Planned Parenthood Advocates of Arizona

Is Your Cell-Phone Pro-Choice?

2010-03-09T11:15:00.005-07:00

If you joined the CREDO campaign to send a coat hanger to the Democrats in Congress who voted in favor of the Stupak amendment, you may have received a flyer in the mail recently about CREDO’s cell phone service. I’ve been a CREDO long distance customer since 2000. I like knowing that a portion of my long distance bill goes towards progressive causes, and that CREDO won’t turn over my phone records to the federal government. They’re the only service provider to take a stand against the Patriot Act. So when I got a flyer from them about how AT&T and Verizon support anti-choice candidates, I was intrigued.

A recent issue of Consumer Reports rated all of the major cell phone providers in the US, and rated Verizon as the number one provider in terms of customer satisfaction. Verizon also rated very high when it came to cost of service. But AT&T is rated the highest when it comes to smart phones and internet accessibility.

CREDO operates on the Sprint cell phone network. Sprint rates very low in terms of customer service, but their ratings are actually pretty decent when it comes to cell phone coverage and internet accessibility. All of my experiences with CREDO’s customer service department have been very positive. When I looked for customer reviews on the internet, the number one complaint that customers had about CREDO is that billing errors are a frequent issue. Like I said, I’ve been with CREDO’s long distance for almost ten years, and I’ve ever had a problem with billing. However, when I was an AT&T customer, I had frequent issues with my cell phone bill. And Sprint’s customer service is the worst ever in my opinion.

When I put out a request for feedback on Twitter and Facebook to see if anyone else has used CREDO’s cell phone service, I only had three responses from people who have used their service. All three had positive feedback, though. So I’m seriously thinking about taking the plunge. CREDO’s pricing for a family plan with internet access is comparable to Verizon’s. They don’t have a wide selection of phones, but I really just want to know that I will be able to make a phone call and hop onto the web during work hours. Having the sleekest smart phone with lots of apps really isn’t important to me.

CREDO’s politics are truly the strongest point that they have in their favor. The list of pro-choice causes that they support is pretty extensive. And I like knowing that the money I fork over to the phone company each month isn’t lining anti-choice coffers.

Cross-posted at Feminists For Choice.

Why is Planned Parenthood Arizona Involved in Politics?

2010-02-05T11:00:00.008-07:00

The Legislative session recently began, and Planned Parenthood Advocates of Arizona expects challenges similar to those we saw last session. If we are a reproductive health care and education provider, why do we get so involved in politics? Wouldn't we be better off saving our resources?

PPAZ's president Bryan Howard recently explained why Planned Parenthood Advocates of Arizona is so involved in the legislative process:

While most supporters tell me they understand the necessity of Planned Parenthood’s public policy involvement, others wish we’d avoid this arena, preferring instead that PPAZ limit its focus to the health care and education that have been the centerpiece of our work for 75 years here in Arizona.

Our politics specifically focus on the ability to provide health care and education. Whether or not you are a political enthusiast, I think remembering another date almost 94 years ago reminds us all that Planned Parenthood has been thrust into politics since our very founding.

On October 26, 1916 – ten days after Planned Parenthood opened its first storefront clinic in Brooklyn, New York – plain clothes policeman arrived to arrest staff and close the clinic.

You can draw a straight line from that day almost 94 years ago to just last year when Governor Jan Brewer banned Planned Parenthood from dispensing information about contraception, sexually transmitted infection prevention and early breast and cervical cancer detection at two State of Arizona-sponsored health fairs in Phoenix.

Planned Parenthood has the historical experience to defend women's health care. That's why Planned Parenthood Advocates of Arizona is, and will continue to be, involved in the legislative process.

Cecil Richards Speaks Out Against Stupak-Pitts

2009-11-09T19:13:00.008-07:00

Planned Parenthood condemns the adoption of the Stupak/Pitts amendment in HR 3962 this evening. This amendment is an unacceptable addition to the health care reform bill that, if enacted, would result in women losing health benefits they have today. Simply put, the Stupak/Pitts amendment would restrict women’s access to abortion coverage in the private health insurance market, undermining the ability of women to purchase private health plans that cover abortion, even if they pay for most of the premiums with their own money. This amendment reaches much further than the Hyde Amendment, which has prohibited public funding of abortion in most instances since 1977.

Planned Parenthood serves three million women every year through its more than 850 affiliate health centers across the country and has worked tirelessly on behalf of those patients for affordable, quality health care. On behalf of the millions of women Planned Parenthood health centers serve, the Planned Parenthood Federation of America has no choice but to oppose HR 3962. The bill includes the Stupak/Pitts amendment that would leave women worse off after health care reform than they are today, violating President Obama’s promise to the American people that no one would be forced to lose her or his present coverage under health reform.

