Abortion

Subterms

    More stories

    • 113 Shares199 Views

      in US Politics

      Walmart expands abortion coverage for employees after Roe overturned

      by

      Walmart expands abortion coverage for employees after Roe overturnedMemo to staff says that new healthcare policy will also offer ‘travel support’ for workers seeking abortions The US’s largest private employer, Walmart, is expanding its abortion coverage for employees after staying largely mum on the issue following the supreme court ruling that in June scrapped a nationwide right to abortion.In a memo sent to employees Friday, the retail giant said its healthcare plans will cover abortion for employees “when there is a health risk to the mother, rape or incest, ectopic pregnancy, miscarriage or lack of fetal viability”. The plans will be “effective immediately”, the memo added.The company’s benefits plan had previously covered abortion only in cases “when the health of the mother would be in danger if the fetus were carried to term, the fetus could not survive the birthing process, or death would be imminent after birth”, according to a copy of the policy viewed by the Associated Press but not confirmed by Walmart.Walmart’s chief people officer, Donna Morris, said in the memo to staff that the new policy will also offer “travel support” for workers seeking abortions covered under its healthcare plans – as well as their dependents – so they can access services that are not available within 100 miles of their locations.“Given how recent events are resulting in state-by-state healthcare environments, we will expand our travel coverage,” the memo said.Walmart employs nearly 1.6 million people in the US. The company is headquartered in Arkansas, where abortion is banned under all circumstances unless the procedure is needed to protect the life of the mother in a medical emergency. There are no exceptions for rape or incest.That means under the revised policy, Walmart employees can travel out of the state – or any other state that bans abortion for rape and incest – to obtain the procedure through the retailer’s health plans.According to the memo, which CNN also reviewed, Morris said that Walmart decided to make the changes after “listening to our associates about what’s important to them”, adding that “we strive to provide quality, competitive and accessible health coverage that supports you and your families”.The company said it will also launch a center that provides employees fertility services, including in vitro fertilization. Additionally, it vowed to add surrogacy support and increase its financial aid for adoptions from $5,000 to $20,000. In June, Walmart said it would expand its offering of doulas – or people who assist women during pregnancies – to address racial disparities in maternal care.Some other large companies – including Meta, American Express and Bank of America – have said they will cover travel costs for their employees in the aftermath of the high court ruling that tossed out the federal abortion rights established by the landmark decision in the 1973 case titled Roe v Wade, including elective abortions. But a Walmart spokesperson did not immediately reply for a request for comment on whether any of the company’s revised policy will cover elective abortions as well.“It’s a step in the right direction, but it’s simply not far enough for a company that employs that many women,” said Bianca Agustin, director of the corporate accountability program for United for Respect, a group that advocates for Walmart workers. She said the organization will be incorporating “safe abortions” for employees in their list of demands pressing the company for better pay and benefits.TopicsWalmartAbortionUS politicsnewsReuse this content More

    • 125 Shares99 Views

      in Elections

      The Florida Primary for Governor is Mostly About Ron DeSantis

      by

      Democrats would love to defeat Gov. Ron DeSantis of Florida in November. But first they must nominate a challenger who can win in a state where they seem to perpetually fall short.HOLLYWOOD, Fla. — On the first day of early voting in Broward County, Florida’s Democratic mecca, Jared Brown, a 41-year-old lawyer who until recently had never attended a Democratic Party meeting, drove to the polls in suburban Hollywood, slipped on a party T-shirt and grabbed a clipboard to go knock on voters’ doors.He was motivated by anger.Anger at Republicans in general — for appointing conservative judges, redirecting money from public schools and governing in a way that struck him as “authoritarian” — and anger at one Republican in particular: Gov. Ron DeSantis, whose polarizing persona has come to suck up all of the state’s political oxygen.“It’s too offensive,” Mr. Brown said of the culture wars stoked by the governor and state lawmakers. “If you don’t fight them now,” he added, “it’s just not going to get any better.”Going into Tuesday’s primary election, Florida Democrats like Mr. Brown are angry, especially at the ascendant Mr. DeSantis and the way he seems to them to act like someone who already has his eye on the White House. But it is not clear that in the choices they have to challenge him — Representative Charlie Crist, who served as governor from 2007 to 2011, and Nikki Fried, the state’s agriculture commissioner — they have someone who can beat him.“DeSantis is running for president,” said Ann Ralston, 69, as she prepared for a long, sweaty day volunteering for no fewer than seven down-ballot Democratic candidates, whose logos she had pinned on her clothes, turning herself into a human billboard. “It’s a foregone conclusion,” she said.Representative Charlie Crist, who served as Florida governor from 2007 to 2011, greeted people at Mo’s Bagels & Deli in Aventura this month.Saul Martinez for The New York TimesMs. Fried and Mr. Crist have each cast themselves as the more viable alternative and the truer Democrat, but each is defined as much by their perceived limitations as their strengths: Mr. Crist for already losing two statewide races since being elected governor, and Ms. Fried for her short time in public life.To win, Democrats are fighting history as well as themselves. After four election cycles of close losses, the national donors whom they need to help finance expensive statewide campaigns appear unengaged this time. So do some voters.“It’s an emotional narrative about Florida,” said Andrea Cristina Mercado, the executive director of Florida Rising, a racial justice organization. “‘Florida has broken my heart too many times.’”Money usually flows into the state after the primary. But this year, she worries that Florida is not even on some donors’ radar.More Coverage of the 2022 Midterm ElectionsLiz Cheney’s Lopsided Loss: The Republican congresswoman’s defeat in Wyoming exposed the degree to which former President Donald J. Trump still controls the party’s present — and its near future.2024 Hint: Hours after her loss, Ms. Cheney acknowledged that she was “thinking” about a White House bid. But her mission to thwart Donald J. Trump presents challenges.The ‘Impeachment 10’: With Ms. Cheney’s defeat, only two of the 10 House Republicans who voted to impeach Mr. Trump remain.Alaska Races: Senator Lisa Murkowski and Sarah Palin appeared to be on divergent paths following contests that offered a glimpse at the state’s independent streak.“The right wing says every chance they can that ‘Florida is red, Florida is red,’ and it seems that Democrats are buying into that,” she said, noting that people who live in the state know it feels more closely divided than it looks.“We don’t want DeSantis to just walk into the White House,” she added. “We’re trying to do what needs to be done with Scotch tape and paper clips.”Whether Democrats nominate the more disciplined happy warrior Mr. Crist or the more unpredictable, feisty Ms. Fried might matter less than the state party’s longstanding problems. The failings have been clear for years — a thin candidate bench, weak party infrastructure, undisciplined messaging, mounting losses with Latinos — but leaders have struggled with how to address them. Last year, the number of active voters registered as Republicans surpassed Democrats for the first time in history, and the G.O.P. edge has only continued to grow.Nikki Fried, Florida’s agriculture commissioner, is the only Democrat elected to statewide office since 2018.Saul Martinez for The New York TimesManny Diaz, the executive director of the Florida Democratic Party, said in an interview that since taking over in 2021, he had built an internal voter database, trained volunteers and created a detailed county-level campaign plan. Michael R. Bloomberg, the former New York mayor, who is friendly with Mr. Diaz, recently gave the party $1 million, which is far less than the tens of millions Mr. Bloomberg spent in Florida two years ago.“I’m confident that we will get funding,” Mr. Diaz said.In 2018, Mr. DeSantis defeated Andrew Gillum, who would have become Florida’s first Black governor, by about 32,000 votes — less than half a percentage point — making the state a rare bright spot for Republicans. Some Democrats concluded that they would have won with a more moderate candidate, a hypothesis that Mr. Crist would now test. Others insisted that they only came as close as they did because of the excitement surrounding Mr. Gillum. Ms. Fried would be Florida’s first female governor.For now, Democrats’ most buzzy statewide candidate is Val B. Demings, the Orlando congresswoman challenging Senator Marco Rubio, a Republican. Ms. Demings and Mr. Rubio have already attacked each other in ads, and recent Democratic polls have shown the race to be close, though Mr. Rubio is still considered the favorite. More

