• Overview
• Reproductive Rights
• Sex Equity in Education
• Equity in Vocational Education
• Confirmations
• Consumer Rights

WOMEN'S RIGHTS

• Anti-Affirmative Legislation Stalled in House Judiciary
• DBE Rollback also Stymied
• Houston Ballot Language Change Key to Winning:
• Civil Rights Nominee Challenged

VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN

• White House Hate Crimes Conference Held
• Family Violence Clarification Dropped Again

REPRODUCTIVE RIGHTS

• President Vetoes D & X Abortion Ban; Issue Slated for '98 Elections

• List of All Updates
• Look up legislation on Thomas
• Sign up for the NOW Action Alert list
• Contact your Senators
• Contact your Representatives

In the dwindling hours of the first session, the Republican leadership vowed to withhold votes for the administration's much desired fast track legislation, demanding that the President accept global gag rule language (that non-governmental recipients of U.S. family planning funding not to even discuss abortion with patients or "lobby for" abortion rights with their own governments) in international family planning programs, part of the Foreign Aid spending bill. Abortion rights supporters Reps. Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), Nita Lowey (D-NY), and Rosa DeLauro (D-CT) held a press conference to protest that move and to put pressure on the White House to refuse the offer. The White House held steady and, ultimately, fast track authority went down to defeat due to opposition from a majority of House Democrats.

Anti-abortion rights leaders Reps. Christopher Smith (R-NJ) and Steve Largent (R-OK) pressed the issue onto the $13 billion Foreign Operations spending bill where Republicans became frustrated by Clinton's threat to veto the bill if it contained the gag rule language. In retaliation, Republicans removed funding for the $926 million in United Nations arrears owed by the U.S. and a $3.5 billion credit line for the International Monetary Fund, among other things. These moves could have far-reaching international implications and have left the White House smarting. Congressional abortion rights supporters were outraged.

Authorized (by a vote of 333-76) in the final bill was $385 million for international family planning programs, to be released in 8% incremental amounts each month. Family planning program administrators have indicated that this metering of funds is creating severe problems for program operations.

• a House vote to ban travel to the United States by Chinese officials who may be involved in forced abortion and sterilization practices (H.R. 2570).
• language in the FY 98 Labor, Health and Human Services bill to ban research on human embryos and to extend the Hyde language (prohibiting the use of federal funds to provide abortions) to other health programs. The $9 million for Title X family planning programs cut earlier by the House was re-instated in the Conference Committee, funding the program at $203.453 million.
• a so-called "conscience clause" for military health care providers which would have allowed denial of family planning or abortion services based on moral or religious grounds was passed by the House in the FY 98 Defense Authorization bill, but dropped from the final Conference report.
• a prohibition against the use of locally raised revenue in the District of Columbia and the use of federal funds to provide abortion services for low income women in the FY 98 DC Appropriations bill. Exceptions for life endangerment, rape and incest were included.
• Continuation of the ban on abortions for women in federal prison, except in cases of life endangerment and rape in the FY 98 Commerce, Justice and State Appropriations bill.

A hard fought battle was waged in Congress to oppose Republican advances for educational vouchers, as contained in the District of Columbia FY 98 Appropriations bill. This measure passed the Senate, but voucher supporters were not able to bring it to a vote in the House. The matter will be addressed in a separate bill next session. Democrats fear that these efforts may succeed because of increased support among African-American groups for voucher programs as an alternative to failing public schools. Included voucher in authorization legislation is approval for single sex schools and schools which sponsor school prayer to receive vouchers paid for with public funds.

Also slated for action in 1998 is a rollback of Food and Drug Administration authority to review and approve of drugs and medical devices and to give the drug industry more control over how new prescription medicines will be brought to market (S. 830).

The refusal of the Supreme Court on November 3rd to hear the challenge brought by affirmative action supporters against California's Proposition 209 ban on affirmative action in state employment, education and contracts was a serious setback and advocates feared that this would buttress the opposition's campaign. Political intelligence has it that the anti-affirmative action campaign will be brought to a high pitch for next year's election season.

