We can all agree McCain is right to say, "Elections have consequences." He uses that line whenever he talks about the Supreme Court. He knows Supreme Court appointments are the most enduring legacies presidents can leave behind. That is where we part company with him. Given there are 4 conservatives already on the court, this comment from a recent Wall Street Journal article takes on special meaning:

A March poll of 1,200 women in 16 battleground states, commissioned by Planned Parenthood, showed that about half of the women who backed McCain also support abortion rights.

Given McCain's solid anti-choice voting record, it is not suprising the poll found:

Half of the women surveyed in the poll also said they didn't know "enough about McCain's views on abortion to say whether he is in step or out of step with their own outlook."

Time for some consciousness raising...

I am deeply saddened to read many comments here and on other diaries, which are so caught up in Hillary versus Obama, that everyone seems to forget what NARAL is about.  

At 60+ I am older than most of you I think.  
I doubt many of you ever knew a woman who died from a back alley abortion.  I knew three.

When I was a girl my mom and I drove 6 hours from Detroit to Chicago to help lobby for passage of the Equal Rights Amendment.

When I moved to the DC area some 24 years ago, I didn't waste any time in getting involved with the progressive causes.  With the national headquarters of so many great groups here in our area, it was easy to volunteer and feel like I was making a difference.  One of those groups was NARAL - then called the National Abortion Rights Action League.

I'd show up every Wednesday evening to hang out in the conference room, go through "hate mail" and visit with friends.  We had a great group of folks - and it was kind of funny to see what some of the anti's sent back in NARAL's pre-paid mailers.  The idea was to weed out addresses from the mailing list so the group wouldn't waste money on them once we id'd them as anti's.  They got pretty creative actually - more than once we'd open the envelope to find a squished frog or something equally gross.  Another time someone sent the envelope back taped to a brick - running up the postage charged to the group.

I also showed up to help with national marches, and was a regular at clinic defenses when we got word that the anti's would try to shut down a clinic - especially on January 22nd, when they turned up in DC for their annual march.  The idea was to keep it open so patients could get in for their appointments - most of whom were there for check-ups, advice re birth control or cancer screenings etc.  So we'd act as escorts or legal observers.  We'd ring the door to the clinic to keep the anti's from gaining control of the entrance and shutting it down.  It got kind of comical at times really - we'd set up a ring and then the anti's would set one up in front of us.  Then we'd block them off so more anti's couldn't get in to add to their ranks.  Layer of us - layer of them - layer of us and so on...  to the point where it looked like a rainbow.

FROM NARAL PRO-CHOICE AMERICA

January 24, 2008

A Message to Pro-Choice Voters Regarding the Democratic Presidential
Primary

Nancy Keenan is president of NARAL Pro-Choice America.

This week Americans mark the 35th anniversary of Roe v. Wade, a milestone that coincides with the 2008 presidential election. As we celebrate this occasion, and this critical time for women's reproductive freedom, NARAL Pro-Choice America is proud that we have such strong pro-choice candidates like

Sens. Hillary Clinton
http://www.prochoiceamerica.org/election s/statements/clinton.html  

and
Barack Obama
http://www.prochoiceamerica.org/election s/statements/obama.html

and former Sen. John Edwards
http://www.prochoiceamerica.org/election s/statements/edwards.html

running for president.

Back in July I posted about the inclusion of money for family planning and pregnancy prevention into the Labor-HHS-Education appropriations bill.  I wasn't at all happy with how the measure was framed as a way to reduce abortions, but the possibility of a significant increase for Title X was certainly something to cheer about.

The appropriations bill has now passed both the House and Senate and it includes $310 million for Title X.

Emily Douglas of RH Reality Check has the details:

It's all bad news, all the time, you say? Well, that's not true on Fridays! Last night, the House of Representatives passed the Labor-HHS-Education appropriations bill -- which, as suggested by its title, provides funding for the Departments of Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education -- by a vote of 274-141.
****
It turns out that there is something to cheer about this bill after all. In a win for reproductive health care, the appropriations bill includes a $27.8 million funding increase for important Title X family planning dollars, bringing the total funding for Title X to $310.9 million. This is the largest increase in Title X funding in 35 years.

