How did we lose the two decade fight over regulating clinics?

I am an active Democrat and a feminist and, for what it's worth, this is my take.

The Washington Post front-page article on 2/25/11 quotes Senator Dick Saslaw as saying "They slipped one through." The Democratic leadership failed to stop the legislative maneuver that was taking place. They have been accustomed to doing things the same way for so long - stopping anti-choice bills in the Senate Education and Health Committee - that they, as Saslaw said, didn't catch this, even though members of that committee include the most senior and liberal Democrats.

They simply were out-smarted. And, in my view, didn't take it seriously enough. AG Cuccinelli gave fair warning that he was deadly serious about TRAP - Targeted Regulation of Abortion Providers - when he issued an opinion on this in the summer.

Ben Tribbett has some great quotes, worth repeating:

"These amendments are draconian and patriarchal..." Sen. Mamie Locke, D-Hampton. Love that she says patriarchal.

"There has been no state to adopt this type of legislation that would force women to have a first trimester abortion in a hospital. This is unconstitutional under Roe vs. Wade and Planned Parenthood vs. Casey because it puts an undue burden on a woman who is having a first trimester abortion. They should not have to have this simple procedure in a hospital," said Sen. John Edwards, D-Roanoke.

Ben also blames the Democrats - asleep at the wheel. They knew they only had 18 votes.

The Richmond Times-Dispatch has an excellent and comprehensive report on what happened. On a broader note, the Republicans have pounded away at this issue for 20 some years. Their strategy, in VA and nationally, is chipping away. They are not relying on the Supreme Court to overturn what is left of Roe v Wade. They are chipping away at access to services and at what little funding there is; their message machine is enormous. Their allies include the very powerful US Conference of Catholic Bishops. If this matter is litigated and goes to the Supreme Court, we could lose because we will not have a strong enough case that this type of regulation poses a burden on women. Anthony Kennedy will argue as he did in the late-term abortion decision - regulation is good for women (!), women will appreciate it (because we can't take care of ourselves, presumably).

Other factors of concern:
this is a "women's issue" and unfortunately does not carry the weight of being a civil rights issue that the LGBT cause now carries.
Democrats have been willing to compromise away aspects of abortion rights - note Obama's executive order to get Catholic permission to go ahead with health care reform.

I am also angry that Cucinnelli misrepresented - or heck, lied about - Virginia NOW's position two decades ago on this issue. He actually mentioned NOW in his statement crowing about the passage of the amendment. NOW does not favor the kind of regulations that the Republicans want, which will shut down clinics.

Finally, this shows why advocacy groups are key to any fight. We can't let up the pressure and scrutiny, even of our Democratic friends.

Abortion - Why It MUST Be Covered by Health Insurance

"Why would a woman seek an abortion from Dr. Kermit Gosnell?" - a Philadelphia abortion provider who has been accused of murders by the district attorney. Susan Schewel, executive director of the Women's Medical Fund, a high-quality, respected abortion provider in Philadelphia, answers that question with facts that we must not ignore, no matter how monstrous Gosnell may be (if convicted). The case of Gosnell quite simply illuminates the tremendous injustice that will be done if legislative attempts succeed to ban insurance coverage of abortion under health care reform.

Whatever you think about abortion, please read this.

Schewel writes:

Abortion is a legal, common and routine medical procedure. Yet for 25 years, Pennsylvania has banned Medicaid funding for abortion. Abortion is the only routine medical procedure not covered by Medicaid, and this prohibition leaves desperate women vulnerable to substandard providers such as Gosnell.

She reviewed records of women who lived in the neighborhood where Gosnell practiced and who went to him before going to her excellent practice. During January and February 2010, she found six women, ages 21 to 36.

Five were mothers. Four were enrolled in Medicaid; two had no health insurance at all. Two received unemployment checks, and one had just been laid off a few days before she called. One worked at McDonald's and earned $450 a month, $200 of which went to rent.

One was obtaining a protection-from-abuse order against her violent husband. Another was pregnant due to a rape. One was living in a homeless shelter with her young child. She received $316 a month in welfare. The average monthly income of these six women was $503.

When they arrived for their appointments (at Gosnell's office), they were told that they needed $350 to $450 for an abortion procedure. As you can imagine, this seemed like a fortune. And not one had insurance to cover the cost. Thankfully, they turned to us at the Women's Medical Fund, and we were able to help.

The Gosnell story powerfully demonstrates the consequences of the unconscionable public policy under which, if you are poor, pregnant and don't want to be, you are out of luck and on your own. This story reminds us of the lengths to which desperate women will go to terminate an unwanted pregnancy.

How do we help these women - and thousands others? Not by closing a bad practice or unnecessary additional regulations.

What will solve the problem is lifting the ban on public funding for abortion and providing equitable health coverage for all.

Yet right-wing (Republican) legislators are intent on doing the opposite - making it impossible or difficult to get abortion coverage in the exchanges that are being set up and due to be operational in 2014. In Virginia, two bills are now in the General Assembly - HB 2147 in the House of Delegates introduced by Delegate Cline, and SB 1202 in the Senate, introduced by Senator Obenshain. Both are - simply - immoral and should be defeated.

The cry "no taxpayer funding for abortion" is simplistic and misleading. It appeals to our worst nature - to a self-righteous desire for punishment - in this case, of the most vulnerable. (Of course, one of "us" would never be in that situation - right?) Pregnancy occurs for many reasons - including that a woman feels compelled to have sex and cannot convince the man to use protection. We are talking about power, not morals or lack of morals. Why are so many Americans convinced it's ok to treat women as moral degenerates - and to give men a pass. Why do we want to blame those who most need help? Why won't we treat women decently, morally, humanely? Why won't we work on lifting up women - not keeping them permanently victimized.