May, 29 2012, 03:17pm EDT
Pro-Choice Americans Call on Congress to Stop Attack on D.C. Women's Freedom and Privacy
WASHINGTON
Nancy Keenan, president of NARAL Pro-Choice America, today joined Del. Eleanor Holmes Norton, Mayor Vincent Gray, and other civil and reproductive rights leaders to amplify their opposition to anti-choice bills that would undermine the ability of women in the city to make personal, private medical decisions with their doctors.
The press conference comes one week after the House Judiciary Subcommittee on the Constitution held a hearing on H.R.3803, a bill introduced by anti-choice Rep. Trent Franks (R-Ariz.), to ban abortion at 20 weeks in the District of Columbia, without consideration for the woman's situation, including cases of rape, incest, or fetal anomaly. District of Columbia resident Christy Zink, who had an abortion at 21 weeks and five days after doctors found a cyst on the brain of the fetus and a follow-up MRI revealed severe fetal anomalies of the brain, testified at the hearing. If the ban proposed by the bills had been in effect, Zink would not have had this option in D.C.
The House bill is modeled after an abortion ban enacted in Nebraska in 2010. So far, seven more states followed Nebraska's lead and now anti-choice organizations are pressuring Congress to override local elected leaders and impose this ban on the women of D.C. Keenan addressed these attacks at the news conference. Her remarks, as prepared for delivery, follow:
On behalf of our one million supporters nationwide, I am honored to join Del. Eleanor Holmes Norton, Mayor Vincent Gray, and the other leaders here today.
We believe that no woman's constitutional right to choose should depend upon her ZIP code or her income.
Unfortunately, too many members of Congress disagree with this core value--and they're using Washington, D.C. as a testing ground to interfere in the personal, private decisions that women make with their doctors. We have seen what happens to women in this city when some members of Congress try to play mayor or councilmember.
Just last year, anti-choice lawmakers in the House of Representatives used a must-pass budget bill to reimpose a law that bars the District of Columbia from using its own local dollars to provide low-income residents with access to abortion.
What happened to women as a result of this callous and mean-spirited action?
At just one local clinic here in the District, 28 women were caught in the political crossfire. They had scheduled appointments when funding was legal but...in just a matter of days...Congress intervened and these 28 women had appointments but no way to pay for them. Local charities scrambled to help - but that's just one clinic, one day.
No one knows what happened to the women with appointments for the next day or the day after that.
Can any of us imagine how it would feel to make a medical appointment only to discover that Congress has decided to intervene the day before?
What's worse is that the politicians behind this disgraceful law, most notably Rep. Trent Franks of Arizona, aren't finished.
They are targeting D.C. women with yet another anti-abortion bill.
This latest attack would ban abortion at 20 weeks, without consideration for the woman's situation or protections for her health, or even in the cases of rape or incest.
The D.C.-related attacks are part of a broader War on Women.
Let's look at the facts, just in case someone tries to tell you that the War on Women is not real.
Last year, the House held eight votes on choice-related issues, the highest number in more than a decade.
And they aren't stopping.
On Wednesday, the House is scheduled to vote on a bill that, contrary to its title of the Prenatal Nondiscrimination Act, does nothing to address the serious issues of sex discrimination or gender bias in society. NARAL Pro-Choice America has long opposed reproductive coercion in any form--including societal pressures to have a child of a particular sex. However, this legislation is unenforceable and unworkable. It essentially turns medical professionals into mind readers by requiring them to report even suspicions that sex is a factor in a woman's decision to terminate a pregnancy. It even threatens doctors and other medical professionals with prison sentences. This bill is a clear intrusion into the doctor-patient relationship and is designed to continue chipping away at a woman's right to choose.
This bill was written by the notorious Rep. Franks, who has voted against equal pay, prenatal care, and contraception.
The hypocrisy of Rep. Franks represents cynical politics at their worst.
Thus far, anti-choice House leaders have lined up no fewer than five separate bills with anti-abortion provisions for floor action this session.
This far-reaching agenda is out of touch with our country's values and priorities--and we are fully prepared to fight back against these egregious attacks on a woman's right to choose.
Last year, NARAL delivered nearly 135,000 signatures in opposition to the D.C. abortion ban.
We already have channeled thousands of messages in opposition to the latest legislative attack on D.C. women.
