by Kim Gandy,

President, NOW

The current financial crisis is a feminist issue, and groups like NOW are working to ensure that the revitalization of our economy takes women into account. So, if I sound like I’m taking the successes and setbacks of the economic recovery package personally — well, I am.

In early reports, the recovery package seemed to focus on creating construction and physical infrastructure jobs (which, like it or not, are primarily done by men), even though women’s unemployment rate is nearly as high as men’s. NOW worked with our sister organizations, the Obama transition team, and House and Senate leaders, and–would you look at that!–the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act includes funds for rebuilding our human infrastructure, aimed at helping struggling families and generating jobs in education and health care that women are likely to fill. There are important safety net funds, increases in food stamps and unemployment compensation, tax credits for child care, and much more. Large-scale success for women — I had almost forgotten what that feels like!

And then came a setback. Following harsh but bogus criticism from House Republicans and conservatives making the talk-show circuit, the Medicaid Family Planning State Option was dropped from the economic recovery package at the request of President Obama. There’s been some misinformation about the provision, so let’s be real about what it will actually do. Note that I say “will do,” because I expect a concerted push from Congress, with promised support from President Obama, to quickly pass this measure independent of the stimulus plan.

First, let’s look at the words “State Option.” For the benefit of House Minority Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio) and conservatives who are always talking about states’ rights, the words “State Option” mean that the state can choose whether or not to take advantage of this opportunity. Participation is optional, not mandatory, up to the state — you get the drift.

Currently, states can request a waiver from the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) allowing them to use Medicaid funds to extend coverage for family planning and other services to low-income women who need basic care but are not quite poor enough to qualify for traditional Medicaid. Twenty-seven states have already gone through the expensive and time-consuming process of acquiring waivers.

What about the remaining states? The Medicaid Family Planning State Option would do one simple thing — allow those states to provide the expanded coverage, should they so choose, without having to go through the obstacle course of applying for a waiver.

That’s it. That’s all. To hear the “sky is falling” rhetoric last weekend you’d have thought the government was going to start handing out condoms in elementary schools.

Of course the Republican leaders knew exactly what this provision did, but they’ve never let facts get in the way before–why start now? Instead, Boehner and others seized on the State Option as a way to attack the very idea of family planning.

At this point I’ll repeat a familiar warning of mine for the umpteenth time. The right wing is not just anti-abortion, they are anti-contraception. I’m guessing some of them use contraception themselves (ya think?) but they’re determined to keep it away from the rest of us, if they can.

Boehner asked, “How can you spend hundreds of millions of dollars on contraceptives? How does that stimulate the economy?”

I’m not sure where to begin with that level of denial (or deception). The recovery plan isn’t just about stimulating the economy, it’s about recovering, and that means helping real people who are suffering. It includes helping families weather these difficult economic times by expanding safety net programs like food stamps and unemployment benefits, and yes, family planning, which is basic health care for women.

Second, the cost of the family planning option represented a tiny sum out of the entire $800 billion recovery plan – and more importantly, according to a variety of studies, the amount spent would come back four-fold in savings. Shouldn’t someone like Boehner, who considers himself a fiscal conservative, support such an effective cost-saving measure?

Lastly, this small provision would have a significant effect on women in need. When you’re having trouble paying the bills, “luxuries” like medicine (and doctor’s visits) are some of the first things to go — especially birth control. Still worse, what if you lose your job and along with it your health insurance? What do you do then?

Despite all of this, conservative Republicans protested as though the provision were an attack on so-called family values. I wonder whose families and whose values they have in mind.

NOW’s Media Hall of Shame award-winner Chris Matthews dismissed the cost savings saying, “I don’t know. It sounds a little like China” in an apparent reference to China’s one-child policy. Give me a break, Chris! There is no place in the provision ordering women what to do with their bodies, much less requiring them to use contraceptives to prevent pregnancy. And the provision doesn’t force states to change their funding either (although I honestly think it should). Again, it simply allows states the option to access these funds without expending time and money on getting a waiver, thus extending desperately-needed services to more low-income women who have little time to waste.

Furthermore, contraceptives are but one (although important) part of the family planning services that are covered. There’s also STD/STI testing, as well as cervical and breast cancer screening — and we know early detection will lower medical costs in the long run and save lives. So this isn’t simply a matter of financial savings — it is a moral imperative.

As far as I can see, the objections of the House Republicans just don’t reflect reality.

Then again, they don’t even reflect the wishes of their constituents.

According to research by the National Family Planning and Reproductive Health Association, 80 percent of self-identified “pro-lifers” support women’s access to contraception, and 88 percent of all voters support it (including four out of five Republicans). Eighty-six percent of voters support federal funding of family planning for low-income women, and two-thirds of voters would support even more funding for those programs.

What the public seems to understand (even when their “representatives” don’t) is that funding family planning is a social good. When the Republican leadership fights against family planning, they reveal how woefully out-of-touch they truly are.

And yet, due to their unfounded objections, fanned by conservative pundits, this sensible provision was ripped from the stimulus package.

It’s frustrating, especially in light of President Obama’s support for women’s health needs. One of his first executive orders was overturning the Global Gag Rule, which prohibited U.S. funding to overseas family planning clinics that provided abortion services or even counseled patients about abortion, even using non-U.S. funds. And Obama said this on the anniversary of Roe v Wade:

“We are united in our determination to prevent unintended pregnancies, reduce the need for abortion, and support women and families in the choices they make. To accomplish these goals, we must work to find common ground to expand access to affordable contraception, accurate health information, and preventative services.”

In a plan meant to help everyone in our country during this difficult time, I am disappointed that women’s health needs were cast aside with so little fight. And, it seems, so pointlessly. Reportedly the provision was removed because of House Republican opposition. But on Wednesday, the stimulus bill passed the House-without a single House Republican supporting the bill. Women’s health sacrificed for exactly zero votes.

These are difficult economic times, and there is a lot of talk about the need for give and take from both sides of the partisan divide. But unity with the radical right is a pipedream, and we will not sacrifice women’s health to make Republicans happy. As the President himself pointed out — he won.

We elected this president and this Congress, and we should not compromise our principles to make deals with those who have so little respect for us. I remain hopeful that President Obama will continue to carry out his commitment to women’s health care, and I look forward to quick passage of expanded Medicare family planning services.

If you haven’t done so already, send that message to your members of Congress and President Obama right NOW.