Migration Category: National Old Site

Late last week the US Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) announced its proposed housing regulations that would protect gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender people from discrimination. At this time, federal protections against housing discrimination do not cover gender identity and sexual orientation. A 60 day public comment period is required before the changes can be implemented.

If adopted, the proposal would prevent owners and landlords in HUD assisted or HUD insured housing from inquiring about applicants’ sexual orientation or gender identity. The proposed rules would also prohibit mortgage lenders insured by HUD from discriminating on the basis of gender orientation or sexual identity.

Rea Carey, Executive Director of the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force, asserted, “These are critically important reforms given that lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender people remain particularly vulnerable in seeking or retaining housing due to widespread bias, discrimination and a lack of housing protections. We’re talking about one of the most fundamental needs a person can have: shelter.”

Kansas Representative Lance Kinzer (R-KS) introduced the Abortion Reporting Accuracy and Parental Rights bill in the state’s House of Representatives last week requiring the consent of two parents for girls under 18 to obtain an abortion. Proponents say the two parent notification requirement would only apply in cases in which the nuclear family was intact and without abuse but experience shows that such consent laws are extremely harmful to young girls, especially victims of abuse. The change would alter current Kansas law, in which the minor needs the consent of only one parent to have an abortion.

Sarah Gillooly, the Public Affairs Manager for Planned Parenthood of Kansas and Mid-Missouri, stated, “I think if the legislators were interested in reducing the number of abortions in the state of Kansas, they would stop mandating intrusion into the lives of Kansas families and start focusing on reducing the number of unintended pregnancies through affordable birth control and sex ed.”

Representative Kinzer introduced the bill following Governor Sam Brownback’s request for new abortion restrictions. In his State of the State message in mid January, Kinzer stated his goal to establish “a culture of life in Kansas.” These provisions in the bill had been passed by both chambers of the Kansas legislature over the past three years but were vetoed by then Democratic Governors Kathleen Sebelius and Mark Parkinson.

Reproductive Rights groups, including the Feminist Majority Foundation, Planned Parenthood Federation of America, NARAL Pro-Choice America, and the National Abortion Rights League, will oppose the No Tax-Payer Funding for Abortion bill (HR 3), introduced yesterday by Representative Chris Smith (R-NJ), Congressional Pro-Life Caucus Co-Chair with the support of House Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) and Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-VA). The No Tax-Payer Funding for Abortion Act would prohibit taxpayer funding of abortions and would ensure that healthcare reform law does not cover the cost of abortions.

Representative Diana DeGette (D-CO) stated that the Smith bill “would be the biggest intrusion on a woman’s right to choose in our lifetime. This is not the will of the American people.” Cecile Richards, President of Planned Parenthood, explained, “The Smith bill even goes as far as to take existing protections away from women whose lives are in danger from serious medical conditions.”

House Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) described the bill as “one of our highest legislative priorities.” During the 2010 campaign, Boehner made promises to be the most “pro-life speaker in history.” Nancy Keenan, President of NARAL Pro-Choice America, countered, “The 2010 elections were about jobs and the economy. It was not an endorsement of an anti-choice agenda.”

Events have been scheduled around the country to commemorate the 38th anniversary of Roe v. Wade. For those living near the nation’s capital, please join the Feminist Majority Foundation for several events in the next few days.

— National Organization for Women (NOW) Vigil at the Supreme Court Bring battery-operated candles (note: traditional candles are not allowed outside the Court)

S. Supreme Court Sidewalk, 1 First Street NE, Washington, D.C. 20543 Friday, January 21, 2011. 4-6 pm

–Join Feminist Majority Foundation to support the Germantown Clinic and help keep it open

Bring pro-choice signs and meet at Roy Rogers

Restaurant, 12907 Wisteria Drive, Germantown, MD

Monday, January 24, 2011. 8am

–Religious Coalition for Reproductive Choice (RCRC) Vigil at the Supreme Court

1 First Street NE, Washington, D.C. 20543

Monday, January 24, 2011. 3:30pm

A coalition of pro-reproductive rights groups, including the National Organization for Women (NOW), NARAL Pro-Choice Maryland, Catholics for Choice and Americans United for Separation of Church and State, have joined to encourage the Maryland Health Care Commission to reject Holy Cross Hospital’s proposal to build a hospital in Montgomery County, Maryland. The coalition objected to the construction of a hospital with religiously sanctioned restrictions on publicly owned land.

