NEWSBYNANCY KEENAN

May might traditionally be a month filled with sunshine, graduations, and proms, but it was a bleak month for women’s freedom and privacy. Anti-choice politicians in Washington, D.C. pressed forward with their War on Women–with great zeal.

Fortunately, Americans are realizing just how extreme this agenda is. On May 24, voters in a conservative congressional district in upstate New York elected pro-choice candidate Kathy Hochul (D) to the U.S. House of Representatives.

Rep. Hochul represents the district’s mainstream views, and she knows that voters want Washington to focus on creating jobs and protecting Medicare, not attacking a woman’s right to choose. NARAL Pro-Choice America PAC was proud to endorse Rep. Hochul; her election marks a pro-choice pick-up.

As we celebrate this key victory, it’s important to acknowledge that we still have quite a climb before we can stop the War on Women in the House.

The anti-choice leadership of the U.S. House of Representative is waging a War on Women.

The latest attack: a bill that could subject survivors of sexual assault who choose abortion care to "rape audits" by the Internal Revenue Service (IRS).

According to Mother Jones, H.R.3, the extreme “Stupak on Steroids” bill, could "turn IRS agents into abortion cops."

What these politicians may have overlooked is that their overreaching has galvanized America's pro-choice majority. Since November, NARAL Pro-Choice America member-activists have sent 311,000 messages to Congress in opposition to the extreme anti-choice agenda. And in just the last few weeks, we've added an average of nearly 1,000 new names a day to our activist network.

The pro-choice movement is united, and we’re taking our voices to Washington, D.C. On April 7, NARAL Pro-Choice America will be joined by Planned Parenthood and other pro-choice organizations for a pro-choice lobby day. Join us there!

The anti-choice leadership of the U.S. House of Representatives is moving full steam ahead with its extreme "Stupak on Steroids" agenda, which represents the worst attack on a woman’s right to choose that I have seen in a very long time.

We call it “Stupak on Steroids” because our opponents are putting forward multiple bills that go even further than the Stupak abortion-coverage ban that activists like you helped us defeat in the health-care debate. Clearly, these new leaders won’t take no for answer.

The “Stupak on Steroids” bill, H.R.3, introduced by Rep. Chris Smith of New Jersey, is an everything-but-the-kitchen-sink attack on women’s ability to make personal, private medical decisions:

Today, John Boehner was sworn in as speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives, becoming the most powerful anti-choice politician in the country.

Boehner pledged to Americans United for Life – an extremist anti-choice group – that he would be “the most pro-life Speaker ever.”

I’ve seen my fair share of anti-choice politicians hell-bent on taking away a woman’s right to choose – but Boehner takes the cake.  In the 20 years we’ve tracked John Boehner, he has voted against choice 142 times – that includes votes on sex education or birth control.

John Boehner and his anti-choice cronies have already started pushing a dangerous, anti-choice agenda that includes:

• Repealing the health-reform law and denying millions of women access to birth control and prenatal care.  The House is set to vote on a repeal on January 12.

• Threatening women’s abortion coverage. Boehner also scheduled a vote on a resolution proposing a dozen major changes to the new health-care law, which could include a Stupak-like ban on abortion coverage.

I thank the millions of Americans who voted pro-choice on November 2. You were with us every step of the way helping to protect our pro-choice allies in Congress, and your partnership means so much.

Unfortunately, the newly elected Congress includes at least 92 freshman Senators and Representatives who will attack a woman's right to choose and interfere in our personal, private medical decisions.

Take a look at the following chart:

Choice Composition: the 112th Congress

Pro-Choice       Mixed-Choice       Anti-Choice

House *            154                     33                       248
Senate **           40                      14                        46

* Approximately 10 House races have not been called.
** One Senate race has not been called.

Net Change in Choice Composition

Pro-Choice        Mixed-Choice       Anti-Choice

House             -27                       -15                        +44
Senate             -1                         -5                           +6

The next two years will be daunting for all those who hold the right to privacy dear. Rep. John Boehner, who is widely expected to become the next speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives, has cast 142 anti-choice votes thus far in his career. He’s never voted pro-choice—not even once.

Boehner didn’t waste any time making attacks on a woman’s right to choose a cornerstone of his agenda. His working document is called "Pillars of a New Majority." The first “pillar” is a speech he gave last summer to the National Right to Life Committee in which he says that when women have the right to choose, "freedom is diminished." Watch our video featuring some of the worst statements.

Did you know that women serving our country overseas have fewer health-care choices than women here at home?

Anti-choice politicians ban women in the military from accessing abortion care at a military hospital – even with their own money. Yes, you read that right.

More and more women are serving in the military every year. And they’re stationed overseas in places where local abortion facilities are inadequate or unavailable, or where they don’t speak the language.

That means that often servicewomen facing an unintended pregnancy overseas literally have nowhere to turn. The same is true for families serving abroad. Wives and family members who depend on military services for their health care are banned from turning to their regular doctor if they face an unintended pregnancy. They can’t even use their own money for abortion care. In fact, the only case where the Department of Defense will pay for abortion services is when the woman's life is in danger. While women are able to access abortion care at military hospitals in cases of rape and incest, the woman must bear the cost of the procedure herself.

This ban is unconscionable. That’s why I recently went on Fox News to speak out against it.

