iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
Taylor Marsh

Taylor Marsh

Posted: March 30, 2010 09:27 AM

There Is No Women's Movement

What's Your Reaction:

2010-03-30-bitter_pill.jpg

Whatever money you have given Planned Parenthood, NOW, and NARAL has gone for naught. All you have to do is ask where were these women's groups during the health care fight, when they got beat by a minority in Congress led by one man? As for the Democratic Party, the majority of members, who has always told us it supports women's rights were played like fiddles. The so called progressives and "pro-choice caucus" in Congress rendered silent by the few. Speaker Pelosi... well, she served up Rep. Bart Stupak as the hero of health care. However, the Hyde Amendment didn't have to be codified in health care legislation, but that's what happened, because women had no champions in Congress.

The Democratic Party has come to believe that since Republicans do not stand up for women they have a captive voting block, even if they no longer deserve it. But where are women to go? Who do they vote for if not Democrats? Republicans certainly don't support women's rights. Their last nominee, John McCain, was even against the Ledbetter Act for equal pay. Sarah Palin is against women's self-determination, as is every other possible 2012 Republican contender.

The right-wing rants about freedoms every day. But the right-wing of both political parties ignore the rights of women every time the topic of abortion is brought up. The word "choice" is used to demean the trauma of a woman in the throes of personal panic, while "pro-life" is used to further stigmatize the woman as being somehow against life, even if her decision is often made to save her own life, physically or emotionally, sometimes both. The woman in peril is the primary individual and life in question. There is no one else.

If you don't believe in abortion don't have one, even if put in an untenable position. But no one should have the right or power to strip women of their freedoms to control their own body, something a man would never allow.

And the continued contention that Bart Stupak and others like him are "pro-life" tells only part of the tale. They are actually pro-selective life.

No other person or force, including the government with their concocted health care plan restrictions, should ever be allowed to impede the woman's decision, even if she's poor. To do so is to interrupt a woman's human rights and her freedoms.

Democrats have decided that the rights of women are not equal and worth defending. Republicans have always felt that way. Because if every woman in this country doesn't have 100% control over her own body, regardless of means, she is not free.

Wake up and see your 21st century Democratic Party.

I know, it's sobering.

The last bastion to protecting women's rights has caved. But not because they don't have the majority to protect us; but because they don't feel our full rights are important enough to fight for and they don't have the will for the battle.

But Mr. Stupak would not have gained so much ground against the freedoms of women if Speaker Pelosi hadn't sanctioned it, encouraged it and back it.

If the so called "pro-choice caucus" in Congress, both chambers, hadn't failed to stand up for us.

The women in politics either too old or too lazy to recall the dangers of not having 100% control over your own body. Some of our menopausal matrons simply not up to the task; while young women yawn in ignorance of what's being dismantled.

None of this would have happened if Planned Parenthood had been doing their job and seen the Stupak health care challenge coming (whoever has given them money should ask for it back.) or if NARAL and NOW hadn't been rendered to simply squealing at the wind after the deal was done. (Don't give them another dime when they come calling.)

Not at all impressive for groups whose only purpose is defending the rights of women. They all failed miserably.

Meanwhile, in a little place called Michigan, Connie Saltonstall has bravely come forward, with the help of Blue America, to challenge Bart Stupak. It's a long shot, but at least it's a principled one, and in a year where Bart Stupak has fallen in love with his own image who knows what can happen? I've been sending emails to Emily's List asking them, where's their endorsement? Finally I got a nice email response saying they're "talking to her campaign" and they'll keep me posted. They've missed the biggest PR opening they could have had, right after the passage of health care when Bart Stupak was everywhere, and is now being followed up by an op-ed for the Washington Post.

Honestly, you expect this ineptitude on women's behalf from Republicans, but it's been a sharp stab of betrayal to see it done by Democrats who hold both houses of Congress and the presidency, while "women's groups" fumble around for an excuse to cover their flatfooted surprise and incompetence.

