Viva La Cola!

Founded in January 2009, PubliCola is a blog about Seattle written by journalists who are dedicated to non-partisan, original daily reporting that prioritizes a balanced approach to news. Started by longtime local editor and award-winning reporter Josh Feit, PubliCola is the first online-only news site in state history to get media credentials to cover the state capitol.

PubliCola was off and running. In June 2009, PubliCola hired another award-winning journalist, super-sourced Seattle city hall reporter Erica C. Barnett.

People were afraid that blogging would change journalism. Instead, we believe journalism can change blogging. Twenty-first century journalism may look and feel different, and yes Erica isn't afraid to get cranky, but we're committed to making sure online news still delivers independent, reliable, even-keeled coverage. And most of all, we're committed to making sure the coverage sparks honest civic debate.

Bringing you cola for the people, PubliCola is named after Publius Valerius PubliCola, the alias for the authors of the Federalist Papers—the original bloggers.

The first online-only news site in state history to get media credentials to cover the state capitol and Seattle city hall, PubliCola has been called a “must-read” by the Seattle Post Intelligencer and a hot “New Media Mover and Shaker” by Seattle Magazine—which also cited our own Erica C. Barnett as the city's No. 1 news nerd.

Murray and Cantwell Must do More to Protect Women's Health

Editor’s Note: This post is by Lauren B. Simonds, M.S.W., Executive Director of NARAL Pro-Choice Washington.

“Remember the ladies.”

That is what Abigail Adams wrote to her husband John, who was then a delegate to the Continental Congress, on the eve of the American Revolution. Abigail wrote her letter more than 200 years ago, but her words resonate today. Undeniably, we’ve made some great strides for women’s equality since then. Yet as the recent health care reform debate so painfully illustrates, Congress all too often turns a deaf ear to the cry for women’s rights. In the House last month, and last weekend in the Senate, women’s health was jettisoned in acquiescence to a couple of anti-choice hardliners. Watching Congress push women’s rights aside in the name of a larger goal, you would be excused for thinking we were living back in Adams’ era.

If it wasn’t clear before the health care battle of 2009 that women’s  reproductive health care is viewed as separate and unequal to other types of basic health care, it is now. No other medical procedure is singled out and stigmatized like abortion. Even a proposed tax on elective cosmetic surgery was eliminated after public outcry.

Unlike cosmetic surgery, however, abortion care is a critical component of women’s reproductive health.

As Publicola’s own Erica C. Barnett has reported, the Nelson “compromise,” brought to us courtesy of anti-choice zealot Sen. Ben Nelson, D-Nebraska, is an all-out assault on women’s rights and health. On paper, the Senate bill is only marginally better than the House bill, which contains a total ban on health insurance coverage (the so-called Stupak-Pitts amendment). The ultimate effect of either measure in practice, however, will likely be the same: the eventual elimination of all abortion coverage.

The kicker, for many in the pro-choice and allied movements, is that the ban on abortion coverage and the Nelson “compromise” came at the behest of Democrats. In the House, 64 Democrats voted for the Stupak-Pitts amendment, which establishes a ban on abortion coverage. In the Senate, Nelson’s amendment seeking an abortion ban was defeated, but after he threatened to withhold his support of the health care bill without additional abortion restrictions, all 60 members of the Democratic caucus voted for a health care bill that contains a “compromise” that jeopardizes women’s access to abortion care. Our own Sens. Maria Cantwell and Patty Murray, both of whom are strong pro-choice advocates, were put in the unenviable position of voting for a bill with an anti-choice, anti-woman provision.

The takeaway from the health care mess is that elections matter. We need to elect a pro-choice majority to the Senate and the House that will stand up for women’s rights. Until we get there, women’s ability to control what happens to their bodies is subject to the whims of a few anti-choice ideologues.

This is not merely a political battle; unless there are significant positive changes made to the bill in conference committee, the fallout for women’s health will be severe. For the millions of women who will have an abortion in their lifetimes, the elimination of insurance coverage will be one additional hurdle in accessing a legal, safe, and extremely common medical procedure. The women no longer able to access abortion care will bear the burden of the health and financial problems that so often result from being left without a choice. The continued devaluation of women’s reproductive health care, moreover, means that abortion, the women who choose it, and the doctors who provide it will be even more stigmatized.

Is this–the rejection of women’s health and a huge step backward in the fight for reproductive rights–the best that women can hope for with a Democratic majority in both chambers and a Democratic president who ran on a pro-choice platform?

I think we can – and must – demand more. Yes, it will be an uphill battle without a pro-choice majority on Capitol Hill. But it is incumbent upon our elected officials to remember the women, to use the modern parlance. We in the pro-choice community implore Sens. Murray and Cantwell, and the rest of our congressional delegation, to do all that they can to improve the health care legislation in conference committee and pass health care reform that includes women’s health. Please, make Abigail Adams – and the current generation of women – proud.




  • git ‘r done

    Somehow, I don’t think these invocations to action and change and this imploring and this reference to Abby Adams is going to change anything.
    Solutions:
    a. changing the 60 vote rule.
    Get Cantwell and Murray to agree — they will work to change it. Get Obama to agree – the GOP is abusing it so we are going to change it. Make them agree to go get the votes, and change it already.

    b. Going into Nebraska and other conservadem places and ahem, actually winning the argument for choice?
    Clearly the antichoice side has been winning this argument. We don’t have a majority for choice right now nationwide. We’ve dropped from a majority to a minority position. Personally I think calling it family freedom rather than choice would be better. Choice is vague and intellectual and a bit dishonest (we don’t agree you have a choice to pollute, do we?) and most of all, as the message for what, thirty years, it’s clearly not working!