As we fight the battles of today, we also must change who controls the U.S. House of Representatives.
NARAL Pro-Choice America elects pro-choice candidates and supports pro-choice policies.
We know that the best way to change this situation is to elect more members who share our values and won't try to moonlight as members of the D.C. City Council.
Delegate Norton, Mayor Gray, our nationwide network of activists and our pro-choice allies here today stand with you and are ready to continue to fight for the women of D.C.
NARAL Pro-Choice America fights for reproductive freedom for every body. Each day, we organize and mobilize to protect that freedom by fighting for access to abortion care, birth control, aid parental leave, and protections from pregnancy discrimination.
(202) 973-3000LATEST NEWS
'We Have a Choice Here to Act': IPCC Climate Report to Sound Most Dire Warning Yet
"The central message from climate scientists is unmistakable: governments must rally to drastically cut emissions and cease the extraction and burning of fossil fuels this decade."
Mar 20, 2023
A United Nations panel composed of the world's top scientists is set to release its latest climate assessment on Monday as governments fail to heed repeated, increasingly urgent warnings that the window for action to prevent catastrophic global heating is nearly shut.
The landmark report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) will come after a year in which planet-warming CO2 emissions shattered records once again as the impacts of such pollution—from "apocalyptic" flooding in Pakistan to deadly drought in East Africa—continued to mount.
After repeated delays, government delegations signed off on the IPCC's Sixth Assessment Report on Sunday, clearing the way for the formal release of a sprawling synthesis of years of climate research.
The Associated Pressreported that the final decision came after "officials from big nations such as China, Brazil, Saudi Arabia, the United States, and the European Union haggled through the weekend over the wording of key phrases in the text."
Lesley Hughes, a former IPCC author and a director of the Australia-based Climate Council, said ahead of the report's release that "while this is a summary report of work we'd already seen in development, there is no doubt the findings of this report will be dire."
"Since the previous IPCC report was released, we've had even more unnatural disasters," Hughes added. "We must focus on the fact that predictions are now becoming observations. We've also had a period since the previous IPCC report came out where global emissions are rising once again, so the gap between where we are and where we need to go is increasing rather than decreasing."
"If we haven't seriously turned things around by the time the next such assessment report is due, then we'll be in very deep trouble."
The IPCC's 2021 report was deemed a "code red for humanity," a glaring signal that accelerated global action to phase out fossil fuel extraction and use was needed to avert disaster.
But in the years since, governments—specifically the rich nations most responsible for the climate crisis—have refused to act with the speed and ambition that scientists say is necessary.
At the end of 2022, the U.N. climate conference—an event teeming with fossil fuel lobbyists—ended with no concrete action to rein in oil and gas production.
As a result, hugely profitable global fossil fuel giants are planning to expand their operations in the coming years, potentially locking in additional emissions and further imperiling efforts to meet critical warming targets.
Governments, including those that claim to view the climate crisis as an existential threat, are actively aiding the continued extraction of fossil fuels. Just last week, the Biden administration approved the largest proposed oil drilling project on U.S. public land despite widespread opposition.
"This is the kind of thing that we simply can't afford to do anymore," Kristina Dahl of the Union of Concerned Scientists wrote late last week. "The fossil fuel industry has, for decades, opposed and obstructed any meaningful action on climate change. And despite ardent claims otherwise, the industry has refused to commit to align its business model with what the IPCC says is required to minimize climate harms. The industry remains a barrier to the future the world's children deserve."
Simon Bradshaw, the Climate Council's director of research, said Monday that the IPCC's new report will represent "a final warning."
"The central message from climate scientists is unmistakable: governments must rally to drastically cut emissions and cease the extraction and burning of fossil fuels this decade," said Bradshaw. "That message has been delivered repeatedly, and consistently, for many decades."
"We are seeing progress when it comes to renewable energy uptake, and cleaner transport, but things just aren't moving fast enough. If we haven't seriously turned things around by the time the next such assessment report is due, then we'll be in very deep trouble," Bradshaw added. "We have a choice here to act swiftly this decade. If we start giving it our all right now, we can avert the worst of it. So many solutions are readily available, like solar and wind power, storage, electric appliances, and clean transport options. We need to get our skates on."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Warren Demands Probe Into Bank Failures, Urges Biden to Fire Powell
Jerome Powell "has failed," said Sen. Elizabeth Warren. "I don't think he should be Chairman of the Federal Reserve."