The groups expressed concern that Catholic hospitals’ refusal to provide certain reproductive health cervices, such as tubal ligations, surgical sterilization, and abortions even in life-threatening situations, could restrict women’s and teens’ access to medically necessary services. Melissa Kleder, the Interim Director at NARAL Pro-Choice Maryland, stated, “Not all women know they can’t get these services at Catholic hospitals until it’s too late. In emergency situations, time is of the essence.”

Conflicts between hospitals and church authorities have been on the rise recently. Last May, a Catholic nun in Arizona was excommunicated following controversy after she approved an emergency abortion to save the life of a woman who developed pulmonary hypertension during her pregnancy. Sister Margaret McBride was a senior administrator at St. Joseph’s Hospital in Phoenix.

Yesterday the House voted 245 to 189 in favor of the Patients’ Rights Repeal Act that if it becomes law wills have particularly negative consequences for women. Three Democrats and 242 Republicans voted in support of the bill.

The bill is unlikely to come up for a vote in the Senate, however, which has a Democratic majority. The Feminist Majority Foundation and other women’s rights groups, including the National Partnership for Women and Families and Emily’s List, have expressed their outrage at the proposed repeal bill.

Representative Louise Slaughter (D-NY) explained, “Health care reform was a major victory for women and any attempt to repeal or defund it is simply unfair to our daughters, our mothers, and our grandmothers. It took us decades to finally make it illegal for insurance companies to charge women 48 percent higher premiums just for being a woman and to stop the egregious practice of discrimination against domestic violence victims.”

Currently under the Affordable Care Act, Medicare recipients no longer have to share costs for preventive care including mammograms, cancer screenings, annual physicals and immunizations. Other provisions will begin to close the so-called “doughnut hole,” or gap between the initial coverage limit and the threshold for receiving catastrophic coverage. In 2010, young people were permitted to remain on their parents’ health insurance policies until age 26 unless they have other coverage.

Health and Human Services stated in a press release yesterday that nearly 130 million non-elderly Americans who have preexisting conditions could lose coverage if the Affordable Care Act is repealed. Moreover, the Congressional Budget Office indicated that the Patients’ Rights Repeal Act would increase the deficit by $230 billion over the next ten years.

President Obama signed the final version of the Affordable Care Act in March. If the law is not repealed, it would eventually add coverage for 32 million people.

The House is scheduled to vote on the Patients’ Rights Repeal Act that if passed would have particularly negative consequences for women. The bill is unlikely to come up for a vote in the Senate, which has a Democratic majority. The Feminist Majority Foundation and other women’s rights groups, including the National Partnership for Women and Families and Emily’s List, have expressed their outrage at the proposed repeal bill.

Representative Louise Slaughter (D-NY) explained, “Health care reform was a major victory for women and any attempt to repeal or defund it is simply unfair to our daughters, our mothers, and our grandmothers. It took us decades to finally make it illegal for insurance companies to charge women 48 percent higher premiums just for being a woman and to stop the egregious practice of discrimination against domestic violence victims.”

Currently under the Affordable Care Act, Medicare recipients no longer have to share costs for preventive care including mammograms, cancer screenings, annual physicals and immunizations. Other provisions will begin to close the so-called “doughnut hole,” or gap between the initial coverage limit and the threshold for receiving catastrophic coverage. In 2010, young people were permitted to remain on their parents’ health insurance policies until age 26 unless they have other coverage.

Health and Human Services stated in a press release yesterday that nearly 130 million non-elderly Americans who have preexisting conditions could lose coverage if the Affordable Care Act is repealed. Moreover, the Congressional Budget Office indicated that the Patients’ Rights Repeal Act would increase the deficit by $230 billion over the next ten years.

President Obama signed the final version of the Affordable Care Act in March. If the law is not repealed, it would eventually add coverage for 32 million people.