What’s wrong with this picture?:

This is an ad for a “crisis pregnancy center” (CPC). This CPC, like most CPCs, does not provide abortion care, and yet it’s listed under “abortion services” in Superpages.com and YellowPages.com. Yes, it’s true.

Let me back up a step. Never heard of a CPC? From the outside, a CPC gives the impression that it’s a legitimate women’s health-care clinics. But most of the estimated 4,000 CPCs are unlicensed and unregulated storefronts staffed by anti-choice volunteers.

The CPC’s number-one goal is to make women feel too guilty or scared to choose abortion by providing information that is medically inaccurate and manipulative. That’s pretty despicable, isn’t it?

Anti-choice CPCs do whatever it takes to block women from choosing abortion. Many even stoop to advertising under “abortion services” and “abortion clinics” in popular online search directories. Let’s be clear: CPCs do not provide abortion care. In fact, our investigation shows that anti-choice (CPCs) are blatantly misleading women by advertising under “abortion services” and “abortion clinics” in popular online search directories.

So, back to the ad above: NARAL Pro-Choice America is calling on two of the biggest search directories, SuperPages.com and YellowPages.com, to take down all misleading CPC ads. Look, it’s fine for groups that oppose abortion to advertise, but they shouldn’t be allowed to advertise under “abortion services” or “abortion clinics.” It’s just cruel to lie and to take advantage of women facing an unintended pregnancy.

Our deadline is June 30. Read More »

Imagine you’re a woman serving in the armed forces and you can’t access the medical care you need — even if you pay for it with your own money.

That’s what is happening to women in the military right now.

Federal law bans enlisted women serving overseas and other women who rely on military hospitals for their health care to access abortion — even if they pay for the service with their own money. The only case where the Department of Defense will pay for abortion services is when the woman's life is in danger. While women are able to access abortion care at military hospitals in cases of rape and incest, the woman must bear the cost of the procedure herself.

In late May, members of the Senate Armed Services Committee approved an amendment offered by Sen. Roland Burris (D-Ill.) to repeal the law that forbids servicewomen and female military dependents from using their own money for abortion services at overseas military hospitals.

This is a huge – and important – step forward for women's freedom and privacy and I commended this committee vote, saying:

Women in the military should have access to the same quality care available to women in our country. Signing up to serve in the armed forces shouldn't cause women to lose health-care options if they're stationed overseas. We look forward to working with our allies in the Senate to protect this progress when the bill goes to the full Senate.

NARAL Pro-Choice America has long been a leader of this fight for equality on military bases. That’s because, according to the Pentagon, the number of reported sexual assaults in the military increased significantly over the past few years. The most recent data indicate that the trend may be leveling off. However, sexual assaults in the military remain a major cause for concern. This really underscores the need for women in the military to have access to a full range of reproductive-health services.

“We'll not confirm somebody like that.” That’s what Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.) threatened when discussing Goodwin Liu, one of President Obama’s highly qualified  nominees to the federal courts. Liu’s offense? He supports basic American values like our constitutional right to privacy.

It’s good to know we can always count on Sen. Sessions to bring smear tactics to the judicial-confirmation process. We certainly can’t count on him to be a pro-choice vote.

Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-UT) even called Prof. Liu “the most controversial nominee of President Obama.”

So who is Goodwin Liu, and why are Sessions and Hatch so upset?

• Goodwin Liu is a professor at the University of California Berkeley School of Law.

• He has a distinguished record of working to protect civil rights.

• Prof. Liu received a “well-qualified” rating from the American Bar Association.

• He has a strong record of understanding the importance of the right to privacy, which includes the right to choose.

• Prof. Liu criticized John Roberts’ record when President Bush nominated him to the position of chief justice in 2005. Liu wrote, “What we already know from Roberts's record is cause for concern. His legal career is studded with activities unfriendly to civil rights, abortion rights, and the environment.”

We are days away from marking the one-year anniversary of the Sunday morning Scott Roeder walked into Dr. George Tiller's church in Kansas and shot him at close range.

After his murder, many women and men came to our blog to express their appreciation for what Dr. Tiller had done for their sisters, wives, relatives, and friends. Many of these women had found themselves in desperate and heart-breaking circumstances and turned to Dr. Tiller in their time of need.

Karen from Saylorsburg, Pennsylvania gives us one example of what Dr. Tiller meant to women:

Dr. Tiller, you saved my niece Jeanette's life, you helped our family through one of the darkest, most desperate and unthinkable moments we ever experienced. When we thought there was no where to turn, there you were. I called you the 'Wizard', because of the incredible journey we had taken to find you, in Kansas. You are, and will always be my Hero.

It makes me angry when I think about how Roeder sat through his trial without showing any remorse for his actions. He reached new lows of callousness and disrespect for the Tiller family and for families like Karen's. It's equally infuriating that the same people who spent years harassing Dr. Tiller and his patients outside his health center showed no remorse. They rejected the notion that their pattern of inflammatory rhetoric could lead to violence by the more extreme elements of their own anti-choice movement.

We didn't have to wait long for the intimidation to resume. Less than four months after Dr. Tiller's murder, the members of the notorious Operation Rescue picked up their signs and bullhorns and moved 328 miles north to Omaha, Nebraska. Dr. Tiller's murder didn't change their tactics; they just changed their mailing address — and their target.