    Like all hero narratives, we gotta change ourselves first then conquer Ben Grendel Nelson and his ilk….and like all hero narratives, just sitting and crying for help usu. doesn’t git ‘er done….

  • git ‘r done

    Somehow, I don’t think these invocations to action and change and this imploring and this reference to Abby Adams is going to change anything.
    Solutions:
    a. changing the 60 vote rule.
    Get Cantwell and Murray to agree — they will work to change it. Get Obama to agree – the GOP is abusing it so we are going to change it. Make them agree to go get the votes, and change it already.

    b. Going into Nebraska and other conservadem places and ahem, actually winning the argument for choice?
    Clearly the antichoice side has been winning this argument. We don’t have a majority for choice right now nationwide. We’ve dropped from a majority to a minority position. Personally I think calling it family freedom rather than choice would be better. Choice is vague and intellectual and a bit dishonest (we don’t agree you have a choice to pollute, do we?) and most of all, as the message for what, thirty years, it’s clearly not working!

    Like all hero narratives, we gotta change ourselves first then conquer Ben Grendel Nelson and his ilk….and like all hero narratives, just sitting and crying for help usu. doesn’t git ‘er done….

  • sarah68

    I agree that “choice” has never been a good campaign slogan. The Right says in return that “It’s a child, not a choice.” If someone believes abortion is murder, emphasizing a woman should have a choice to commit what they consider murder doesn’t cut it.

    Instead, it should be presented as a privacy right (which is how Roe v. Wade won). No governmental authority tells a man what to do with his body, nor should a woman be told. That doesn’t really cover the “murder” idea but nothing will because that stems from a religious viewpoint. But presenting it as an anti-governmental interference issue will hopefully go farther than choice.

  • sarah68

    I agree that “choice” has never been a good campaign slogan. The Right says in return that “It’s a child, not a choice.” If someone believes abortion is murder, emphasizing a woman should have a choice to commit what they consider murder doesn’t cut it.

    Instead, it should be presented as a privacy right (which is how Roe v. Wade won). No governmental authority tells a man what to do with his body, nor should a woman be told. That doesn’t really cover the “murder” idea but nothing will because that stems from a religious viewpoint. But presenting it as an anti-governmental interference issue will hopefully go farther than choice.

  • http://bit.ly/7bwEx2 vernachase

    Very nice article about medical insurance industry. But you could get medical insurance for your entire family at the best price from http://bit.ly/7bwEx2 if you spent few mins you can find a good plan.

  • http://bit.ly/7bwEx2 vernachase

    Very nice article about medical insurance industry. But you could get medical insurance for your entire family at the best price from http://bit.ly/7bwEx2 if you spent few mins you can find a good plan.

  • git ‘r done

    Harkin has introduced a bill to end the 60 vote rule

    so what Murray and Cantwell need to do, is get on that pronto.

    them telling Nebraskans to change their minds and be pro choice ain’t gonna work.

  • git ‘r done

    Harkin has introduced a bill to end the 60 vote rule

    so what Murray and Cantwell need to do, is get on that pronto.

    them telling Nebraskans to change their minds and be pro choice ain’t gonna work.

  • Mathew “RennDawg” Renner

    I still do not see what infantcide has to do with health care.

  • Mathew “RennDawg” Renner

    I still do not see what infantcide has to do with health care.

  • RKW

    Always nice to hear something from NARAL besides “Give us some more money!”. I switched my donations to Planned Parenthood after NARAL sat on their hands (and huge war chest) while Bush slipped in not one but two anti-abortion Supremes. They did essentially *nothing* about it but use the two nominations and subsequent confirmations as fund raising opportunities.

    As a side note, NARAL played a significant part in the defeat of the good Democrat & throughly Pro Choice Ned Lamont by the evil Joe Lieberman…how does that bright move look now when it comes to women’s health care concerns?

  • RKW

    Always nice to hear something from NARAL besides “Give us some more money!”. I switched my donations to Planned Parenthood after NARAL sat on their hands (and huge war chest) while Bush slipped in not one but two anti-abortion Supremes. They did essentially *nothing* about it but use the two nominations and subsequent confirmations as fund raising opportunities.

    As a side note, NARAL played a significant part in the defeat of the good Democrat & throughly Pro Choice Ned Lamont by the evil Joe Lieberman…how does that bright move look now when it comes to women’s health care concerns?

  • sarah68

    Renn Dawg: I don’t see what 75-year-old men not being able to keep it up has to do with health care either. And yet drugs for it are covered by insurance, because obviously “sex for life” is more important than saving a woman’s life who is suffering from life-threatening eclampsia, or a woman who has been raped by her father.

  • sarah68

    Renn Dawg: I don’t see what 75-year-old men not being able to keep it up has to do with health care either. And yet drugs for it are covered by insurance, because obviously “sex for life” is more important than saving a woman’s life who is suffering from life-threatening eclampsia, or a woman who has been raped by her father.

  • Mathew “RennDawg” Renner

    Well sarah, I do not think that those pills do not commit an act of murder. Personially, if I were in a pharmacy I would not give those drugs to anyone who was not married. I am not against the procedure if the mother would die if she does not have it. In the case of rape and incest how does the murder of an innocent baby change what happened.

    Remember we do not have fetus showers we have baby showers.

  • Mathew “RennDawg” Renner

    Well sarah, I do not think that those pills do not commit an act of murder. Personially, if I were in a pharmacy I would not give those drugs to anyone who was not married. I am not against the procedure if the mother would die if she does not have it. In the case of rape and incest how does the murder of an innocent baby change what happened.

    Remember we do not have fetus showers we have baby showers.