    • 88 Shares99 Views

      in Elections

      Stacey Abrams’ Personal Evolution on Abortion Rights

      by

      The Georgia Democrat, a child of Methodist preachers, once identified as an abortion foe. Now, she is putting her defense of abortion rights — and the story of her conversion — at the center of her campaign for governor.DUBLIN, Ga. — On the day that a leaked draft opinion suggested the Supreme Court was poised to overturn Roe v. Wade, Stacey Abrams addressed the abortion rights group Emily’s List and preached about abortion rights with “the zeal of the converted.”Early in her professional career, she opposed abortion rights, she volunteered, adding that as a teenager she had criticized a friend who considered having an abortion.“I was wrong,” she said. “But I’ve worked hard to make myself right.”Ms. Abrams is among scores of Democrats pushing their defense of abortion rights to the center of their midterm campaigns, hoping anger over the Supreme Court decision overturning Roe v. Wade will energize the Democratic base and push fence-sitting moderates into her corner. But she is the rare Democrat eager to acknowledge that she didn’t always support abortion rights.The daughter of Methodist ministers living in the Deep South, Ms. Abrams grew up believing abortion was morally wrong. Conversations with other women, a friend’s deliberations over having an abortion and her own political ambitions led her to rethink her stance, she says.Ms. Abrams’ personal approach to talking about abortion is new for the longtime Georgia politician. She did not emphasize her shift when she first ran for governor in 2018. But today, Ms. Abrams says she uses the story to connect with voters who may personally oppose abortion but, perhaps for the first time, are confronting the reality of new government restrictions. In Georgia, most abortions are now banned after six weeks of pregnancy, based on a law signed by Ms. Abrams’ Republican rival, Gov. Brian Kemp.Talking about her own story is “giving them permission to say that choice should exist,” Ms. Abrams said in an interview.“I want people to understand that I know where they’re coming from,” Ms. Abrams said. “But it also creates the opportunity for people to tell you where they stand, as well.”Ms. Abrams’ strategy is something of a throwback. For decades, Democrats treaded carefully when talking about abortion, often assuming voters were disapproving and uncomfortable with the procedure, even if they supported the rights protected by Roe v. Wade. For years, Democratic leaders, starting with Bill Clinton in 1992, declared that their goal was to make abortion “safe, legal and rare,” in an attempt to unite voters with a broad range of views on the issue.For some Democrats, the phrase became emblematic of the party’s willingness to cede ground to abortion rights opponents and attach shame to the procedures. And in the wake of the court’s decision this summer, some are again criticizing the party for using messaging that lets abortion foes frame the debate.“I don’t think that Democrats as a whole — as a party — have talked enough about this issue,” said Renitta Shannon, a Georgia state representative, who did not specifically criticize Ms. Abrams. “All this time, we’ve been relying on the opinion of the court to hold intact people’s reproductive freedom, and that is not a good strategy.”Ms. Abrams has clear reasons for trying to use the issue to cast as wide a net as possible. After voters in conservative Kansas overwhelmingly voted to guard abortion protections, Democrats across the country are hoping the issue shifts momentum in their direction during a year when other political forces — ongoing economic anxiety and President Joe Biden’s weak approval ratings — are working against them.Abortion rights demonstrators outside the Georgia State Capitol in Atlanta shortly after the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade in June.Kendrick Brinson for The New York TimesNearly 55 percent of voters in Georgia oppose the Supreme Court’s ruling reversing Roe v. Wade, according to an Atlanta Journal-Constitution poll released last month.That poll also showed Ms. Abrams trailing Mr. Kemp by five points and, notably, losing ground with Black voters in the state. More

