Two Farewells and a Missed Opportunity

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

September 27, 2006

Last week, church bells rang across the state of Texas in memorial to a feminist.

Texas: where 76 percent of voters supported a ban on equal marriage rights for same-sex couples, where about 80,000 teenage girls become pregnant annually, where 93 percent of counties have no abortion provider, where 86 percent of law enforcement agencies reported searching Blacks and Latinos at significantly higher rates than white people, and where about 25 percent of people have no health insurance coverage (the highest percentage in the U.S.).

These are not numbers that feminist and one-time Texas governor, Ann Richards, would have smiled upon. Ann Richards, indeed, was a steadfast advocate for the rights of women, children, people of color, and all marginalized communities. While people across this country continue to mourn the loss of an impressive and dynamic leader, the state of Texas suffers from the loss of one of its few politicians who prioritized human rights and fairness above all else—and who never hesitated to call out those who did not, especially her successor as Texas Governor, George W. Bush.

And it's no coincidence that with W as president, the U.S. is looking more and more like what he let Texas become. In a 1995 commencement speech at Mount Holyoke, Richards told graduates, "We have learned that when the scales are weighted in favor of one gender or one race or one privileged background, no one in society is very well served." She also said that one of her rules for living life was to "love people more than things." Her Texas rival never grasped that concept. Amen, Ann.

Earlier this month we said farewell to another amazing woman. The title "Estelle Ramey, 89; Doctor, Sharp-Tongued Feminist" led her obituary in the Los Angeles Times on September 17, describing the endocrinologist with the rapier wit. Taking on a Democratic Party official who said that "raging storms of monthly hormonal imbalances" meant women should not serve in high office, Ramey (whose medical specialty happened to be hormone imbalances) debated him at the National Women's Press Club.

The Los Angeles Times told it best: "When Berman opened [the debate] by saying, 'I really love women,' she clobbered him with 'So did Henry VIII.' The Washington Post, in its story on the debate, reported that Ramey 'mopped up the floor' with Berman. He ultimately resigned his post on the Democratic National Committee and Ramey became a popular public speaker on women's issues." She continued to use her medical expertise to challenge assumptions about the real meaning of women's and men's physical differences.

Though our current leadership continues to disappoint, it behooves us to remember and celebrate two women whose life-long commitments to women's rights are exemplary and rare.

A Missed Opportunity . . .

Representatives Tim Ryan (D-Ohio) and Rosa DeLauro (D-Conn.) just introduced a bill they say is intended to reduce the number of abortions in the U.S. by preventing unintended pregnancies and offering support to pregnant women and new parents.

This is great—comprehensive prevention, expanded access to contraceptives, health care for pregnant women and new mothers—we've needed these kinds of initiatives since, well, forever. But while the provisions are fine as far as they go, this bill misses some real opportunities because it fails to address families' real life financial needs.

Sure, making sure that Medicaid covers contraception and expanding coverage for family planning services is terrific, as is increasing support for new moms. However, a free post-birth home visit from a registered nurse isn't going to help much if that mother can no longer afford her rent because her employer doesn't provides paid family leave (hint: expand the Family and Medical Leave Act to include paid leave). Or worse, if she loses her job because her employer provides no sick days at all, and fires her for taking off two weeks to give birth . Yes, Virginia, it does happen (hint: require that all employers provide a minimum number of paid sick days for every employee—it should be part of the Fair Labor Standards Act).

Availability of health care and nutritional supports are not the only factors affecting a woman's family planning decisions—there's her ability to continue full-time work while pregnant and postpartum, and with that paycheck the ability to keep a roof over her head. Is she one of the nearly half of all employed women whose employer isn't covered by the Family and Medical Leave Act—which means she not only doesn't' have paid leave, she doesn't have any right to maternity leave at all (hint: extend the FMLA to cover all employers with more than 15 employees, just like other employment statutes).

There's more: What are her employer's policies towards working mothers? Will she be able to take paid sick days to bring her child to the doctor? How will she pay for the added costs of childcare? There are many reasons working single mothers are among the fastest growing groups in poverty. And effective efforts to reduce the number of abortions must consider not only reducing unintended pregnancies but also the financial impact of living in a nation with some of the most family-unfriendly policies in the developed world.

And it's a bit odd that a bill seeking to reduce abortion doesn't once mention condoms or emergency contraception—the text mentions "contraception" and "contraceptive services" but is short on details despite its length. And because some of the co-sponsors of the bill are anti-abortion, the bill ignores the needs and rights of women who do get pregnant and don't want to be.

This is another opportunity missed for women's rights, and we will continue to miss those opportunities as long as lawmakers only think of reproductive justice as an issue to be dealt with, rather than a right to be protected.

Recent Below the Belt columns |