Author: Feminist Majority Foundation Blog

Yesterday, Congresswoman Jackie Speier (D-CA) issued a statement critical of the Marine Corp’s handling of her complaint regarding an offensive Facebook page posted by active-duty Marines threatening violence against women and the Congresswoman herself.

The pages, which Speier reported to the Secretary of Defense in the beginning of May, featured degrading images and comments about women and women in the military. Many images condoned and even promoted violence against women and rape. Facebook has since removed the page, but various versions have reappeared. After Speier filed her complaint, new pages threatening Speier (and President Obama) that featured manipulated photos of her implying abuse and sexual assault appeared. The threats are being investigated by the Secret Service and the US Capitol Police.

In response to her complaint, Speier received a letter [PDF] from General James Amos, Commandant of the Marine Corps, on behalf of the Secretary of Defense. In the letter Amos cited the difficulties in monitoring and tracking social media to investigate offensive content; technicalities regarding military conduct codes; and lack of funding, hindering their efforts to investigate offensive content.

Congresswoman Speier criticized Amos’ excuses, saying the following in her statement:

“The Marine Corps’ good order and discipline creed has been totally undermined when it cannot police Marines who use social media to promote anti-Semitism, sexism and racism. These messages of hate reflect the kinds of attitudes our military fights around the world as oppressive and demeaning to human dignity. The postings of a few serve to discredit the entire Corps and contribute to a hostile work environment. In the private sector these employees would be fired. The Marine Corps must do the right thing now and stop their own who practice the worst forms of hatred. The letter from General Amos offers sequestration as a reason for inaction. The Commander-in-Chief has spoken. Suggesting that misconduct cannot be addressed because of sequestration is frankly unacceptable.”

Top Pentagon leaders will face scrutiny from members of Congress today as the first hearing on military sexual assault begins today. The hearing, hosted by the Senate Armed Services Committee, will feature testimony from victim-support organizations focused on the military and a wide variety of military officials and legal counsel on the issue.

Many members of congress are outraged over the string of recent sexual assault cases that have been exposed in the military. Senator Kay Hagen (D-NC) told reporters, “We are demanding that change take place… This is a crime and we’re going to address it as a crime, and the perpetrators are going to be kicked out of the military.” Senator Barbara Mikulski (D-MD), member of the Senate Appropriations Committee, told reporters “I think 26,000 sexual assaults is going too far,” Mikulski said. “And now there is even a criminal investigation of the football team at the Naval Academy, where we are training the next best.”

Anu Bhagwati, former Marine Corps Captain and executive director of Service Women’s Action Network (SWAN), said in a statement [PDF], “We are grateful to Chairman Carl Levin and Ranking Member James Inhofe for holding this hearing to discuss critical legislation on the issue of sexual violence in the military. The military is facing a crisis in the ranks and troops are quickly losing faith in the military’s ability to provide adequate protection for victims and prosecute and punish offenders. Much of the new legislation, if passed, would help restore confidence in the military’s ability to maintain good order and discipline in the ranks.”

A study released by the Harvard Medical School on Wednesday shows that immigrants as whole pay more into Medicare than they use, effectively subsidizing the program. The study found that in 2009 alone, immigrants created a $13.8 billion surplus for Medicare. From 2002 to 2009, immigrants paid a total of $115 billion more to the government health program than they used. American-born workers, on the other hand, posted a $28 billion deficit in the same 2002 to 2009 time frame.

Leah Zellman, who led the research team, explained possible reasons for the surplus, “Immigrants generate a surplus for Medicare primarily because so many of them are working age adults and the group has a high labor-force participation rate-a combination that generates large payroll tax payments.” Since the immigrant population contributing to Medicare is overall younger and larger than its American-born population, and is therefore not eligible, part of the surplus could be generated simply because of availability.

The authors of the study wrote that changes in immigration policies could have unanticipated consequences for the government program. They wrote, “Policies that reduce immigration would almost certainly weaken Medicare’s financial health, while an increasing flow of immigrants might bolster its sustainability.” Zellman said, “[This study] pokes a hole in the widespread assumption that immigrants drain U.S. health care spending dollars.”

