At RH Reality Check, Jodi Jacobson writes, House Committee Votes to Reinstate Global Gag Rule and Other Misogynistic Amendments:
A central motto of today's GOP and Tea Parties appears to be: Never let evidence get in the way of efforts to pass a law undermining women's access to healthcare.
An addendum to this motto appears to be: Never let an opportunity pass to deny funding to or politicize services providing care to the poorest and least-enfranchised women in the world, most particularly those who suffer high rates of maternal death due to lack of access to family planning services and high rates of complications of pregnancy and unsafe abortion.
In keeping with this, just weeks after publication of a major report underscoring the benefits of robust U.S. investment in family planning worldwide, the GOP-controlled House Foreign Affairs Committee voted in the early hours of the morning today to reinstate the Global Gag Rule (GGR) as part of the draft Fiscal Year 2012 State Department Authorizations Act, except this time with broader and more damaging implications than ever before.
Some 215 million women worldwide have an "unmet need" for family planning, meaning that they want to either space or limit births but do not have access or lack consistent access to reliable methods of birth control that fit their personal needs. Women with unmet need make up 82 percent of the estimated 75 million unintended pregnancies that occur each year. The remaining 18 percent are due to inconsistent method use or method failure.
Providing all women with basic family planning services, is first and foremost a matter of basic human rights and bodily integrity. But it is a smart investment for many other reasons. ...
At Daily Kos on this date in 2006:
You are doing an admirable thing for Senator Lieberman, Mr. President, and I applaud you for your decision and your commitment to supporting the candidate of your choice in this primary election. And I also applaud you for announcing that you intend to support the winner of the Democratic primary in Connecticut next month.
Mr. President, you obviously recognize the importance of keeping this seat in Connecticut in Democratic control. I hope that your commitment will bring you back to Connecticut following the primary and you will continue to work to keep this seat by campaigning again for the Democratic candidate, no matter whom it might be. Know that if the Democratic voters of Connecticut choose Joe Lieberman as their nominee, we as Democrats will follow your lead and support him.
However, in the event that the people of Connecticut choose Ned Lamont as their candidate on August 8, I hope you will use your considerable influence with Senator Lieberman, witnessed by your presence in the state next week, to urge the Senator to change his mind about betraying the Democratic party and the Democratic voters of Connecticut. If Senator Lieberman loses this primary, I hope you will help him make the decision to recognize and accept the will of the Connecticut voters and bow out as graciously as his years of service and the dignity of the Senate seat deserves.