    • 125 Shares139 Views

      in Elections

      Group Seeks to Block Abortion Vote in Michigan, Citing Typography

      by

      Conservative groups in Michigan filed challenges this week to efforts to put two constitutional amendments on the ballot in November, one that would guarantee abortion rights and the other that would expand voting access.The challenge to the abortion amendment was based on a lack of spacing between words, which gave some words the appearance of running together. They characterized the typographical errors as “gibberish,” and “incomprehensible argle-bargle.”One group argued that the Michigan Board of State Canvassers should reject the petition to put that amendment to voters, while a second group took issue with the voting petition, saying it failed to identify every current constitutional provision the amendment would override.The board of canvassers will meet on Aug. 31 to decide whether to certify the petitions.The challenge to the abortion measure comes less than three weeks after voters in Kansas overwhelmingly rejected a constitutional amendment that would have let state legislators ban or severely restrict abortion. That vote underscored abortion rights as a salient issue capable of driving voters to the polls after the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade, and it raised advocates’ hopes that Michiganders would vote similarly.Supporters of the petition for the Michigan abortion amendment said they had submitted more than 730,000 signatures, surpassing the roughly 425,000 required, though the board of canvassers needs to verify them.Read More on Abortion Issues in AmericaAn Uneasy Champion: President Biden, a practicing Catholic, is being called to lead a fight for abortion rights that he has sidestepped for decades. Advocates wonder if he’s up to the task.Safe Havens: After Roe, conservatives are seeking to expand ways that allow women to give up newborns, such as baby drop boxes. But for many experts in adoption and women’s health, they are hardly a solution.In Mississippi: The state that spurred the overturning of abortion rights, is among 17 that have rejected an option to extend new mothers’ Medicaid coverage.A Rare Prosecution: A teenager used pills to terminate her pregnancy at home with the aid of her mother. Their Facebook messages are now key evidence in a rare prosecution over abortion.Darci McConnell, a spokeswoman for Reproductive Freedom for All, the group promoting the abortion amendment, said that the organization was “confident that we’re in compliance with all legal requirements for ballot proposals” and that hundreds of thousands of voters had “read, understood and signed the petition in support of reproductive freedom for all.”The petition includes the text of the proposed amendment, which would ensure abortion rights broadly until fetal viability and in cases where “the life or physical or mental health of the pregnant individual” was in danger after viability. On some lines, the text is squeezed tightly. In a 152-page challenge, Citizens to Support MI Women and Children, a group that opposes the amendment, argued that the lack of spacing was unacceptable.For instance, in a section that reads, “Every individual has a fundamental right to reproductive freedom, which entails the right to make and effectuate decisions about all matters relating to pregnancy,” the challengers said the formatting created “nonexistent words” such as “decisionsaboutallmattersrelatingtopregnancy.”They described this and other examples as “nonsensical groupings of letters that are found in no dictionary and are incapable of having any meaning.”The text at issue in a Reproductive Freedom for All petition.State of Michigan“Because the petition fails to use actual words in the full text in its proposed amendment, how can the people know what they are voting for or against?” it said, adding that even if the board of canvassers concluded that these were merely typos, Michigan law did not allow supporters of the amendment to fix such errors at this point in the process. Citizens to Support MI Women and Children directed a request for comment to Genevieve Marnon, the legislative director for Right to Life of Michigan, an anti-abortion group. Ms. Marnon, who filed an affidavit in support of the challenge, said that petitions were “routinely disqualified for technical errors,” saying that state officials had rejected signatures on a 2019 anti-abortion proposal “for small tears in the petition and for return address stickers’ covering a few words of the ‘essential elements’ of the petition.” (Signatures for that campaign, which extended into 2020, were also challenged on substantive grounds, including claims that some were duplicates.)Ms. Marnon attached to her email a mocking word-search puzzle whose answer list consisted of words from the petition — all of them separated in the correct places.Reproductive Freedom for All will file a formal rebuttal by Tuesday, according to Mark Brewer, a lawyer working with the group, who called the complaint a “frivolous Hail Mary challenge.” After that, he said, nonpartisan staff in the Michigan secretary of state’s office will make a recommendation to the board of canvassers on whether the challenge should be upheld.If the board of canvassers — two Democrats and two Republicans — deadlocks at its meeting on Aug. 31, the next step will be the courts. Under the Michigan Constitution, amendments for the November ballot must be finalized by Sept. 9.The challenge to the voting rights amendment was filed on behalf of a group called Defend Your Vote. The proposal it objected to would amend the Michigan Constitution to, among other things, require nine days of early in-person voting and expand access to absentee ballots. It would also bar any law or conduct that “has the intent or effect of denying, abridging, interfering with or unreasonably burdening the fundamental right to vote.”Supporters said they had submitted about 670,000 signatures.In their challenge, lawyers for Defend Your Vote argued that the amendment petition did not specify all of the current constitutional provisions it would modify.One provision they said was improperly omitted designates the “first Tuesday after the first Monday of November” as Election Day. By mandating an early-voting period, the challengers argued, the amendment would render that provision “inoperative.”Micheal Davis Jr., the executive director of Promote the Vote, the group supporting the voting amendment, called the complaint “bogus, baseless and meritless.”The challenge to the voting amendment will be adjudicated through the same process as the challenge to the abortion amendment. A spokeswoman for Promote the Vote said the group had not filed its formal rebuttal yet. More