So, in a season where Rep. Bart Stupak and the minority in the House took down the majority in the Democratic Congress who allegedly support women's rights, while even wrangling Pres. Obama to help carve away more of what we've already won, it's time to face facts.

We continue to deny poor women full freedoms based on their inability to pay for them.

Women in America no longer have any political party willing to stand up for our full freedoms. No politicians willing to fight our fights.

And there is no women's movement anymore.

Taylor Marsh is a political analyst out of Washington, D.C.

 

Follow Taylor Marsh on Twitter: www.twitter.com/taylormarsh

 
 
  • Comments
  • 24
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Recency  | 
Popularity
12:42 PM on 04/08/2010
And in the absence of a cohesive women's movement, women continue to rely on volunteer-run private abortion funds to pay for emergency medical care. It's shameful.

As Stephanie Poggi, Executive Director of the National Network of Abortion Fund noted in her statement on Obama's Executive Order last month, "with the stroke of his pen, President Obama expanded the Hyde Amendment's guarantee of inequality and unfairness." (full statement: http://bit.ly/dAnsx)

Now is the time to advance abortion rights. Don't pick up your ball and go home. Pick it up and throw it down the lane--you can participate in a national campaign this April to raise money to directly pay for the abortions that Obama and Stupak are denying poor women. Sign up here:

National Campaign for Abortion Access! http://bowlathon.nnaf.org
01:35 PM on 04/08/2010
Not sure what happened with the bit.ly link going to the Network's statement on the Executive Order, so here it is in its entirety: http://www.facebook.com/NationalNetworkofAbortionFunds?v=app_2347471856
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Radicalhousewife
www.theradicalhousewife.com
12:23 PM on 04/08/2010
Ms. Marsh, PLEASE do not lump the National Organization for Women in with Planned Parenthood and NARAL. As a state leader in NOW, I can assure you that our members did NOT remain silent during the health care disaster, nor did we merely "squeal in the wind" afterwards.

As soon as the Stupak-Pitts Amendment was announced, NOW's President, Terry O'Neill, and Action Vice President, Erin Matson, appeared in the media with unequivocal opposition. On November 8, 2009,NOW issued its first press release condemning the amendment (http://www.now.org/press/11-09/11-08.html). O'Neill spoke out in favor of killing the bill on March 4, 2010, writing, "NOW refuses to compromise on our most basic principles. We will not accept a health care bill that trades off the rights and needs of some women for the benefit of others." (http://www.now.org/press/03-10/03-04.html)

Lest you think NOW is a tool of the Democratic Party, another accusation that has been leveled at women's groups lately, read the March 21 release entitled "President Obama Breaks Faith with Women" (http://www.now.org/press/03-10/03-21a.html)

NOW has a fraction of the resources of NARAL and Planned Parenthood because our funding comes solely from members, not from corporations or foundations. We are beholden to no one. When women's rights are threatened, we speak out.

Please clarify this for your readers. Thank you.

Shannon Drury
President, Minnesota NOW
photo
Joanne TostiVasey
National NOW Board Member
02:31 PM on 04/08/2010
ALL levels of the National Organization have spoken out and lobbied against the Stupak-Pitts amendment since day one.

Before the first vote, I faxed the entire Pennsylvania Congressional Delegation to oppose Stupak-Pitts and to stand up for full reproductive health care. After the vote, we our members of who voted which way and made a call for action (http://pennsylvanianow.blogspot.com/2009/11/we-were-sold-down-river.html.)

On January 20, there was a national Lobby Day for women's health care reform in DC. I recognized NOW members from Pennsylvania, New Jersey, Mississippi, New York, New Jersey, DC, and Maryland, among others.

NOW has not ended our fight against this egregious act. Terry O'Neill reiterated this on March 26:
"NOW asks for [Obama's] leadership in repealing the discriminatory Hyde Amendment, which harms low-income women in seeking safe and legal abortion care. At the same time, we would like the Obama administration to help build support in Congress for the Freedom of Choice Act that would codify Roe v. Wade in federal statutes. Adoption of such a law would go a long way toward clearly establishing in law a woman's right to control her reproductive life and would diminish the political polarization of the issue." http://now.org/press/03-10/03-26.html.