The study also included some personal interjection from the authors on the issue of immigration. They wrote, “Having ourselves witnessed immigrants dying needlessly because of lack of health care, we (and many of our colleagues) are motivated by the belief that all patients have a human right to health care. But economic concerns – including the worry that immigrants are driving up US health care costs – have often dominated the debate over immigration. Our data offer a new perspective on these economic concerns.”

A Navy veteran who has transitioned since her military career ended has successfully petitioned the Pentagon to have her military records reflect her correct gender. This is the first time the Pentagon has approved such a change.

Autumn Sandeen was assigned male at birth but knew that she was female in her teen years. She entered the Navy, where she served for two decades before retiring. During her military career, she kept her true gender a secret for fear of dismissal on mental health grounds. She told reporters “If I would have been myself, I would have been kicked out… feel like we should able to serve openly because we are physically able to serve openly. It’s not a disorder,” she said. “We’re not allowing capable people who have something to offer the country to serve their country.” Despite the ban on openly gay and lesbian soldiers from serving being lifted in 2011, the ban on transgender soldiers remained. There is hope that this can also be removed now that the American Psychiatric Association no longer recognizes gender identity disorder as a mental disorder.

After originally filing the request in 2011 with the office of Veteran’s Affairs, Autumn’s records were updated earlier this month in both the VA office and the Pentagon. Sandeen even purchased a woman’s uniform for photographs to replace her photographs from before her transition. “By showing you can actually change your gender marker with the Department of Defense, it shows that the Department of Defense actually will do that, and if they do that then it’s another stop toward figuring out a way to have open service for trans people” she said.

On Tuesday the United States Supreme Court refused to hear an appeal by the state of Indiana over the blocking of a law that would ban Planned Parenthood from receiving Medicaid funding. The Court dismissed the case without comment, allowing the lower court ruling to stand. Last July, the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the Indiana law violates federal law which requires that Medicaid enrollees have the freedom to choose their health care provider, and permanently blocked its enforcement.

The law, which was passed by the Republican-controlled state legislature and signed into law by Governor Mitch Daniels (R) in 2011, would have prohibited the state from contracting Planned Parenthood of Indiana for health care services other than abortions despite Planned Parenthood using private funds to pay for abortion services. It would also have prohibited Planned Parenthood from receiving Medicaid funding for preventive healthcare services, such as cancer screenings, well-woman visits, and STI tests. The law would also have prevented Medicaid recipients who went to Planned Parenthood from being reimbursed through their insurance for services rendered. Supporters of the ban argued that allowing Medicaid funding for preventative services indirectly provided more organizational money to fund abortions.

Cecile Richards, president of Planned Parenthood Federation of America, told reporters, “[Yesterday’s] announcement from the Supreme Court is not only a victory for Planned Parenthood’s patients in Indiana, it is a victory for the nearly 3 million people who turn to Planned Parenthood health centers each year across the country.”

In the 2013 legislative season, seven new states have tried to defund Planned Parenthood. Similar measures in Tennessee, North Carolina, Kansas, and Arizona have also been blocked by judges. However, efforts to restrict funding in Oklahoma and Texas were more successful.

On Thursday, the Boy Scouts of America voted to allow openly gay youth to participate in the organization. Openly gay leaders and adults are still prohibited from taking part.

Over 1,400 members of the BSA National Council voted on the proposed change, with over 60 percent voting in favor of allowing gay youth. However, openly gay members will not be allowed to continue with the organization once they turn 18 and gay troop leaders are still prohibited.

Matt Comer, 27, who was kicked out of the Boy Scouts when at age 14 because of his sexual orientation welcomed the news. “Today we finally have some justice for me and others,” he said. “But gay youths will still be told they are no longer welcome when they turn 18.”

Eagle Scout and executive director of Scouts for Equality, Zach Wahls, said, “The Boy Scouts of America can do better. We welcome the news that the ban on gay Scouts is history, but our work isn’t over until we honor the Scout Law by making this American institution open and affirming to all.”