Yesterday the US Supreme Court declined to hear a case filed by Bishop Harry Jackson, the National Organization for Marriage, and the Alliance Defense Fund challenging the District of Columbia’s law allowing same-sex couples to marry. The groups filed the lawsuit after the DC Board of Elections and Ethics refused a ballot measure allowing residents of the District of Columbia to vote on same-sex marriage laws. The Board maintained that adding the initiative to the ballot would have violated the city’s Human Rights Act.

Joe Solmonese, President of the Human Rights Campaign stated, “Today’s action by the Supreme Court makes abundantly clear that D.C.’s human rights protections are strong enough to withstand the hateful efforts of outside anti-LGBT groups to put people’s basic civil rights on the ballot. For almost two years, the National Organization for Marriage and the Alliance Defense Fund, along with Bishop Harry Jackson, have fought a losing battle to shamelessly harm gay and lesbian couples in D.C. who seek nothing more than to share in the rights and responsibilities of marriage.”

In December 2009, the D.C. Council passed the Religious Freedom and Civil Marriage Equality Act, which was signed into law on March 3, 2010 and granted marriage rights to same-sex couples in the District of Columbia. Currently, Connecticut, Iowa, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Vermont, and Washington DC allow marriage of same-sex couples. Five states, California, Nevada, New Jersey, Oregon, and Washington, allow same-sex couples to form civil unions or domestic partnerships, which carry many of the benefits of marriage.

Proposed regulations to the Credit Card Act, issued by the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System in November 2010 and may go into effect in 2011 have created a firestorm. Today Congresswomen Carolyn Maloney (D-NY), chief author of the Credit Card Act, and Louise Slaughter (D-NY), the principal proponent of the act’s provision affecting younger consumers, released a public statement calling upon the Federal Reserve to revise its regulations.

The proposed “ability to pay” regulations would require that credit card companies “consider information regarding the consumer’s independent income, rather than his or her household income” before the company allows the consumer to open a new credit card or increase their credit limit.

Although the restrictions were intended to prohibit consumers under 21 from reporting their parents’ income to apply for credit cards, the rules are particularly harmful to women. Women, who on the average earn less than men, would be disadvantaged in applying for a credit card in their name. Moreover, the rules could affect spouses who are not employed (i.e. mostly wives with small children) from getting a credit card in their name.

Congresswomen Maloney and Slaughter wrote the Board of Governors protesting the proposal, which they said “goes beyond the intent behind both the specific provisions and the law itself.” Representative Maloney said in a press release today, “The intent of Congress was to curb abusive practices to young people, not make it harder for stay-at-home parents or other over-21 consumers to obtain a card. That’s why we’re asking the Fed to revise their approach.”

Representative Slaughter clarified, “While I was proud that my amendment to protect young adults was included in the legislation, we should remember that it was necessary because college students were targeted by credit card companies and too often falling into crippling debt. That provision should not be extended in a way that harms-stay-at-home mothers.”

“The proposed regulations set women back to 1975. The proposed regulations would make it much more difficult for women to get credit, especially married women who work in the home,” Eleanor Smeal, President of the Feminist Majority Foundation, explained. “Once again care givers would be punished economically by a so-called neutral government regulation. There are other ways of issuing regulations that could deal with credit seekers less than 21 years of age.”

The new proposed restrictions would reduce the economic power of women and are particularly harmful for women in abusive partnerships. The Congresswomen asserted in the press release, “Women trapped in abusive marriages may be unable to work due to a controlling spouse, the hallmark of relationship characterized by domestic violence. The availability of an independent credit card may represent her best chance at establishing independence and a path out of a dangerous relationship. By not allowing these women to apply independently for a credit card, the proposed regulations represent a significant – and potentially dangerous – set-back.”

The Military Leadership Diversity Commission announced plans to recommend that the Pentagon change its policies to allow women in combat. The Commission, established by Congress in 2009, is comprised of senior retired and active military officers. Members of the Commission stated that the report will be given to Congress and the White House by March.

In its list of recommendations, the Commission urged the Department of Defense (DOD) to seek the help of Congress to increase the representation of women in high-level military leadership positions. The recommendations stated, “Congress should pass legislation raising the standing requirement for Equal Protection Clause claims alleging discrimination based on the use of suspect classifications to a showing that the plaintiff might have been selected or retained but for consideration of suspect-class membership or gender.”

