Citadel Broadcasting is paving the way for the return of misogynist poster boy Don Imus to the public airwaves. If the deal goes through, Imus’ debut will be Dec. 1, and already there’s talk that the show may go into syndication. Imus was fired by CBS and NBC last spring for his derogatory and misogynist comments about the Rutgers women’s basketball team.

The National Organization for Women was the first women’s organization to speak out against Don Imus’ insulting and degrading language directed at those accomplished young women, generating over 30,000 message through our website. In April, NOW and other civil rights organizations went to New York City and told CBS and MSNBC that it was time for Imus to go.

“CBS and MSNBC did the right thing and fired Don Imus. Not one but two major media corporations understood the cost of hate speech and the value of public confidence,” said NOW President Kim Gandy. “Now, after a six-month vacation and a seven-figure settlement, Imus is looking for a comeback with another big corporation. It’s like a bad dream. Didn’t they learn anything? No one has a right to a platform on the radio — if they did, we’d have more talk shows than we have airtime.”

So what does it say to the public when a big corporation provides a stage for someone with a history of using the public airwaves for hateful and racist speech? It says they’ve made a choice about the kind of audience they want, and women and people of color aren’t included.

NOW has alerted supporters so they can write to Citadel Broadcasting urging them to reconsider, and to take a stand against hate speech.

The health and well-being of our children should be a national priority. Unfortunately, today President Bush once again showed our country and the world how little he values families and children with his veto of the Children’s Health Insurance Program Reauthorization Act (H.R. 976). This bill, which would have reauthorized and improved the ten-year-old State Children’s Health Insurance Program (SCHIP) and provided more than 10 million low-income children with desperately needed health care, was vetoed by the president. The cruel message to millions of hardworking parents whose jobs don’t provide health insurance or wages that allow them to buy private insurance policies is this: if your children get sick or are injured, we really don’t care.

“Millions of families, especially single mothers with children, have once again been cast aside by George Bush,” says NOW President Kim Gandy. “This was his opportunity to welcome bipartisan legislation ensuring that 6.6 million low-income kids have ongoing health care, and allowing nearly 4 million more low-income children to become enrolled in the state-run programs. For single parents, pregnant women and low-income families just barely getting by, this program has literally been a life saver. No child should go without health care simply because her or his parents are employed in jobs without benefits and there isn’t enough money to pay both the rent and the doctor. George Bush’s priorities are out of line with the rest of the country; sadly, this is no surprise to those of us who work daily to improve the lives of women and their families.”

It is ironic that taxpayers have been assessed almost a trillion dollars on the Iraq invasion and occupation, but have no say about using a piddling amount by comparison to provide a modest $35-$50 billion to expand SCHIP to cover millions more kids. The truth is, for what we spend in a single week on the war, 800,000 children could get health care for a year. A bipartisan majority of both houses of Congress voted for our children’s health care, but the veto pen makes final passage an uphill battle, especially in the House of Representatives where the final tally was two dozen votes shy of the 290 needed for a veto override.

While the National Organization for Women applauds the tenacious bipartisan efforts in Congress, which voted to expand healthcare for millions of children, at the same time we are disappointed that the bill failed to support the inclusion of legal immigrant children and pregnant immigrant women. The National Coalition for Immigrant Women’s Rights (NCIWR), of which NOW is a member, sought but failed to get support for a final bill that removed the punitive and mandatory five-year waiting period for new legal immigrant children. Although the House bill included provisions from the Immigrant Children’s Health Improvement Act (ICHIA), giving states the option to provide immediate health coverage to lawfully residing low-income immigrant children and pregnant women through Medicaid and SCHIP, the Senate insisted that this provision be removed in the final bill.

“It is shameful that our president, who enjoys government-subsidized health care, vetoed the SCHIP renewal, but also that Congress dropped coverage for legal immigrant children in hopes of avoiding the veto pen,” says Gandy. “These are hard-working, low-income families, who are legally in this country but cannot afford to buy health care for their children. But they are being ignored and told to wait five years. Without adequate, essential health care, these children and pregnant women face an uncertain future,” said Gandy.

NOW will ask Congress to override the president’s veto, but we will also continue to fight for real health protection legislation that promotes basic health care for ALL low-income families, including documented and undocumented children, single parents and pregnant women. SCHIP is not perfect, but we believe it is a start.