The Stupak/Pitts amendment violates the spirit of health care reform, which is meant to guarantee quality, affordable health care coverage for all. In fact, this amendment would create a two-tiered system that would punish women, particularly those with low and middle incomes, the very people this bill is intended to assist. The majority of private health insurance plans currently offer abortion coverage, and the Stupak/Pitts amendment would result in the elimination of private abortion coverage in the ‘exchange,’ the new insurance market created under health care reform, as well as in the public option, if one is created.

The Stupak/Pitts amendment would purportedly allow women who want comprehensive reproductive health care coverage to purchase a separate, single-service rider to cover abortion. But such abortion riders do not exist because women do not plan to have unintended pregnancies or medically complicated pregnancies that require ending the pregnancy. These so-called ‘abortion riders,’ which would be the only insurance policy through which abortion care could be covered in the ‘exchange,’ are discriminatory and illogical. Proposing a separate ‘abortion rider’ or ‘single-service plan’ is tantamount to banning abortion coverage since no insurance company would offer such a policy.

It is extremely unfortunate that the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops and anti-choice opponents were able to hijack the health care reform bill in their dedicated attempt to ban all legal abortion In the United States. Most telling is the fact that the vast majority of members of the House who supported the Stupak/Pitts amendment in today’s vote do not support HR 3962, revealing their true motive, which is to kill the health care reform bill. These single-issue advocates simply used health care reform to advance their extreme, ideological agenda at the expense of tens of millions of women.

Planned Parenthood applauds the members of Congress who stood up for women’s health and voted to oppose the Stupak/Pitts amendment. We will work with those members to rectify this travesty.

As a health care provider, Planned Parenthood is committed to passing health care reform that will guarantee affordable, quality health care coverage for all, including access to comprehensive reproductive health care. In the coming weeks, Planned Parenthood will work with its allies in the Senate to ensure that the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops and those who oppose abortion do not once again hijack the legislative process in their ongoing campaign to make abortion illegal. Planned Parenthood will join forces with women and their families and health providers to ensure that health care reform does not take away benefits that most women with private health coverage have today. Together, women and their allies are going to make their voices heard, so that they do not become second-class citizens in a newly reformed health care system in the United States.”

Was Roe a Mistake?

2009-09-04T15:39:00.003-07:00

An article in Wall Street Journal claims that if the Supreme Court decides to hear an appeal of California's Proposition 8 (which outlawed same sex marriage), the justices would be "repeating the mistakes of Roe."

It would be disastrous for the justices to do so. They would repeat the error in Roe v. Wade: namely, trying to remove a morally charged policy issue from the forums of democratic deliberation and resolve it according to their personal lights. Even many supporters of legal abortion now consider Roe a mistake. Lacking any basis in the text, logic or original understanding of the Constitution, the decision became a symbol of the judicial usurpation of authority vested in the people and their representatives. It sent the message that judges need not be impartial umpires—as both John Roberts and Sonia Sotomayor say they should be—but that judges can impose their policy preferences under the pretext of enforcing constitutional guarantees.

By short-circuiting the democratic process, Roe inflamed the culture war that has divided our nation and polarized our politics. Abortion, which the Court purported to settle in 1973, remains the most unsettled issue in American politics—and the most unsettling. Another Roe would deepen the culture war and prolong it indefinitely.

First of all, Roe was not a mistake. Although the justices at the time could have done more to shore up women's equality by deciding the case under the 14th Amendment's equal protection clause, rather than on the grounds of privacy, the wording of the original decision is still sound. If any SCOTUS decision can be faulted it's Planned Parenthood v. Casey, which set up the "undue burden" standard. Since 1992, we have seen a vicious attack on women's rights, as anti-choicers keep sponsoring legislation that pushes the limits of the "undue burden" standard further and further. Abortion may still be technically legal in the United States, but the legislative restrictions that have been placed on access to abortion make it inaccessible for most women - 87% of US counties have no abortion provider. In her Feminists For Choice interview last week, Gloria Feldt argued that pro-choice advocates need to be articulating their demands from a human rights platform, rather than on the grounds of privacy. I think that this paradigm shift would overcome any of the shortcomings of Roe because it would allow us to have recourse beyond SCOTUS.

