Big Blow for Women’s Health in Texas

By Mike Garvey, Clara Bell Duvall Reproductive Freedom Project Intern

These days, it seems that victories for abortion access and rights are rare. The news frequently portrays stories about restriction, not expansion, of access. So, supporters of access received something of a win Monday, when a district court judge in Texas issued a permanent injunction on a particular provision – that doctors performing abortions must have hospital admitting privileges within 30 miles of the site – of a restrictive new state abortion law. The ruling was the result of a lawsuit brought by, among others, the ACLU, Planned Parenthood, the Center for Reproductive Rights, and a number of women’s health centers in Texas. The judge in this case ruled that the provision had nothing to do with safety and more to do with placing an undue burden on a woman seeking an abortion. 

But Thursday, the Fifth Circuit of Appeals – following an emergency appeal by the state – overturned the ruling, allowing the law to go into effect while a legal case against it moves forward in court.

This isn't a small decision. It’s a disaster. Because the law was allowed to go into effect, according to the New York Times, as many as 13 of Texas’ 36 health centers that currently provide abortion services will be forced to stop providing them.

What the appeals court’s decision won’t decrease, however, is the number of women who decide that abortion is the right course of action for them. These are women who might live in areas those 13 clinics would ordinarily serve. They’re women who, because of this restrictive law, will be forced to travel long distances and potentially plan multi-day trips to access abortion services. They’re women who might not be able to afford to travel. They’re women who, having no feasible option, might decide to undergo an unsafe abortion. 

The appeals court itself found that the regulation might increase the cost of accessing a provider while simultaneously decreasing the number of providers. But because those are incidental effects of a regulation that serves a “valid purpose,” the regulation was allowed to stand.

The assertion that this provision is about women’s health is laughable. Texas is a huge state. Did its government not grasp that the admitting provisions requirement would make it close to impossible for poor and rural women to access abortion?

We know the answer - the effect of decreased access isn't incidental. This is a law signed by a governor whose stated goal is to wipe out abortion, period. It’s the intent of a state government that doesn't trust women to make decisions about their own lives, and values its own misguided judgment more than the people who actually provide abortion care. No, it’s not incidental. It’s patently intentional and leading us back to a pre-Roe world.

Mike Garvey is an MSW candidate at the University of Pennsylvania.

Invincible Youth, Invisible Epidemic

Unsafe Sex Puts Black Youth at Risk

by Khalia Walters, Clara Bell Duvall Reproductive Freedom Intern 

In Philadelphia, there are not many teenagers who are well-educated on reproductive health. Things like pregnancy rates, STD rates or just STD’s period are a non-factor to a great number of Philadelphia teens. I know this because I am a teen living in Philadelphia, and from the things I’ve seen and heard from my peers, people don’t know that sexual intercourse can be really risky.

I came across a website suggested by one of my coworkers here at ACLU that gave the most straightforward yet very informational facts about STD’s. The website is called takecontrolphilly.org and it gives you all facts on every STD. It tells you the symptoms, whether they’re curable or not, and how you can catch them. It also says what you should do when you catch a curable STD and what you’re restricted from doing if you have an STD that isn’t curable. Some STD’s spread simply by the male privates and female privates touching each other, not only by full sexual intercourse. And pregnancy can happen before intercourse, too. But so many teens don’t know that.

At our age, we teens think we’re  invincible and that things like STD’s are  facts broadcast to us to make us refrain  from sexual activity. With some STD’s, you won’t really able to tell if you have it or not. With HIV, most times you won’t even look or feel differently. Other times people get flu-like symptoms which can just be mistaken for the common flu. And so some infected people are running around freely thinking they’re STD-free when they’re actually infecting others.  In 2010, of all the youth in Philadelphia diagnosed with HIV, 84% of them were African-American.  Also, 70% of the adolescents diagnosed with HIV each year are African-American.

So what exactly do we do about these frightening facts? I say that the Philadelphia School District should place more health classes in middle schools and in all high schools. This can be a touchy subject with some parents and to officials this may seem unnecessary, but with the rate of HIV in African-American youth in Philadelphia as high as it is, something big needs to happen. Teens need to know the great risk they’re taking when they go out and “hook up” with someone. Anyone who thinks he’s too cool to use a condom is fooling himself. Using a condom is a way of looking out for yourself and your partner.

When I was in middle school, we had health classes that taught us about some of the STD’s out there and we were told to read these really old health books with scenarios that were so unrealistic that was it hard to believe that something called AIDS could bring so much destruction to one’s life. Running with this, I think that the Philadelphia School District has an obligation to its students. They should establish health classes at every Philadelphia high school with an updated, effective, and relevant curriculum. Teachers should teach about current statistics and make lessons more interesting. Websites like takecontrolphilly.org are far more appealing to the eye than a normal website with blank facts typed all over. Their graphic designs and accurate information intrigues the reader and pulls them in, making them want to learn more about the risk of sex. Sex ed classes should be at least this interesting.

