McCain Fights to Keep Crucial Blue State in Play - NYTimes.com

I have been moving around a bit. For the last 2 years, I was in rural, western PA. It felt good to be there during the primary. I saw new people discovering the democratic networks that had become isolated from new members. The democratic party in PA is much larger now, thanks to the voter registration during the primary and on non-stop until the deadline to register on Oct. 8.

"[T]his year there are 1.2 million more registered Democrats than Republicans in the state," says a NYTimes article on McCain in PA. Read McCain Fights to Keep Crucial Blue State in Play

McCain's strategists think he can make a play for PA, which has gone blue in the last four elections.... McCain's ad's of blatant lies about Obama raising our taxes have been on the radio for weeks.

Volunteers have really made the campaign strong in rural PA as well as in the somewhat urban area where I now reside. Here, we are fortunate to get volunteers from New Jersey and New York as well as Connecticut!

Having McCain target the pro-gun, working class people of PA will intensify the efforts of volunteers in the Keystone state. Also, I believe in the old-school mentality of the blue-collar Pennsylvanian who understands that regulations exist to help employees and consumers. They understand that by helping each other, we help ourselves!

My friend flew in to PA this last weekend from AZ. She got a taste of knocking on doors and entering data. Now, she is advocating the ease of involvement in the campaign to people in AZ! Her husband is an economist, and he now supports Obama mainly on the basis of who he solicits for economic advice. She sent me a link to the NYTimes article about McCain trying to move in on PA, and now she wants to come back!

Come to PA and help to make the Obama victory in this state a landslide!

Oral Contraceptives and the Struggle for Reproductive Freedom and Women's Rights

There is a sad and simple truth that more women need to realize. The fight for women's rights is NOT over! If you value your ability to plan the size of your family, then you must take a stand and protect women's ability to access oral contraception.

Women's liberation was made possible by, among other things, the invention of the oral contraceptive pill (OCP). As a reliable form of birth control, one that could largely be controlled by the woman, became available, more women were free to pursue an education and enter the work force. Unfortunately, there are those who believe that OCP is an abortifacient, that it aborts an unborn child and want to prevent women from gaining access to OCP. On July 15, Robert Pear of the New York Times reported that Secretary Leavitt of the Health and Human Services Agency and President Bush are planning to

require all recipients of aid under federal health programs to certify that they will not refuse to hire nurses and other providers who object to abortion and even certain types of birth control.

According to NARAL: Pro-Choice America:

• This regulation could undermine good state laws that require hospitals to provide emergency contraception to rape survivors and ensure that pharmacies fill women’s prescriptions for birth control.
• The proposal could allow health-care corporations (hospitals, HMOs, and health plans) to refuse to provide services or make referrals for birth control.
• The proposed regulation could affect Medicaid and the Title X family-planning program. For instance, staff at clinics or health-care plans that contract for Medicaid services could refuse to provide contraception.

In her blog on Reality Check, Christina notes that this legislation is "a spectacular act of complicity with the religious right."

We have already seen changes to policies in 2004 at the Center for Disease Control, where condoms are no longer advocated as the best defense against sexually transmitted disease. We have also recently witnessed various attempts to remove access to late term abortions on the state level in South Dakota, which resulted in a law requiring doctors to tell women seeking an abortion that they are terminating the "the life of a whole, separate, unique, living human being."

We can not continue to allow policy to be shaped by ideological beliefs over scientific fact as well as the pressing reality of overpopulation and the global benefits of women's ability to control reproduction.

Oral contraceptives suppress ovulation; increase the accumulation of mucus in the cervical tubes, which make it difficult for sperm to reach an egg; and impede the thickening of the endometrium, which is where a fertilized egg, or blastocyst, typically is implanted for development into an embryo.

In a recent issue of Ethics and Medicine Dr. J. Goodnough critiques a argument made by Dr. R. Alcorn that OCP is an abortifacient because, at times, ovulation does occur, eggs can be fertilized, and, therefore, embryos may die.

According to Dr. Alcorn, OCP is an abortifacent because some breakthrough ovulation can occur. If this happens, then there is the chance an egg will be fertilized but unable to implant due to the thinning of the endometrium. Dr. Goodnough argues that OCP has a .1% pregnancy rate, which means about 3% of users will become pregnant even while taking OCP. However, he believes this rate is mainly accounted for by missed pills. One should not assume that breakthrough ovulation is a common occurrence.

Dr. Goodnough also argues that there is no actual proof that the endometrium is made so hostile as to cause death for an embryo. Goodnough states:

he could just as easily assume that the embryo always implants and survives despite seemingly hostile changes in the endometrium. Or, more accurately stated, he could say that the embryo implants and survives as frequently in those on the OCP as happens in those not on the OCP, since embryo loss occurs in an estimated 70 % of fertilizations in women not taking the OCP. Fifteen percent of these embryos die immediately after fertilization, 15 % fail to implant, and 41 % are lost after implantation.

In other words, a sexually active woman using OCP is just as likely to experience the loss of an embryo as a sexually active woman not using OCP.

Oral contraception pills prevent ovulation and impede fertilization. It is not clear the extent that they inhibit implantation of a fertilized egg.

Do not be lured by ideological slants on research. OCP is not an abortifacient.