Human Rights Campaign President Chad Griffin said, “Today is a historic day for Boy Scouts across the country who want to be a part of this great American institution. But the new policy doesn’t go far enough. Parents and adults of good moral character, regardless of sexual orientation, should be able to volunteer their time to mentor the next generation of Americans.”

After the vote, the BSA announced, “While people have different opinions about this policy, we can all agree that kids are better off when they are in Scouting.” The new policy will take affect January 2014.

On Thursday, a panel of eight male members of the House of Representatives met to discuss a nationwide ban of abortion after 20 weeks gestation.

The House Judiciary Subcommittee on the Constitution and Civil Justice began consideration of the DC Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act on Thursday. The bill, sponsored by Trent Franks (R-AZ), who is also the chair of the subcommittee, originally would have banned abortion at 20 weeks gestation only in the District of Columbia. However, Franks decided to expand the bill nationwide following the murder conviction of Kermit Gosnell, a rogue doctor who performed illegal abortions in Pennsylvania. Franks has introduced the bill in previous sessions of Congress, but it was defeated.

Nancy Northrup, president of the Center for Reproductive Rights, said in a statement, “It is no small irony that Rep. Franks is using the subcommittee on the Constitution to advance legislation attacking the firmly established constitutional rights of women. Everywhere that similarly unconstitutional laws have been challenged in the courts including Rep. Franks’s home state of Arizona just this week they have been blocked before they could jeopardize women’s health and lives.”

In a scene familiar to women’s rights activists, the entire panel considering the bill was made up of men. Laura Basset, a frequent writer for the Huffington Post tweeted at the hearing “Well this looks familiar: every lawmaker at the House hearing on the nationwide 20-week abortion ban is a man.” The scene is reminiscent of last year’s debate on contraception coverage under the Affordable Care Act, when the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform did not have any witnesses from the Democrats and only consulted male witnesses. In response, Sandra Fluke testified as part of a House Democratic Steering Committee hearing led by Nancy Pelosi.

Four universities across the country are facing allegations of mishandling sexual assault cases in violation of the Clery Act and Title IX.

On Wednesday, students filed complaints against Dartmouth College, Swarthmore College, University of California at Berkeley, and the University of Southern California. Attorney Gloria Allred said at a press conference, “We are asking the United States Department of Education to open an investigation into these complaints and take appropriate actions to force these colleges to comply with the law or risk losing their federal funding.”

She continued, “Women from all over this country are demanding that their colleges stop these rapes and sexual assaults from happening. They will no longer accept the status quo where rapes and sexual assaults are being swept under the rug and condoned by college administrators.”

One of the students filing a complaint, Sofie Karasek, spoke about her experience of reporting sexual assault at UC Berkeley. “They solved it through the early resolution process, which meant that there were no hearings and they never asked me for evidence,” she said. “I received another email telling me my assailant was charged with a violation of student conduct, but it did not say if any disciplinary action been taken.” A week later, her attacker graduated.

The new allegations are a continuation of a string of sexual assault challenges. Last month, a complaint was filed against Occidental College for violating Title IX and the Clery Act. University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill is also facing Title IX and Clery Act complaints.

A sergeant first class with the US Military Academy at West Point is facing charges of secretly filming female cadets with hidden cameras and without consent.

Sergeant First Class Michael McClendon is accused of secretly videotaping at least a dozen women without their consent. McClendon, who has been an instructor at West Point since 2009, served as a “tactical noncommissioned officer” and was “responsible for the health, welfare and discipline” of a company of 125 cadets. This position is responsible for “assist[ing] each cadet in balancing and integrating the requirements of physical, military, academic and moral-ethical programs.” The Army is currently reaching out to a dozen women whose privacy may have been compromised and are offering support services.

McClendon has not been suspended during the investigation, but was transferred to Fort Drum in New York after charges were filed May 14th. According to the New York Times, which first reported the story, “The Army made no announcement of the charges against Sergeant McClendon, but provided details after The New York Times learned of the inquiry from several current and former members of the West Point community who said they were alarmed by the allegations and wanted to learn of the academy’s plans to investigate and prevent future violations.”

