Videos on Reproductive Rights

Guttmacher Institute on Who has abortions and why we need to fund abortions and why we need to provide FREE birth control! yeah!

Sen Kirsten Gillibrand on Women Need to WAKE UP and TAKE ACTION, VOTE
start at 9:39 (notice the Silver Ribbons on Sen. Gillibrand and EMILY’s list President)

Watch live streaming video from emilyslist at livestream.com

“I Have Sex” — students speak out against ideological attack on PP …

Red County speaks out

Jackie Speier speaks about her abortion

Walk for Choice theme song

Not Under the Bus

Wear Your Silver Ribbon- Stop HR 3!

The House leadership continues to harm women’s health by restricting women’s access to reproductive health services. Tomorrow they’re going even further by bringing up H.R. 3 to the floor for a vote, a bill that places dangerous restrictions on insurance coverage for abortion.

H.R. 3 is a dangerous and extreme bill that threatens women’s health by aiming to deny access to health insurance that includes coverage for abortion services, whether that insurance is public or private.  The bill catapults from the fact that the federal government provides a tax break on most employer-provided health insurance most women rely on, to assert that the government can dictate that this workplace-based insurance cannot cover abortion. 

 HR 3 allows no health exception: it would leave women whose health is seriously threatened by their pregnancies without access to the care their doctors recommend to protect their health. This would especially endanger the health of underserved women and those with greater health care needs. Women with illnesses like cancer and heart disease sometimes face severe, permanent health damage if they don’t have access to abortion care.

H.R. 3 would invite an unprecedented, radical level of government intrusion into deeply private and personal health care decisions. While there is an exception in cases of rape or incest, incredibly, a rape or incest survivor seeking to include the cost of an abortion in her medical expense deductions or to use tax-advantaged savings to pay for the service could have to provide evidence of the rape or incest in the event of an IRS audit in order to prove herself eligible under longstanding exceptions for those circumstances. Clearly this level of government intrusiveness into an individual’s private and personal life is unacceptable.

The legislation would also codify harmful riders that deny women access to abortion care, including the recently reinstated interference with the District of Columbia’s use of its own local funds and the restriction on federal Medicaid, both of which disproportionately affect women of color and low-income women.

By banning abortion coverage for millions of women in the new health exchanges and imposing tax penalties on small businesses that offer comprehensive insurance plans, H.R. 3 would rob women of insurance coverage for abortion. According to the Congress’ Joint Committee on Taxation, the bill would likely take away health insurance coverage that women have today and would impose new tax penalties on millions of families and small businesses.

Contact Congress or Call 888-907-9762 TODAY and tell your Representative to oppose this harmful bill and protect women’s health. 

Wear your Silver Ribbon and show that you Trust Women to make essential choices about our lives and our health!

Silver Ribbon Q & A

What is the Silver Ribbon/Trust Women Campaign and what you are hoping to accomplish with it?

a. Bring awareness to the public and the policymakers about the 80% of the country that believe we should TRUST WOMEN with personal health decisions and reproductive rights.

b. Wake up the public about the attacks on reproductive rights, in Congress and statehouses

c. Get people to TAKE ACTION – and tell others.

d. To bring reproductive health/justice/ rights supporters together under 1 public symbol to work together.

A recent Huffington Post article by Ellen Shaffer (Co-Director of the Center for Policy Analysis, which sponsors the Silver Ribbon campaign) notes that even the best birth control could fail 1 time in 100, half of pregnancies are unintended, and at least a 1/3 of US women have an abortion during their lifetime. Could you tell us a little bit about the work the Campaign has done to make reproductive services like this available to women?

Fighting cuts to family planning e.g. title X funding. Planned parenthood funding

Supporting healthcare reform

Defining birth control as preventive care

Supporting Walks for Choice

What are some of the biggest threats to reproductive health rights both legally, politically and socially?

This “war on women.” This attack on reproductive rights on that national and state level

states are passing more and more ridiculous laws to make abortion unavailable by increasing costs and wait times and making it so that the providers will quit

e.g. justifiable homicide, treating an abortion clinic like a full service surgery center, etc. etc.

Can you tell us over the last 10 to 15 years who has been the most impacted on hostilities towards reproductive care?

Women of color, women in the middle and lower classes of income.

The proportion of abortion patients who were poor increased by almost 60%—from 27% in 2000 to 42% in 2008, according to Guttmacher.

