Doing some policy research? Need some background materials? You've come to the right place.
Note: Documents in the library are organized by issue area — and PDFs require Adobe Reader (free download/upgrade available).
The Obama Administration has initiated the process to rescind a harmful regulation issued by the Department of Health and Human Services – one of the infamous ‘midnight regulations’- that became effective on the last day of the Bush Administration. The HHS regulation threatens to dramatically undermine access to a broad range of health information and services by essentially allowing health care workers and institutions an unfettered ability to refuse to provide health care services, information, and referrals that offend their religious beliefs or moral convictions.
In 2008, virtually all reproductive health debates and decisions in the legislative and policy arenas took place against the backdrop of one of the most unforgettable presidential campaigns in history – one in which voters could not have been presented with a starker choice between candidates on reproductive health policy. When the dust had settled, the country had elected a pro-choice, pro-prevention President with a strong track record of support for women’s reproductive health.
Several provisions of federal law prohibit recipients of certain federal funds from coercing individuals in the health care field into participating in actions they find religiously or morally objectionable. These same provisions also prohibit discrimination on the basis of one’s objection to, participation in, or refusal to participate in, specific medical procedures, including abortion or sterilization.
The National Partnership for Women & Families (National Partnership) submits these comments in strong opposition to the proposed rule published on August 26, 2008 by the Department of Health and Human Services (hereinafter referenced as proposed rule or proposal). We believe the proposed rule is an ill-conceived, unnecessary, and counter-productive attempt to expand the reach of specific refusal statutes that permit institutions or individuals to deny health services for religious or moral reasons.
On behalf of the American Hospital Association (AHA) and our more than 5,000 member hospitals, health systems and other health care organizations, and our 38,000 individual members, we appreciate the opportunity to comment on the Department of Health and Human Service’s (HHS) proposed rule on provider conscience protections.
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) included family planning as one of its “Ten Great Public Health Achievements in the 20th Century.” Rightfully so – widespread use of contraceptives has been the driving force in reducing unintended pregnancies and sexually transmitted infections (STIs), and reducing the need for abortion in this nation.
The Department of Health and Human Services proposes to promulgate regulations to ensure that Department funds do not support morally coercive or discriminatory practices or policies in violation of federal law, pursuant to the Church Amendments, Public Health Service Act § 245, and the Weldon Amendment.
I am contacting you regarding the proposed Health and Human Services regulation, known as “Provider Conscience Regulation”, published on August 21, 2008. I must express my strong objection to this regulation change.
The undersigned organizations are writing to ask that during conference negotiations on the FY 2008 Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education spending bill (H.R. 3043) you fund the Title X family planning program at the House-passed level of $311 million, a $28 million increase over FY 2007 funding.
A rich and growing literature attests to the benefits that accrue to workers, families, businesses, and the public when workers have access to paid leave to care for a new child. Such benefits include lower likelihood of premature birth, improvements in breastfeeding establishment and duration, and higher likelihood of obtaining well‐baby care.
A minimum paid sick days standard would help to protect millions of working families from falling further into financial crisis during these tough economic times.
Today’s working families deserve the same protection that Social Security has provided for the last seven decades. There is no other guaranteed wage-replacement program, public or private, that offers the same level of security to America’s working families.
More than 12 million Latino workers - nearly 60 percent of the Latino workforce - don't have a single paid sick day to use to recover from common illnesses.
A new survey conducted by the National Opinion Research Center at the University of Chicago and commissioned by the Public Welfare Foundation demonstrates that lack of access to paid sick days has significant negative consequences for public health, health care costs, and families' financial security.
At some point in their lives, nearly all workers will need time away from their jobs to attend to their own serious illness, care for an ill or injured family member, or welcome a new child. But in the current economic climate—and without public policies providing job-protected paid family and medical leave—most can’t afford to take the time they need without causing a family financial crisis.
Just 11 percent of the workforce has access to paid family leave through their employers, and fewer than 40 percent of workers have access to personal medical leave through an employer’s temporary disability insurance program.
Businesses benefit when employees are able to take time away from work to cope with personal and family illnesses. More satisfied and productive workers translate into improved workplace morale, greater worker loyalty and better bottom lines.
A growing number of employers recognize the benefits of flexible workplace practices. These employers know that setting workplace standards that promote flexibility and allow workers to meet the dual demands of work and family improves employee productivity, loyalty and retention—creating happier, healthier workplaces, and better bottom lines.
Social Security is the largest source of retirement income for most seniors, helping millions pay for food, housing and other necessities late in life. Fifty-four million Americans1, including 26.1 million adult women who are widowed, retired or face a serious disability, depend on it.2 There is no other guaranteed wage-replacement program, public or private, that offers the same level of economic security — yet lawmakers continue to consider deep cuts and potentially punitive structural changes to the program.
Manufacturing industry workers are struggling with job and financial insecurity. Few have access to the basic flexible workplace policies they need to manage their responsibilities at home and on the job.
|Items 21 - 40 of 52||Previous||1||2||3||Next|