Bush is expected to veto the appropriations bill over discretionary spending, and unfortunately there aren't enough votes to override.      

EDITED: Tim Ryan is actually a Democrat. My apologies for the error.

Big news on the family planning front today.  Representatives Rosa Delauro (D-CT) and Tim Ryan (D-OH) got the House to include $647 million for family planning and pregnancy prevention into the Appropriations bill.  The measure is titled: "Reducing the Need for Abortions Initiative."  I hate, hate, hate how this is being framed but I can't help being excited at how the money will be spent.  It's the biggest shift on this front since Bush came to power.

Here are the changes specific to contraception from Tim Ryan's press release:

Preventive provisions:

Access to contraceptive information and services is an important element of preventing pregnancy. In addition to several funding increases for programs that increase access to contraceptives, the bill also contains provisions that seek to reduce teen pregnancy

-The first increase in more than 6 years for the Title X  family planning program,

-Teen Pregnancy Prevention Grants - a new Program at CDC - to support medically accurate, age-appropriate approaches to preventing teen pregnancies that include information about both abstinence and contraception, including the dissemination of science-based tools and strategies to prevent HIV, STD, and teen pregnancy.  

21 Republicans crossed party lines to vote in favor of the new funding.  Now they can go back to their districts and tell constituents that they voted for legislation that will help "reduce abortions."  But the real news here is the shift on sex ed and funding for Title X.  Both programs have been nearly choked to death under the Bush administration.  This is a small step in the right direction.

Meanwhile anti-choicers still aren't happy...

Last week I posted a first draft with six questions  about family planning, specifically contraception, to ask candidates around the country.  I asked for and received feedback about the specific wording, most of which remains unchanged.  Here is the final draft of the questions.  

1. Do you support the right to use contraception?
2. Would you support legislation requiring pharmacies to both stock and fill prescriptions for birth control pills including Plan B emergency contraception?
3. Do you support continued funding of Title X, which provides contraception and related reproductive health care services to low-income women?
4. Would you support legislation requiring hospitals to offer information and prescriptions of emergency contraception to victims of sexual assault?
5. Would you support legislation requiring schools to include scientifically accurate information about contraception as part of any sex education curriculum?
6. Would you support legislation requiring health insurance providers to cover oral contraceptives in their prescription plans?

This week I will send questionnaires out to the Presidential candidates in both parties.  I'll post the responses in full, as well as the names of those candidates who haven't yet responded.  I use the phrase haven't yet because I plan to keep after those campaigns that don't and I hope others will contact them as well.

NARAL's website has a section devoted to the 2008 Presidential candidates and their views on a woman's right to choose.  This will come as no surprise, but only one Republican candidate, Rep. Tancredo, responded to NARAL's request for a statement.  

But candidate statements and voting records on choice in the general sense don't interest me as much as where they stand on access to contraption.  Birth control as an issue is less cut and dry, and party affiliation doesn't necessarily clue voters in to what a candidate's position is.  As I wrote in my last post about birth control, the right wing attacks on access to contraception have been brutal, especially when it comes to spreading misinformation.  The voting public is well versed on issues surrounding abortion, but my sense is that many if not most don't realize that access to contraception is also a big part of the debate about reproductive freedom.

Birth Control is a good issue for Democrats. It's a women's issue, a health care issue, an economic issue. Virtually every American makes choices about family planning over the course of their lifetime. Public policy decisions about contraception will affect a majority of Americans. Democratic candidates, starting with those running for President, need to be talking about access, and activists can help them along by asking the right questions.

I propose developing a standard list of questions to ask about access to birth control. It could first be sent out to Presidential candidates, and then used by those wishing to question candidates running for Congress and their State Assemblies in 2008.