Mar 19, 2023
Sen. Elizabeth Warren this weekend called on federal officials to investigate the causes of recent bank failures and urged President Joe Biden to fire Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell, whom she has criticized for intensifying financial deregulation and imposing job- and wage-destroying interest rate hikes.
Asked on Sunday by Chuck Todd of NBC's "Meet the Press" about the possibility of Powell imposing yet another interest rate hike despite ongoing market turmoil, Warren (D-Mass.) said, "I've been in the camp for a long time that these extraordinary rate increases that he has taken on, these extreme rate increases, are something that he should not be doing."
Powell "has a dual mandate," said Warren. "Yes, he is responsible for dealing with inflation, but he is also responsible for employment. And what Chair Powell is trying to do, and he has said fairly explicitly, is that they are trying to, in effect, slow down the economy so that, this is by the Fed's own estimate, two million people will lose their jobs. And I believe that is not what the chair of the Federal Reserve should be doing."
Since the Covid-19 pandemic and Russia's invasion of Ukraine disrupted international supply chains—rendered fragile by decades of neoliberal globalization—powerful corporations in highly consolidated industries have taken advantage of these and other crises such as the bird flu outbreak to justify profit-boosting price hikes that far outpace the increased costs of doing business.
"Raising interest rates doesn't do anything to solve" a cost-of-living crisis driven primarily by "price gouging, supply chain kinks, [and] the war in Ukraine," Warren said Sunday. "All it does is put millions of people out of work."
"Jay Powell... has had two jobs. One is to deal with monetary policy, one is to deal with regulation. He has failed at both."
Powell, an ex-investment banker, was first appointed by then-President Donald Trump in 2018 and reappointed by Biden in 2021. Warren noted that she opposed Powell's nomination in both cases "because of his views on regulation and what he was already doing to weaken regulation."
"But I think he's failing in both jobs, both as the oversight and manager of these big banks, which is his job, and also what he's doing with inflation," said Warren.
Asked by Todd if Biden should fire Powell, Warren said: "My views on Jay Powell are well-known at this point. He has had two jobs. One is to deal with monetary policy, one is to deal with regulation. He has failed at both."
"Would you advise President Biden to replace him?" Todd inquired.
"I don't think he should be Chairman of the Federal Reserve," the Massachusetts Democrat responded. "I have said it as publicly as I know how to say it. I've said it to everyone."
Meanwhile, in a Saturday letter, Warren asked Richard Delmar, Tyler Smith, and Mark Bialek—respectively the deputy inspector general of the Treasury Department, acting inspector general of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC), and inspector general of the Fed's board of governors—to "immediately open a thorough, independent investigation of the causes of the bank management and regulatory and supervisory problems that resulted in this month's failure of Silicon Valley Bank (SVB) and Signature Bank (Signature) and deliver preliminary results within 30 days."
Until the Treasury Department, the Fed, and the FDIC "intervened to guarantee billions of dollars of deposits," the second- and third-biggest bank failures in U.S. history "threatened economic contagion and severe damage to the banking and financial systems," Warren noted. "The bank's executives, who took unnecessary risks or failed to hedge against entirely foreseeable threats, must be held accountable for these failures."
"But this mismanagement was allowed to occur because of a series of failures by lawmakers and regulators," Warren continued.
In 2018, several Democrats joined Republicans in approving Sen. Mike Crapo's (R-Idaho) Economic Growth, Regulatory Relief, and Consumer Protection Act, which weakened the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act passed in the wake of the 2008 financial crisis. Crapo's deregulatory measure, signed into law by Trump, loosened federal oversight of banks with between $50 billion and $250 billion in assets—a category that includes SVB and Signature.
"As officials sought to develop a plan responding to SVB's failure, Chair Powell muzzled regulators from any public mention of the regulatory failures that occurred under his watch."
Moreover, the Fed under Powell's leadership "initiated key regulatory rollbacks," Warren wrote Saturday, echoing criticisms that she and financial industry watchdogs voiced earlier in the week. "And the banks' supervisors—particularly the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco, which oversaw SVB—missed or ignored key signals about their impending failure."
