Womenstake

NWLC in the News

by Andrea Maruniak, Communications Program Assistant,
National Women's Law Center

The Colorado Independent, November 17, 2009
Colorado Health Insurance Lobby Vows to Fight Mandatory Maternity Coverage

Women's eNews, November 15, 2009
Jobless Benefits Will Now Reach More Women

The New York Times, November 14, 2009
In Congress, a Predicament for Abortion Supporters

NPR, November 10, 2009
Democrats Face Backlash Over House Abortion Limits

ClickZ, November 10, 2009
Healthcare Reform Advertisers Warming Up Big Guns

U.S. News & World Report, November 9, 2009
Abortion Coverage Severely Restricted in House Health Reform Bill

Register Today: Call on State Early Childhood Advisory Councils

by Helen Blank, Director, Leadership and Public Policy,
National Women's Law Center,
and Danielle Ewen, Director of Child Care and Early Education,
CLASP

So what are states doing with economic recovery funds that are allocated to fund State Early Childhood Advisory Councils?

To help provide an update on states’ progress in using these funds to get a Council off the ground as well as information about the workings of existing Councils, the National Women’s Law Center and CLASP are hosting a free conference call. 

Update on State Advisory Councils on Early Childhood Education and Care will take place on Tuesday, Dec. 1, at 2:00 p.m. Eastern.

Register Today! This conference call is free to participants, but registration is required.

More details about the key provisions of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act are available on our websites at www.nwlc.org/economicrecovery and www.clasp.org.

The call will be moderated by Helen Blank of the National Women’s Law Center and Danielle Ewen from CLASP. Presenters will discuss the progress states are making in planning and implementing Councils and include:

·    Rachel Demma, Senior Policy Analyst in Early Childhood Education, National Governors Association

·    Karen Schimke, President, Schuyler Center for Analysis and Advocacy, New York

·    Dave Edie, Early Education Policy Analyst, Wisconsin Council on Children and Families

·    Jim Redmon, Executive Director, Kansas Children’s Cabinet and Trust Fund

We look forward to you joining us!

Tell Your Senators that You Need It All

by Judy Waxman, Vice President for Health and Reproductive Rights, 
National Women's Law Center

Why should women have to make a trade-off between our ability to get abortion coverage and trying to eliminate other unfair and discriminatory insurance practices against women in health reform?

We shouldn’t.

Tell your Senators that you need it all — health care reform that works for women includes comprehensive reproductive health care that covers abortion care.

The passage of the House health care reform bill brought us one step closer to health reform that works for women by ending higher premiums based on gender, denials by insurance companies for having had a Cesarean section or suffered domestic abuse under the guise that these were “pre-existing conditions,” and providing other major protections for women.

But anti-choice Members of Congress dealt a huge blow to women’s reproductive health coverage at the last minute by including the anti-choice Stupak-Pitts amendment in health care legislation. If this amendment becomes law, it will, in effect, prohibit women from using their own personal, private funds to purchase an insurance plan that includes abortion coverage in the new health insurance exchanges—taking away essential coverage that most insurance plans provide today.

Now, the Senate is about to take up health reform legislation. We need to make sure that they know that women demand it all because women need it all. Tell your Senators that we need health reform that works for women now, including comprehensive reproductive health care that covers abortion care.

Putting Women Between a Rock and a Hard Place: Accept a System That Insures More People, Lose Your Reproductive Rights

by Micole Allekotte, Health Fellow, 
National Women's Law Center 

Ezra Klein recently posted to his blog about how the Stupak amendment unfairly limits low- and middle-income women’s access to insurance plans that cover abortion. 

The House health reform bill creates an insurance exchange where people who receive government subsidies will go to choose among insurance plans. The Stupak amendment forbids plans that are offered to people who receive subsidies from covering abortion. This means that people receiving subsidies will not be able to buy a comprehensive insurance plan that covers abortion, even if the abortion coverage would have been paid for using the personal premium dollars and not the subsidies (which was the compromise reached before the Stupak amendment). Because most people will receive subsidies, insurance plans on the exchange will also be unlikely to offer a separate comprehensive plan that covers abortion for non-subsidized individuals, so even people who do not receive subsidies at all may not be able to find a plan that covers abortion on the exchange. 

Mr. Klein’s post reminded me of three thoughts:

1) Low income women already get no respect when it comes to being allowed to make reproductive decisions. All women should have the right to make whatever decision is best for themselves and their families. But Medicaid doesn’t cover abortions because of the Hyde Amendment, which prohibits federal funds from being used for abortion except in extremely narrow exceptions. Only 17 states use their own funds to cover all medically necessary abortions for women on Medicaid. Health reform makes many more women eligible for Medicaid, which means more women will have health insurance, but at the expense of the government taking the power to make personal decisions away from women.

Weekly Round-Up

by Katherine Beauchemin, Communication Intern, 
National Women's Law Center 

The American Prospect took a look at Title IX through the eyes of a father as he witnessed the positive impact of Little League baseball on his daughter.

According to a Washington Post report, a panel of independent experts concluded, “Sex-education programs that encourage teens to delay sexual activity and teach them about contraception cut risky sexual behavior, increase condom use and lower the chances of getting the AIDS virus and other infections.”

The Centers for Disease Control eliminated the requirement that immigrant women and girls receive the HPV vaccine, the National Latina Institute for Reproductive Health and other organizations announced. 

In an attempt to curb teen pregnancies and encourage girls to attend college, a group in North Carolina is paying girls who enroll in college and don’t become pregnant, Opposing Views reported. 

