Tag: healthcare

Todayâ€™s Newly Elected Congress: No Jobs! Only Attacks on Womenâ€™s Health & Rights!

We Must Stop this anti-choice run-away-train Congress! There are lives at stake – those of the living, breathing women of this nation!

On Friday, the House passed the Pence Amendment (H.R. 217.)
This amendmentâ€”if it passes the Senate–will mean the end of federal support for an organization that each year provides more than 800,000 women with breast exams, more than 4 million Americans with testing and treatment for sexually transmitted diseases, and 2.5 million people with contraception. Women will die.

What did newly elected Rep. Nan Hayworth (R – 19th C.D.) do when the pressure was on???

Hayworth Voted with Pence and AGAINST the Women of this Nation, and her District!

This new Congress has launched an unprecedented attack on womenâ€™s reproductive rights, and they have a powerful strategy.

Instead of going directly at overturning Roe v. Wade, they have launched a multi-bill assault. Right now, our pro-choice congressional representatives and advocates are fighting off three bills plus budget cuts all at once, and the anti-choice zealots promise that this is just the beginning.

H.R. 3 â€œis radically broad and is clearly intended to prevent all women from obtaining health insurance coverage for abortion services â€“ even insurance paid for with private dollars or provided by employers in the private marketplace. Â The bill would raise taxes on millions of American families and impose intrusive new government rules on private, personal medical decisions.â€ (*Italics added) Center for Reproductive Rights

Under H.R. 3, â€œwomen would no longer be able to use their tax-saver accounts to pay for abortions because, in Smith’s view, this would constitute a federal subsidy; nor could families with high health insurance expenses deduct those expenses from their taxes if the insurance they buy with their own money includes coverage for abortion â€” even if they never use the coverage to pay for one. Small businesses, though not large corporations, could no longer deduct the cost of their employee insurance plans if they cover abortion, as 87% of health plans now do.â€ (*Italics added)Â  Los Angeles Times

H.R. 358 â€œwould allow hospitals that object to abortion (as some Catholic ones do, for instance) to make the appalling decision to withhold the procedure even in dire emergencies when it is necessary to save a woman’s life â€” a car accident, say, or a shooting. It also includes an objectionable provision â€” one that failed to become part of the healthcare reformÂ  law passed last year â€” that would prohibit federal funds from being used toward the purchase of any health insurance that includes abortion coverage. Current law prohibits federal funds from being used for abortion but allows insurance companies to segregate federal money from private funds used for abortion.â€ Los Angeles Times

Pitts and his buddies are quite literally willing to let women, who are in need of emergency pregnancy termination to save their lives, die. This bill would allow hospitals to refuse to provide abortion care when necessary to save a womanâ€™s life. â€œ…they have written into the bill a new amendment that would override the requirement that emergency room doctors save every patient, regardless of status or ability to pay.Â  The law would carve out an exception for pregnant women; doctors and hospitals will be allowed to let pregnant women die if interventions to save them will kill the fetus.â€

Pitts’ new bill would free hospitals from any abortion requirement under EMTALA, meaning that medical providers who aren’t willing to terminate pregnancies wouldn’t have to — nor would they have to facilitate a transfer.â€

â€œThe Pitts bill effectively turns all hospitals into arms of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops.Â  In other words, your health care is now fully subject to fundamentalist religious ideology.â€ RH Reality Check

To read more, go to RH Realty Check
And the Center for Reproductive Right

H.R. 217 – Title X Abortion Provider Prohibition Act

The sole purpose of this act is to attack Planned Parenthood. It seeks to deny any federal funding to Planned Parenthood.

Friday afternoon, 2/18/2011, the House passed this horrific amendment revoking allÂ  funding from Planned Parenthood.Â  The bill isÂ  falsely advertised as saving tax-payer dollars and ensuring that no federal funds are used for abortion. False Advertising! It is already law that NO federal funds can be used for abortion, other than in cases of rape, incest and to save a woman’s life. Passage of this fiscally irresponsible amendment will ultimately cost lives, and tax payers more dollars in long term health related cost for the poor and most vulnerable. Any funds that a clinic uses for such services must be raised separately and outside of federal taxpayer dollars. More than ninety percent ofÂ Planned Parenthood services are non-abortion related.Â  Their work is focused on preventive care includingÂ  birth control and cancer screenings. The final vote was 239-185.

Myth Busters #1 Nan Hayworth is NOT Pro-Choice!

Fact #1: Nan Hayworth is NOT Pro-Choice!!
She is running for Congress against Pro-Choice John Hall, in the 19th District which encompasses northern Westchester County, and parts of Orange, Dutchess and Rockland counties.

Nan Hayworth is a Wolf in Sheep’s Clothing.

In the Republican Primary she wanted voters to believe she was as anti-choice and reactionary as her opponent, and as soon as she won that, she started claiming she was pro-choice.

How do we know this?

Because her campaign told us that they did not want to hand in our questionnaire until after the Primary. Then, when they saw the questionnaire, she refused to complete it out of fear that we’d reveal the truth. Nan Hayworth is anti-choice.

What they did not bargain for
is that back in December 2009, soon after Hayworth announced she was going to run, we emailed her. We had an on-going communication in which her campaign as authorized by her clearly stated:

Hayworth wants to:
1. Severely limit a woman’s right to choose;
2. Restrict access to women’s reproductive rights; and
3. She would have voted in support of the Stupak Amendment which is the greatest attack on women’s reproductive rights since the passage of Roe v Wade.

The reason given for her support of the Stupak Amendment was because she “would have voted with the GOP [Republican } Conference.”

In other words, Hayworth is in lockstep with her Party. All for independent thought!!

Apparently, a vote for Nan Hayworth is a vote for whatever her party tells her to do.

Lest You Forget
Why it is Important to Use Your Right to Vote to Vote Choice

(We are posting a different story each email. Take the time to read someone else’s pain.)

“A doctor brought her in. He called me and said, “Will you admit her on your service? She’s got a strangulated hernia.” I said, “Well, why don’t you send her to general surgery?” He said, “I think it’s in your field.” She came in and she had a loop of bowel hanging out of her vagina wrapped in newspaper and that was the “strangulated hernia”. And what he [the abortionist] did was perforate the uterus. He pulled out the bowel with his aborting instruments and he thought it was fetal bowel. She had literally over thirty inches of bowel hanging out of her vagina. And the poor woman should have died from several causes:  bowel obstruction, septicemia, and everything else. I operated and did a bowel resection, pulled this damn dirty bowel out of the uterus and vagina, and she lived. But many others died.

(Taylor Buckley, former chief resident in a big city general hospital in the early 1940’s, in Doctors of Conscience, by Carol Joffe, Beacon Press, 1995)