It is "critical that your investigation be completely independent and free of influence from the bank executives or regulators that were responsible for action that led to these bank failures," Warren stressed. "I am particularly concerned that you avoid any interference from Fed Chair Jerome Powell, who bears direct responsibility for—and has a long record of failure involving—regulatory and supervisory matters involving these two banks."
"I have already asked Chair Powell to recuse himself from the Fed's internal investigation of this matter, but he has not yet responded to this request," wrote Warren. The progressive lawmaker said "this silence is troubling" in light of recent reporting that "as officials sought to develop a plan responding to SVB's failure, Chair Powell muzzled regulators from any public mention of the regulatory failures that occurred under his watch."
"Bank regulators and Congress must move quickly to close the gaps that allowed these bank failures to happen, and your investigation will provide us important insight as we take steps to do so," added Warren, who has introduced legislation to repeal a vital provision of the Trump-era bank deregulation law enacted five years ago with bipartisan support.
In appearances on three Sunday morning talk shows, Warren doubled down on her demands for an independent investigation into recent bank failures, stronger financial regulations, and punishing those responsible.
After lawmakers from both parties helped Trump fulfill his campaign promise to weaken federal oversight of the banking system, Powell "took a flamethrower to the regulations, saying, 'I'm doing this because Congress let me do it,'" Warren toldABC's "This Week" co-anchor Jonathan Karl. "And what happened was exactly what we should have predicted, and that is the banks, these big, multi-billion-dollar banks, loaded up on risk; they boosted their short-term profits; they gave themselves huge bonuses and big salaries; and they exploded their banks."
"When you explode a bank, you ought to be banned from banking forever."
"When you explode a bank, you ought to be banned from banking forever," said Warren, who acknowledged that criminal charges could be coming. "The Department of Justice has opened an investigation. I think that's appropriate for them to do. We'll see where the facts take them. But we've got to take a close look at this."
Not only did former SVB chief executive officer Greg Becker, who lobbied aggressively for the 2018 bank deregulation law, sell millions of dollars of shares as recently as late last month, but until federal regulators took control of the failed bank on March 10, he was on the board of directors at the San Francisco Fed—the institution responsible for overseeing SVB.
On Saturday, Independent Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont announced that he plans to introduce legislation "to end this conflict of interest by banning big bank CEOs from serving on Fed boards."
"We've got to say overall that we can't keep repeating this approach of weakening the regulation over the banks, then stepping in when these giant banks get into trouble," Warren said Sunday, arguing for stronger federal oversight to prevent the need for bailouts.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Manhattan DA: Trump's Intimidation Efforts Won't Be Tolerated
Alvin Bragg's comments came after Trump urged his supporters to "protest" and "take our nation back" ahead of his expected indictment.
Mar 19, 2023
Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg said Saturday that former President Donald Trump's efforts to undermine his prosecutorial authority won't be tolerated.
In a memo to colleagues, Bragg wrote that "we do not tolerate attempts to intimidate our office or threaten the rule of law in New York."
"Our law enforcement partners will ensure that any specific or credible threats against the office will be fully investigated and that the proper safeguards are in place so all 1,600 of us have a secure work environment," Bragg continued.
"As with all of our investigations, we will continue to apply the law evenly and fairly, and speak publicly only when appropriate," he added.
"We do not tolerate attempts to intimidate our office or threaten the rule of law in New York."
Bragg's email didn't specifically name Trump, referring only to the "public comments surrounding an ongoing investigation by this office."
But it came just hours after the former president and leading 2024 GOP candidate claimed on his social media platform that he "will be arrested" on Tuesday and called on his supporters to "protest" and "take our nation back."
Trump is expected to be indicted by a Manhattan grand jury in a criminal case involving hush money paid to women who alleged sexual encounters with the former president, but its timing remains uncertain.
In a follow-up post on Truth Social, Trump wrote: "It's time!!! We are a nation in steep decline... We just can't allow this anymore. They're killing our nation as we sit back and watch. We must save America! Protest, protest, protest!!!"
Trump's call to action echoed how, six weeks after losing the 2020 presidential election, he fired off a tweet encouraging his supporters to join a "big protest" in Washington, D.C. on January 6, 2021. "Be there, will be wild!" he wrote. Hundreds of far-right extremists came and—after Trump told them to march from a rally near the White House to the Capitol—ransacked the halls of Congress in a bid to prevent lawmakers from certifying President Joe Biden's win. Several people died as a result of the insurrection, which was precipitated by Trump and his Republican allies' ceaseless lies about voter fraud.