    • 175 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      Are Latino voters really moving right? The end of Roe may muddy the picture

      by

      Are Latino voters really moving right? The end of Roe may muddy the pictureLatinos support reproductive rights by large margins – and that could prove a powerful mobilizing tool in the midterms After the Republican party made some inroads among Latino voters in the 2020 presidential election, when Latino support for Trump went up by 3% compared with 2016, many commentators declared this group was decisively moving away from the Democratic party.As November’s midterms approach, the GOP is aiming to capitalize on these gains. The recent victory of the Latina Republican Mayra Flores, who won a congressional seat representing southern Texas, is one they are hoping to replicate across the country.Yet, with increased support largely limited to Florida and Texas, the political landscape is more complicated than it seems heading into this year’s midterms, and experts say the supreme court’s decision to overturn Roe v Wade may play a role in halting the GOP’s gains.Christine Sierra, professor emerita of political science at the University of New Mexico and a specialist in Latino politics, says that any Republican gains in the 2020 presidential election did not mark a definitive trend. “While Republicans managed to make a few inroads in very specific counties in Florida and Texas, for example, Democrats maintain a majority of the Latino vote,” she recently told the Guardian. More than 60% of Latinos voted for Joe Biden.Historically, Latinos have focused on issues such as economics, jobs, education and immigration to determine their vote – areas in which the GOP believes it has an upper hand among more moderate voters. However, the quickly changing landscape of sexual and reproductive rights in the United States might influence what matters most to Latino voters. Abortion bans are expected to have a greater effect on women of color, and Latina women account for about 25% of abortion patients in the US.“Now, given the controversy and salience of abortion as an issue, it may go to the top one, two, or three issues [that matter to Latinos],” Sierra said.A poll conducted in June by Change Research on behalf of the political organization Voto Latino found that 64% of Latinos in battleground states “are more motivated to vote in November” due to the fall of Roe, and 52% are “much more motivated”. The poll surveyed Latino voters in Texas, Arizona, Nevada, Florida, Georgia, North Carolina and Pennsylvania.Another poll by the same organization conducted in May found that across the battleground states of Arizona, Pennsylvania, Nevada and Georgia, 70% of Latino voters are in favor of protecting the right to choose. At least 30% of Latino Republicans in these states believe abortion should be legal “in all or most cases”.Moreover, a recent Axios-Ipsos Latino poll in partnership with Noticias Telemundo revealed at least 50% of Latino voters in the US say abortion should be legal while another 21% don’t have a view. One-fourth believe abortion should be illegal “at any time under any circumstances”.Lina-Maria Murillo, assistant professor of gender, women’s and sexuality studies as well as history and Latinx studies at the University of Iowa, believes this extreme conservative stance among a minority of Latino voters can be traced back to the influence of the evangelical Christian church, where Latinos have been considered “one of the fastest growing segments’’, and of which Flores is a member. Bucking what Murillo says is a common stereotype that Latinos oppose abortion due to their Catholicism, the May Voto Latino poll shows Catholic Latinos support a woman’s right to choose at about the same rate as Latinos in general.Still, Ameer Patel, vice-president of programs at Voto Latino, says the belief that Latinos are generally conservative is more anecdotal than anything else. “They’re actually really in favor of reproductive rights. And that number obviously increases when we look at younger Latinos,” he said. In the May Voto Latino poll, 75% of respondents between the ages of 18 through 39 said they support a woman’s right to choose.Every year, about 1 million Latinos turn 18 and become eligible to vote in the US. Patel says their stance on abortion represents a unique mobilization opportunity for Democrats. “If you’re able to use this as a mobilization issue for young Latino voters in places like Arizona, Georgia and Nevada, this is an extremely powerful tool,” he said.In Arizona, where the end of Roe could revive a civil war-era law banning abortions, Latinos account for about 25% of voters and played a critical role in flipping the state in the 2020 presidential election. Moreover, 64% of respondents to the Voto Latino poll in Arizona said they would not support a candidate who stands for a complete abortion ban, stating “it would be a deal breaker.” This picture could affect contests like the attorney general race, where the Republican candidate Abraham Hamadeh has campaigned on the promise of upholding Arizona’s anti-abortion laws.Patel says Republicans are taking note of this trend and choosing not to focus on reproductive rights as an issue to sway Latino voters, “because [they know] this is not a message they can win them on”. While Arizona’s Democratic candidate for governor, Katie Hobbs, has been outspoken about her stance on abortion, for instance, the Republican candidate, Kari Lake, has recently shied away from discussing the issue. In Texas, the Democratic candidate Beto O’Rourke has repeatedly vowed to repeal the state’s abortion ban if elected governor. In Florida, the Republican governor, Ron DeSantis, is avoiding the subject.Murillo believes the role of Latinas working for reproductive justice is often overlooked. “If we look at some of the major abortion funds in Texas, like West Fund and Frontera Fund, they have been established and are run by Latinx folks,” she said.If O’Rourke can “galvanize the youth in Texas, especially around issues of abortion”, said Murillo, “then I think he has a chance and I think that Latinx people in Texas have a major role to play in that”.According to a New York Times analysis, Democrats are vastly outspending Republicans on midterm ads talking about abortion. Still, Murillo believes Democrats are not fully seizing the opportunity to sway Latino voters. “Democrats are stuck in these old pandering ways; they’re not seeing the changes that are coming and the ways that Latinx people are not a monolith and that the youth component of this community is overwhelmingly progressive,” she said.If Democrats don’t act, she says, while Latino voters “are not necessarily going to be turning to Republicans, they may just not vote at all”.TopicsAbortionUS politicsUS midterm elections 2022newsReuse this content More