As we raise awareness during Black History Month of issues facing our community, teens in Philadelphia need to know the facts about reproductive health. They need to know that unsafe sex is a risk no one should take. STD’s are lurking around the city affecting the lives of many teens who may not even be aware of the danger. Health classes in Philadelphia high schools and middle schools could really benefit Philadelphia youth, especially African-Americans who are by far at the greatest risk.

Khalia Walters is a high school sophomore at the Mastery Charter School, Lenfest Campus. She is interning at the Clara Bell Duvall Reproductive Freedom Project this semester. 

This post is part of a series honoring Black History Month.

-         

Roe at 40: Looking Backward, Looking Forward

Today marks the 40^th anniversary of Roe v. Wade, the historic Supreme Court decision recognizing that women have the right to choose abortion.  While lawmakers and pundits have twisted themselves into knots analyzing the impact and significance of the decision, for generations of people, the meaning of Roe is quite clear: It is the key to securing women’s place as equals in society.

For 10 years, Linn Duvall Harwell could only guess as to why her mother died so suddenly in 1929.  But when she found out that her mother, Clara Bell Duvall, died of an illegal abortion, Linn instantly understood.  “She loved her children…She was desperate because she wanted to care for them beautifully,” she told the Philadelphia Daily News  in 1986. While Linn understood the sacrifice her mother made, she knew it was a senseless loss. 

Linn held many jobs in her life, but the one nearest and dearest to her was pro-choice activist – as a member of NARAL Pro-Choice Americ a, the National Organization of Women and the founder of the Clara Bell Duvall Education Fund (now the Clara Bell Duvall Reproductive Freedom Project of the ACLU of Pennsylvania).  In a letter addressed to Representative Karen Ritter in 1990 Linn wrote, “The last thing a woman wants to consider when faced with an unwanted pregnancy is some bureaucrat sitting in an office in Harrisburg or a robed judge in a courtroom…. No woman can make advances in a career without the protection of her reproductive rights.”  It’s chilling to think that those words are just as true today as they were in 1990.

Linn wasn’t the only person fighting for reproductive rights.  As a college student in 1970, Peter Goldberger smuggled a friend to a secret location in Delaware, where she could obtain an abortion.  “I knew it was civil disobedience, but I don't think I considered any part of it other than doing the right thing for a friend in trouble,” he recalled.  “It was the right thing to do because it is what she had decided.”  It was only last week that he realized that, had he been caught, he would have faced up to five years in jail.

Later as a law student at Yale, Goldberger thought back to that night as he sat in classes and watched his colleagues on the frontlines of public interest law.  When Roe was decided in the second semester of his first year of law school, he reflected that the decision itself wasn’t a “gigantic event” on campus.  But for him, it was monumental. “The freedom to make that choice…is critical to women’s ability to succeed and be on an equal plane.”  He added that he had always thought that – but seeing it codified was another thing.

Jumping forward to today, we see a national climate that is as hostile as ever to reproductive justice.  But we also see a debate that has become more nuanced and more diverse than in previous decades. “Women born after Roe v. Wade – known as millennials -- see ‘choice’ as more complex than their predecessors,” says Alanna Tievsky, born a decade after Roe v. Wade. “So many of our fundamental rights are under attack – we can no longer narrowly focus only on access to abortion.”

Indeed, the battle is no longer just about safe, legal abortion – it’s defending the right to contraception, to maternal leave, to bodily integrity.  It’s about honoring the rights of women and men whose lives may not look like ours – and valuing their voices in the conversation.  And it’s about remaining constantly vigilant in a political climate that is slowly but surely chipping away at Roe and the full spectrum of reproductive choices we depend upon.” The legacy of millennial women will be reframing the debate around abortion to a dialogue that is more encompassing, more diverse, and more in tune with the needs of women and men, at every stage of their reproductive lives,” argues Gwen Emmons, a millennial and a reproductive justice activist.  “It’s a responsibility we take very seriously.”

Unfortunately for millennial activists in this field, it’s challenging to get a toehold in the leadership structure of the ‘old school’ abortion rights organizations. “Despite the fact that young reproductive activists are working in these organizations, losing sleep on the campaign trail, or manning the phones at abortion hotlines, previous generations argue that we ‘lack passion for abortion rights,’” says Emmons.  “If we’re to be the next guardians of reproductive choice, things have got to change.”  Tievsky notes the numerous strategies this generation has been using to combat the onslaught of anti-women’s health legislation locally and nationally. “A difference in strategies does not make us less passionate than Peter,” she argues.  “A belief in a broader vision of what choice is does not mean we cannot stand shoulder-to-shoulder with Linn.”  But that is the opinion of too many leaders in the choice movement.

Roe has had a profound impact on the fight for women’s equality.  Each generation has reacted to the continued attacks on women’s health with their own brand of activism.  For Linn Duvall Harwell, it was to volunteer and speak out at every opportunity she could.  For Peter Goldberger, it was to do the right thing – even if it was illegal.  And for Alanna Tievsky and Gwen Emmons, it’s to question the strategies and direction of previous generations – and plot a new course for the future.  As we look ahead to another 40 years of Roe (and beyond!), the goal must not only be to defend this monumental decision – it must be to nurture, inspire, and trust the next generation of activists who will be protecting it.

