A clique of anti-choice Democrats in Congress joined forces with Republicans to pass an amendment forcing women to choose between affordable health insurance and abortion coverage, even if they pay for abortion coverage with their own money. Pro-choice Democrats and women’s health activists are up in arms over the eleventh hour deal
Support Congresswomen Diana DeGette (D-CO) and Jan Schakowsky (D-IL) who have launched a sign-on letter and ad campaign to stop the Stupak-Pitts amendment in health reform.
These Representatives have put themselves on the line to defend our rights. We need to stand behind them. Here’s how you can take action.
In the midst of foaming-at-the-mouth at the political give-and-take in health care reform, many prominent pundits neglected to properly inform the public that Stupak’s language allowed for a major incursion into women’s rights.
Today, the Association of Reproductive Health Professionals called on Congress to remove the Stupak Amendment from the rinal version of the House health reform bill.
What are the real-life effects of the Stupak-Pitts amendment to the House health care bill? An analysis by experts on health law, and reproductive and sexual health issues, shows just how far it goes.
Daily Kos contributor “Adam B” has launched an effort to show vulnerable pro-choice Dems “we’ve got your back.”
In a remarkable piece at Newsweek.com, Kathleen Kennedy Townsend writes that it is in the national interest “to pass meaningful health-care reform and not litigate abortion in the process. Too much is at stake to let differences over abortion derail real health reform.”
None of the bills emerging from either the House or the Senate require insurers to cover all of the elements of a basic gynecological "well-woman" visit leaving out essential care such as pelvic exams, STI counseling and – yes – birth control.
Far, far right television and radio talk show hosts provide an echo chamber for a very far out statement by Republican Congresswoman Virginia Foxx that health reform is more dangerous than terrorism.
Poor and uninsured Kansans are likely to be most affected by a proposed Kansas law that would, if passed, likely prevent Kansas from participating in a public health insurance option.