What are some of the initiatives and projects you are involved in that we can support after tonight to continue in making sure our rights are protected?

Please wear a silver ribbon and talk about it with everyone that asks about it.

Email your friends, facebook, twitter.

Make sure that your friends with conservative representatives (in other states in more rural CA) speak up and stand up and be counted

Follow us on facebook. follow us on twitter.

Twibbon up!

Santorum: Our Abortion Was Different

Rick Santorum is one dangerously confused denialist. The former Pennsylvania Senator and presidential aspirant is best known for his inability to associate his professed compassion for life at the level of the zygote, with the physical realities of human sexuality.  He has equated loving same-sex relationships to bestiality.  He is opposed to abortion under any circumstance. Almost.

In October, 1996, his wife Karen had a second trimester abortion.  They don’t like to describe it that way. In his 2004 interview with Terry Gross, Santorum characterizes the fetus, who must be treated as an autonomous person, as a practically a gunslinging threat, whom the mother must murder in self-defense. Karen has had to justify her decision to save her own life by explaining that if she died her other children would have lost a mother.

Republican extremists in Congress and the statehouses propose to make abortion illegal even if it would save the mother’s life.  Even the Santorums admit they would make that choice, while claiming that they didn’t.

Losing a pregnancy because of a fatal fetal anomaly is never cause for celebration. The pain of second-trimester abortions is compounded by the hateful hypocrites who vilify families facing sorrowful circumstances, and the resulting scarcity of abortion clinicians.

It is revolting that Rick and Karen Santorum choose to stigmatize and harass those of us who, as they did, grieve over the loss of a possible child in the second trimester.

Abortion should not be driving U.S. policy.  It’s not a more fundamental right than the right to a job or safety from violence.  But we can’t stop it from being used as a wedge issue if we never talk about our experiences.  

Here’s the Santorums’ description of their second trimester abortion, written by Steve Goldstein, Philadelphia Inquirer,  May 4, 1997

Karen was in her 19th week of pregnancy. Husband and wife were in a suburban Virginia office for a routine sonogram when a radiologist told them that the fetus Karen was carrying had a fatal defect and was going to die.

After consulting with specialists, who offered several options including abortion, the Santorums decided on long-shot intrauterine surgery to correct an obstruction of the urinary tract called posterior urethral valve syndrome.

A few days later, rare “bladder shunt” surgery was performed at Pennsylvania Hospital in Philadelphia. The incision in the womb carried a high risk of infection.

Two days later, at home in the Pittsburgh suburb of Verona, Karen Santorum became feverish. Her Philadelphia doctors instructed her to hurry to Pittsburgh’s Magee-Women’s Hospital, which has a unit specializing in high-risk pregnancies.

<strong>After examining Karen, who was nearly incoherent with a 105-degree fever, a doctor at Magee led Santorum into the hallway outside her room and said that she had an intrauterine infection and some type of medical intervention was necessary. Unless the source of the infection, the fetus, was removed from Karen’s body, she would likely die.

At minimum, the doctor said, Karen had to be given antibiotics intravenously or she might go into septic shock and die.

The Santorums were at a crossroads.

Once they agreed to use antibiotics, they believed they were committing to delivery of the fetus, which they knew would most likely not survive outside the womb.</strong>

“The doctors said they were talking about a matter of hours or a day or two before risking sepsis and both of them might die,” Santorum said. “Obviously, if it was a choice of whether both Karen and the child are going to die or just the child is going to die, I mean it’s a pretty easy call.”

Shivering under heated blankets in Magee’s labor and delivery unit as her body tried to reject the source of the infection, Karen felt cramping from early labor.

Santorum agreed to start his wife on intravenous antibiotics “to buy her some time,” he said.

The antibiotics brought Karen’s fever down. The doctor suggested a drug to accelerate her labor.

“The cramps were labor, and she was going to get into more active labor,” Santorum said. “Karen said, `We’re not inducing labor, that’s an abortion. No way. That isn’t going to happen. I don’t care what happens.’ ”

As her fever subsided, Karen – a former neonatal intensive-care nurse – asked for something to stop the labor. Her doctors refused, Santorum recalled, citing malpractice concerns.

Santorum said her labor proceeded without having to induce an abortion.

Karen, a soft-spoken red-haired 37-year-old, said that “ultimately” she would have agreed to intervention for the sake of her other children.