We need to continue our fight for full reproductive freedom. Don't count us (the National Organization for Women) out!

Joanne Tosti-Vasey, Ph.D.
President
Pennsylvania NOW, Inc.
photo
Joanne TostiVasey
National NOW Board Member
02:37 PM on 04/08/2010
We need to vote out all legislators who have sold women down the river. Starting with Bart Stupak of Michigan and Joe Pitts of Pennsylvania.

And once again, NOW is stepping up to the plate. On Saturday, November 21, 2009, Terry O'Neill announced the National NOW/PAC endorsement of Lois Herr for Pennsylvania's 16th Congressional District seat currently held by Joe Pitts. Both my comments and those of Terry O'Neill on this endorsement can be found at the Pennsylvania NOW blog at http://pennsylvanianow.blogspot.com/2009/11/national-now-pac-endorses-lois-herr-for.html. For more information on Lois Herr, see http://www.nowpacs.org/2010/herr.html and http://www.herr2010.com/.

Similarly, on March 17, 2010, the National NOW/PAC endorsed Connie Saltonstall (http://www.now.org/press/03-10/03-17.html). Saltonstall is running against Bart Stupak in Michigan's 1st CD. The NOW/PAC profile of Connie Saltonstall can be found at http://www.nowpacs.org/2010/saltonstall.html. Connie's website is at http://conniesaltonstall.com/o/20064/.

For a full listing of the Federal candidates endorsed by NOW/PAC in 2010, go to http://www.nowpacs.org/2010/profiles.html.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
07:30 AM on 03/31/2010
It seems like in these days: politicians are accustomed to thinking of what voters want, but with the states of some things and with the flair ups across the population, they must still be thinking about the temperature with all citizens, and that includes people that have not been won over yet. Because that small sliver could always, as Massachusetts had shown, become a dividing line.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
07:28 AM on 03/31/2010
The government doesn't usually pay for abortions. There are emergency and at need services, but overall it is not a Medicaid philosophy to pay for abortions... that has been my understanding of attention given to the issue, and with not at all being a Medicaid expert. SO it wasn't a furthering in one direction over the other.

What would be nice is when women in Washington explain hard shifts that they make in policy advocacy. So say Nancy Pelosi - sending out so many emails saying that health insurance is nothing without the public option and advocating for what a necessary part of the legislation it is.

Well, adjustments were made to the legislation, without the public option, and many feel it offers greater protections and assurances and manages to take care of the lapse gaps and uncovered and the standards of what health insurance is there for. It would be great to hear her explain her shift in support through the changes enacted in the legislation. I really think more marginalized citizens would garner greater trust with that kind of accountability to ideas. Because otherwise it seems like a clump of confused people not sure why another politically engaged group is so darn happily excited.
12:49 PM on 03/30/2010
You State, "And the continued contention that Bart Stupak and others like him are "pro-life" tells only part of the tale. They are actually pro-selective life." So...you admit that the unborn child is a LIFE.
THANK YOU !
photo
HUFFPOST BLOGGER
Taylor Marsh
Author of the new book "The Hillary Effect."
01:38 PM on 03/30/2010
You assumed or misunderstood, rapnsum. Many religious individuals are against stem cell research, with right-wingers pro death penalty as well.