H.R. 1909, sponsored by Rep. Charles Canady (R-FL) and in the Senate (S. 950) by Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-KY), would prevent employers and educational institutions from taking any action which would constitute a "preference" for one group over another. So extreme is the bill that it prevents any remedies for proven patterns of discrimination and would undo entirely Executive Order 11246 which has helped open doors for people of color and by a subsequent order which has assisted women in federal contracting. Some analysts also believe that the legislation, if passed, would prevent federal agencies from entering into consent decrees even in instances of proven, intentional discrimination. Critics note that the effect of H.R. 1909 is to wipe out thirty years of bipartisan federal civil rights enforcement policies.

NOW and other civil rights groups have also decried to Congress the following consequences of H.R. 1909/S. 950:

• effectively overturn the Supreme Court's 1995 Adarand Constructors v. Pena decision because the legislation would prohibit even those federal programs that would survive the "strict scrutiny" standard set by the Court;

• reject the longstanding principle established by the Supreme Court in Bakke that race could be considered among a number of factors in affirmative action programs;

• eviscerate every Supreme Court decision authorizing the courts' use of proper affirmative action to remedy past discrimination by the federal government; and,

• make it virtually impossible for federal agencies to ensure that persons of both sexes and of all races and national origins are able to participate fully in the benefits of federal programs.

A massive grassroots campaign will be required next year to prevent passage of the Canady-McConnell legislation and to stave off several pending ballot measures, including ones in Florida and Washington state. NOW activists are encouraged to educate chapter members and other community leaders and activists on the importance of protecting affirmative action programs.

The original wording on the Houston ballot read:

"The City of Houston shall not discriminate against, or grant preferential treatment to, any individual or group on the basis of race, sex, color, ethnicity, or national origin in the operation of public employment and public contracting."

Houston Mayor Bob Lanier and the city council changed the wording to more exactly describe what the ballot initiative was attempting to accomplish. The language change was as follows:

"Shall the Charter of the City of Houston be amended to end the use of Affirmative Action for women and minorities in the operation of the City of Houston employment and contracting, including ending the current program and any similar programs in the future."

Lee, the son of Chinese immigrants, is the western regional counsel for the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund and has a distinguished record in negotiating legal settlements with employers to resolve patterns of sex and race discrimination. He attended Yale on a scholarship and earned a law degree at Columbia University Law School in 1974. The nominee has also served as adjunct professor of political science at Fordham University, New York, and was a volunteer attorney for the Asian American legal Defense and Education Fund. Lee also served with the Center for Law in the Public Interest in California where he was supervising attorney for civil rights litigation for five years. Lee has authored briefs in many U.S. Supreme Court cases and has presented oral arguments before seven U.S. Circuit Courts of Appeal.

The Senate Judiciary Committee was expected to split evenly on the question of his nomination. Republican Senator Arlen Specter (PA) was predicted to join the eight Democratic members (Leahy -VT, Kennedy - MA, Biden - DE, Kohl - WI, Feinstein - CA, Feingold - WI, Durbin - IL, Torricelli - NJ) in supporting the nominee and advocates were hoping to find an extra vote to break the tie. But Committee Chair, Orrin Hatch (R-UT) used his position to stop action on a committee vote. Democratic supporters vowed to find a way to get the nomination to the floor of the Senate where it is expected that Lee can be confirmed with several moderate Republican senators joining the Democrats.

Previous to the White House conference, at our request, a meeting was held with Attorney General Janet Reno to advocate for support of sex-based hate crimes as part of the new legislation.NOW Officers Patricia Ireland, Elizabeth Toledo, Kim Gandy, and Karen Johnson, with NOW Advisory Board Co-Chairs Ellie Smeal and Janet Canterbury, met with The Attorney General and several of her staff..

Sen. Edward Kennedy (D-MA) and Sen. Arlen Specter (R-PA) are sponsoring the new legislation and similar language will be included in the new Violence Against Women Act, set for introduction in early 1998.

The FVO clarification stipulates that the Option waivers were intended to be individual, temporary waivers, separate from the new welfare laws hardship exemption (which covers only the 5-year lifetime limit on welfare and only for up to 20% of a state's caseload.) Some states have hesitated to adopt the FVO clarification (that would allow battered women temporary respite from welfare-to-work requirements while obtaining needed services) because they feared incurring a penalty for not moving their quota of welfare recipients into jobs.