Pledge to stand strong against attacks on Roe and all reproductive freedoms – then spread the word.

Another Contraception Challenge, Another Misguided Argument

By Brigitte Amiri, ACLU Reproductive Freedom Project & Sarah Lipton-Lubet, ACLU Washington Legislative Office & Witold Walczak, Legal Director, ACLU of Pennsylvania

As we’ve written before, history has a way of repeating itself. Private companies that are challenging the federal rule that requires employers to provide insurance coverage for contraception without a co-pay are also repeating their same, misguided argument that the rule violates their religious liberty. Yesterday the ACLU filed an amicus brief in the most recent case raising these arguments – this time in a case brought by a lumber company.

The right to practice one’s religion, or no religion, is a core component of our civil liberties and is of vital importance to the ACLU. The ACLU is also fiercely committed to fighting discrimination and inequality, including discrimination based on gender. An important component of gender equality is the ability of women to have full control of their reproductive lives, and to be able to decide whether and when to have children.

Drawing on all of these principals, the ACLU’s brief places the company’s religious liberty arguments in a historical context. That history reveals that courts have long rejected the argument that employers can use their religion to discriminate against others, deny them rights and benefits, or foist their religion on their employees.

The availability of contraception has given women the ability to make their own decisions about whether and when to have children, which in turn has allowed them to make decisions about their schooling, a particular job or career, and their families. Furthermore, the contraception rule helps eliminate gender disparities in health costs: currently, women of child-bearing age pay 68 percent more for out-of-pocket costs than men, in large part because of reproductive health needs, including contraception.

An employer’s religious beliefs don’t get trump this rule, which is designed to eradicate discrimination. The same is true, as courts have ruled, for restaurants in the 1960’s that refused to serve African-Americans because integration was against the owners’ religious beliefs, or for schools that paid men more than women because men, according to their religious beliefs, needed more money as the head of the household. Religion was not allowed to be used to justify discrimination then, and it should not be used to do so now.

Cross-posted on the national ACLU Blog of Rights.

What happened in Harrisburg?

So the dust has pretty much settled from budget month at the state capitol. What didn't happen is as noteworthy as what did happen.

No defund of Planned Parenthood. Although House Bill 2405 was introduced with great fanfare- because everything primary sponsor Rep. Daryl Metcalfe does is done with great fanfare- the bill was referred to the House Rules Committee and was never heard from again.

No preconviction DNA collection. There were murmurs throughout the spring that the House would take up Senate Bill 775, mandating the collection of DNA from all persons arrested- but not convicted- for a felony or one of several enumerated misdemeanors. In June, the House had already debated expanding the power of the government and civilians to wiretap us and a ban on "secret compartments" in vehicles. Taking up DNA collection of people who are innocent under the law may have been a bridge too far toward the police state, but we are on alert for the possibility that this bill comes back when the legislature returns to session in the fall.

No ID for public benefits. With the President Pro Tempore of the Senate, Joseph Scarnati, as the primary sponsor, it seemed that the passage of SB 9 was a foregone conclusion. But the bill went through a serious game of legislative ping-pong. It was amended and passed in the House, forcing it to return to the Senate. It was amended and passed in the Senate, forcing it back to the House. The bill was brought up for consideration on the House floor at 11:45pm on Saturday, just as the governor was preparing for the signing ceremony of the budget and related legislation. When the House Republicans returned from the ceremony, SB 9 wasn't taken up.

SB 9, in its current form, mandates applicants for public aid to show ID to be eligible for the aid, with some exceptions. No ID, no aid. As we've learned throughout the debate over voter ID, there are some citizens who do not have and who would have a difficult time obtaining ID. In the House, Rep. Metcalfe (that guy again) stirred the pot further by adding a provision that would create a third-degree felony if an undocumented immigrant possesses a benefits card, an obviously unconstitutional provision since there are legitimate reasons for an undocumented immigrant to possess a card. For example, he might have it because his citizen child participates in food stamps.

It's hard to predict where SB 9 will end.

No taxpayer-funded private school vouchers. Vouchers proponents are claiming victory after the passage of an enhanced version of the Educational Improvement Tax Credit program, in which private corporations can get a tax break for donating to a scholarship fund. But the fact is that "EITC 2.0," as it's been called, was Plan B after the defeat of vouchers, which would have given public funds directly to students to attend private and parochial schools....well, parochial schools because the amount of the voucher could only cover the tuition at a religious school and not at a secular private school.

We lost on a new E-Verify mandate for public contractors, Senate Bill 637, Pennsylvania's first E-Verify mandate. The governor has not yet signed the bill, but he is expected to do so.

All told, though, we escaped the torture of budget month in Harrisburg with civil liberties relatively unscathed. All in a day's, or month's, work at the ACLU of Pennsylvania..... And that sounds like a good reason for you to donate today!