When a woman is pregnant it is her body that is impacted, with her life the only one in question.
11:18 AM on 03/30/2010
I wholeheartedly agree with this, however, I do think that the reason there is no women's movement is because women have been co-opted back into the value system of the 1950s. If you don't believe me, take a look at the images of women in the media today. They would be considered downright misogynistic 20 years ago, but today, no one notices. Women themselves have fallen back into the "I need a husband and 2.5 kids in order to be fulfilled" mentality that many of our mothers and grandmothers fought so hard to get future generations out from under. The truth is that the 2nd wave feminists did little but open up doors for upper middle class white women, while poor and minority women (who have NEVER had a party in support of their needs) were given the honor of doing all of the underpaid "women's" work that the middle class wanted no part of. White women thought they at least were getting a good deal, but a generation later, those same women have even less self esteem than our mothers/ grandmothers and now spend their higher incomes on plastic surgeons who try to make them look like their daughters. It's a vicious cycle and until women stop buying into it, there will be absolutely no progress for women. For if we don't respect ourselves, why would we expect anyone else to?
11:00 AM on 03/30/2010
Women aren't the only group with essentially zero representation. Further, while it is certainly easy enough to categorize women as a group based on physical traits I'm not so sure that's true regarding stances on issues. As crazy as it seems there are women out there in favor of having the government regulate abortion.

I don't disagree that the Democrats threw women to the wolves in this reform bill but without the executive order and Stupak's cooperation the bill wouldn't have passed. Don't you have any words for Olympia Snowe? Just askin.

The solution here is the same as it is for all the other disenfranchised groups. Organize, get supported candidates elected to local office, get those candidates elected to national office. In other words start the movement back up.

Personally I think congress needs a whole lot less old white men so I hope you succeed in your efforts to get some women elected.
photo
HUFFPOST BLOGGER
Taylor Marsh
Author of the new book "The Hillary Effect."
11:07 AM on 03/30/2010
You know, Romsek, Democrats have elected women, see Speaker Pelosi, the first female in that position ever and look what she did. Pelosi gave Stupak, but also Catholic reps, power to write health care language in the bill. We also elected other females in Congress. Guess what? They got beat by Stupak and the minority. It doesn't do any good to elect women if they're just as weak as the men.

Abortion is already rightly regulated, but let's remember that rights were won via Griswold and Roe, with Hyde simply a reaction, which no Democrat has the guts to challenge.

But no argument from me on "a whole lot less old white men."
01:40 PM on 03/30/2010
I find it odd then that you highlight Connie Saltonstall who seems to accept the Hyde Amendment. Her campaign website says this:

"For more than 30 years, the Hyde amendment has assured that there is no federal funding for abortion and this bill includes that provision; there will be no federal funding for abortion."

http://www.conniesaltonstall.com/news.html#release02

So, visitors at her website ought to be "assured" that there will be no federal funding for abortion? Maybe part of the problem with Congress, regarding women's rights, is that folks support candidates they ought to know will not fight hard for what they believe in. Or maybe Saltonstall is not as bad as Stupak who in turn is not as bad as a Republican.
12:26 AM on 03/31/2010
I regard Mz. Saltonstall as a pragmatic liberal who is open to compromise. Exactly the kind of person you have blasted in your article. I've already pointed out her opinion of the Hyde amendment in another post here. In the past, she has voted for Stupak and worked as a volunteer in his campaigns so Stupak's well known anti-abortion views were not a deal breaker for her then.

""He's been my congressman for many years. I have compromised voting for him because of his position on choice. Health care and choice are two issues I am especially concerned about."

The two rivals have a political history together. Saltonstall admitted she has voted for Stupak and worked as a volunteer on his campaign in previous elections."

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2010/03/10/stupak-facing-primary-challenger-over-abortion-funding/?fbid=7UTr0jy_mog

Connie supports a single payer health system but supported passage of the HCR bill as a start.

“This is not a perfect bill. I believe universal healthcare is a right, not a privilege or a luxury."

http://michiganmessenger.com/35998/stupak-opponent-stays-in-race-vows-to-fight-for-single-payer-system

Stupak wasn't perfect in her opinion but good enough in the past to vote for and campaign for. The HCR bill isn't perfect but good enough for her to support passage of. Mz. Saltonstall is an example of a politician who you profess to despise in your article.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
MarieNat
Lobbyist, wanna make something of it?
10:51 AM on 03/30/2010
Ouch.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
10:20 AM on 03/30/2010
"If you don't believe in abortion don't have one if put in an untenable position, but no one should have the right or power to strip women of their freedoms to control their own body, something a man would never allow." Your meaning here is open to interpretation due to this abysmal sentence construction, but no one has any rights over our bodies that we don't give them.