“If the physician came to me and said if we don’t deliver your baby in one hour you will be dead, yeah, I would have to do it,” she said. “But for me, it was at the very end. I would never make a decision like that until all other means had been thoroughly exhausted.”

The fetus was delivered at 20 weeks, at least a month shy of what most doctors consider viability.

In the months after the birth and death of Gabriel Michael Santorum, rumors began circulating in the Pennsylvania medical community that Karen Santorum had undergone an abortion. Those rumors found their way to The Inquirer, prompting the questions that led to this article.

“There are a lot of people who aren’t big fans of Rick Santorum,” the senator said of the rumors. “You’re a public figure, and you’re out there. Maybe it accomplishes a political purpose”…

_____________________________________________________________

see also:

http://www.slate.com/id/1210/    The New Yorker, Jan. 5, 1998

An article chronicles the troubled pregnancy of Karen Santorum, wife of partial-birth-abortion foe Sen. Rick Santorum, R-Pa., and the evolution of the senator’s views on the procedure. A birth defect threatened the lives of both fetus and mother, forcing the couple to face the ethical question of whether or not to abort to save her life. Premature labor made the quandary moot–the baby died two hours after birth–but stiffened their resolve against late-term abortion. (A “Strange Bedfellow” bashes Santorum’s “pathetic grandstanding.”)

__________________________________________________________________

http://mysite.verizon.net/vzeo69a0/id81.html

Audio Interview:  Santorum defends the GOP Platform on Reproductive Rights 

Terry Gross, Fresh Air  Aug 30, 2004 (20 min.)

Santorum discusses:

Human Life amendment to the constitution,

Why judges opposed to Roe are not activists,

That embryos from fertility clinics should be adopted, 

The Catholic mass and viewing with his children at home of his son, Gabriel, who was born 4 months premature and lived for 2 hours .

Listen to entire interview.

http://www.now.org/issues/abortion/alerts/11-13-97.html

Activists urged to call Family Circle on abortion article

November, 1997

——————————————————————————–

Family Circle magazine featured an anti-abortion article in the “Full Circle” section of their October 1997 issue. The article, written by Karen Santorum, decried the use of late-term abortion under any circumstances. And it told the story of her own tragic pregnancy and the decision she and her family made – an option she and her husband would deny to other women .

Karen Santorum is the wife of right-wing, anti-abortion Senator Rick Santorum (R-Pa.). In 1996, Senator Santorum led the debate on a bill that attempted to ban late-term abortions, and refused to make an exception even in the case of “grievous bodily injury” to the woman. In Santorum’s article, she expresses her view that carrying a non-viable fetus to term is the only option, and apparently does not think the woman’s health or future fertility should be a consideration.

The National Abortion Federation (NAF) responded by requesting that a patient response be printed in the next issue, thus presenting an opposing view and bringing the argument “Full Circle.” We have learned from NAF that Family Circle is only planning to publish “Letters to the Editor,” and your actions could change their decision. Please urge Family Circle to print the article by Sophie Horak, which was submitted to them by NAF, in its entirety. We do not have permission to send you the text of the original article.

We urge you to email Family Circle at fcfeedback@familycircle.com or call (212-499-2000) and express concern over their incomplete (and in this case, biased) reporting on the very private issue of abortion.

Send letters to:

Family Circle Magazine

___________________________________________________________

http://www.post-gazette.com/books/19980623corner.asp

Karen Santorum’s letter to ill-fated son express joy, sorrow

Tuesday, June 23, 1998

By Karen MacPherson

________________________________________________________________

http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A61804-2005Apr17?language=printer

 Father First, Senator Second

For Rick Santorum, Politics Could Hardly Get More Personal

By Mark Leibovich

Washington Post Staff Writer

Monday, April 18, 2005; Page C01

In his Senate office, on a shelf next to an autographed baseball, Sen. Rick Santorum keeps a framed photo of his son Gabriel Michael, the fourth of his seven children. Named for two archangels, Gabriel Michael was born prematurely, at 20 weeks, on Oct. 11, 1996, and lived two hours outside the womb.

Upon their son’s death, Rick and Karen Santorum opted not to bring his body to a funeral home. Instead, they bundled him in a blanket and drove him to Karen’s parents’ home in Pittsburgh. There, they spent several hours kissing and cuddling Gabriel with his three siblings, ages 6, 4 and 1 1/2. They took photos, sang lullabies in his ear and held a private Mass.

