NARAL Pro-Choice America About Our Bloggers Contact Us Disclaimer RSS Feed

Results tagged “Politico” from Blog for Choice

President Obama spoke today about his administration's new policy ensuring that insurance plans cover birth control without a copay.

The president reaffirmed his commitment to making sure that women of all faiths who work at religiously affiliated hospitals, universities, and service organizations can get contraceptive coverage.

The New York Times, Politico, Mother Jones, Talking Points Memo, and The Huffington Post turned to NARAL Pro-Choice America to find out what this means for the 99 percent of women--including 98 percent of Catholic women--who use birth control at some point in their lives.

Nancy Keenan, president of NARAL Pro-Choice America, said President Obama's policy ensures that women get seamless coverage of contraception through their health plans:

Today's announcement makes it clear that President Obama is firmly committed to protecting women's health. Unfortunately, some opponents of contraception may not be satisfied. These groups and their allies in Congress want to take away contraceptive coverage from nurses, janitors, administrative staff, and college instructors--and that agenda is out of touch with our country's values and priorities. We will continue to fight on every front to support women's access to birth control as politicians in Washington, D.C. try to take it away.

Indeed, there are politicians and activists who don't want women to have access to insurance coverage of birth control, period.

As my colleague Jen mentioned yesterday, one of these extremists said Taco Bell should be allowed to deny its employees access to basic health care.

Right now, anti-contraception politicians in Washington are pushing multiple attacks on women's access to birth-control coverage.

Anti-choice Sen. Roy Blunt (R-Mo.) is trying to stuff one of these attacks into a transportation bill.

Tell your lawmakers to stand strong against any attacks on birth control!

Enhanced by Zemanta

Yesterday, Greenberg Quinlan Rosner Research released a new poll conducted on our behalf that shows choice provides an opening for President Obama to create a sharp contrast with anti-choice Republicans.

Now, major news media organizations are picking up the story. Nancy Keenan, president of NARAL Pro-Choice America, appeared on ABC News' "Top Line" to discuss how the president's pro-choice position can help him win back women "defectors":

Politico, The Wall Street Journal, and The Hill are also reporting on the poll.

All of the candidates for the Republican nomination oppose a woman's right to choose.

Over the next year, we'll be working in day-in and day-out to highlight the contrast between pro-choice President Obama and his extreme anti-choice Republican opponents.

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

Enhanced by Zemanta

It's just over six months until the Iowa caucuses, and the Republican candidates for president are already jockeying for position. They're also in a grudge-match to see who can be the most hostile to a woman's right to choose.

Yesterday, NARAL Pro-Choice America released its research on 12 announced and potential GOP candidates--and leading media organizations are reporting on what they discovered. 

For instance, which two of the candidates signed pro-choice bills into law? We've put all the coverage in one place, so you can find out the answer to this question and more! 

OK, this shouldn't come as much of a surprise. But the abortion-rights group NARAL Pro-Choice America says that none of the declared Republican candidates for president -- nor any of those thought to be waiting in the wings -- would pass muster with voters who support a woman's right to choose....

There is a big difference from 2008, however, when it comes to birth control.

For the first time, many, if not most of the candidates have come out not just for the defunding of Planned Parenthood (which is at least arguably about abortion). Some have also voted against -- and spoken out against -- any kind of federal funding for contraception.

Of the approximately 15 Republicans who have either announced or hinted a run for president in 2012, the abortion-rights policy group NARAL Pro-Choice has identified the 12 most prominent potential contenders as presenting a threat to women's access to abortion and family-planning services.

On Thursday, NARAL policy directors briefed reporters on a new report analyzing the records and statements of current GOP candidates, released just before the Ames Straw Poll in Iowa on Aug. 13. It is the first phase of the organization's election-related analysis, said NARAL Communications Director Ted Miller.

NARAL LOOKS AT GOP FIELD-- Spoiler alert! They don't like any of them. At a briefing with reporters yesterday, abortion-rights group NARAL looked at 12 declared or potential Republican presidential candidates and their history on abortion and reproductive rights issues. All of the contenders have announced themselves to be firmly anti-abortion with a few voting or policy exceptions that NARAL considers to be "pro-choice." For instance, former Govs. Jon Huntsman and Tim Pawlenty both signed into law bills that would allow sexual assault victims access to emergency contraception. But when it comes down to Election Day, "they're all equally unacceptable," said policy director Donna Crane.

Which of the Republican presidential candidates vetoed legislation that would require doctors to provide emergency contraception to rape victims?

It was then Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney. (The state legislature went on to pass it over his veto.)

