Reproductive Rights Threats Are Real -- Just Ask Your Congress Member

Statement of NOW President Patricia Ireland

April 18, 2001

---

If there was any doubt that the presidency of George W. Bush would be a defining--and dangerous--time for women's reproductive freedom, anti-abortion rights activists in the administration and the U.S. House of Representatives have erased it.  We won't have to wait four years to see Roe v. Wade quashed, because the congress members who have been eagerly awaiting this day are getting to work right now.

With an anti-abortion rights friend in the White House, legislators are feeling emboldened, making pronouncements such as "This is a pro-life Congress, House and Senate," from House Majority Leader Richard Armey, R-Texas.  House Majority Whip Tom Delay, R-Texas, brags of more opportunities thanks to a president who is sure to sign an abortion procedures ban, limits on who can prescribe mifepristone (RU-486), criminal sanctions against anyone--even a grandmother--who helps a minor cross state lines to avoid her home state's limits on abortion, establishment of fetal rights and more.

These lawmakers know that they can do just as much harm to reproductive rights with a pickaxe as with a shovel.  It's been working for years, creating a nation where women in 86 percent of U.S. counties do not have access to an abortion provider.  But much of this work is flying under the mainstream radar.  Abortion foes are admittedly reluctant to stage an outright attack on Roe v. Wade, choosing instead to launch restriction after restriction on access to abortion and birth control until Roe is nothing more than a ghost of women's rights past.

Conservatives at the state level are stepping up their own roadblock construction, inspired and validated by the Bush agenda.  The list of recent actions in the states is long, and court rulings upholding them include a decision in Louisiana allowing extensive, unprecedented lawsuits against abortion providers, and the Supreme Court's refusal to hear a South Carolina case, letting stand severe restrictions on facilities providing abortion services.

This last case illustrated perhaps the most threatening potential of the Bush presidency.  Justice Sandra Day O'Connor may retire as early as this summer.  While she is to the right of center on many issues, O'Connor has been the all-important fifth vote on decisions preserving Roe v. Wade's recognition of a constitutional right to abortion.  The court's refusal to hear the South Carolina case fueled speculation that anti-abortion rights justices do not want to hear another case on the subject until they are assured of a majority.

When Bush takes on the task of filling a vacated Supreme Court seat--and with the ages and health of the current justices it's a matter of when, not if--the Senate will reject or confirm the nomination. With confirmation of John Ashcroft as Attorney General, the standard has certainly shifted; Ashcroft, after all, opposes not only the right to abortion even in cases of rape, incest or danger to a woman's health, but also the most effective and popular methods of birth control.  In comparison, conservative ideologues like Orrin Hatch could be portrayed as moderate and sail through the hearing process.  It will take only one more Clarence Thomas or Antonin Scalia--whom Bush identifies as his favorite justices--to overturn Roe v. Wade, potentially outlawing abortion in all but the most progressive states.

We have little time to stop this steamroller from moving ahead. On April 22, in Washington, D.C., NOW and more than 100 sponsors are kicking off a concerted campaign for reproductive rights with an Emergency Action for Women's Lives. The Emergency Action will cap two weeks of state lobbying events during the Senate's spring recess and will include virtual action to inundate senators with e-mail messages when they return to Washington.

Everyone who believes that women have a right to safe, legal and accessible birth control and abortion has two very important jobs.  First, we must convince our friends who might not see the writing on the wall that this is in fact a very crucial time for reproductive rights and women's civil rights generally--maybe the most perilous time since before Roe.

Second, the Senate needs to hear from the people whose votes put them in office. Legislators who typically support women's rights are vulnerable right now to the rallying cry for bi-partisanship, a Bush catch phrase for capitulating to the conservative position.  Senators need to know from voters just how important it is that they support reproductive rights, whether by voting to defeat bills to further limit access to birth control and abortion or to confirm only Supreme Court nominees dedicated to upholding Roe v. Wade.

The April 22 Emergency Action for Women's Lives will show the Senate that their constituents are paying attention; and if we can mobilize this fast to protect the Supreme Court, imagine how much we can do before the 2002 elections.