, state by state.

Last week, the U.S. Senate rejected the Blunt amendment, which would have allowed bosses to block their employees from getting insurance coverage for birth control.

But, anti-choice politicians in the Granite State couldn't just accept the U.S. Senate's word. On Wednesday, the New Hampshire state House passed a bill that would allow employers to refuse to cover contraception for employees.

Fortunately, New Hampshire women are not ones to let politicians attack their health-care coverage.

NARAL Pro-Choice New Hampshire led a rally outside the statehouse in Concord to stand up against these attacks on contraception.

Activists handed out Bayer aspirin--a reference to comments by a Rick Santorum supporter suggesting that women put Bayer aspirin between their knees as contraception.

Special props to everyone who braved the New Hampshire winter to stand up for coverage of birth control!

Ann McLane Kuster is a candidate for U.S. House of Representatives in the 2nd District of New Hampshire and an adoption attorney in Concord, N.H.

For the past 25 years as an adoption attorney, I have represented women - from age 14 to 40, from junior high school to juniors in college, from living in cars to the most prestigious neighborhoods - who face unplanned pregnancy. Every time, with hundreds of women, year by year, I witnessed the courage, compassion and conviction that women across the country face every day.

Thanks to the United States Supreme Court decision in Roe v. Wade, these women have the choice - the personal, private and legal choice - about their reproductive health and their future.

There is more we can do. I applaud President Obama this week for standing up for women across the country. Thanks to health reform, women across the country with private insurance can get birth control without paying anything out of pocket. This lets women make the health care decisions that are right for them and puts every one of us in charge of our own reproductive health. I know firsthand how painful the choices are, and these are the steps that will prevent so many women from having to face this challenge.

The extreme positions being advocated by the far right will roll back the clock on women's rights and access to the healthcare they need. We need to be on the side of progress and less government interference in people's personal lives, so women will be able to make the choices that fit in their lives.

As an adoption attorney, a mother, a daughter and a friend, I will work every day here in New Hampshire - and in the United States Congress - to honor women everywhere and their right to freedom of choice. I hope you will join me and together, we will be heard and our legal rights will be protected!

New Hampshire voters go to the polls today in the first primary of the 2012 presidential election. Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney is widely expected to win the Republican contest.

Who is Romney really? Well, Nancy Keenan, president of NARAL Pro-Choice America, takes a look into Romney's record on contraception over at The Huffington Post. The news ain't so pretty:

Gov. Romney, who has taken a commanding lead in polls, seemed flabbergasted to be asked a question at Saturday's GOP presidential debate about the right to contraception. He called it "an unusual topic," and said that he "can't imagine a state banning contraception."

An unusual topic? I wish I could say it was. Even though 98 percent of American women use birth control at some point in their lives, attacking the right to contraception has become anything but unusual for anti-choice politicians, including Romney.

Let's take a moment to review the facts. As governor, Romney vetoed a bill giving rape survivors information about and timely access to emergency contraception. Fortunately, the Massachusetts state legislature voted to override Romney's veto...

Read more at The Huffington Post.

Paid for by NARAL Pro-Choice America, www.ProChoiceAmerica.org, and not authorized by any candidate or candidate's committee.

Have you ever wanted to ask any of the Republican candidates currently vying to challenge President Obama a question?

Well, two back-to-back debates being held in New Hampshire this weekend give you a chance to review their records and play citizen reporter.

Tomorrow, January 7 at 9 p.m. EST, the candidates will debate on ABC. Yahoo! is co-sponsoring the debate--and is inviting Americans to submit a question to the candidates. Send in your "choice" questions to Yahoo!, or post them on Twitter with the hashtag #NHdebate.

Then, on Sunday, January 8 at 9 a.m. EST (yes--a.m.), the candidates will appear again on NBC. This debate is co-sponsored by the New Hampshire Union-Leader and Facebook.

If you're on Facebook, RSVP for the debate and ask your questions!

When it comes to their out-of-the-mainstream position on choice, these candidates have some explaining to do! Help hold their feet to the fire.

For instance:

Mr. Romney, why did you veto a bill that would have improved women's access to emergency contraception?

Mr. Santorum, tell us why you oppose allowing women to use contraception.

There's so much more, so have at it!

Paid for by NARAL Pro-Choice America, www.ProChoiceAmerica.org, and not authorized by any candidate or candidate's committee.

Ninety-eight percent of American women use birth control at some point in their lives.

Think about that. Ninety-eight percent. There's no TV show that's watched by 98 percent of American women, no sports team that can count on 98 percent of the population as its fans. In an age of polarization, there is perhaps nothing so universally used and accepted as birth control.

This week, Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary Kathleen Sebelius announced that, as medical experts advised, newly issued insurance plans must cover the full range of FDA-approved contraception without a copay. In a country where one in three women finds it difficult to pay for birth control, Secretary Sebelius' decision was a victory for women's health and common sense.

The reaction from right-wing politicians and commentators? You'll have to see (or read) it to believe it.

On Monday, Rep. Steve King of Iowa spoke out against birth control on the floor of the U.S. House of Representatives. He called the new no-cost birth control regulations "bizarre," "Orwellian," and said that they would make us "a dying civilization":

Bill O'Reilly of Fox News doubted the importance of no-cost birth control, saying, "Many women who get pregnant are blasted out of their minds when they have sex. They're not going to use birth control anyway."

In June, New Hampshire's Executive Council voted to cut off state funding for family-planning services at Planned Parenthood, forcing the state's six clinics to stop providing birth control.

