“I’m not going to speak for what Canada decides, but I will say that I’ve worked in this area for many years,” Clinton told reporters. “And if we’re talking about maternal health, you cannot have maternal health without reproductive health. And reproductive health includes contraception and family planning and access to legal, safe abortion.” – Sect. Hillary Rodham Clinton (via Politico)
At a time when women’s rights are being bargained away by Democrats in health care language, she sits and shrugs; all of this happening with the backdrop of Dr. Tiller’s murderer being sentenced to life in prison. You’d think Cecile Richards would sense the urgency of where women stand right now. However, Ms. Richards is as clueless as Planned Parenthood is rudderless.
If I hadn’t seen this with my own eyes I wouldn’t have believed it. When Cecile Richards said “this is a ‘pro-choice’ country, Chuck Todd stumbled over himself interrupting and challenging her saying “what do you base that on?” Meanwhile, Savannah Guthrie sits there like a potted plant. What is it about the NBC network family that refuses to acknowledge the realities of women’s rights in the U.S., while muting the female anchor, and choosing the man for a Planned Parenthood interview on abortion rights? Russert rarely had a woman on “Meet the Press” to discuss abortion, with this type of interview casting stereotypical of this network.
However, that isn’t the worst of this interview.
The only thing I can say about Ms. Richards is that she sure as hell isn’t her mother. It’s a cruel comparison, but the times today are deadly serious, with Cecile Richards simply not up to the job. We need someone with fire, passion and purpose who isn’t afraid of ruffling feathers.
Where women stand today through the Nelson language in health care was stated most clearly through Guttmacher Institute (which I linked to recently). Ms. Richards is evidently ignorant of the facts, either that or she just doesn’t care.
Abortion: Insurance Coverage Now an Endangered Species
The bill’s restrictive abortion provision is putatively designed to uphold the status quo on the question of federal funding. Accordingly, federal funds—in this case, subsidy dollars for individuals purchasing insurance plans on the new health care “exchanges” that are slated to become operational in 2014—may not be used to pay for abortion coverage (except in extreme cases), but individuals, at least in theory, may purchase a plan that includes abortion coverage so long as the abortion coverage itself is paid for with their own money. (This mirrors the Hyde Amendment, under which federal Medicaid dollars may not be used to pay for most abortions, but states may cover the procedure for their Medicaid recipients using their own funds.)
In practice, however, the complex, politicized arrangements the legislation necessitates militate heavily against the likelihood that many such plans will be purchased—or even offered. Consumers purchasing exchange plans that include abortion coverage would have to make two separate premium payments—one to cover abortion services and one to cover everything else. Insurance companies would have to jump through numerous, unprecedented hoops to estimate the cost of abortion coverage and ensure that the abortion payments never mix with other funds; they also are likely to face extensive public scrutiny and protest around their action. All told, according to an analysis by George Washington University’s Sara Rosenbaum, “the more logical response” for private insurers marketing plans within the exchanges—and eventually in the broader market as well—“would be not to sell products that cover abortion services.”
Ms. Richards is under the delusion that her group’s mere presence at this point in women’s history justifies their existence and excuses their incompetence.
There are a lot of so called “women’s rights groups” out there, with money scarce. I don’t think Planned Parenthood has earned their keep, so I don’t know why anyone would give them money over Emily’s List. NOW and NARAL got played on health care too, but at least they had the passion of purpose to denounce the outcome, including Obama’s Stupak pandering executive order.
After the health care battle, Ms. Richards was simply satisfied that Stupak language wasn’t inserted in the health care bill. She was clearly ambivalent about the Nelson language, nonchalant even, another mid-life menopausal matron unmoved by the carving away of women’s rights.
That’s because Planned Parenthood lives and breathes because of Democrats. They don’t stand up for women, they live to raise money to keep their organization alive. After Ms. Richards’ bumbling on health care I honestly think we could do without them.
Cecile Richards certainly isn’t doing the job needed on behalf of women’s rights. Her performance on MSNBC simply a fundraiser booking. Her goal obviously to look “moderate” and sensible, you know, not too passionate to scare people off, at a time when their fundraising is about to kick in for 2010.
But Ms. Richards has proven she will sell women out in order to keep her donor base growing and the Democratic elite happy, though I’m sure her party card is filled, which after all is what counts to these people.
Ann Richards wasn’t afraid to offend, because she had the courage of her convictions. That’s the type of female leader women so desperately need today.
Unfortunately (fortunately for Obama and the U.S.), she’s currently Secretary of State.
Comments are closed.