Secondly, I seriously doubt that the attorneys in the Prop 8 appeal are going to be arguing that same sex marriage is a matter of privacy. Granted, the Lawrence v. Texas case, which overturned sodomy statues, relied on Griswold v. Connecticut for legal precedent. Griswold was the 1965 case that set the groundwork for Roe. The justices found that a married couple had a right to receive contraceptives because it was covered under the right to privacy. Although Griswold is an important legal precedent, my bet is that the Prop 8 case will ultimately be decided on the justices' interpretation of the 14th Amendment's equal protection clause. The Supreme Court will have to decide if gays and lesbians are entitled to equal protection under the law. This is not a "moral issue," as those who oppose same sex marriage claim. If the government grants legal protections to heterosexuals to marry, then it must provide the same protections and benefits to gay and lesbian couples under the 14th Amendment. If the Supreme Court rules otherwise, then we will truly see what the Court believes about the LGBTQ community and our rights.

I do think that an appeal of Prop 8 to the SCOTUS is a mistake, but not for the same reasons that George gives in the Wall Street Journal. I think that the state by state strategy is actually working. I mean, hell - even voters in Iowa approved marriage equality this year. I don't think that the current make up of SCOTUS is going to pan out in favor of the LGBTQ community on the question of marriage equality. It's far too conservative, and if they decide that Prop 8 is not unconstitutional on 14th Amendment grounds, you can kiss everything else, like employment protections and hate crimes statutes, goodbye. It's too risky. We could actually get an inclusive ENDA passed this year. But if a Prop 8 decision comes down in favor of the fundies, ENDA will be a wash.

That's just my opinion, though. What do you think? Was Roe a mistake? And is it a mistake to appeal Prop 8 to the Supreme Court?

Cross-posted at Feminists For Choice.

Cheers to AZ Lawmakers Who Stand Up for Women...and Jeers to Those Who Let Us Down!

2009-08-22T11:35:00.004-07:00

Hundreds of bills moved through the Arizona Legislature this past spring and into the summer; some of which, as you know, will drastically impact women’s access to reproductive care.

Planned Parenthood Arizona fought diligently for the reproductive rights of all Arizona women and families. There was common sense legislation offered that addressed fundamental health care needs, only to have it mischaracterized and rejected by anti-choice legislators. Positive proposals such as offering comprehensive, responsible sex education in Arizona schools were never even considered.

We encourage you to take a few minutes to review your legislators' voting record and to contact them with a message of CHEERS or JEERS to let them know how you feel about their votes on issues related to choice this legislative session.

Our easy-to-use Legislative Scorecard gives a description of each bill we tracked this session as well as a list of how every State Representative and State Senator voted on each of those bills. If you are unsure about who your Legislators are, click here.

PPAZ President Resigns from Governor's Commission on Women's & Children's Health

2009-08-09T22:55:00.005-07:00

Recently, Planned Parenthood Arizona’s president and CEO, Bryan Howard and Candace Lew, OB/GYN and PPAZ board chair, resigned their respective memberships on the Governor’s Commission on Women’s and Children’s Health. This resignation was a result of numerous decisions Gov. Jan Brewer and her administration made that endanger women’s health and undermine the work of the Commission.

“Planned Parenthood Arizona believes strongly in the importance of the Commission’s mission and work. Indeed, the Commission was created by Governor Jane Hull following our recommendation,” said Howard.

The letter sent to Gov. Brewer cited that for the governor, political priorities outweigh women’s health priorities. The governor’s actions are deliberately contrary to the recommendations made by public health leaders who have donated their time and best thinking to the women and families of Arizona through their participation in the Commission’s deliberations on critical issues including teen pregnancy and inadequate access to basic prevention-oriented health care. Click here to read the full letter.

Harmful decisions made by Gov. Brewer and her administration, include:

The decision to ban information about family planning and sexually transmitted infection prevention at two state-sponsored Women’s Health Expos in Phoenix.
The decision to resume ineffective abstinence-only education programming that prohibits distribution of life-saving information about how to reduce exposure to HIV and other sexually transmitted infections and unplanned pregnancy.
The decision to sign House Bill 2564, a measure which will radically restrict access to abortion care in Arizona, significantly increasing health care costs for Arizona women and families and exposing the private health care decisions of Arizona families to the general public.
The decision to sign Senate Bill 1175, which will reduce the scope of practice of duly licensed Arizona health professionals, exacerbating the state’s already dire shortage.
The decision to rescind the agreement between the Arizona Department of Public Health and Planned Parenthood to promote testing and treatment for sexually transmitted infections.

In addition to the above decisions, Gov. Brewer and her administration have repeatedly ignored and rejected Planned Parenthood Arizona’s requests to meet and describe the full scope of services the organization provides; services that are enabling women, men and young people to reduce their risk of disease, detect cancer earlier, and prevent unplanned pregnancy. Six out of seven women who come to Planned Parenthood Arizona do so for preventive health care services.