Councillor Raymond Wieczorek expressed his feelings on women who use contraception:

If they want to have a good time, why not let them pay for it?

Not to be outdone, the commissioners of Ravalli County, Montana are threatening to reject Title-X funds, putting nearly 500 residents' access to birth control, cancer screenings, and other care at risk.

But no problem, according to Commissioner Matt Kanenwisher:

In my mind, pregnancy is not a disease state. An unplanned pregnancy doesn't make it anymore so. You can say it's a social problem, and you can argue there is a role for government to take some action in that. I don't believe that's the case.

Back in the world of "fair and balanced," Sandy Rios, vice president of Family PAC Federal and another Fox News contributor, had this to say:

Is the White House out of their mind? Does the West Wing not know what the left wing is doing? We're $14 trillion in debt and now we're going to cover birth control, breast pumps, counseling for abuse? Are we going to do pedicures and manicures as well?

Let's review what they oppose...again.

Insurance plans will cover contraception without a copay--improving women's access to family-planning services and thereby reducing the need for abortion.

As more of these anti-contraception extremists speak, I'm confident it will spur even more Americans to side with us. Do you agree?

Is the White House out of their mind? Does the West Wing not know what the left wing is doing? We're $14 trillion in debt and now we're going to cover birth control, breast pumps, counseling for abuse? Are we going to do pedicures and manicures as well?

In my mind, pregnancy is not a disease state. An unplanned pregnancy doesn't make it anymore so. You can say it's a social problem, and you can argue there is a role for government to take some action in that. I don't believe that's the case.

If they want to have a good time, why not let them pay for it?

If they want to have a good time, why not let them pay for it?

If they want to have a good time, why not let them pay for it?

South Dakota politicians have now made our state the first in the country to pass such a far-reaching bill that disrespects the doctor-patient relationship and turns women's health care into a game of government mandates. Politicians want to tell women who they can talk to before making a profoundly personal medical decision. It is hard to out-do insurance companies and HMOs when it comes to being told what doctor you can see or where you can access medical care, but the legislators behind this bill are doing just that.

It is clear that this committee is more interested in making headlines than discussing how to improve women's access to health care or create good jobs in our state. This bill could entangle Ohio in an expensive legal fight, and is out of touch with our state's values and priorities.

It is beyond disappointing that the committee won't allow video testimony so they can hear from women who have made the profoundly personal decision to terminate a pregnancy. The politicians behind this bill refuse to acknowledge what Ohioans understand: Every woman's situation is different, and it's unacceptable for anti-choice lawmakers to think they should make the personal, private decisions that belong to women and their doctors.

My sincere hope would be for legislators to focus on the country's pressing challenges rather than undermining a woman's right to choose, but the outlook is not promising. Anti-choice lawmakers, in their words and actions, are pushing for a wave of proposals that would open the door to more political interference in the doctor-patient relationship. This agenda is out of step with our country's priorities.

Created with Admarket's flickrSLiDR.

NARAL Pro-Choice America Foundation held an event this afternoon to launch the 20th edition of Who Decides?. We were joined by pro-choice coalition partners and members of the news media. Nancy Keenan highlighted the report's key findings.

Donna Crane, policy director at NARAL Pro-Choice America, gave an overview of what we can expect from Congress and the states in the next year. She drew special attention to a new law in Nebraska that bans abortion at 20 weeks, without an adequate exception for threats to a woman's health, for cases in which the pregnancy was the result of rape or incest, or for cases of fetal anomaly. The law targeted Dr. LeRoy Carhart, whose practice is located in Nebraska. Anti-choice groups are threatening to pass copycat laws in other states in 2011. 

Pilar Olivo, executive director of NARAL Pro-Choice New Hampshire, commented on the status of a woman's right to choose in the Granite State. 

New Hampshire received an A- grade in the new Who Decides?, and has a history of strong bipartisan support for the right to choose. But anti-choice gains in both houses of the state legislature could threaten New Hampshire's pro-choice status. Olivo said that, as recent as yesterday, legislative leaders had vowed to pass a parental-involvement mandate that could jeopardize the health and safety of vulnerable teens.  A bipartisan coalition of lawmakers repealed a similar measure in 2007. That law had been the focus of a court challenge that went to the U.S. Supreme Court.

NARAL Pro-Choice New Hampshire will work closely with pro-choice Gov. John Lynch to make sure that a woman's right to make personal, private medical decisions doesn't go the way of the Old Man of the Mountain.

See how your state rates in the new Who Decides?, and find out if your state government supports a woman's right to choose.

We all recognize the focus will be on education and budget issues. We will not neglect those responsibilities. But we can multitask.

Sarah Palin, Tom Coburn, and Rick Santorum Walk Into a Senate Race. We wish this line were the beginning of a lame joke, but it's not. Anti-choice Senate candidate Kelly Ayotte of New Hampshire completed the right-wing "trifecta" as her campaign touted its endorsement from these three "leaders."

One of our colleagues (Do you know Beth Shipp?) aptly described this trio as the "Snap, Crackle, Pop" of the anti-choice movement.

Please know that we mean no disrespect to the Rice Krispies® brand; but the description just makes total sense, and thus we are morally obligated to include it.

Whatever happens in Ayotte's primary, voters in the Granite State have a pro-choice option in the general election, Rep. Paul Hodes, the NARAL Pro-Choice America PAC-endorsed candidate. Go, Hodes!

Paid for by NARAL Pro-Choice America, www.ProChoiceAmerica.org, and not authorized by any candidate or candidate's committee.