The Commission reports that despite official military policy, women’s participation in the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq has increasingly included direct combat. It also notes that succeeding in combat is the most direct way to achieve a promotion in the military. The military’s failure to allow women to serve in these positions therefore limits women’s chance of promotion.

The United States currently restricts women from direct combat roles in infantry positions or in the Special Forces. A 1994 Department of Defense directive banned women from units that primarily engage in direct combat.

Medical regulators for the state of Iowa announced yesterday that they will not punish a Planned Parenthood doctor for prescribing mifepristone, also known as RU-486 or the abortion pill, remotely through telemedicine. Last year, Operation Rescue, an anti-abortion group, filled a formal complaint with the Iowa State Board of Medicine arguing that the video method did not meet the state law requiring medical doctors be present for the administration of the pill.

Planned Parenthood clinics in Iowa introduced a program that enables mifepristone, a drug intended to terminate a pregnancy in its early stages, to be administered to patients while videoconferencing with their doctors. This practice, known as telemedicine, is designed to provide women living in remote and rural areas of Iowa with abortion services.

In order for a woman to receive mifepristone via videoconference, she must first go to her local Planned Parenthood and undergo the required physical exam, blood test, medical history report, ultrasound, and counseling session, all administered in-person by a nurse. Women must also watch an eight-minute video describing the procedure and all possible side effects. If the woman decides to continue with the process, the doctor then clicks a button on his computer that releases a drawer containing the medicine in front of the patient. Still in the company of the clinic nurse, the patient then takes the mifepristone with her doctor watching and receives the follow-up drug, misoprostol, to take later.

Late last week, Representative Mike Pence (R-IN) introduced the Title X Abortion Provider Prohibition Act in the House. If passed, the bill would amend Title X of the Public Health Services Act and ban any organization that performs abortions, except in cases or rape, incest, or if the woman’s life is endangered, from receiving family planning grants.

Under the current Public Services Act, Title X money is allocated to grantees to fund family planning services and preventive health services and may not be used on abortion services.

Betty Cockrum, President of Planned Parenthood of Indiana, pointed out that the cuts in family planning grants would have harmful consequences for public health. She clarified, “The more we do to educate people and provide birth control, the fewer…unintended pregnancies there are and the fewer abortions there are.”

A recent study conducted by the Guttmacher Institute indicates that the decline in abortion rate from 1990 to 2005 has leveled off. Guttmacher surveyed approximately 1,800 abortion providers and found that medical abortions, performed by giving the woman a combination of two medications by pill form, have increased. The study also showed abortions are occurring earlier in pregnancy and primarily because medical abortions via pills can be provided earlier in a pregnancy, according to the study. Today some 59 percent of abortion providers offer medical abortion services.

The study found that the abortion rate in 2008 was 19.6 per 1,000 for women between the ages of 15 and 44 and had not changed since 2005. Rates of abortion varied by region of the country and by state with the West and the Northeast having the highest rates.

Sharon Camp, the President and CEO of the Guttmacher Instituted stated, “In this time of heightened politicization around abortion, our stalled progress should be an urgent message to policymakers that we need to do more to increase access to contraceptive services to prevent unintended pregnancy, while ensuring access to abortion services for the many women who still need them.”

Yesterday, the Arizona State Legislature passed legislation to ban protestors from coming within 300 feet of the funeral services of the victims of the Tucson shootings. Governor Jan Brewer signed the bill that day.

The bill was proposed in response to the Westboro Baptist Church’s announcement of its plans to picket the funeral of nine-year-old Christina Green because Christina and her family were Roman Catholic. The group posted fliers on its website stating, “God hates Catholics” and “God Sent the Shooter.”

Although the church has since decided to forgo Green’s funeral, Shirley Phelps-Roper, a member of the church, clarified that members still intend to picket the funeral of Judge John Roll. Westboro Baptist Church, founded by Reverend Fred Phelps, is known for its fierce anti-gay rhetoric and hate speech.