    • 100 Shares119 Views

      in Elections

      A Campaign Tactic by Democrats: Smart? Risky? Unethical?

      by

      More from our inbox:Covid Priorities, in the Schools and BeyondThe Needs of Ukraine’s StudentsThe Kansas Abortion Vote Trent Bozeman for The New York TimesTo the Editor:Re “A Cynical Low for the Democratic Party” (editorial, Aug. 4):Cynical, indeed! As a moderate Democrat, I find it appalling that Democratic campaign organizations are contributing money to finance the primary campaigns of ultra-right, pro-Trump supporters and election deniers.Money contributed to these Democratic organizations should go to candidates promoting free and fair elections, and who work to combat lies, racism and antisemitism. I want campaign dollars to support and guarantee that women have the right to make decisions about their own health and welfare.To learn now that our campaign dollars are going to promote extreme right-wingers and Trumpers makes me wonder: Why would I ever consider making contributions again to Democratic groups if they give money to the campaigns of the very people I wish to see defeated?Robert D. GreenbergBethesda, Md.To the Editor:I would beg to differ with the editorial board’s view that the Democratic Party’s support for Trump Republican proponents of the Big Lie is a “cynical low.” Your argument is that Democrats, who claim to stand up for the truth, should not be supporting the deniers of truth, and, furthermore, that theirs is a “repugnant and risky strategy.”But can it also be considered a deft political strategy and worth the risk? It is not an illegal action, and it is probably not immoral, but just plain smart politics.Raymond ComeauBelmont, Mass.To the Editor:While Democrats’ efforts to promote far-right candidates, whom they perceive to be easier targets in the general election, may succeed in swaying a few Republican primary voters, they pose the greater risk of alienating large swaths of independent voters like me who simply want politicians to act with a modicum of honesty and integrity.Especially in battleground states like Michigan, where independents have the power to decide races with far-reaching consequences, Democrats would be wise to build the moral high ground on election integrity rather than actively undermining it.John ZaineaAnn Arbor, Mich.To the Editor:Let’s be cleareyed. There no longer is such a thing as a moderate Republican politician. I, too, detest Democratic donations going to nominate election deniers. But Republicans who didn’t get Donald Trump’s endorsement by and large deny climate change, support abortion bans and favor a tax system that tilts toward corporations and the wealthy.Don’t shift the political landscape even farther in that direction by describing those right-wing Republicans as “moderate.” They aren’t.Ken EudyRaleigh, N.C.The writer is a retired senior adviser to Gov. Roy Cooper.Covid Priorities, in the Schools and Beyond Jonathan Kirn/Getty ImagesTo the Editor:Re “A Proposal for School Covid Policies This Year,” by Joseph G. Allen (Opinion guest essay, Aug. 6):While I appreciate the critical thought and expertise that Dr. Allen brought to the discourse on Covid policies in our education system, I’m concerned that the scope too frequently narrowed on children’s resilience.Children may be far less likely to be hospitalized or experience severe symptoms, but they are just as likely to pass symptoms to adult family members who could be at high risk.The guidelines from Britain’s education system referred to in the article suggest that children go to school unmasked if symptoms are only minor (a runny nose, a slight cough, etc). Those children may easily pass those minor symptoms to their classmates, who may just as easily pass them to an adult (a family member or staff at the school) who experiences Covid more seriously.Yes, the alternative is damaging: children missing school. But our educators and families could pay a larger price if we let children pass it among themselves and to adults.Alexandra DavisBrooklynTo the Editor:Joseph G. Allen says he is writing in these capacities: “As a public health scientist. As someone who has spent nearly 20 years doing risk assessments of indoor environmental hazards. As a dad of three school-age kids, and an uncle to 15.”But Covid policy in schools affects people schoolchildren interact with outside school. This includes the old and immunocomromised adults who cannot take Paxlovid because it interacts with their other medicines.Writing as an old person, a liberal and a bioethicist, I wonder why a public health expert thinks “the overriding goal for the next school year should be to maximize time in the classroom and make school look and feel much like it did before the pandemic started,” rather than recognizing that the overriding goal of any Covid policy should be to save lives.Felicia Nimue AckermanProvidence, R.I.The Needs of Ukraine’s Students Emile Ducke for The New York TimesTo the Editor:Re “For Children of War, a Time for Play” (news article and photo essay, Aug. 8):As children, their families and teachers get excited about the new school year throughout the world, it is imperative to continue to publicize the dire education needs of Ukrainian children.In addition to the physical destruction of school infrastructure, there are shortages of supplies from laptops to textbooks. Some teachers have had to physically defend their schools as Russian invaders entered.Professors have been giving lectures from the front lines. Others have been teaching in person from shelters, where air-raid sirens wail. The dedication of the teachers in wartime is heroic.Students are the future of any country. The education of students in Ukraine, as had been taking place before the invasion in February, is essential to the rebuilding of the country. They deserve our support. As do their teachers.Anna NagurneyAmherst, Mass.The writer is the Eugene M. Isenberg chair in integrative studies, University of Massachusetts Amherst, and co-chair of the board of directors of the Kyiv School of Economics.The Kansas Abortion VoteIn its most recent term, in addition to overturning Roe v. Wade, the Supreme Court expanded gun rights, limited the Environmental Protection Agency’s ability to address climate change and expanded the role of religion in public life.T.J. Kirkpatrick for The New York TimesTo the Editor:Re “Defying the Supreme Court,” by David Leonhardt (The Morning newsletter, Aug. 4):Those, like me, rejoicing over the overwhelming rejection in Kansas of a measure to allow banning abortion there ought to curb their enthusiasm. The outcome of that referendum could exemplify the adage “Be careful what you ask for; you might get it.”That Kansas voters refused to permit their legislature to roll back women’s reproductive rights plays into the narrative of the Supreme Court’s rationale in the Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization case, in which the justices reasoned that decisions on women’s control over their own bodies should be left to each of the states.By demonstrating that this tenet can work to protect individual rights, the Kansas vote could bolster the states’ rights argument underlying the Dobbs decision. It may be invoked to justify the inclination of the supermajority radicals on the court to reconsider decisions involving contraception and same-sex marriage, among other matters, as advocated in the Dobbs case by Justice Clarence Thomas.Marshall H. TanickMinneapolisThe writer is a lawyer. More