“That’s my little guy,” Santorum says, pointing to the photo of Gabriel, in which his tiny physique is framed by his father’s hand. The senator often speaks of his late son in the present tense. It is a rare instance in which he talks softly.

He and Karen brought Gabriel’s body home so their children could “absorb and understand that they had a brother,” Santorum says. “We wanted them to see that he was real,” not an abstraction, he says. Not a “fetus,” either, as Rick and Karen were appalled to see him described — “a 20-week-old fetus” — on a hospital form. They changed the form to read “20-week-old baby.”

Karen Santorum, a former nurse, wrote letters to her son during and after her pregnancy. She compiled them into a book, “Letters to Gabriel,” a collection of prayers, Bible passages and a chronicle of the prenatal complications that led to Gabriel’s premature delivery. At one point, her doctor raised the prospect of an abortion, an “option” Karen ridicules. “Letters to Gabriel” also derides “pro-abortion activists” and decries the “infanticide” of “partial-birth abortion,” the legality of which Rick Santorum was then debating in the Senate. The book reads, in places, like a call to action.

“When the partial-birth abortion vote comes to the floor of the U.S. Senate for the third time,” Karen writes to Gabriel, “your daddy needs to proclaim God’s message for life with even more strength and devotion to the cause.”

The issue came up again the following spring. Santorum, a Pennsylvania Republican, appeared on the Senate floor with oversize illustrations of fetuses in various stages of delivery. He described the process by which a physician “brutally kills” a child “by thrusting a pair of scissors into the back of its skull and suctioning its brains out.” He asked that a 5-year-old girl be admitted to the visitors’ gallery, though Senate rules forbid children under 6. “She is very interested in the subject,” Santorum said, explaining that the girl’s mother had been a candidate for a late-term abortion when doctors advised her during her pregnancy that the child was unlikely to survive.

Sen. Barbara Boxer objected, saying it would be “rather exploitive to have a child present in the gallery” during such a debate. Santorum relented, bemoaning Boxer’s objection as proof that “we have coarsened the comity of this place.”

 The same has been said of Santorum. In so many words, or facial gestures….

Government Shutdown Threatens Public’s Health

CPHA-N, EQUAL Health Network, CPEHN

ershaffer@gmail.com
Women’s Health, Greenhouse Gas Emission Protection, Health Care Reform at Risk

http://bit.ly/fBopF8

The public’s health would be a collateral casualty of caustic ideological battles over the national budget. Republican demands to defund family planning and to stop EPA regulation of greenhouse gas emissions have brought the federal government to a standstill. Crippling the popular Planned Parenthood clinics and lowering air pollution standards would profoundly damage the health of the nation and of California.

Women and men in many of the poorest neighborhoods rely on Planned Parenthood facilities for basic health care services, family planning, HIV care and cancer screenings. The Planned Parenthood Affiliates of California, Inc., has been instrumental in public policy for the health of women and girls.

These ideologically-driven “social riders” to the proposed budget would also eliminate funds for implementation of the Affordable Care Act and the new consumer protection bureau, leaving hundreds of thousands of families struggling to afford medical care.

Cuts could also fall on the Center for Infectious Diseases & Emergency Readiness at the University of California Berkeley, the only research center in the United States on radiological and nuclear public health preparedness.

The proposed $60 billion in cuts that Congressional Republicans have demanded this year, and trillions to come, would devastate the very projects that could revitalize jobs and ensure prosperity. Millions of people’s livelihoods depend on publicly funded transportation, infrastructure, education, and health care.

In addition, the shutdown itself will weaken the fragile economy, immediately placing 800,000 federal workers on furlough, suspending paychecks for soldiers and delaying business loans.

We need to develop a comprehensive solution that revitalizes federal revenues, while requiring those who benefit the most from our society’s infrastructure to pay the most to ensure its upkeep. Taxes for corporations and for wealthy individuals declined over the last decade, resulting in significant income disparities between the rich and the poor in the U.S., and leading to health inequalities. Reversing tax giveaways to the super-rich and the nation’s largest corporations could raise $4 trillion within a decade.

We stand in support of reproductive and public health and against the threat of climate change!  We urge our federal representatives to insist that these important programs continue!