President Obama and First Lady Michelle Obama, as House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi are scheduled to attend a memorial service for the six victims at the University of Arizona today. Services for Christina Green and US Judge Roll will be held Thursday and Friday.

A committee realignment will likely ensure that the marriage bill will finally move to the Senate floor for a vote. In the 2010 election, Democrats gained two Senate seats, which would facilitate the passage of the marriage bill this year. If the bill is passed by the state legislature, Governor Martin O’Malley (D-MD) has publicly declared that he would sign the bill into law.

Last year, an opinion from Maryland’s Attorney General Douglas Gansler recognized same-sex marriages performed in other states as valid in Maryland.

Morgan Meneses-Sheetes, Executive Director of Equality Maryland, stated, “We really feel like 2011 is the year.” Equality Maryland’s website clarifies, “With the return of so many pro-equality incumbents and the addition of new leaders ready to stand up for fairness, Equality Maryland is confident that 2011 will hold new opportunities to advance equal treatment under the law.”

Currently, Connecticut, Iowa, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Vermont, and Washington DC allow marriage of same-sex couples. Five states, California, Nevada, New Jersey, Oregon, and Washington, allow same-sex couples to form civil unions or domestic partnerships, which carry many of the benefits of marriage.

A budding feminist and nine-year-old elementary school politician, Christina Taylor Green, was the youngest of six killed in the shooting that occurred at the “Congress on Your Corner” event sponsored by Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords (D-AZ) in Tucson, Arizona, on Saturday.

Born on 9/11 and featured in a book entitled Faces of Hope: Babies Born on 9/11, Green expressed an abiding interest in American civic life. She attended the attended Congresswoman Giffords’ event on Saturday with her neighbor in order to learn more about politics. Green had recently been elected to Mesa Verde Elementary School’s student council.

Green was also active in extracurricular activities and had an avid interest in baseball. She was the granddaughter of the manager who led the Philadelphia Phillies when they won the World Series in 1980, Green was the only girl who played in her little league system and had a goal to play baseball professionally.

A total of 20 people were shot in the attack by what seems to have been a single gunman. Six people were killed, including federal district judge John M. Roll. Suspected shooter Jared Lee Loughner is in police custody.

Representative Giffords is now in condition. Giffords is considered a moderate “Blue Dog” Democrat. She is also the first Jewish woman elected to Congress from Arizona. Supported by feminist groups, she is pro-choice and has stood up for comprehensive immigration reform, health-care reform, stem-cell research and raising the minimum wage, among other positions.

Mississippi Governor Haley Barbour suspended Jamie and Gladys Scott’s life sentences on the condition that Gladys donates a kidney to her sister. Barbour cited the high cost of Jamie’s dialysis treatment, which totaled approximately $200,000 per year, in his announcement of the women’s release. The women left the Central Mississippi Correctional Facility on Friday after serving 16 years.

In 1994, Judge Marcus Gordon convicted sentenced each Scott sister to two life sentences after they were convicted of planning and participating in an armed robbery in which only $11 was stolen and no one was injured. Neither woman had a prior criminal record. The men arrested for the robbery were sentenced to eight years in jail and served only three years.

Benjamin Todd Jealous, President of the NAAP, stated, “It is a travesty that in the state of Mississippi, the lives of two Black women are valued at little more than 11 dollars. From the outset, the measures in which the Scott Sisters were convicted were questionable and pattern themselves after dubious criminal justice trends in Mississippi and nationwide.”

Nasrin Sotoudeh, an Iranian Human Rights lawyer, received an 11 year prison sentence. Sotoudeh was arrested in September and went to trial on November 15 for allegedly acting against state security, assembling, and collusion with intent to disrupt national security. She was also charged for working with the Center for Human Rights Defenders, which was founded by Nobel Laureate Shirin Ebadi. In addition to the 11 year prison sentence, the court has prohibited Sotoudeh from practicing law or leaving Iran for the next 20 years.

Before her arrest, Sotoudeh was a member of the One Million Signatures Campaign and on the board of directors of the Society for Defense of Children’s Rights.