    • 150 Shares179 Views

      in Elections

      Why Abortion Has Become a Centerpiece of Democratic TV Ads in 2022

      by

      Since the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade, Democrats have spent nearly eight times as much on abortion-related ads as Republicans have.In Michigan, Democrats took aim at the Republican nominee for governor almost immediately after the primary with a television ad highlighting her opposition to abortion, without exceptions for rape or incest.In Georgia, Democrats recently attacked the Republican governor in another television ad, with women speaking fearfully about the specter of being investigated and “criminalized.”And in Arizona, the Republican nominees for both Senate and governor were confronted almost instantly after their primaries with different ads calling them “dangerous” for their anti-abortion positions.All across America, Democrats are using abortion as a powerful cudgel in their 2022 television campaigns, paying for an onslaught of ads in House, Senate and governor’s races that show how swiftly abortion politics have shifted since the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade in late June.With national protections for abortion rights suddenly gone and bans going into effect in many states, senior White House officials and top Democratic strategists believe the issue has radically reshaped the 2022 landscape in their favor. They say it has not only reawakened the party’s progressive base, but also provided a wedge issue that could wrest away independent voters and even some Republican women who believe abortion opponents have overreached.Volunteers organizing campaign materials before the Kansas state primary at the Johnson County Democratic Party headquarters in Overland Park, Kan.Katie Currid for The New York TimesIn the fallout of the ruling, Democrats see the potential to upend the typical dynamic of midterm elections in which voters punish the party in power. In this case, although Democrats control the White House and both chambers of Congress, it is one of their top policy priorities — access to abortion — that has been most visibly stripped away.“Rarely has an issue been handed on a silver platter to Democrats that is so clear-cut,” said Anna Greenberg, a Democratic pollster working with multiple 2022 campaigns. “It took an election that was going to be mostly about inflation and immigration and made it also about abortion.”In the roughly 50 days since the Supreme Court’s ruling, Democrats have flooded the airwaves in many of the nation’s most closely watched contests, spending nearly eight times as much as Republicans have on ads talking about abortion — $31.9 million compared with $4.2 million, according to data from AdImpact, a media tracking firm. And in the closest Senate and governor’s contests, Republicans have spent virtually nothing countering the Democratic offensive.By contrast, in the last midterms four years ago, Democrats spent less than $1 million on ads that mentioned abortion-related issues in the same time period.The 2022 advertising figures do not include money spent on the recent anti-abortion rights referendum in Kansas. The landslide defeat of that measure, particularly in a traditionally conservative state, has only further emboldened Democratic strategists and candidates.There are risks to focusing so heavily on abortion at a moment when Americans are also expressing intense anxiety over the economy. But Democrats are plowing ahead, particularly in key Senate races.They have spent more than $2 million on ads targeting Senator Ron Johnson, Republican of Wisconsin, for his position on abortion; $1.6 million on ads against Mehmet Oz, the Republican candidate for Senate in Pennsylvania; and $1.8 million on Adam Laxalt, the Republican Senate nominee in Nevada who recently wrote an op-ed defending his stance on the issue.Read More on Abortion Issues in AmericaA First: Indiana became the first state to draw up and approve a near-total abortion ban in the post-Roe era. Some major companies in the state, including Eli Lilly, have criticized the law.An Uneasy Champion: President Biden, a practicing Catholic, is being called to lead a fight for abortion rights that he has sidestepped for decades. Advocates wonder if he’s up to the task.A Resounding Decision: Kansas voters overwhelmingly rejected an amendment that would have removed the right to abortion from the State Constitution, a major win for abortion rights in a deep-red state.Safe Havens: After Roe, conservatives are seeking to expand ways that allow women to give up newborns, such as baby drop boxes. But for many experts in adoption and women’s health, they are hardly a solution.More abortion ads have aired in the Senate races in North Carolina, New Hampshire, Arizona and Washington — and even in Connecticut and Maryland, two states with secure Democratic incumbents.“I clearly believe abortion is going to matter because I think it cuts across demographics and it really does get into many voters, including Trump voters and independents, and their concept of personal freedom,” said J.B. Poersch, the president of Senate Majority PAC, a Democratic super political action committee that has already funded abortion commercials in multiple states.But Republicans say Democrats risk ignoring the economic concerns that polls have shown are paramount.