The Hits Just Keep Coming
On the one hand, the President has just signed an Executive Order extending and legalizing the illegal Hyde Amendment (and "segregating" evil abortion funding from pure Christian-like funding); on the other hand, it's Obama's FDA, refusing to follow the federal judge's orders to allow the emergency contraception pill to be sold over the counter without a prescription.
For a YEAR.
03.23.10 - Today, the Center for Reproductive Rights calls on the Food and Drug Administration to finally follow a federal court’s order and make the morning-after pill available without a prescription to all ages. One year ago today, a New York federal court found that the FDA’s previous decisions around over-the-counter access to emergency contraception were based in politics and ideology, not science. The court ordered the agency to go back and consider making the drug available to all ages. However, to date no progress has been made on that front.
“This past weekend, the White House turned its back on women, sanctioning a cruel and unjust federal policy that denies poor women across the country access to medically necessary abortions. Given the ground that women lost in the healthcare debate over access to abortion, it is now even more important that the administration step up its efforts to increase access to contraception to prevent unwanted pregnancies,” said Nancy Northup, president of the Center for Reproductive Rights. “The Obama Administration made a promise to restore scientific integrity to federal agencies. The FDA’s continued inaction on decisions that were clearly made with a political agenda in mind are simply unacceptable.”
Last April, I wrote a piece about how Obama had declared war on pro-choice Americans, and no one had noticed. I also predicted that Bush's conscience rule would not, in fact, be overturned - and indeed, Obama has included it in his Executive Order, therefore giving it far more legitimacy than ever before. So, we're talking abortion AND birth control becoming prohibitively expensive - and unavailable - for poorer women. But to add insult to injury, his FDA hasn't even given women that last, desperate chance to control whether they get pregnant or not.
Have we noticed the war now, ladies and gentlemen?
Certainly our female "pro-choice" Congresscritters don't seem to have noticed much. I've gotten triumphalist letters from Senator Kirsten Gillibrand about the Health Whatever Bill that I won't even open. She said she wouldn't let Stupak be in the bill. She said she would push for the Public Option Sparkle Pony (no great loss there, unfortunately). And what did she do? Voted for the Senate bill with the Nelson Amendment in it, this woman who had a great pro-choice record before Obama got his hands on her.
My Representative, Carolyn Maloney (D-NY), also voted for the House version, which contained the Stupak Amendment (although she voted "no" on the Amendment); then, she voted for the bill again, even though she knew that Stupakian Executive Order was coming. That's why I'm protesting her vote on Saturday. She has been a wonderful Congressperson in the past, but what do we really owe her if she won't stand up against this outrageous affront to reproductive justice?
I say, we owe them nothing. THEY are the ones who owe US. We vote for them, volunteer for them, and donate money to them because of their stated positions. If they vote against those stated positions, then why should we keep supporting them?
Is a pro-choice Congressperson who votes against a woman's right to choose still worth voting for, if she's a woman?
What do you think?