California Public Health Association-North  www.cphan.org s EQUAL Health Network  www.equalhealth.info
California Pan-Ethnic Health Network www.cpehn.org

April Calendar of events

4/7 – Rally for Choice in DC

sign up with RCRC:

https://rcrc.wufoo.com/forms/lobby-day-april-7-2011/

Stand up for Women’s Health Rally facebook event

https://www.facebook.com/event.php?eid=149754481754343

Thursday, April 7 · 11:30am – 12:30pm

The National Mall in front of the Capitol Building
3rd/4th St. SW
Washington, DC

4/9 or before, protest/complain about Dillard’s Houston area store hosting Anti-Choice Anti-African-American event

http://www.blackpridenetwork.com/houston-area-department-store-sponsors-anti-choice-event/

Care2 reports on Memorial City’s Dillard planning to host an anti-choice fundraiser on 4/9/11.

Please sign the petition. http://www.thepetitionsite.com/1/cancel-the-dillards-anti-abortion-fundraiser/

Per our partners at SisterSong email dillards: questions@dillards.com
Call the store manager. Stephen Brophy ( 713) 464-1851

Fax the store manager. Stephen Brophy Fax: 713-463-4100

Boycott Dillard’s.

Protest in front of Dillard’s on 4/9/11.

read more here. http://bit.ly/i1ritb

passed:

4/2 6pm in Chicago Pro-Choice Counterprotest at the Joe Scheidler Tribute!

http://www.facebook.com/event.php?eid=204718812886125

NOW-NYC launches “My Health Matters” on youtube. Add your video.

NOW NYC launches a video/youtube campaign. My Health Matters

http://www.youtube.com/MyHealthMattersNOW

You can make a video and upload it to youtube for the My Health Matters campaign. Talking about how your health or a woman that you care about is important and should not be endangered by government ideological political battles.

for example,

the House voted to defund all family planning for Title X clinics.

HR3 and HR 358 aim to get rid of private insurance funding for abortion

HR 358 expands conscience clause protections so broadly that it would become legal for a hospital todeny life-saving care based on “moral or religious” ground

read more here
http://www.rhrealitycheck.org/blog/2011/03/14/women-declare-health-matters”

Do You Have Sex? Do You Have Power?

Ellen Shaffer, Defend the Dream Rally, San Francisco, March 15, 2011Robert Reich is an inspiration to all of us, and one of the country’s truly great thinkers. There are a lot of very smart people over at UC Berkeley, where he teaches.  As Co-Director of the Center for Policy Analysis, I want to demonstrate to Professor Reich that we can hold our own over here in San Francisco, too. So I have some complicated math questions I want to ask you. Some of them are multiple choice. I want you to huddle up and get warm and stand with some other people you think are really smart and we’ll see if we can figure out what the problem is around here.

Are you ready?

Ok here’s the first question, tell me if you can answer it:

Do you have sex?

One more time: Do you have sex?

Ok here’s the next question, this one has multiple parts:

Have you ever had sex, do you plan to have sex in the future, do you have any friends or relatives who you have reason to believe have ever had sex?

If you said yes to any of these questions, think about this one:

Do you think it’s any business of Congress’ if you do or if you don’t?

All right, now let’s get into some really tricky stuff.

When you’ve had sex, how many of you were surprised at some point when you got pregnant?

Here’s a fact: 50% of pregnancies in the US are unintended pregnancies.

And 30% of women have an abortion at some time in our lives.

30%.

Here’s another little-known fact: some of those women are – Republicans!

Now let’s see what else we can discover here today.
We hear there are deficits, at the state and federal levels. The federal deficit is a big one, $1.5 trillion.

So let’s see whose fault that is.

Did you make $810 billion last year? Anyone?

The oil industry did.

Anyone here vote to spend $3 trillion fighting phantom weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, without any way to pay for it?

Fact: Corporate profits went up to $1.6 trillion in 2010. Over half of U.S. companies paid no federal taxes at some time in the last decade.

Anybody here make $1.6 trillion and not pay taxes?

Here in California we have seen some of the starkest financial tragedies, the tragic divide between rich and poor, entire communities devastated by the irresponsible, criminal negligence of banks and finance capital.

Now here’s another question:

Do we have any power?

You bet we do. If we didn’t have any power they wouldn’t have to keep bopping us over the head to keep us down.

The right wing extremists in Congress are marching to the tune of the extremists in the corporate world.

In Congress, and in the states, the far right is going after us, all of us, with their guns drawn, literally and figuratively.

The Republican budget bill would slash funds to implement health care reform, slash Head Start early childhood programs, slash Pell grants to students, close down public radio, deregulate environmental polluters.