But, for arguments sake, let's say that OCP is an abortifacient, would that reality give health practitioners the right to refuse to prescribe or fill prescriptions for OCP? Do we really want to empower health practitioners with the right to make choices based on their religious values when they serve the public health? What if we were to allow teachers in public schools the same right? Would you be partial to allowing an educator to refuse to teach students who did not share his/her religious values? Perhaps an educator might refuse to teach a segment of history that did not meet his or her belief system? Maybe educators who do not believe the holocaust existed should not have to teach about it. Perhaps educators who believe democrat values are really a psychological illness can fail students who do not demonstrate republican beliefs and refer them to the nurse?

Those who serve the public do not get to make choices based on religious or partisan values. They must make choices that serve the common good and reflect the will of the people as demonstrated through democratic processes, and they must be conscious and respectful of reason and scientific evidence.

Thankfully, many members of Congress are speaking out on behalf of OCP and family planning. According to Matthew Jaffe of ABC news,

More than 100 members of Congress wrote President Bush today, urging him to "halt all action" on a proposal they argue would change the definition of abortion, and drastically limit women's access to birth control.

We should not take this proposed legislation lightly. Write your Senators and Congressmen to tell them where you stand on this issue.

Write Sec. Leavitt at secretary@hhs.gov and explain to him why you support a woman's right to control her fertility and to plan her family.

Voting Makes a Comeback: On the Importance of Registering Voters and Getting them to the Polls

Winning an election is not a mystery. You want more people who support your candidates and issues going to the polls than people who support other candidates and issues. Americans didn't seem to vote much in the last 40 years...but that is starting to change.

In the 2004 Presidential election, we returned to levels of voter participation not seen since the 1968 election between Nixon and Humphrey, where just over 60% of the eligible population turned out to vote.

According to federal records, only 70% of the eligible population is actually registered to vote, which means we need to reach out to that 30% of unregistered voters!

According to Dr. Michael McDonald of George Mason University, voter turnout in the United States has been largely misrepresented due to comparisons of votes to people of voting age; however, comparisons using numbers of eligible voters still demonstrate, in my opinion, that not enough Americans vote. One of the lowest voter turn outs in his records was 52% in the 1996 election between then President Clinton and Bob Dole.

Perhaps voter participation has not changed radically since 1972; we seem to hover around the 55% mark, as seen in McDonald's study of participation in presidential elections since 1948. Since 1948, the only time we hit 65% participation was in 1960 in the presidential race between Kennedy and Nixon! Between 1952 and 1968, voter participation remained above 60%.

An interest in changing the world did not retire with the baby boomers who broke through to a counter culture! Once again, people are getting involved in governance because they recognize that their voices matter, and they don't want to risk not casting a vote.

Your vote is your voice!

If we are to show the world just how much Americans care about democracy, we need to bring those 30% of unregistered voters into the fold!

In 2004, 62% of Pennsylvania's eligible voters participated in the election. In 2008, 32% of Pennsylvania's eligible voters participated in the April 22 Primary.

We need to make sure active voters get out and vote!

More people are interested in politics than have been since 1960! We have a great chance to show people that collectively they can and will make a difference.

Not sure where to start? In Pennsylvania, we can increase voter registrations by targeting women!!

A study of women in Pennsylvania in 1998 to 2000 indicated that only 62.3% of women are registered to vote. Of those, it seems that only 47.3% voted!

It was a stratgey in the 2004 election, and it is again in 2008, no matter who is the democratic nominee. If candidates want to win, they should make sure women are registered and getting out to vote.

More people are getting involved because they see how politics affect their day to day lives with gas prices, the cost of food, health care, joblessness, home financing, and, of course, the threat of losing more soldiers....

Declare yourself! Vote!

America is Awake!

I was almost surprised to see this. My neighbor's feed business posted this sign on November 8.







I guess he was not too happy with the outcome--Democrats are in control of both houses of congress.

A few friends emailed me, knowing how I tend to be involved in grassroots campaigns, and congratulated me on the recent gain.

As I have commented in past postings, I have noticed Democrats in meetups to have been suffering from the frustration of loss and a sense of helplessness.

As Democrats may be feeling waves of relief, hope, and determination Republicans may also be feeling--as the sign my neighbor posted indicates--waves of frustration, fear, and loathing. Good. I would like them to feel it for a least a short while. After they process a full range of grief, I hope they will begin to reach out to bi-partisan efforts with a bit more humility than our President.

I have not been able to find the quote yet, but I believe the President's first word on the subject of a change of power in the house was that he was a little disappointed. In his radio address on 11 November Bush said,

"The message of this week's elections is clear: the American people want their leaders in Washington to set aside partisan differences, conduct ourselves in an ethical manner, and work together to address the challenges facing our Nation. This is important work that will demand the hard effort and good faith of leaders from both sides of the aisle, and I pledge to do my part."

I hope my neighbor heard that!

In closing, I just want to say that I was pleased with the comments that came out of Pelosi and Bush's first meeting (click to read the transcript).
I am hoping this is the beginning of a beautiful friendship, it seems they are both going to be able to forget all the dirty talk during the election.

Americas are awake, and I hope this means none of us will be so stubborn to let differences get in the way of making progress in areas of health insurance, education, health care, an Iraq exit strategy, and the 9-11 commission recommendations.