Mother Jones' D.C. bureau chief David Corn noted that Trump has recently "excused or dismissed the violence of January 6."
"He is an authoritarian willing to (again) use violence for his own ends," Corn tweeted. "That is a threat to the nation."
Trump started priming his supporters for unrest more than a year ago. At a January 2022 rally in Texas, the ex-president promised to pardon January 6 rioters if he wins in 2024 and called for protests if prosecutors investigating his effort to subvert the 2020 election and other alleged crimes attempt to bring charges.
"If these radical, vicious, racist prosecutors do anything wrong or illegal, I hope we are going to have in this country the biggest protest we have ever had... in Washington, D.C., in New York, in Atlanta, and elsewhere because our country and our elections are corrupt," Trump told a crowd of his supporters 14 months ago.
On Saturday, HuffPost's senior White House correspondent S.V. Dáte asked if high-ranking Republicans had anything to say about Trump's most recent threats.
"If a new round of political violence occurs, McCarthy should absolutely shoulder some of the blame."
House Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) and other right-wing lawmakers quickly made it clear that they're siding with Trump over the rule of law.
Trump is expected to be charged in connection with payments his former lawyer, Michael Cohen, made to buy the silence of adult film actress Stormy Daniels and Playboy model Karen McDougal—both of whom say they had affairs with Trump—at the height of the 2016 presidential election.
Cohen has testified that at Trump's direction, he organized payments totaling $280,000 to Daniels and McDougal. According to Cohen, the Trump Organization reimbursed him $420,000 and categorized it as a legal fee. Trump's former fixer pleaded guilty to federal campaign violations in 2018.
Trump has so far evaded charges but that could soon change, as Manhattan prosecutors are expected to accuse Trump of overseeing the false recording of expenses in his company's internal records.
McCarthy on Saturday described Bragg's probe as "an outrageous abuse of power by a radical D.A. who lets violent criminals walk as he pursues political vengeance against President Trump."
"I'm directing relevant committees to immediately investigate if federal funds are being used to subvert our democracy by interfering in elections with politically motivated prosecutions," he tweeted.
According toMSNBC's Hayes Brown:
By the time he fired off his own tweet, McCarthy had presumably seen Trump calling his supporters into the streets, echoing the incitement of violence against Congress two years ago. The speaker lived through that experience and witnessed firsthand the effect of Trump's words. And yet he opted to pretend otherwise in the weeks and months after the January 6 attack as he flew to Mar-a-Lago in supplication. In handing over unvetted security footage from the attack to a far-right propagandist last month, McCarthy is once again complicit in trying to whitewash the assault. If a new round of political violence occurs, McCarthy should absolutely shoulder some of the blame.
McCarthy was far from alone. Rep. Andy Biggs (R-Ariz.), for example, baselessly declared: "If they can come for Trump, they will come for you. This type of stuff only occurs in third world authoritarian countries."
The GOP's current framing of ongoing investigations into Trump as political "witch hunts" is not new. McCarthy and others reacted in a similar manner when the FBI in early August searched Trump's Mar-a-Lago resort and removed boxes of documents as part of a federal probe into the ex-president's handling of classified materials.
In New York, meanwhile, law enforcement and security agencies at all levels are reportedly preparing for the possibility of a Trump indictment as early as this week.
If indicted, Trump would become the first U.S. president to face criminal charges in or out of office. Trump, who has denied all wrongdoing, has vowed to keep campaigning regardless of whether he's arrested.
The New York Times reported that if "Trump is arraigned, he will almost certainly be released without spending any time behind bars because the indictment is likely to contain only nonviolent felony charges."
However, the Manhattan D.A.'s hush money probe is just one of many pending cases against Trump. The twice-impeached former president is also facing a state-level criminal investigation in Georgia over his efforts to overturn that state's 2020 election results, as well as federal probes into his coup attempt and his handling of classified government documents.
As The Associated Pressobserved, it's not clear when the other investigations into Trump "will end or whether they might result in criminal charges."
"But they will continue regardless of what happens in New York," the outlet noted, "underscoring the ongoing gravity—and broad geographic scope—of the legal challenges confronting the former president."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular
SUPPORT OUR WORK.
We are independent, non-profit, advertising-free and 100%
reader supported.
reader supported.