More

Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
Rep. Jim McDermott

Rep. Jim McDermott

GET UPDATES FROM Rep. Jim McDermott

Playing Politics with Women's Rights

Posted: 04/12/11 10:37 AM ET

Investing in the health of American women should not be a partisan dispute. Family planning decisions belong to women, their doctors and their families, not to ideologues in Congress. Unfortunately, House Republicans have made attacks on women's health services a top priority of the 112th Congress. Even more startling is that the measures we're considering will not only disproportionately limit low-income and minority women's access to basic health care, it will place unprecedented restrictions on the health insurance benefits offered to middle-class women, civil servants and small business owners.

Today, millions of low-income women and minority women receive basic health services through organizations like Planned Parenthood. They have come under relentless attack by anti-choice groups and their supporters on Capitol Hill, even though the majority of Americans endorse women's access to health care. More than 60 percent of voters support family planning programs, according to a recent national survey conducted by the Lombardo Consulting Group. Last Friday, the Hart Research Associates conducted a national poll that showed that 64 percent of registered voters oppose proposals to end all funding for Planned Parenthood, while the vast majority -- 81 percent -- of voters under age 30 opposes ending funding for Planned Parenthood.

So why are some Members of Congress so consumed with restricting women's access to the health services they need when we have an economy in shreds and devastating high unemployment? Why is the House Republican majority laser-focused on pursuing unprecedented government intrusion into reproductive rights? And, why do some lawmakers insist on using deceptively titled bills, like the "No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion Act," when federal funding for abortion is already banned under current law, except in extremely narrow circumstances?

Over the past four months, House Republicans have introduced or reintroduced a series of legislation that would, among other things, redefine "forcible rape"; permanently block access of low-income women, civil servants and military women to abortion care; and penalize millions of small businesses that choose to offer their employees comprehensive health insurance coverage that includes abortion services. For a party whose mantra is "small government," Republicans' ceaseless meddling in women's health care flies in the face of every principle they claim to embrace.

But this is about more than just trying to square the Republican Party's call for small government with its penchant for federal intrusions into the lives of women. This is about imposing far-reaching restrictions on abortion access to a much larger share of the population than current laws allow. And, it is about implementing sweeping changes to federal tax policy that will raise health care costs for millions of women who seek comprehensive health care coverage.

These alarming efforts to roll back women's reproductive rights are paralleled by similar efforts on the state level. NARAL Pro-Choice America is tracking 371 anti-choice measures offered in state legislatures this year; there were 174 state bills at this time last year.

Last Wednesday, Virginia joined seven other states to ban health insurance plans in the Affordable Care Act's state health care exchanges from covering abortion -- even when women buy that insurance with their own, private dollars. In Nebraska today, it is illegal for a woman to obtain abortion care after 20 weeks, even in tragic cases of a fetal anomaly.

Such radical measures against women are anachronistic and insidious; their immediate consequences will be felt throughout our population.

It used to be a statement of fact that investing in the health of women is good for the country. The fundamental recognition that in a civilized society, we must strive to provide basic services to all -- not just the wealthy -- is missing in the current legislative discussions about women's health. Playing politics with women's health is simply wrong. American women deserve better.



Congressman Jim McDermott (D-WA) is a physician as well as a senior member of the House Ways and Means Committee. Throughout his career as an elected official in the Washington State Legislature and U.S. Congress, his primary focus has been improving our health care systems to provide more affordable, effective and accessible care to all Americans.

Connect with Rep. Jim McDermott on Facebook

 

Follow Rep. Jim McDermott on Twitter: www.twitter.com/RepJimMcDermott

Investing in the health of American women should not be a partisan dispute. Family planning decisions belong to women, their doctors and their families, not to ideologues in Congress. Unfortunately, H...
Investing in the health of American women should not be a partisan dispute. Family planning decisions belong to women, their doctors and their families, not to ideologues in Congress. Unfortunately, H...
 
