Protecting Our Rights From April Fools

Below the Belt: A Biweekly Column by NOW President Kim Gandy

March 31, 2005

April Fools! Not.

Each time a terrible bill is introduced in Congress these days, I keep waiting for someone to pop up and yell "April Fools!" Alas, no such luck.

Case in point: the budget. Using their infamous "moral values" as a convenient smokescreen, George W. Bush and the Republicans in Congress are pushing a budget that (once again) slashes funding for education, health care, and social programs while lining the pockets of their corporate cronies. It's gotten so bad that key leaders in the faith community are speaking out, saying the proposed budget's values are anything but "moral." The leader of the National Council of Churches said that "this budget is immoral and does not reflect the values we hold as people of faith." Meantime, the leaders of five Protestant denominations called the budget "unjust." But my favorite is from the Interfaith Alliance: "As a moral document, the federal budget should not, and cannot, be built on the backs of the poor, the elderly and future generations." Well said.

But all is not doom and gloom! Here's one for the "better late than never" files—Arkansas may ratify the Equal Rights Amendment (ERA), which still is not part of the Constitution! Three cheers for the state legislators fighting to bring their state out of the dark ages: Senator Sue Madison and Representative Lindsley Smith, both Democrats from Fayetteville. Cheers also to U.S. Congresswoman Carolyn Maloney, D-New York, who graced the Congressional session with her traditional reintroduction of the national ERA. In Fayetteville, Smith and Madison are hopeful that "things have changed a lot since the 1970s," as Smith put it. She added: "Everybody is going to be looking at Arkansas. It's all about respect for other people and fair treatment, and that's going to interest a lot of people." Hip-hip-hooray!

Representative Smith also plans to introduce a bill that will modify the Arkansas Civil Rights Act of 1993 to add sexual orientation as a basis for civil rights violation claims. Of that fight, she noted, "I expect a little more debate about that." Indeed. Kudos to this brave state legislator for taking on these fights and standing up for justice.

And at the other extreme from politicians bravely taking on tough fights for their constituents, we have the example of the U.S. Congress passing a law intended to primarily benefit themselves. Wherever you stand on end-of-life choices, or on the tragic Terri Schiavo case, it is worth noting that Republicans are using it to strengthen their ties to anti-abortion forces and draw attention away from Tom DeLay's serious legal and ethics problems—and most amazingly to bolster the "nuclear option," a plan to wipe out the filibuster in order to confirm all of Bush's extremist judicial appointments.

The latest example comes from conservative rag The Weekly Standard, whose editor, William Kristol, says the Schiavo case demonstrates that we need to "rise up against our robed masters" and insist on the confirmation of judges who are "respectful of democratic self-government and committed to a genuine constitutionalism." He even suggests calling it "Terri's revolution." It apparently doesn't matter to Kristol that the facts in the Schiavo case don't support his position—most of the judges who heard this case in its many forms were conservative Republicans, and the legislatures they tried to overrule were democratically elected! Talk about hitting "below the belt"!

While we're on the subject, at least three key elements have been overlooked in all the media hype.

First, if this case had involved a same-sex couple, Terri Schiavo's partner would not have any say in her medical care, and might not have even been allowed to visit her in the hospital. The cruel injustice of excluding someone from medical decisions about their incapacitated partner's life and health is one more reason to fight for equal marriage rights. Join NOW's Equal Marriage NOW campaign to raise your voice alongside ours and hear more about activities you can do to create justice for same-sex couples.

Second, the $1,000,000 that has been paying for Terri's medical care came from a medical malpractice judgment—the very kinds of cases the Bush administration and Republican leadership in Congress are trying to wipe out through so-called "tort reform," which would put a cap of $250,000 on damages.

Lastly, Terri was hospitalized initially because she wanted desperately to be thin—she was suffering from bulimia, another tragedy in a case full of them. Yet there has been no mention how Terri got to that state—no mention of the enormous pressure on young women to fit an "ideal," even to the point of developing eating disorders and undergoing cosmetic surgery (even dangerous silicone gel breast implants)—pressure that drove a beautiful young woman to starve herself until she was hospitalized, beginning this sad chain of events.

Who will talk about this?