And to women, and to those of you who ever have had or ever will have sex, they would do this:

The would defund family planning, period. Defund Planned Parenthood, period – even the cancer screenings and preventive health services in poor neighborhoods that make up 97% of their budget. Remember, half of pregnancies are unintended; that percent would go straight up.

They would make it virtually impossible to get an abortion. Because many employers get a federal tax break for providing health insurance, extremists say this means you should not be able to use your private insurance to pay for an abortion, because there is a public dollar in there somewhere.

It gets worse than that. You’ve probably heard some of the proposals: defining the murder of abortion providers as justifiable homicide. Authorizing hospitals to refuse to perform an abortion even if the refusal would result in the death of the mother.

The number of reliable pro-choice Senators is now a bare 40.

The vast majority of Americans believe that we as individuals have the right to make our own decisions about how and when we’re going to have children. The majority believe that abortion should be legal.

The Trust Women/Silver Ribbon Campaign was formed so that the 80% of us who support individual choices about our reproductive health can be visible and vocal, and can take action.

We can exert tremendous influences over our life courses, as individuals.

But in many other ways, do as well as our communities do.

It is when we are united that we truly have power.

That is why we have to be smart.

They are throwing everything at us at the same time: trying to smash our unions, smash our democracy, smash our freedom of choice about when we’re going to have kids, and with whom.

Because we are strongest when we are united, and we are weakest when they can pull us apart.

We are here today with Madison, we are here today with Ohio, we are here today with the LGBTQ community, with undocumented immigrants, with men and women – and for sure with all of us who have sex!

We are here with the people near the Fukushima Daichi reactor, where caretakers kept saying, don’t worry, it’s perfectly safe.

We’re here with each other because we know that when we stand together that is when we have power.

Do we have power?

Do we have power?

Do we have power?

Now let’s show our leaders what power is and what to do with it.

Thanks to Weslyan Uncut:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gaxBR1AiFS4

Murkowski opposes Planned Parenthood, Title X cuts

Murkowski opposes Planned Parenthood, Title X cuts
By: Sarah Kliff   March 11, 2011 06:19 PM EST
Sen. Lisa Murkowski of Alaska has come out in opposition to the House’s attempts to defund Planned Parenthood, making her the first Republican senator to specifically support the beleaguered organization.

“I believe Planned Parenthood provides vital services to those in need and disagree with their funding cuts in the bill,” Murkowski wrote in a letter to Senate Appropriations Committee Chairman Daniel Inouye (D-Hawaii) and Vice Chairman Thad Cochran (R-Miss.). “I ask you to consider these programs going forward to determine if there is room for allowing continued funding.”

Murkowski’s move follows that of Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine), who last week came out against the House vote to defund Title X, the only federal program dedicated to reproductive health issues.

“Sen. Collins is a longtime supporter of the Title X family planning program, and she believes the House’s decision to completely eliminate the funding is unwise,” Collins spokesman Kevin Kelley said. “The program has successfully reduced the number of unplanned pregnancies, therefore helping to reduce health care costs.”

Planned Parenthood receives Title X funding, which is defunded in the Republican spending bill. Planned Parenthood defunding was the subject of a separate amendment to the spending bill sponsored by Rep. Mike Pence (R-Ind.).

In an e-mail to a constituent, Murkowski expanded on her position, also taking shots at the House Republicans’ attempts to end Title X funding. “I do believe that Planned Parenthood provides vital services to those in need and disagree with its funding cuts contained in the H.R. 1 package,” she wrote in a Friday e-mail, obtained by POLITICO. “From 2002-2008, Planned Parenthood received $342 million in federal taxpayer money through Title X funding alone. With these funds, Planned Parenthood has provided women throughout the U.S. with important family planning and contraceptive services as well as screening for breast and cervical cancers for low-income women. I believe it is important that Title X organizations continue to receive funding. In Alaska, this includes five centers — two health department clinics, two Planned Parenthood clinics in Sitka and Soldotna and one independent clinic.”

While the House’s long-term continuing resolution strips Planned Parenthood of all its federal funding, the letter comes on the heels of two, short-term continuing resolutions that leave their funding intact.

Social conservatives have petitioned the House leadership to make the defunding of Planned Parenthood a “nonnegotiable” in their budget talks with the Senate. But leadership has given them no such a promise.

Seven House Republicans voted against the amendment to defund Planned Parenthood during the continuing resolution debate.