 
  • Comments
  • 29
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
09:09 PM on 04/15/2011
What I don't understand is how so many completely ignore the long term outcome of eliminating these types of programs. Regardless of how you personally feel about abortion, the cost of not providing these services to low income women will end up being a much bigger burden to tax payers in years to come. The same is true for many social programs that the GOP want to cut.

In order to stabilize the economy for more than a few months, we need to invest in worthwhile policy that will continue to stimulate it for many years to come. Expanding access to healthcare and higher education is well worth the investment when you consider the payoff of being healthy and a college degree. HEALTHY PEOPLE are obviously able to contribute to society in many ways... while on the other hand, SICK PEOPLE who are unable to afford the treatments that they need, will probably have a difficult time holding down a job because they are SICK.. and more than likely, many of these sick people will end up having to resort to using government healthcare (tax payer's $$) because they cannot obtain insurance through an employer, and clearly they have no income to pay for a private insurance policy. It is pretty simple stuff really.

Being GREEDY has gotten us NOWHERE. We should be giving to women, children & the poor.. not taking from them. It is time to start doing what makes sense for the PEOPLE & the FUTURE.
05:16 PM on 04/12/2011
Have said this before, if this was approached differently, people would change their tune. If stats were more emphasized to cover everyone, women, men & children, that PP helps, this would be such a non-issue.
03:36 PM on 04/12/2011
A country that is borrowing trillions of dollars from future generations shouldn't be spending money on non-essential items. Planned Parenthood is a non-essential item under any reasonable definition. Even if you want to assume that PP does a good job of providing medical care to women, and there isn't really any data to support that, it is immoral to borrow from future generations to pay for it. Those future generations will have their own problems to deal with. Why should we force them to pay for ours? If you believe in programs like PP then find a way to pay for them. The money isn't there. Tax 100% of earnings above $250,000 and take 100% of the profits of the Fortune 500 companies. Ignore the effects that that would have, but lets just say that the government had the money. It still wouldn't end our deficits.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
LadyAurora
Pagan for Peace
04:16 PM on 04/12/2011
"Planned Parenthood is a non-essent­ial item under any reasonable definition"

Tell that to all the women who get PAP smears, cervical cancer screenings, mamograms, and a variety of other healthcare that has absolutely nothing to do with abortions.

Better yet, unless you grow a womb anytime in the near future, you really have no business in telling women what healthcare they can have.
04:28 PM on 04/12/2011
So taxpayers are obligated to pay for those things for you because you have a womb? I guess the rest of us are second class citizens then. Again the issue isn't a woman having access to those things it is that taxpayers, or future taxpayers in this case, are obligated to pay for them that is the problem. You can't both have the freedom to do what you want and expect other people to pay. Freedom and responsibility go hand and hand.
liry
Runnin' on empty
04:53 PM on 04/12/2011
I'd fan you 15 times if I could. Thank you.
04:42 PM on 04/12/2011
I am a nurse and I do not see cancer screening, birth control, and disease treatment as non-essential. Patients don't disappear just because you don't fund health care...they end up in ERs and with more serious illness and complications...costing tax-payers more. The ER must treat people insurance or not. So NOT funding preventative care in all its forms will always cost more.

This funding makes up such a small part of all federal spending... for example 50% of our federal budget is on defense and security.

This is clearly a targeted attack on PP and has nothing to do with a real desire to fix our budget deficit. I don't think anyone is suggesting taking 100% of profits...I pay taxes, small businesses pay taxes, why can't a corporation pay taxes? In 2010 GM paid out 21 billion dollars in bonuses and the taxpayers bailed them out to the tune of 71 billion dollars a few years before and did they pay taxes in 2010? Nope they got a 3.2 billion dollar tax credit. The money is there we are the richest nation in the world our tax system is broken.
10:49 AM on 04/13/2011
The budget for defense is more like 20% of all government spending. Could we find waste there to cut? Yep, just like in every other government program.