“They’ve got a lot of bad news, and they think that’s the only good news they’ve got,” said former Representative Steve Stivers of Ohio, who led the House Republican campaign arm during the 2018 midterm elections. “If they want to be a single-issue party, that’s on them.”If Democrats do focus overwhelmingly on the issue of abortion at the expense of other matters, Mr. Stivers suggested, “they’ll get smoked on the economy, where they’re already losing ground.”For months, Democrats have been bracing for a Republican wave this fall, prompted by President Biden’s diminished popularity, high gas prices and inflation, and they still face a difficult political environment. But Mr. Biden is expected to sign a sweeping legislative package soon that addresses climate change and prescription drug prices. In addition, gas prices are declining, and there are at least some tentative signs that inflation may be slowing.Those developments, combined with the backlash to the Supreme Court’s ruling on abortion, have raised Democrats’ hopes of maintaining power after November. Certainly, they plan to advertise their legislative achievements while making other attacks on Republicans, whom they argue are a threat to democracy.For now, new abortion-focused Democratic advertisements are popping up seemingly almost every day, including in Alaska, Iowa and Virginia.Some abortion ads use the specific words and positions of Republican candidates against them. Some are narrated by women speaking in deeply raw and personal terms. Some use Republicans’ unyielding stances on abortion to cast them more broadly as extremists.And some, like one early ad hitting Doug Mastriano, the Republican nominee for governor in Pennsylvania, do all three. “Doug Mastriano scares me,” a woman declares at the beginning of the spot.One particularly emotional spot came from Stacey Abrams, the Democratic nominee for governor of Georgia, who used a montage of women to target Gov. Brian Kemp’s stance on abortion.“He supports a total ban,” one woman says in the ad. “Even if I’m raped,” another says. More women continue, one after another: “A victim of incest. Forced pregnancy. Criminalized women. Women with jail time.”An ad for Stacey Abrams includes a montage of women describing what the re-election of Gov. Brian Kemp would mean for abortion rights.One GeorgiaDemocrats aim to connect abortion messaging to the broader argument that hard-line Republicans are seeking to strip away fundamental freedoms.“The arguments Democrats are using in those ads don’t stay contained to the abortion space,” said Jennifer Palmieri, the former White House communications director under President Barack Obama and a longtime party strategist. “You’re telling them something about their temperament, their judgment and their values.”In at least five states, Democrats have used the phrase “too extreme” to call out Republicans, using abortion as the example.Often, abortion is the Democrats’ opening gambit at the start of general election ad campaigns. Just this month, ads have targeted Tudor Dixon in the governor’s race in Michigan and Kari Lake in the governor’s race in Arizona. And a day after Minnesota’s primary for governor, Democrats began airing an ad calling Scott Jensen, the Republican nominee, “too extreme” on abortion.Elaine Luria, the Democratic candidate for the House of Representatives in Virginia, has aired an ad calling her opponent, Jen Kiggans, “too extreme for Virginia.”Elaine for CongressThe next major test of abortion’s political power comes in a special election on Aug. 23 in New York.County Executive Pat Ryan in Ulster County, N.Y., the Democratic candidate in that race, has made abortion the focus of his campaign, even in a state where access remains protected. In a new ad this week, Mr. Ryan featured a carousel of national Republicans arguing that the party would pursue a nationwide ban.A Democratic super PAC is spending $500,000 to promote Mr. Ryan, a veteran, with an abortion message. “He sure didn’t fight for our freedom abroad to see it taken away from women here at home,” the narrator says.The election is being closely monitored as a barometer of the issue’s power. Democrats have overperformed — even in defeat — in two other special elections since Roe v. Wade was overturned, in Minnesota and Nebraska.Meredith Kelly, a Democratic strategist and ad maker, said one factor that made abortion “extremely powerful” was the idea that “Republicans are taking something away.”Research has shown that the notion of losing rights can be galvanizing for voters, which Ms. Kelly saw firsthand in 2018 when she guided the messaging for the House Democratic campaign arm. The party took over the House in part by bludgeoning Republicans for their repeated efforts to repeal the Affordable Care Act.“When you take something away from voters, especially something as cherished and crucial as health care, which is what this is, that is a really politically perilous decision,” she said of Republicans’ approach to abortion rights.Some Republicans are trying to backpedal or soften their stances.In Arizona, ads are hammering Blake Masters, the Republican Senate candidate, for calling abortion “demonic,” talking about punishing doctors who perform the procedure and opposing exceptions for rape and incest during the primary. In a post-primary interview with The Arizona Republic, Mr. Masters called the state’s 15-week ban “a reasonable solution” and expressed his desire to “reflect the will of Arizonans.”On the airwaves, though, few Republicans have had an answer. One notable exception has come in the New Mexico governor’s race; Mark Ronchetti, the Republican nominee to take on Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham, has been under fire over his stance on abortion.“I’m personally pro-life, but I believe we can all come together on a policy that reflects our shared values,” Mr. Ronchetti said in a campaign spot that detailed his position on the issue.Josh Shapiro, the Pennsylvania attorney general and Democratic nominee for governor, opened his first ad of the general election by hitting Mr. Mastriano on abortion.Josh Shapiro, Pennsylvania’s attorney general and the Democratic nominee for governor, at a campaign event in Lock Haven, Pa.Kriston Jae Bethel for The New York TimesIn an interview, Mr. Shapiro said voters were especially attuned to the issue because the state’s Republican-led Legislature had passed strict abortion limits that he would veto and that Mr. Mastriano would sign.“There is an intensity around this,” he said. “They know the next governor of Pennsylvania is going to decide this.”The evening before, Mr. Shapiro said, he met a Republican woman in the Lehigh Valley who told him that she was voting for him — her first Democratic ballot — because of abortion.“It has brought people into our campaign and brought people off the sidelines to get engaged unlike any other issue,” Mr. Shapiro said of abortion’s influence after the Supreme Court’s ruling. “We just saw an explosion.” More