Hadi Fhaemi, a spokesperson for the International Campaign for Human Rights in Iran, stated, “This is a transparently political sentence aimed at taking one of Iran’s leading human rights defenders out of practice via a gross miscarriage of justice. Nasrin Sotoudeh has broken no laws, but is being jailed because she has upheld Iranian and international law in a judicial system bent on violating human rights.”

Sotoudeh, who has been in Evin Prison since September 4, went on a hunger strike to protest the conditions of her illegal arrest. After ending her hunger strike for a few days, she started a dry hunger strike, protesting her deprivation of her legal rights, such as the right to telephone calls and visits from her family members and her two young children along with the gross mishandling of her case. She broke her dry hunger strike on November 11 and ended her hunger strike, which lasted a total of 50 days, following the trial.

Last week, Representative Matt Gaetz (R-FL) in Florida and Representatives Annette Dub (D-NE) and Beau McCoy (R-NE) in Nebraska proposed bills that, if passed, would ban abortion coverage in insurance policies sold in state health insurance exchanges. The state exchanges are scheduled to begin operating in 2014. Representative McCoy’s bill, which was endorsed by Nebraska Right to Life, also proposes prohibiting private health plans from covering abortion services unless the women’s life is threatened.

Representative Gaetz (R-FL) said that he intended for the bill to serve as an extension of the Hyde Amendment, which prohibits the use of federal funds for abortion services except in cases of rape, incest, or impending death of the woman.

Stephanie Kunkel, executive director of the Florida Association of Planned Parenthood Affiliates, pointed out that the bill is unnecessary because federal restrictions on abortion funding already exist. She clarified, “Our hope is elected officials will agree this (Gaetz bill) is simply unnecessary and will let it die.”

Arizona Democrat Gabrielle Giffords is fighting for her life in a Tucson hospital after having been shot in the head by a gunman while she conducted a “Congress on Your Corner” event in front of a market.

Although she was listed in very critical condition after surgery, Dr. Peter Rhee, medical director of the trauma and critical care unit at the University Medical Center where Giffords is being treated, said he was “very optimistic about her recovery.”

A total of 20 people were shot in the attack by what seems to have been a single gunman. Six people were killed, including federal district judge John M. Roll. Police have in custody the suspected shooter, 22-year-old Jared Lee Loughner.

Pima County Sheriff Clarence Dupnik, at a press conference this afternoon, said that law enforcement are also looking for a possible second suspect, a white man in his 50s.

Dupnik had critical words about the climate in the country and his state surrounding this act of violence:

“When you look at unbalanced people, how they respond to the vitriol that comes out of certain mouths about tearing down the government. The anger, the hatred, the bigotry that goes on in this country is getting to be outrageous. And, unfortunately, Arizona I think has become sort of the capital. We have become the Mecca for prejudice and bigotry.”

“Let me just say one thing, because people tend to pooh-pooh this business about all the vitriol that we hear inflaming the American public by people who make a living off of doing that. That may be free speech. But it’s not without consequences.”

Giffords’ office had been the target of vandalism last year after she voted for health-care reform. She was also targeted “quite literally” for defeat by Sarah Palin’s political action committee before the November 2010 midterm elections. SarahPAC put forth a map of the U.S. with 20 locations marked with the crosshairs of gun sights to indicate 20 House Democrats, including Giffords, who voted for the health-care bill and thus should be turned out of office. Responding to that, Giffords told MSNBC:

“We need to realize that the rhetoric, and the firing people up and for example, we’re on Sarah Palin’s targeted list, but the thing is, the way she has it depicted, we’re in the crosshairs of a gun sight over our district. When people do that, they’ve got to realize that there are consequences to that action.”

Further extending the “target” metaphor, Giffords’ unsuccessful Republican opponent in the November election, Jesse Kelly, held a $50-per-ticket event last June 12 that was thus advertised on the Pima County Republican website:

“Get on Target for Victory in November[.] Help remove Gabrielle Giffords from office[.] Shoot a fully automatic M15 with Jesse Kelly[.]”

Giffords, the first Jewish woman elected to Congress from Arizona, is considered a moderate “Blue Dog” Democrat. Supported by feminist groups, she is pro-choice and has stood up for comprehensive immigration reform, health-care reform, stem-cell research and raising the minimum wage, among other positions.