Reproductive Health Locked Up: No Contraception on Lock Down

In the newly-released ACLU-PA report, “Reproductive Health Locked Up,” there are numerous revelations as to just how unprepared Pennsylvania jails are to accommodate women’s reproductive health needs. Even more disappointing is how out of touch prison policymakers are with the practical realities of women’s encounters with the prison system.

According to the report, no county jails in Pennsylvania allow women to use contraceptives for the purpose of pregnancy prevention during incarceration. Over half of the prisons surveyed had no policy at all about contraception, and those that did only allowed inmates access to birth control for a medical purpose other than preventing pregnancy. The lack of support for women taking control of their reproductive health is unconscionable.

One might find it hard to imagine why an incarcerated woman would be concerned about the risk of pregnancy. This is the reality: the average jail stay for women is less than two weeks in length (pp. 22-23, “Reproductive Health Locked Up”). Then they’re out and back to their lives—but their pregnancy prevention plan has been disrupted. Repairing it might very well take a back seat to the litany of priorities to address after “getting out”—unresolved legal issues, compliance with parole, drug treatment, reconnecting with loved ones, finding a job.   

Reducing unplanned pregnancy is a major public health concern across the country. For women who are already in contact with the criminal justice system, an unplanned pregnancy can be a significant destabilizing event, one that would make it even harder for them to “straighten out” and get back on the right track.

How’s this for radical thinking: find out if women are using contraception upon intake and continue their prescription for as long as they want it. The infrastructures to take medical histories and to dole out medication are already in place. Offer affordable contraceptive options to all women before release, along with a prescription for refills, just like they’d receive from a doctor. Treat an encounter with the prison system as an opportunity to broaden the health options of low-income women and to empower formerly incarcerated individuals to make every child a wanted child. This can only have positive outcomes for both mother and child, and for society at large.

Janna Frieman is an intern with the ACLU-PA’s Duvall Reproductive Freedom Project. She is pursuing a master's in Social Policy at the University of Pennsylvania’s School of Social Policy and Practice.

Reproductive Health Locked Up

In the past 25 years, the number of women and girls caught up in the criminal justice system has skyrocketed. Many have been swept up in the War on Drugs and subject to punitive sentencing policies for nonviolent offenses.

In Pennsylvania, thousands of woman cycle through the county jail system every year.  Unfortunately, the county prisons that house these women – 57 in total – have been slow to adapt to the changing demographics of their prisoners. As a result, the unique health care needs of women have been largely ignored, leaving the health of this vulnerable population at risk.

This week our Duvall Reproductive Freedom Project issued a new report, “Reproductive Health Locked Up: An Examination of Pennsylvania JailPolicies,” that exposes the failure of counties to put adequate health care policies in place. In many cases, current policies fail to address the most basic reproductive health services, such as pregnancy testing, prenatal care, screening and treatment for sexually transmitted infections, and access to abortion services.

Three-quarters of the women incarcerated in county jails are of reproductive age, and the majority are mothers and the sole caretakers of their children. Most are incarcerated for nonviolent crimes, are undereducated, come from minority groups, and fall below the poverty line. Approximately 6 percent of all female inmates are pregnant upon admission to jail.

As the population of women in jail grows, counties will increasingly be vulnerable to lawsuits brought by prisoners whose medical treatment or lack of treatment has caused them harm or violated their constitutional rights. The public will be harmed as women laving jail re-enter the community with unaddressed health needs. And finally, we as a society are harmed when we squander the opportunity to help the most vulnerable among us.

Over the next few days, we will be posting a series of blog posts highlighting some of the findings of the report and what needs to be done to fix these problems.

Roe v. Wade anniversary message: Don't tread on me

“Don't Tread On Me.”

It's a favorite saying of anti-government tea partiers and libertarians alike. Dating back to the Revolutionary War, this motto-- paired with the image of a rattlesnake coiled to strike-- summons along with it a call to defend certain natural rights to privacy and autonomy, a fundamental resistance to the authoritarian impulses of state power. Leave me alone, the snake glares, or else. Though the iconic phrase has been co-opted for many causes over its long existence,  today it seems as though only right-wing small-and anti-government advocates wave the Gadsden flag (as it is historically named) with pride.

But it’s no secret that tea partiers and the politicians who pander to them don't actually believe in freedom from government regulation -- at least, not without notable exceptions. For all their talk about financial, educational, and environmental deregulation, the glaring inconsistency of smaller-government activists and politicians lies in their fierce opposition to the deregulation of a most fundamental site-- the (female) body. My body. And this isn't just a back-burner issue. This is a priority. In the first six months of 2011, Pennsylvania lawmakers spent 30 percent of their days at the Capitol working to restrict access to safe, legal abortion when they should have been solving real problems.

Actually, that's small-minded of me. For some voters, activists, and lawmakers, my bodily autonomy is a “real problem.” They are so uncomfortable with the idea that I currently can choose whether or not to have a baby that even my right to use birth control is coming under fire in popular discourse. Iowa caucus runner-up Rick Santorum has infamously said that contraception is “a license to do things in a sexual realm that is counter to how things are supposed to be.” It's no stretch of the imagination to think that if elected president, Santorum or any one of his like-minded colleagues will continue to push these paternalistic, religious, anti-sex, anti-liberty agendas.

