Blogs Comment on Ellsworth Proposal, Former Texas Planned Parenthood Director, 'Men's Rights' Movement

November 6, 2009 — The following summarizes selected women's health-related blog entries.

• "Abortion Opponents Cannot Be Allowed To Derail Health Care Reform," Julie Menin, Huffington Post blogs: "A truly alarming storm is brewing in the ongoing health care reform saga," as "[b]ipartisan congressional opponents of abortion are explicitly threatening to vote 'no' on any health care bill that does not explicitly prohibit abortion coverage," Menin, a television host and blogger, writes. "Such a prohibition, if put into effect, would actually have the shocking consequence of regulating abortion in the private insurance market as well," she continues. Menin notes that in "three versions of congressional bills in the House, lower-income Americans would be eligible for subsidies to aid them in purchasing health insurance." She writes that "if antiabortion legislators succeed, the subsidies could not be used to purchase a policy that in any way offers abortion coverage," which "would have the effect of essentially legislating abortion coverage in the private insurance market and taking away from women a right that they currently have with their private insurance." Citing 2002 data from the Guttmacher Institute, Menin reports than nearly 90% of private policies currently cover abortion services, meaning that "this change would be seismic." Since House Republicans are "indicating that they will not support the current health care legislation (HR 3962), the potential defection of a bloc of House Democrats (now estimated to be as high as 40 Democrats) is catastrophic," according to Menin. She says that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) "needs to respond to these Democrats with some hard facts," particularly that "abortion is a constitutionally protected right" and that "for the government to legislate over what can be in a woman's private policy cannot stand." She concludes, "True health care reform means finally providing women with equal access to health care -- and health care that is truly comprehensive in its nature -- which de facto must include abortion coverage" (Menin, Huffington Post blogs, 11/6).
  
  
• "House Democrats' Abortion Battle on Health Care Down to the Wire," Dan Gilgoff, U.S. News & World Report's "God & Country": Gilgoff writes that Rep. Brad Ellsworth (D-Ind.) "has emerged as the key player in the House Democrats' effort to win antiabortion Democrats over to health care reform." He continues that Ellsworth "is still revising an amendment dictating the bill's abortion provisions in time for a House Rules Committee meeting Friday afternoon." He has said "his goal is to build a higher wall between private premiums, ... and federal funds, which Democrats say they want to prevent from funding abortions," Gilgoff says. According to Gilgoff, many lawmakers who oppose abortion rights "want to bar the public health insurance option and the private plans participating in the [health insurance] exchange from offering abortion coverage." He reports that Ellsworth spokesperson Liz Farrar "says she doesn't have a count of how many antiabortion Democrats support Ellsworth's amendment but that 'most pro-life Democrats are warm to the idea of a pro-life member working through the issue'" (Gilgoff, "God & Country," U.S. News & World Report, 11/5).
  
  
• "Former Planned Parenthood Director Telling Fishy Story," Amanda Marcotte, Double X 's "XX Factor": The "sudden conversion" of Abby Johnson, the former director of a Texas Planned Parenthood affiliate, "to an anti-choice fanatic has more holes in it than a piece of Swiss cheese after being used for target practice," Marcotte writes. Johnson's story -- that she changed her views on abortion after seeing an ultrasound -- "fits way too neatly into a bunch of easily disproven anti-choice myths," the "main one being that all it takes is one glance at an ultrasound to cause someone to 'realize' that hey! abortion removes a fetus from your uterus," Marcotte says. "Pro-choicers already know that," Marcotte notes, adding, "Johnson seems to be selling a story that's a tad too pat, too close to what anti-choicers want to hear." Marcotte writes that "Johnson worked at a clinic that provides abortion, amongst other things. Therefore she's probably seen a whole lot of ultrasound-enabled abortions," which is a "standard part of an abortion, because gestational age determines the exact procedure, and whether or not the clinic can even do it." As a result, "Johnson's story of a sudden revelation about the nature of abortion simply doesn't seem possible," Marcotte says. According to Marcotte, "speculation that Planned Parenthood is trying to silence Johnson doesn't fit the evidence, either." She writes that the restraining order that the Texas facility obtained against Johnson and the Coalition for Life shows that Johnson tried "copying and possibly stealing private patient files from their offices after she was put under performance-review watch." In addition, Johnson is "alleged to have passed along information to the Coalition for Life that would make it easier for them to target" doctors, and she allegedly "told a clinic employee that 'something big' was going to happen," Marcotte writes (Marcotte, "XX Factor," Double X, 11/3).
  
  
• "Right to Life Blasts Ellsworth Amendment," Patrick O'Connor, Politico's "Live Pulse": The National Right to Life Committee on Tuesday issued a statement "blasting" language proposed by Rep. Brad Ellsworth (D-Ind.) that is intended to help form a compromise on abortion coverage in health reform legislation, O'Connor writes. Douglas Johnson, legislative director of the group, said the proposal "is intended only to wrap the pro-abortion provisions in additional layers of concealment." Johnson added that Ellsworth's language "serves no purpose except to assist" House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) "peel votes away from the authentic pro-life amendment," proposed by Rep. Bart Stupak (D-Mich.). Johnson had especially harsh words for Ellsworth, saying "it is always unpleasant to be bayoneted in the back by somebody who said that he was on your side" (O'Connor, "Live Pulse," Politico, 11/3).
  
  
• "'Men's Rights' Groups Go Mainstream," Judy Berman, Salon's "Broadsheet": Berman writes about the growing "'men's rights' movement, a loosely organized coalition of individuals and organizations that believe feminist-influenced society is oppressing men." Berman notes that a recent Double X article reported that groups of men's rights activists, or MRAs, are becoming increasingly involved with mainstream politics and "facing unprecedented success." According to the Double X article, the groups claim "that false (domestic abuse) allegations are rampant, that a feminist-run court system fraudulently separates innocent fathers from children, that battered women's shelters are running a racket that funnels federal dollars to feminists, that domestic violence laws give cover to cagey mail-order brides seeking Green Cards, and finally, that men are victims of an unrecognized epidemic of violence at the hands of abusive wives." Especially chilling are MRAs' accusations that men and women are equally likely to commit domestic abuse. MRAs "are beginning to find a place under conservatism's big, reactionary tent," and Berman wonders how feminists should react to them. "(D)o we go to war, or do we try and hear MRAs out?" she asks, adding, "Is there common ground to be found, or is the new men's rights movement nothing more than the old men's rights movement with a fancy haircut and a flashy suit?" (Berman, "Broadsheet," Salon, 11/5).