With a more women-friendly president and Congress after 2008, NOW anticipates - and will promote - major improvements in public financing of health care in our country.

In This Issue:

~Why I Take the Issue of Abstinence-only  Education Personally by Carolyn Mark, President

~Language Concerns over Stillborn Legislation

~Calendar of Events

~Legislative Update

~Supreme Court Decision Impacts States

~Volunteer Opportunities

Download it here!

Statement of NOW President Kim Gandy

Eighty-seven years ago, on August 26, 1920, women finally won the right to vote in the United States. Each year we commemorate this pivotal date for women, hailing it as Women’s Equality Day.

Thanks to the leadership of great women who have organized, demanded change, and fought for their rights, today’s women have more opportunities than ever in education and employment, more economic freedom and reproductive options, and a better future for themselves and their families. But many of those gains are threatened.

So in celebrating Women’s Equality Day 2007, we should pause and ask, “Is this what equality looks like?”

On average, women still only make $.77 for every dollar a man makes; for women of color the percentage is even less. The boardrooms of Fortune 500 companies are still overwhelmingly male. Working women have no guaranteed medical leave for childbirth, and are often discriminated against in promotions and salary.

A woman’s right to safe, accessible, legal abortion is threatened as never before — as is the availability of birth control and family planning services. One in six U.S. women is a victim of sexual assault, and for many women violence is a part of their daily lives.

Although the proportion of women in elected office is growing, we’re still a far cry from parity in policymaking roles. Women make up just 16 percent of our representatives in Congress, 18 percent of governors, and only 23.5% of state legislators across the country.

The suffragists endured ridicule, ostracism, abuse and imprisonment, and their steely determination sets an example for all of us who continue to work toward equality for ourselves and our daughters. Until women earn the same wages as men; until we are in charge of our own reproductive lives; until racism and sexism and violence are eradicated; until we have overcome discrimination and bigotry; until women are included in the U.S. Constitution … we will keep working for equality and justice.

The National Organization for Women (NOW) is urging its Maryland members to speak out against a rush to judgment in the Ocean City stillbirth case.

Christy Freeman is being charged under a 2005 state “fetal homicide” law that makes it illegal to kill “a viable fetus,” despite a provision in the law that was intended to protect pregnant women from prosecution for actions that result in their own fetus’ death, such as abortion.
NOW strongly opposes these kinds of fetal homicide laws because they have the potential to undermine a woman’s right to make reproductive decisions, even when the law specifically states that the pregnant woman’s actions are not covered. This case is a perfect example: the Maryland law states that it does not apply to a pregnant woman’s actions that harm her fetus, yet she is being prosecuted under the law anyway. In many states, such laws are being used to prosecute women who consume alcohol or take drugs during pregnancy.

“Fetal harm laws are all too often used not as a safeguard but as a club, to punish women who already have two strikes against them,” says NOW President Kim Gandy. “A punitive approach to substance abuse by pregnant women is unwarranted; a medical and therapeutic answer is more appropriate and should be the proper focus of such laws.”

Extremists opposed to abortion and birth control use fetal harm laws to advance their own goals, by playing upon the natural sympathy for violently injured pregnant women. But instead of advancing laws that actually protect women, they push to have a fetus recognized in law as an autonomous person. That legal definition ultimately enables the government to prosecute women who undertake any activity, such as smoking, that could harm their fetus.

In the 30 states where these kinds of bills have been passed, the incidence of violence against pregnant women has not decreased but rather it has increased. In the 30 states where these kinds of bills have been enacted, the prosecution of pregnant women who have taken drugs or consumed alcohol has increased tremendously. Research data show that a woman who is in an abusive relationship and a woman abusing substances are often one and the same person. Why pass laws that do not prevent violence but instead punish vulnerable women?

Maryland NOW’s president Terry O’Neill cautions that right-wing talk radio and Internet chatter shouldn’t be allowed to sensationalize this tragedy. “We know the radical right won’t stop until abortion is legally defined as murder,” O’Neill says. “It is unacceptable that women who need help are invisible until calamity strikes – and then they are considered criminal. Responding to the Christy Freeman tragedy is a job for social services, not the D.A.”