Last week the news broke that an Army Sergeant 1st Class Sexual Harassment/Assault Result Prevention (SHARP) Coordinator and Equal Opportunity Advisor at Fort Hood in Texas is being investigated for sexual assault. According to a statement released by the Department of Defense (DoD) the service member in question is being investigated for allegations of “pandering, abusive sexual contact, assault and maltreatment of subordinates.” Two weeks earlier, an Air Force chief of sexual assault prevention and response was arrested on charges of sexual battery. Lieutenant Colonel Jeffery Krusinski groped a woman in a parking lot. She fought him off when he attempted to grab her for a second time and immediately alerted the police. An anonymous spokesperson for the Air Force confirmed that Krusinski had been dismissed from his post in response to the allegations.

In addition, the Department of Defense issued an annual report in the beginning of May that showed that sexual assault in the military rose by 35% from 2010 to 2012. The report found that 26,000 members of the military experienced “unwanted sexual contact” in 2012 when answering an anonymous survey – a rate of approximately 70 assaults a day. The report also found only 3,374 reports of sexual assault were filed, according to the Pentagon. Of those cases filed, fewer than one in 10 ended with a court-martial conviction of sexual assault. In the majority of cases, the alleged attacker faced small administrative punishments or the case was dismissed.

On Tuesday, the Arizona law banning abortion after 20 weeks in a pregnancy was ruled unconstitutional and permanently struck down.

The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the 20 week ban in Arizona violated a woman’s constitutional right to terminate a pregnancy before viability (around 24 weeks) as determined by Roe v. Wade. In the unanimous decision, Judge Marsha Berzon wrote “A woman has a constitutional right to choose to terminate her pregnancy before the fetus is viable without undue interference by the state.” She continued, “While the state may regulate the model and manner of abortion prior to fetal viability, it may not proscribe a woman from electing abortion, nor may it impose an undue burden on her choice through regulation.” Even the staunch anti-abortion Judge Andrew Kleinfeld agreed that while he may disagree with the practice of abortion, he was bound to uphold the Supreme Court’s authority.

The judges rejected the claim that the law was not a ban on abortion, merely a regulation since doctors were allowed to perform abortions after 20 weeks for medical emergencies. In the opinion, Berzon wrote, “Allowing a physician to decide if abortion is medically necessary is not the same as allowing a woman to decide whether to carry her own pregnancy to term.”

Nancy Northrup, President of the Center for Reproductive Rights, said that the ruling “should send a clear message to anti-choice politicians that their attempts to deprive pregnant women of critical health care are clearly unconstitutional.”

Last night, the Senate Judiciary Committee approved a sweeping immigration reform bill in a bipartisan vote of 13 to 5. The bill, drafted by the so-called “Gang of Eight,” includes a path to citizenship for the 11 million people currently in the United States who do not have legal status. It also includes measures to strengthen boarder security, and new programs for highly skilled workers.

President Obama issued a statement supporting the advancement, saying the bill was “largely consistent with the principles of commonsense reform I have proposed and meets the challenge of fixing our broken immigration system.” He continued, “None of the committee members got everything they wanted, and neither did I, but in the end, we all owe it to the American people to get the best possible result over the finish line. I encourage the full Senate to bring this bipartisan bill to the floor at the at the earliest possible opportunity and remain hopeful that the amendment process will lead to further improvements.”

Despite wide support, many LGBT advocacy groups are outraged after an amendment to extend protections to same-sex couples was dropped by Democrats. The amendment would give same-sex partners the ability to sponsor their significant other for citizenship, however conservative members of the Committee and the Gang of Eight threatened to pull their support for the bill if the amendment was included. Senator Patrick Leahy (D-VT) told the committee “So, with a heavy heart, and as a result of my conclusion that Republicans will kill this vital legislation if this anti-discrimination amendment is added, I will withhold calling for a vote on it at this time. But I will continue to fight for equality.”

Human Rights Campaign President Chad Griffin said in a statement “It is deplorable that a small number of Senators have been able to stand in the way of progress for lesbian and gay couples torn apart by discriminatory laws. We are extremely disappointed that our allies did not put their anti-LGBT colleagues on the spot and force a vote on the measure that remains popular with the American people.”