And to them I say: don't tread on me.  Writing under a pseudonym in 1775, Ben Franklin commented on the appropriateness of the rattle snake as a symbol for the freedom-loving American spirit:

She never begins an attack, nor, when once engaged, ever surrenders... she never wounds till she has generously given notice, even to her enemy, and cautioned him against the danger of stepping on her.—Was I wrong, Sir, in thinking this a strong picture of the temper and conduct of America?

As the 39^th anniversary of Roe v. Wade  approaches and my reproductive rights increasingly come under fire, I think it’s time to re-appropriate the Gadsden flag for its original purpose -- the symbolic defense of civil liberties against the creeping authoritarianism of the state.  Like the Gadsden flag's rattlesnake, American women have generously given notice that these onslaughts against our basic bodily autonomy are unacceptable. So let this year be a year filled with pro-choice visibilities, actions, and activism -- a shot across the bow for opponents of personal liberty and reproductive privacy. Consider this fair warning: don't tread on me.

Janna Frieman is an intern with the ACLU-PA’s Duvall Reproductive Freedom Project and a Master of Social Policy candidate at the University of Pennsylvania’s School of Social Policy and Practice.


This post is part of the We've Had Enough Campaign's Roe v. Wade Blog Carnival.  See other posts on the importance of Roe and the attacks against women's health here:  http://www.wevehadenoughpa.org/blog.html

2011: The Year In Civil Liberties

It's been a very mixed year for we civil libertarians, with major victories and stunning defeats. On one hand, we're all happy to be out of Iraq - on the other, Gitmo is fast approaching its tenth year in business, and Congress has given the President nearly unchecked authority to detain or execute suspected terrorists. Don't Ask/Don't Tell died in 2011, and New York State doubled the number of LGBT Americans with full marriage rights, but Pennsylvania is once again considering a Constitutional ban on same-sex marriage. We've dramatically increased the number of Americans with access to decent health care, but Pennsylvanians may soon have to leave the state to get a safe and legal abortion. Through it all, we've been encouraged to see record numbers of Americans take to the streets to make their voices heard - and sickened to see them arrested, beaten, and pepper-sprayed for speaking out in a public forum.

See what I mean? Mixed year.

As we always are, the ACLU has been in the middle of most of these issues, as busy as ever in the courthouse and busier perhaps than ever before in Congress and state legislatures across the country. We've been so busy, in fact, that it's going to take us the rest of the year to tell you about it.

Over the next ten days, we'll review some of the highs and lows of 2011, to let you know what the ACLU has been doing for you - both in Pennsylvania and across the country - and to remind you why we need your support. In return, we hope you will consider becoming a card-carrying member (if you're not already), making a tax-deductible year-end contribution, or both - because if there's one thing we want you to know about our work, it's that we can't do it without you.

When abortion was illegal....

Cross-posted at We've Had Enough.

I had the incredible privilege of speaking with Linn Duvall Harwell, one of the founders of the Clara Bell Duvall Reproductive Freedom Project at the ACLU about the recent legislative attacks on reproductive rights. During our conversation, Linn shared with me that her husband is in hospice care and doesn’t have long to live. The fact that she wanted to take time to speak with me during such a difficult moment points to her steadfast, lifelong commitment to the issue of reproductive freedom for women.

Linn Harwell’s mother, Clara Bell Duvall was the victim of an unsafe abortion in the 1920s, well before abortion was legalized under Roe V. Wade in 1973. This tragic event stayed with her and became the catalyst for her career and commitment to women’s reproductive rights activism.

During our conversation, she shared her disgust with proposed Senate Bill 732 and said, “I am appalledto witness the continuity of that effort from many years ago to reinstate those kinds of restrictions. For me, it all equals restrictions for women.”

She believes that supporters of the anti-abortion movement lack knowledge of the conditions that existed before Roe V. Wade and “do not know the history that preceded Roe v. Wade and why Roe v. Wade came to be.”

She urges Pennsylvanians to open their eyes to the gravity of the issue and reminds us of a time when things were not so easy, a time that could become a reality once again if we do not take action. “Please don’t take these things for granted. Call your representative and tell them where you are and what you need to prevent tragedies in the public health of our nation,” she said.

She stressed the importance of men’s participation in the effort and believes that educating men about reproductive health and preventative medicine would provide them with a basis to take action. “The relationship of the man who is relating to the woman in need is essential and we are neglecting educating men on this issue,” she said. She believes that her husband’s unwavering support has been a strong presence in her career as an activist and in her role as a mother.

Linn believes "We've Had Enough" could transform the movement:“All my life I have regretted the nature of my mother’s death and so I have worked for women I have never known and I would love to see Pennsylvania pick up and care about people that they don’t know.”

Katherine in Philly

As goes Kansas, so goes Pennsylvania?