Please join us for an evening of spoken word to raise money to end violence against women at the Biltmore Hotel grand ballroom Thursday, October 4th at 7:00 p.m. This fundraiser is sponsored by The Silent Witnesses of Rhode Island. Rhode Island political leaders, journalists, our own RI NOW president, Carolyn Mark, and other notable folks will be speaking. Stay tuned for more information.

Agenda Download it here (PDF).

For questions about the legislative agenda, or to get involved, contact us.

You can find information about these bills at the RI General Assembly website.

June 20, 2007

After a bipartisan effort that led to the passage of the stem cell research bill in both the House and Senate, George W. Bush vetoed this legislation that would have eased restraints on federally funded embryonic stem cell research, utilizing donated human embryos that would otherwise be destroyed. This is the second time George Bush has used his veto power to override a measure that could have led to treatment of debilitating illnesses and life-threatening diseases such as Parkinson’s and Alzheimer’s diseases, heart disease, spinal cord injury, and diabetes.

“With this veto, George Bush has proved once again that his allegiance is to his extremist base and not to the millions of caregivers and families who need this research,” says NOW President Kim Gandy. “Women are the majority of caregivers in our society, and this veto is an outright slap in the face for women who take on the every day burden of caring for family members who are ill or dying,” said Gandy.

There is enormous public support for stem cell research, and that is why Congress passed the measure. George Bush’s veto demonstrates that he has become even more out of touch with the country. Even the National Institutes of Health acknowledge that human embryos are the most promising of all the stem cells to offer renewable source of replacement cells and tissues to treat diseases like Alzheimer’s and Parkinson’s diseases.

We were on the cusp of extending medical research, and with a stroke of the pen, George Bush took it away,” says Gandy. “This is even more reason to change the face of politics. We need a government and a leader who considers the health and safety of women, girls and families.”

The following is a statement From Marriage Equality RI on the Massachusetts Constitutional Convention:

Today legislators in Massachusetts, under the leadership Governor Deval Patrick, Senate President Therese Murray, and House Speaker Salvatore DiMasi, courageously stood up against fear, bias, and discrimination. We applaud the 155 members of the Massachusetts {legislature} who stood up against bias, defeating the amendment by a greater margin than expected. Marriage Equality Rhode Island was pleased to see the Massachusetts legislators vote against sending the civil rights of same sex couples to a popular vote. Massachusetts, always a beacon of progress and equality, has NEVER written discrimination into its Constitution. With hundreds of Rhode Island couples already married in Massachusetts, and hundreds more planning their weddings, this vote has particular significance for all Rhode Islanders. We commend our colleagues at MassEquality for this hard-won fight, and will continue to work for equal marriage here in Rhode Island. We look forward to following the standard set by our sister state, and urge the Rhode Island legislature to support the right of all Rhode Island couples to marry in their home state.

MERI believes that a civil society guarantees to all of its citizens certain civil rights; civil marriage is one of these fundamental rights. Each and every adult in Rhode Island - regardless of socioeconomic status, race, ethnicity, religion, gender identity, or sexual orientation - deserves the opportunity to attain the legal protections and safeguards gained through civil marriage.

June 07, 2007

In a 247-176 bipartisan vote, the House today passed a bill that would allow federal funding of stem cell research utilizing donated human embryos. If signed into law, this bill would offer people with serious illnesses and life-threatening conditions such as Parkinson’s disease and spinal cord injuries the chance for a better life. The Senate passed a similar bill in April, reflecting the fact that an overwhelming majority of the public supports this research.

According to a recent poll, 62 percent of people in the U.S. approve of medical research using embryonic stem cells, and nearly 60 percent want more taxpayer money to be used for this promising line of research. President Bush’s 2005 veto of similar legislation and his current threat to veto this bi-partisan measure exposes his willingness to pander to his ultra-conservative supporters, regardless of the price the public will pay.

“Women are the majority of family caregivers, and the heartbreak of having a loved one with a debilitating illness and the related burden of their care could both be lifted with this bill,” said NOW President Kim Gandy. “Although George W. Bush seems stubbornly bent on pleasing his right-wing base, we urge him not to choose religious and political extremism over medical progress.”

NOW thanks members of the House and Senate for their bipartisan support. “We must continue to change the face of politics so that our leaders will put our health, our families and our well-being at the top of the nation’s priorities,” said Gandy.