You honestly think that a person's neighbors should buy their birth control for them? If someone wants to be sexually active that is fine, but part of being an adult is accepting the responsibility of your own actions. Buy your own birth control. Pay for your own health related expenses. The biggest problem in the medical field right now is that people have no incentive to find ways to save money. To most people a $3 pill costs the same as a 3 cent pill. Their insurance picks up the cost so there is no market for cheap, but effective solutions.

Money wasted bailing out GM or wasted in other areas does not mean that we should waste more money on other things. We should stop wasting that money also. We are borrowing from future generations. We are putting them at risk. If we looked at the big picture we couldn't claim to be under any type of real crisis. The economy is in a downturn, but overall we are still doing very well as a whole. So what is the excuse for us to have a debt equal to our GDP? To be borrowing 43% of government spending in the next budget. Which is a record.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
JustABriefThought
TAX THE RICH? ONLY a DEM supermajority will do it.
03:32 PM on 04/12/2011
Women have a choice: They can VOTE and they can EDUCATE themselves before voting. Why do so many women believe the GOP/TP has respect for them when really they simply have contempt for them and their right to their own bodies?
03:28 PM on 04/12/2011
Why should the money of the many be used to benefit the few? McDermott may not personally need the votes but his party uses taxpayer money to buy votes in order to maintain their power.
02:55 PM on 04/12/2011
Don't forget that since the vast majority of these restriction spring from the fact that these Republicans have a RELIGIOUS view that abortion and contraception are immoral. Thus their attempts to write their particular religious views into law, and thereby force American women of all faiths, or no faith, to abide by their own Christian version of Sharia law, is a clear violation of the establishment clause. It's baffling to me that more Dems aren't pointing this out, but then I could say that about 90% of what the Dems do, ever since Clinton was elected when I was a teenager. Capitulation seems to be the only thing they do well.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
michiganms
02:48 PM on 04/12/2011
Repubs do not like women. Nor minorities. Nor the working class. Nor the poor, the uneducated, or anyone in need. Nothing new here.
02:26 PM on 04/12/2011
This just made me even prouder to be a Washingtonian, and even happier that Mr. McDermott has always had my vote.
liry
Runnin' on empty
04:55 PM on 04/12/2011
I agree. A Congressman who GETS it. Amazing.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Dee Amschler
on the edge
01:46 PM on 04/12/2011
It's legal, it should be covered by all insurance - including public policies like Medicaid. If idealogues like the wingnuts at the extremes of the Republican Party want to defund abortion, they need to change the law.

Of course, our nation has a horrid record on human rights and womens' rights so I wouldn't recommend holding my breath on seeing the Republicans move on this in a reasonable, civilized manner - or even one that simply does anything besides treat women (and our bodies) as anything more than pawns in a political game. Damn it, Bohener, we ARE human. And despite being female, we have the right to privacy and the right to decisions about our bodies - just like men (such as you) do. Rights are not dependent on gender or status - or at least they're not supposed to be. So unless we're moving backwards in time by at least a hundred years (or more), the Republicans need to keep their noses out of womens uteri and stop their anti-abortion policing.
liry
Runnin' on empty
04:58 PM on 04/12/2011
F & F'ed. If you don't like abortion, don't believe in abortion, don't have an abortion.
11:49 AM on 04/12/2011
We all know that in order to pack up the rest of the middle class and ship it to china they have to distract their base with things like this. The Dems also benefit. As we have seen in the post bush years you all can do nothing, and get votes purely for not being in the GOP
missprissanna
the weight of the news nearly broke my back
11:08 AM on 04/12/2011
Clearly we aren't a civilized society anymore.

Playing politics is a true description, playing a game is what it is to them. Win at any cost, lie about anything and everything, anyway at all to win the next election is their only goal. No concern about the real damage done to real people.

The direction of our country is disgraceful and frightening if you aren't one of the haves or have mores.