Which 2012 GOP contender signed a similar measure into law? It was actually two of them--Tim Pawlenty in Minnesota in 2007 and Jon Huntsman in Utah in 2009.

These are among the facts in an assessment of the Republican presidential wannabes released by NARAL, the national pro-choice advocacy group. The organization examined the records of 12 candidates--some announced and some still teasing--and though a few have occasionally made moves slightly supportive of women's reproductive rights, all of the candidates received a failing grade. This was no shocker.

"They're all unacceptable for pro-choice voters," said Ted Miller, NARAL's communications director. He declined to rank them.

As Ted said, this is just the beginning of our analysis on the 2012 election. Keep checking back for facts as this race heats up.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Birth Control for Horses, Not for Women


Which of these two would get birth control if the anti-choice leadership of the U.S. House of Representatives gets its way?

Horse and woman.JPG
Politico and RH Reality Check are reporting that anti-choice Rep. Dan Burton of Indiana has introduced an amendment to a spending bill that would promote contraception--for wild horses.

Ted Miller, communications director for NARAL Pro-Choice America, said the move would be ridiculous if the stakes weren't so high:

House members fighting to preserve a horse's right to birth control would be laughable, if they weren't trying to block women from accessing contraception at the exact same time. What's next? An amendment that would allow veterinarians to refuse to provide birth control to a horse if the vet is personally opposed to contraception?

(Well, doesn't giving birth control to wild horses just encourage them to be even wilder?)

Enhanced by Zemanta

The war on women's health care continues. This week, the anti-choice leadership of the U.S. House of Representatives held back-to-back committee hearings on two different anti-choice bills.

But apparently, attacking women's access to abortion care isn't enough for them: now these same anti-choice leaders have proposed eliminating funding for birth control and cancer screenings.  

The leaders of the House Appropriations Committee yesterday announced their intent to eliminate all funding for the Title X program. Title X is the nation's only program dedicated solely to family planning for low-income Americans, including birth control and cancer screenings.

Nancy Keenan, president of NARAL Pro-Choice America, called the move blatantly hypocritical:

The new anti-choice House leadership now wants to take away birth control and cancer screenings from millions of American women and men. While these politicians attack abortion coverage from every angle, they now want to deny funding for birth control, even though that's the best way to prevent unintended pregnancy.

Focusing on jobs and the economy was so last year! Politico, The Hill, The Wall Street Journal, and Mother Jones are all reporting on the House leadership's new top priority: attacking women's health care. 

Enhanced by Zemanta

The anti-choice leadership of the U.S. House of Representatives is forging ahead with its extreme and broad "Stupak on Steroids" agenda, holding two committee hearings on two anti-choice bills, H.R.3 and H.R.358, this week

Major news media are reporting on these outrageous attacks on women's health and privacy, and are turning to NARAL Pro-Choice America for information. 

The Hill, Politico, The Boston Globe, Mother Jones, McClatchy Newspapers, Fox News Channel, Talking Points Memo, DailyKos, and BBC News are just some of the organizations that have cited NARAL Pro-Choice America's analysis.


Enhanced by Zemanta

And they're off!

The anti-choice leadership of the U.S. House of Representatives is kicking off its extreme "Stupak on Steroids" agenda with a key committee hearing this afternoon. At 4 p.m. today the Judiciary subcommittee on the Constitution will hold a hearing on H.R.3, the "Stupak on Steroids" bill introduced by Rep. Chris Smith of New Jersey.

Among many egregious provisions, this bill 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.

Nancy Keenan, president of NARAL Pro-Choice America, has submitted written testimony to the subcommittee detailing how the "Stupak on Steroids" bill would restrict women's ability to make personal, private medical decisions. We'll be monitoring this hearing closely, and provide more information here at Blog for Choice after it happens.

Today's hearing is just the first game in an anti-choice double-header. At 1 p.m. tomorrow, the Energy and Commerce health subcommittee will hold a hearing on H.R.358, which was introduced by Rep. Joe Pitts of Pennsylvania. This bill would allow hospitals to refuse to provide abortion care even when it's necessary to save a woman's life!.

Creating jobs and getting the economy back on track? Pffff--that's so 2010! 

Speaker John Boehner called attacking a woman's right to choose one of his "highest legislative priorities," and these hearings show us he means it.

Fortunately, pro-choice allies in the House and Senate are standing up to fight the dangerous "Stupak on Steroids" agenda. Senators Richard Blumenthal of Connecticut, Barbara Boxer of California, Al Franken of Minnesota, Kirsten Gillibrand of New York, Frank Lautenberg of New Jersey, and Patty Murray of Washington held a press conference this morning calling on the anti-choice House leadership to focus on jobs and the economy--not attacking women's health and privacy.