Pro-big-government activists are implementing their strategy to rollback women's access to reproductive healthcare all over the country, not just in Pennsylvania. The strategy goes a little something like this: Alter the legal requirements for abortion clinics, under the guise of "patient safety" (because we're all supposed to believe they want women to have safe access to abortion), and then watch the clinics scramble to meet the requirements. Poof! No more access to safe abortion!

Note that I didn't say no more abortions. There will still be abortions. With less clinics able to offer care, though, women seeking abortions will potentially seek care via less safe methods, including self-induced abortions and from illegal providers like Kermit Gosnell.

Pennsylvania is facing that threat with Senate Bill 732 and House Bill 574, both of which have passed one chamber of the state legislature. WPSU-FM laid out the arguments in a story yesterday.

The pro-big-government activists have pursued a similar strategy in Kansas. The requirements were different, and the KS Department of Health only gave the clinics two weeks to react. But the strategy is the same.

Here in PA, we've predicted that the enactment of SB 732 or HB 574 could lead to clinics closing or no longer offering abortion services. It would also likely lead to costly litigation.

And that's exactly what has happened in Kansas. Two of the state's three clinics were unable to comply, and they filed suit. A federal judge ruled in their favor and imposed a temporary restraining order on the new legal requirements.

Some states have implemented ambulatory surgical facility regs on abortion clinics that offer abortion beyond a certain period of weeks gestation, but we are aware of no state that has implemented ASF regs for all abortion clinics like SB 732 and HB 574. If enacted, this law would make Pennsylvania the most extreme of the extreme. And like Kansas, Pennsylvania can expect a costly constitutional lawsuit on its hands.

Greetings from Harrisburg! Summer break edition

The legislature has left Harrisburg for the summer. Civil liberties are safe! Find out what went down in the mad legislative rush this week as the General Assembly finished the state budget.

Please note that by playing this clip YouTube and Google will place a long-term cookie on your computer. Please see YouTube's privacy statement on their website and Google's privacy statement on theirs to learn more. To view the ACLU of PA's privacy statement, click here.

55 hours out, abortion's on tap. Again.

It really is incredible. As I write this, the Pennsylvania General Assembly is 55 hours out from its deadline to pass its annual state budget. All of the bills are lining up for passage just in time to beat the deadline on Thursday, but it has been a mad rush here at the end, especially for those legislators who predicted that the budget would be done in May.

Even in the midst of all of this, the state House is inconceivably teeing up not one but two bills to rollback women's access to reproductive healthcare. Senate Bill 3, which cuts off insurance coverage of abortion in the exchanges created by healthcare reform, and Senate Bill 732, which alters the legal requirements abortion clinics must follow, have both bounced out of committee and are headed to the House floor for a vote. Because it was amended in the House Health Committee, SB 732 would have to go to back to the Senate for a vote on "concurrence," but without an amendment, SB 3 could head to the governor after passage in the House.

If anyone needs some help understanding the dangers of SB 732, check out this news from Kansas. Abortion clinics are struggling to meet new legal requirements there:

Kansas health regulators said today that the abortion clinics they’ve inspected so far have failed to meet the requirements to get a license under a law that takes effect Friday...

The new licensing law requires clinics to be inspected twice a year, including one unannounced review. It also spells out standards for operations, supplies, facilities and medical procedures.

The regulations total 36 pages. Among other things, they require any physician performing an abortion to have clinical privileges at a hospital within 30 miles of the clinic. They also require each facility to have drugs and equipment to deal with a medical crisis such as a heart attack or an allergic reaction to medication.

They also contain a number of requirements for the building including dressing rooms for staff that are equipped with a toilet, a sink and a place to store clothes. The procedure rooms are also required to be 150 square feet and the recovery area must be at least 80 square feet per patient.

The rules also set the temperature for the recovery rooms (between 70 and 75 degrees) and the procedure room (between 68 and 73 degrees).

The regulations were sent out to providers on June 17, only days before the inspections.

Sound familiar? The situations aren't totally analogous since the Kansas requirements are different, but the strategy is the same: Alter the legal mandates in a way that creates a burden for the clinics, thus potentially cutting off women's access to a legal right.

The supporters of HB 574 and SB 732 can wrap themselves in the language of patient safety all they wish, but the reality is that this legislation is straight out of the playbook of those who believe that the government should make medical decisions for women. And that is what puts patient safety at risk.

24 hour victories

When defending civil liberties at a state legislature that is hostile to them, we have to hang our hat on all victories, no matter how small, even if they last just a few months, a few weeks, or even 24 hours.

Yesterday had the potential to be a rough day at the PA General Assembly, particularly in the House. Somehow we came out of it almost completely unscathed.

Voter ID, HB 934: We expected the House to vote on final passage. It never happened. The House adjourned abruptly just after 4pm without a vote on the bill. Also, more good news on this front yesterday. The AARP of Pennsylvania sent a letter to all House members expressing their opposition.

I still expect this bill to get a vote today or at least before the summer recess. But we'll take victories where we can get them. Rep. Mike Sturla of Lancaster had some insight on the two week delay of this bill earlier this month:

House GOP leaders delayed this bill as long as they could, but, needing budget votes from the Paranoid Delusional faction within the Republican Caucus, we now find ourselves devoting hours to debating a voter suppression bill, rather than, you know, discussing a state budget.