Why are you and so many women like you waiting for men to give you the right to do as you want? Don't you realize that waiting for permission is just inhabiting the subservient role you are railing against?

We have all the rights we need over our own bodies and our own lives. We don't need men (or the law) to acknowledge those rights. Own the power you already have.
photo
HUFFPOST BLOGGER
Taylor Marsh
Author of the new book "The Hillary Effect."
10:56 AM on 03/30/2010
sixyfivepercentwater, it's remarkable that you don't know what is tied to the health care legislation. The Hyde Amendment, put forth by the late Rep. Henry Hyde as a reaction to Roe v. Wade, changed women's freedoms forever, which Democrats just acknowledged further in the health care bill.

You really need to do a little homework.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
11:28 AM on 03/30/2010
Please don't assume that I don't know something, and I can do without the "do homework" put-downs. I'm probably older, better educated and more experienced than you are, if we're going by averages.

I have led a pretty wild life, doing exactly as I please when I please, and I have never felt that I have been held back by men or by the law. If you are looking for oppression you will find it. If you are looking for freedom you will find it. Neither one of these things comes from men or from the law.
10:16 AM on 03/30/2010
Usually I like your comments. This one escapes me.

It was absolutely essential that the Ds put a crack in the wall of health insurance. If they didn't weaken that wall now, it would be another generation before an attempt would be made.

So, now the insurance wall has been weakened. Yes, I know the insurance companies will benefit over the next FEW years. In the meantime, Ds will weaken that wall and eventually we will have the kind of civil intelligent humane health care reform you want.

As for Stupak, he got nothing. He got window dressing. That Executive Order does nothing more than say, "oh yeah, and the Hyde Amendment has been Law for a while". Nothing changed. Nothing was added to or subtracted from Hyde- in the new Health Care Bill . It was a public display of the bone thrown to Stupak to show his reichwing constituents who are too stupid to know it's just a bone. Ds simply needed his vote. And those of the pro-choice Members as well.

If the pro-choice Members had defeated the Bill, children would still be without health care, sick people would still be without care, and MEDICAID FUNDING WOULD STILL BE UNAVAILABLE FOR ABORTIONS. I am pro-choice. I believe our side will eventually kill the Hyde Amendment .

As for the Woman's Movement, you're right. Women have always been their own worst enemy.
All you need for proof of that old wisdom is two words: Sarah Palin.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Okieborn
Equal Rights For All !
10:15 AM on 03/30/2010
I am a male Progressive Democrat and I marched and worked for womens rights and the Equal Rights Amendment.
The women in America should be taking to the streets not the T Bagger bunch !!
photo
HUFFPOST BLOGGER
Taylor Marsh
Author of the new book "The Hillary Effect."
10:59 AM on 03/30/2010
For that, Okieborn, I salute you. But considering that Planned Parenthood is only good for propping up Democrats, with NARAL and NOW reduced to squealing after the health care bill passed, there likely wouldn't be enough women who care about full freedoms to take to the streets.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
11:29 AM on 03/30/2010
Why on earth should we "take to the streets" like animals? We don't need a law to allow us to get a safe abortion. Any woman with a brain can find whatever she needs, with or without permission from the government.
11:38 AM on 03/30/2010
I disagree. I am 32 years old and am only now beginning to comprehend all that I have been given by previous generations of women. People my age were not taught about Women's History. We were brought up that legalizing abortion and equal pay (theoretical before this presidency) were the last battles. We were taught they were fought on our behalf and won (we were taught incorrectly). I and others my age and younger are only now beginning to realize how far we have to go. There are women (and men) willing to march, but we need leaders. We need someone like you who has a deeper understanding to help us educate one another and organize.