And Rep. Lois Capps of California wrote an op-ed in Politico this morning calling on the House leadership to stop its attacks on choice. 


Enhanced by Zemanta

The report featured NARAL Pro-Choice America's Nancy Keenan, and used our research to develop maps showing which states are most likely to see attacks on women's freedom and privacy. Nancy talked about how the changed political landscape will affect women's ability to make personal, private medical decisions.

The CBS Evening News is not the only leading media organization that is turning to NARAL Pro-Choice America for in-depth analysis. The New York Times, NPR, Politico, and the Associated Press have all cited our research in recent stories on anti-choice legislation in Congress and the states.

Politicians who campaigned last fall on promises of job creation, fiscal responsibility, and "limited government" have now turned around and made attacking a woman's right to choose a top priority. NARAL Pro-Choice America is working overtime getting the word out that these attacks mean more government interference in our personal, private lives, not less.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Last night, the U.S. House of Representatives voted to repeal the health-reform law, a top priority of anti-choice Speaker John Boehner

Here's what Nancy Keenan says about this new attack:

These anti-choice politicians are out of touch with Americans' values and priorities. These same lawmakers voted to repeal a health-care law that provides prenatal care and the promise of no-cost birth control to women.  Now, they want to make it even harder for women to purchase private health insurance that includes abortion coverage with their own money. Their hypocrisy is astounding.  It seems that they're fine with government intrusion, as long as it involves interfering in women's personal, private decisions.

And you can voice your concerns about choice in 2011, because tomorrow is Blog For Choice Day! Sign up now to blog for choice. 

Enhanced by Zemanta

Politico Previews Upcoming Attacks on Choice


What do the numbers 29 and 15 mean when it comes to the debate over choice?

The article showcases NARAL Pro-Choice America's analysis of the sort of anti-choice attacks we can expect in Congress and in state legislatures in 2011. 

Anti-choice forces are feeling so emboldened by the outcome of November's elections that they called an emergency conference last week to plot their attacks. You can be sure that NARAL Pro-Choice America and our affiliate network will be fighting their extreme agenda every step of the way

Enhanced by Zemanta

Some irony for your Thursday afternoon...I meant to mention it days ago when it happened, but there's been so much crazy, it was hard to keep up! Apologies.

Anyway, the Politico reported on a pre-9/12 rally on The Hill saying:

Attendees, many of whom railed against Obama's health care reform push, carried signs reading, "Who owns your body? You or your government?"

I'm sorry - what now?

It's a hypocrisy many pro-choice activists are familiar with: Anti-choice extremists say they don't want the government making decisions about what they choose to do with their personal health, and yet they have spent the majority of this summer demanding a new nationwide abortion ban in the private health-insurance market. If these anti-choice extremists, who include some members of Congress, get their way, women could lose coverage for abortion care, even if their private health-insurance plan already covers it! How in the world does that give people control over their body?

It's as frustrating as it is wrong.

Call Congress today to make sure they know that you strongly urge your representative to oppose any attempts to take away abortion coverage from women who already have it.

Today, NARAL Pro-Choice America PAC announced its endorsement of Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand in the special primary election slated for September 2010:

"As a dedicated supporter of women's health and rights, I am honored to receive the early endorsement of NARAL Pro-Choice America for my election to the United States Senate," Sen. Gillibrand said. "I congratulate Nancy Keenan and the entire organization for their tremendous efforts to elect pro-choice leaders and protect pro-choice values. We have done a lot of great work together, but we have a whole lot more work to do to protect reproductive rights in this country and ensure privacy and freedom for women."

Keenan said NARAL Pro-Choice America PAC contributed $5,000 to Sen. Gillibrand's campaign. She also pledged to mobilize the organization's 63,113 member activists in support of Sen. Gillibrand, whom the PAC endorsed in previous campaigns for the U.S. House in New York's 20th District.

"Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand is a rising star among pro-choice leaders in the Senate," Keenan said. "We are proud to continue the partnership we started in 2006 when Sen. Gillibrand first won a tough race for the House. She is a resilient campaigner whose fully pro-choice voting record reflects an unwavering commitment to the values of freedom and privacy. We are proud to stand with Sen. Gillibrand and pledge to rally thousands of our member activists behind her in the same way she has stood up for a woman's right to choose."

Jonathan Martin, covering Ben Smith's blog over at Politico, already reported on our endorsement.

Facebook Twitter YouTube Tumblr flickr
Donate Take Action
In Your State Share Your Story
Get email updates from NARAL Pro-Choice America:
Search the Blog
Featured Video
Most Recent Entries