ID for aid, SB 9: More "papers, please" legislation. This bill denies public aid to anyone who is unable to produce government-issued ID. The House State Government Committee was expected to take up this bill but instead held it over. The bill will be part of a series of hearings the committee is going to hold over the summer on immigration issue. Mind you, without credible evidence of ineligible persons receiving benefits, it's not an immigration issue at all but is, instead, a poverty issue.

Publicly-funded private school vouchers, SB 1/HB 1708: There were some signs that a compromise on school vouchers might be jammed through before the legislature finishes the state budget, which is due June 30. On Tuesday, the House Education Committee posted notice of hearings scheduled for Wednesday and Thursday on this issue. But the Democratic chairman of the committee, Rep. James Roebuck of West Philly, objected because the notice did not follow House rules on sunshining a hearing. To his credit, the majority chairman, Rep. Paul Clymer of Bucks County, agreed and promptly cancelled both hearings.

There was some bad news...

Abortion coverage in the insurance exchanges created by healthcare reform, SB 3: We got crushed. This bill was voted out of the House Insurance Committee on a vote of 22-2. The legislature is struggling to finish the budget by the June 30 deadline (and completely missed their own goal of finishing it by the end of May) but has plenty of time to deal with abortion, apparently.

HB 574, the Mensch amendment, & the pro-government Trojan horse

We're going to keep beating the drum over what's happening on reproductive rights at the state capitol in Harrisburg. Let me be clear, yet again: Women's access to reproductive healthcare is in serious jeopardy due to several pieces of state legislation. House Bill 574 and the amended Senate Bill 732, amended and hijacked by Senator Bob Mensch of Easton, would alter the legal playing field for abortion clinics in ways that would be so onerous that clinics would have to spend hundreds of thousands, maybe over a million, dollars to comply.

Supporters of HB 574 and the Mensch amendment, including the Pennsylvania Catholic Conference and the Pennsylvania Family Institute, have wrapped themselves in the language of women's safety, as if we're all supposed to believe that suddenly they want women to have safe access to abortion care. Try wrapping your head around that one.

But yesterday the Pennsylvania Catholic Conference showed their true colors in an email sent to their listserv. The Conference made clear their true reasons for supporting the legislation and implied that they support the legislation because it will, indeed, cut off access to abortion care:

Today, the Senate voted 38 to 12 to pass Senate Bill 732, which, thanks to the Mensch Amendment added on Wednesday, June 8, would hold abortion facilities to the same fire and safety standards, personnel and equipment requirements, and quality assurance procedures as other freestanding ambulatory surgical facilities. The Mensch Amendment was a courageous stand for the pro-life cause. (emphasis added)

"A courageous stand for the pro-life," i.e. pro-government, "cause"? Need I say more? Only the American Family Association of Pennsylvania- the crazy Uncle Charlie of the pro-government, anti-gay crowd in PA- has been honest enough to admit that they're supporting the bills because they could close clinics. Diane Gramley of AFA of PA sent an email to their listserv on May 9 that said:

The passage of such legislation would significantly reduce the number of abortions, abortion facilities and abortionists in Pennsylvania.

The pro-government advocates can try to hide behind the language of "safety," but their motivations are obvious.

(Aside: I've been struggling with what framing to use to describe those who want women to have no access to reproductive healthcare. I'm not a fan of "pro-life" or "anti-choice." I've settled on "pro-government" for the moment because these are people who believe that the government should make private medical decisions for women. If you have any other ideas, let me know.)

Update, 12:50pm: The Lancaster Intelligencer Journal has called out the supporters of HB 574 and the amended SB 732 for the same reason.

Forcing clinics to enlarge room sizes, which already are covered by building codes, or replace existing elevators with hospital-grade elevators has nothing to do with protecting a woman's health.

Pennsylvania has strict abortion laws. That's as it should be.

But the Gosnell situation is being exploited to make it even more difficult for women in the state to obtain an abortion.

Greetings from Harrisburg! The ongoing abortion saga

The state Senate passed the amended Senate Bill 732, requiring abortion clinics to follow the ambulatory surgical facilities regulations. Plus, Senate committees moved bills on prison reform and blocking the implementation of Real ID. Learn more with this update, and check out our legislative webpage.

Please note that by playing this clip YouTube and Google will place a long-term cookie on your computer. Please see YouTube's privacy statement on their website and Google's privacy statement on theirs to learn more. To view the ACLU of PA's privacy statement, click here.

Greetings from Harrisburg! Reproductive rights in crisis in PA

The state Senate passed an amendment today (June 8) to require freestanding abortion clinics to follow the same regulations as ambulatory surgical facilities. Learn more about this and the latest on an attempt to require all voters at every election to show photo ID.

Please note that by playing this clip YouTube and Google will place a long-term cookie on your computer. Please see YouTube's privacy statement on their website and Google's privacy statement on theirs to learn more. To view the ACLU of PA's privacy statement, click here.