The policies Gov. Brewer and the administration have adopted are driven by political considerations, given that they squarely contradict the recommendations from public health leaders including the Arizona Board of Nursing, the Arizona College of Emergency Physicians, the Arizona Nurses Association and the Arizona Public Health Association. In so doing, the administration is wasting taxpayer dollars and putting Arizonans in harm’s way.

Stay tuned over the next few weeks for our special series of E-announcements regarding the movement of HB2564 into law. Through this series, entitled “90 Day Countdown to Harmful Health Care Hurdles” we will keep you informed on the harmful impact this bill will have on your community and how you can help, what we are doing to continue our mission-driven work and how you can continue to support Planned Parenthood Arizona.

If you haven't already, be sure you sign up for Planned Parenthood Arizona Advocacy Network.

Abortion Myths vs. Reality in Healthcare Reform Debate

2009-07-30T01:54:00.004-07:00

There has been a great deal of misinformation being spread about abortion care in health reform efforts. First, the majority of private insurance plans today cover abortion care. Second, a recent Mellman poll revealed that most Americans will NOT support health care reform if it doesn’t include comprehensive reproductive health care, including abortion. And, third, Americans do not want to see benefits taken away under health care reform. In other words, women don’t want to be worse off under health reform than they are today.

Here are some common myths that have been promoted throughout the health care reform debate.

1. MYTH: Health care reform would result in the greatest expansion of abortion since Roe v. Wade.
REALITY: Currently, the majority of plans already cover basic reproductive health care, including abortion care. In fact, more than 86 percent of employer-based insurance plans cover abortion care. That's why anti-choice groups are working so hard to strip reproductive health from health care reform — in order to strip women of coverage they currently have.

2. MYTH: Taxpayer money would be used to pay for abortions in the public plan.
REALITY: Opponents of reproductive health care are trying to confuse people into thinking that the public plan is a government-funded health plan like Medicaid or Medicare — it is not. The public health insurance plan would operate like any private insurance plan would. It would be funded and paid for by private individual premiums, in the same way a private insurance plan is. Therefore, there is no reason to treat any coverage issue, including abortion coverage, differently in the public health insurance plan than in private plans.

3. MYTH: Health care reform will "mandate" abortion coverage.
REALITY: Nothing in any of the current health care reform bills mandates abortion coverage — or any other type of health care service. Opponents of women's health and health care reform are trying to hijack health care reform to push for unprecedented prohibitions on abortion coverage in the private marketplace.

Bottom Line
Singling out abortion for exclusion from plans in a health insurance exchange is both discriminatory and harmful to women’s health. With the majority of private insurance plans covering abortion today, any attempt to restrict this coverage in the health insurance exchange would constitute an unprecedented restriction on women—taking benefits away that they currently have today.

HB2564 Media Attention

2009-07-28T00:47:00.001-07:00

The following articles appeared in Arizona media outlets after Gov. Brewer signed HB2564, the Omnibus Anti-Abortion Bill. Feel free to post any others as a comment to this post.

Arizona Daily Star Op. Ed. against HB2564

Article in Arizona Central

News story on KVOA

News story on KOLD

Article in East Valley Tribune

Kathleen Sebelius Nomination Confirmed

2009-04-29T19:15:00.001-07:00

Exciting Political News! The U.S. Senate just confirmed Kansas Gov. Kathleen Sebelius' nomination to lead the Department of Health and Human Services.

This is a huge victory, with the Senate voting 65-31 for Sebelius to take the helm. She will now be sworn into office by the Obama White House. The Department of Health and Human Services provides critical services to millions of Americans, and finally has a thoughtful, progressive leader at the helm. Cecile Richards, president of Planned Parenthood Federation of America, was quick to release a statement after the vote applauding her nomination.

She is an excellent choice to lead HHS and has a proven track record of increasing access to affordable care, as countless women and their families struggle to afford quality health care during these difficult economic times, the need for health care reform that improves health outcomes is immediate.

Progressive Lobby Day

2009-02-24T16:21:00.002-07:00

Join us in Phoenix to learn about important issues affecting reproductive rights and other vital issues affecting our state.

Your voice and your presence are powerful, and your participation is necessary to move pro-equality, pro-sexual health legislation forward.

Left: Volunteers Sarah, Melinda, Tiffany and Grassroots Leader Emily at the Capital.

Representatives have lunch with the Planned Parenthood volunteers

Volunteers meet with Arizona House member, Olivia Cajero Bedford