Economists at MIT conducted a national study which links girls’ school environment with success in mathematics, reported MIT News.

Chally posted links to a collection of excellent feminist carnivals on Feministe. 

NWLC Files Comments with Georgia Department of Education

by Kolbe Franklin, Program Associate, 
National Women’s Law Center

On September 30, the Center filed comments with the Georgia Department of Education regarding the state’s proposed new rule on homebound instruction services. Specifically, the Center recommended a number of changes that Georgia can make to ensure that its rule does not adversely affect pregnant and parenting students so they can benefit from homebound instruction services when they need them. These services play a significant role in keeping students on track to graduate and Title IX requires that schools give pregnant and parenting students equal access to these important services.

Abortion Coverage Matters: The High-Stakes in the Fight Over the Stupak Amendment

by Kelli Garcia, Fellow,
National Women's Law Center

Some proponents of health-care reform are urging those who support abortion rights to accept the restrictions imposed by the Stupak Amendment in the name of the “greater good.” What is health insurance coverage for abortion compared to extending coverage to 35 million Americans, they ask? According to Washington Post columnist E.J. Dionne Jr., the whole debate is a bunch of fuss over nothing much. He cites a 2001 study by the Guttmacher Institute that found that only 13 percent of abortions in 2001 were billed directly to providers as support for the notion that the Stupak Amendment will have little real impact on women. Of course, as the Guttmmacher Institute notes, this number is misleading for two primary reasons.

First, the study looked at all women who obtained abortions in 2001, including women on Medicaid and those who were uninsured. Obviously, women who are uninsured will not have abortion coverage and current law restricts federal funding for abortion services for Medicaid recipients (although some states do use their own funds to pay for abortion coverage). According to the Guttmacher Institute, had they looked only at women with private insurance, the percentage of abortions billed to insurance companies would be “substantially higher”.

Second, the study did not include women who obtained reimbursement from their insurance company directly, which is relatively common, because many abortion providers are not part of private insurance networks. The Gutmmacher Institute also found that in 2002, 87 percent of typical employer-based insurance policies covered medically necessary or appropriate abortions. Notably, “the 87 percent of plans that covered abortions did not include those plans that offered abortion coverage only in very limited circumstances, such as rape and incest, or to protect the woman’s life.”

New Fact Sheet Addresses Schools' Gender Equity Obligations During the Economic Downturn

by Kolbe Franklin, Program Associate, 
National Women’s Law Center

NWLC has a new fact sheet, Title IX Still Applies: Gender Equity in Athletics during Difficult Economic Times, which reminds schools that despite the economic crisis, they must not forget their obligations under Title IX to ensure equal opportunity when making decisions difficult decisons about their athletic programs. With many school districts facing tightening budgets, some are making cuts to their athletic programs in ways that impose a greater burden on women and girls. Citing the need to comply with Title IX, this fact sheet provides guidance and examples for institutions on what the law requires if they choose to reduce athletic opportunities or benefits.

We Can’t Afford to Wait Any Longer- The Department of Labor Needs its Solicitor General

by Rachel Peck, Fellow, 
National Women's Law Center 

Patricia Smith, New York’s labor commissioner and a long-time champion for low-wage workers, has been nominated to be the Solicitor of the Department of Labor. The National Women’s Law Center strongly supports Commissioner Smith’s nomination, and we encourage the Senate to take immediate action on it.  Her nomination has been pending since last March – this is too long for the Department of Labor to be without one of it top officials!

The Solicitor is the chief legal advisor for the Department of Labor, assists in the development of regulations, standards and legislative proposals, and provides legal opinions and advice concerning all the Department's activities. This position is critically important to women – the Department oversees such laws as the Family and Medical Leave Act (which allows employees to take up to 12 weeks of leave to care for a sick family member or for a new child) and the Fair Labor Standards Act (which establishes the minimum wage and overtime rates).

Patricia Smith is highly qualified for this position. She has more than thirty years of experience, public service, and leadership in enforcing legal protections for America’s workers, including for low-income working women.  As Commissioner of Labor for New York State, she has targeted enforcement efforts on protecting low-wage workers, including in the garment industry, an industry where most of the low-wage workers are women.

Commissioner Smith was approved by the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee (or HELP) Committee in October, and the only step remaining is a vote before the full Senate. However, Senator Enzi, the Ranking Member of the HELP Committee, is blocking a vote. It’s time to give the Department of Labor its legal advisor so the many important tasks under its jurisdiction can move forward.

Eight months is too long for a great nominee like Commissioner Smith to wait!

Female Judges on the Rise in Pennsylvania

by Rachel Peck, Fellow, 
National Women's Law Center 

Women have been long underrepresented in the judiciary.  While women now make up half of all law school classes, outside of law school, the number of women serving as judges is sorely lacking.  The Supreme Court has only two women among its members and only 28% of Federal Appeals Court justices are women.On the state level, only 26% of state court judges are women. 

Last week Pennsylvania voters took their state judiciary to a whole new level.  After Pennsylvania’s election results were announced, the number of women serving on the Pennsylvania Appeals Court reached 21 out of a total 31 seats, to a whopping 68%. These new judges will help serve as an inspiration to young women that they can reach top levels in the legal profession, and as a reflection of our diverse population, as well as legal profession. 

We hope Pennsylvania’s results are only the beginning of an upward trend in the number of female judges, and one we hope to see replicated throughout the states and at the federal level.