This week at the state capitol: Voter ID, Abortion, HIV, Oh, my!

Another week of session at the state capitol is upon us. And the attempts to erode your rights continue.

We expect House Bill 934, Rep. Daryl Metcalfe's voter ID bill, to get a vote in the state House this week. The bill would require all voters at every election to show unexpired, government-issued photo ID, effectively disenfranchising a large swath of U.S. citizens who do not have such ID. Supporters are chasing the ghosts of voter fraud while providing no credible evidence of fraud. And my personal favorite, they equate voting with driving a car, getting a library card, and renting a movie at your local Blockbuster store (if you still have one). So the cornerstone of our democratic experiment, the vote, is equal to your ability to go down the street and pick up a copy of Fast Times at Ridgemont High. Gnarly.

The New York Times published a story on this vast right wing conspiracy last week.

On the Senate calendar, two abortion bills, SB 732 and SB 3, continue to linger menacingly, and there's a good chance that the Senate takes up one or both of these bills this week. SB 732 beefs up the inspection process for abortion clinics. While there are some minor problems with that bill, the real issue is with an amendment by Senator Mensch of Easton that alters the legal requirements for clinics in such a way that the clinics would have to spends hundreds of thousands and maybe more than a million dollars in building renovations and staff increases.

SB 3, meanwhile, prohibits insurance companies from offering coverage of abortion care when they participate in the insurance exchanges, or marketplaces, created by federal healthcare reform. That includes policies that are purchased with private money. Sounds like a government takeover of healthcare....

Finally, on Tuesday, the House Human Services Committee is scheduled to consider Senate Bill 260. This bill erodes the privacy protections currently in state law on HIV testing. It replaces a requirement of written informed consent with "documented" informed consent, meaning the doctor could sign off on the test instead of the patient; allows doctors to force patients to opt out of an HIV test, rather signing into the test; and eliminates the requirement in law for pre-test counseling. The ACLU of PA opposes this bill for privacy reasons. Unfortunately, HIV still carries a stigma that can lead to discrimination, and it is important that patients not feel forced into a test. I'm also not clear on why withholding information from patients is a good thing, and the supporters of this bill have yet to respond to that point.

As always, you can find more details about our positions on these and other bills at our legislative webpage.

Greetings from Harrisburg! Win (temporarily) on reproductive rights

The Pennsylvania Senate delayed votes on legislation that would adversely affect women's access to reproductive healthcare in the commonwealth. Learn more with this video update from legislative director Andy Hoover, and find memos, press releases, and other statements at our legislative webpage.



Please note that by playing this clip YouTube and Google will place a long-term cookie on your computer. Please see YouTube's privacy statement on their website and Google's privacy statement on theirs to learn more. To view the ACLU of PA's privacy statement, click here.

Next week at the state capitol: When it rains, it pours

I'll try not to be overly dramatic. But the s**t is hitting the fan at the state capitol. Here's what could be/will be on tap for next week.

House Bill 574, re: altering legal guidelines for abortion clinics. This bill could cost freestanding abortion clinics to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars in building renovations and staffing increases and could put those clinics out of business or at least increase dramatically the cost of abortion care. Supporters of the bill include the Pennsylvania Family Institute and Pennsylvania Catholic Conference, organizations that oppose women's access to abortion care. That says plenty.

Interestingly, while supporters of the bill have claimed that Philadelphia DA Seth Williams supports the bill, after the indictment of West Philly "Doctor" Kermit Gosnell, DA Williams has said, no, I don't.

HB 574 has been moved from the House Tabled Calendar to the House Calendar, and the word is that it is going to get a vote next week. We have an action alert posted on it. Take action now!

House Bill 934, re: voter suppression by ID. The House State Government Committee will vote on Monday on this bill to mandate photo ID at the polls. The problem? Approximately 11 percent of US citizens do not have government-issued ID, and they are disproportionately the elderly, the working poor, and African-Americans. In other words, this is an ol' fashioned voter suppression tactic that harkens back to the darkest corners of American history. Our friends at Project H.O.M.E. have posted an action on HB 934.

This just in! Late word has come in this afternoon that the Senate may take up Senate Bill 9, re: mandatory government-issued ID for public aid, and SB 637, re: forcing state contractors to use the federal E-Verify database program. We oppose both bills.

Hearings! Hearings! It's not all bad news. On Wednesday, the Senate Communications & Technology Committee will hold a hearing on SB 354, which would prohibit Pennsylvania's participation in the federal Real ID Act, and on other privacy issues. I'm testifying at that hearing and at a joint hearing of the Senate and House State Government committees on redistricting on Thursday. The latter is an open discussion about redistricting.

The hits just keep on comin'!

The Update, 4:15pm: I just got the Senate Appropriations Committee agenda for Monday. It includes SB 637 and SB 9...and SB 3, which prohibits insurance companies that participate in the insurance exchange created by healthcare reform from covering abortion care. I wasn't kidding when I said that the hits just keep on comin'.