    • 163 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      After the fall of Roe, Republican pursuit of abortion bans appears to falter

      by

      After the fall of Roe, Republican pursuit of abortion bans appears to falterThe stunning defeat of the Kansas referendum and internal divisions have undercut an all-out assault on reproductive rights In the leadup to the US supreme court overturning Roe v Wade and thus scrapping federal abortion protection, Republican lawmakers across the country maintained an uncompromising rallying cry against abortions, vowing to implement a sweeping wave of restrictions in their states.However, since the highest court in the US overturned the ruling, many Republican leaders and officials have become more hesitant – or have even gone silent – over the exact type of bans they promised to enact.As Republicans move towards an election season rife with internal disagreements within their own party and mixed public opinions on exceptions in abortion bans such as instances of rape and incest, many rightwing lawmakers are finding it increasingly difficult to implement cohesive abortion policies.The phenomenon has been starkly illustrated by Kansas’s referendum last week, where the usually reliably Republican state voted to keep abortion protections in its state constitution, providing an unexpected boost from red state America to the abortion rights movement.With delays in passing abortion bills across the US and contentious questions on how far the bans will reach, Republicans are now, as Sarah Longwell, a moderate Republican strategist, said to Politico, “the dog that caught the car”.According to a survey conducted between 27 June and 4 July by the Pew Research center, a majority of the American public disapproves of the supreme court’s decision to overturn Roe: 57% of adults disapprove of the court’s decision, including 43% who strongly disapprove, and 41% of American adults approve while 25% strongly approve of the court’s decision.The survey also found that 62% of Americans say that abortion should be legal in all or most cases, and 36% of Americans say that abortion should be illegal in all or most cases. Only 38% of Republicans say that abortion should be legal in all or most cases, marking a 1% decrease from poll results obtained in 2007.As Republican lawmakers grapple with mixed public opinions, many lawmakers have been divided over just how far they should go to ban abortions. With the recent case of the 10-year-old rape victim traveling across state lines from Ohio to Indiana to obtain an abortion continuing to dominate national headlines, many Republicans are realizing that the reality they are presented with differs vastly from their initial narratives surrounding abortion politics.What kind of exceptions should be made in cases of rape and incest? Should a woman be granted an abortion if she is faced with a life-threatening ectopic pregnancy or an incomplete miscarriage? If an outright ban is put in place, should there be expansions of paid family leave benefits and increased funding for foster care and women’s health?Some states have plowed ahead. Indiana has now passed a Republican-sponsored bill that would ban nearly all abortions in the state with limited exceptions, including cases of rape and incest, and to protect the health of the mother. That made it the first state in the US to put new restrictions in place, rather than just rely on a pre-existing “trigger law” passed before the supreme court’s decision.But even in Indiana the move came after a series of thorny debates in the Indiana congress that reflect the growing divide Republicans are facing when it comes to fleshing out the specifics of abortion ban bills.Before Roe v Wade was overturned, lawmakers did not spend “enough time on those issues, because you knew it was an issue you didn’t have to really get into the granular level in. But we’re in there and we’re recognizing that this is pretty hard work,” Republican Indiana state senator Rodric Bray told the New York Times.Another Indiana Republican state senator, Kyle Walker, who voted against the ban last month, said: “I believe we must strike a balance for pregnant women to make their own health decisions in the first trimester of the pregnancy and also provide protections for an unborn baby as it progresses toward viability outside the womb.”Even state senator Sue Glick, the sponsor of the bill, said that she was “not exactly” happy with the bill.Meanwhile, the American Civil Liberties Union of Indiana called the bill “cruel” and “dangerous”, while Indiana Right to Life criticized it as being “weak and troubling”, saying that it “lacks any teeth to actually reduce abortions in Indiana by holding those who perform abortions or would intentionally skirt the law accountable with criminal consequences.”South Dakota, a predominantly Republican state, is facing a similar situation.Shortly after the bombshell leak of the supreme court draft opinion on Roe, Republican governor Kristi Noem announced that she will “immediately call for a special session to save lives and guarantee that every unborn child has a right to life in South Dakota.”However, since the supreme court overturned Roe, Noem has yet to publicly give any indication of when or if a special session will still take place. In response to the Associated Press asking if the special legislative session is still on the table, Noem’s office said it will happen “later this year”.Noem has largely kept her language surrounding South Dakota’s abortion bans vague, simply reaffirming that “there is more work to do” and promising to “help mothers in crisis”. In June, Noem appeared to soften her approach on abortions by saying that doctors, not their patients, should be prosecuted for offering abortion pills.“I don’t believe women should ever be prosecuted,” she said. “I don’t believe there should be any punishment for women, ever, that are in a crisis situation or have an unplanned pregnancy,” she said. The governor also set up a website for pregnant women that aims to “help mothers and their babies before birth and after by providing resources for pregnancy, new parents, financial assistance and adoption.”Speaking to the Associated Press, South Dakota Right to Life’s executive director, Dale Bartscher, said that Noem’s actions reflect a turning point in the anti-abortion movement.“An entirely new pro-life movement has just begun – we stand ready to serve women, the unborn and families,” he said. The Guardian reached out to Bartscher for additional comments.In Arkansas, the Republican governor, Asa Hutchinson, appears to have taken a softer approach on the issue after the state’s abortion trigger ban immediately went into effect when Roe was overturned. Last month, Hutchinson did not confirm that abortion will be a topic on the agenda of this month’s special session that is supposed to focus on tax cuts.Referring to alternatives to abortion, Hutchinson said: “That’s come up in conversations … I’ve mentioned that need. You know, what can we do more for maternal care? What can we do more for adoption services because of the increased number that’s going to be demanding that? And so that is a potential issue … so just stay tuned.”In May, Hutchinson acknowledged that his state’s abortion trigger law would result in “heartbreaking circumstances”, adding that “whenever you see that real-life circumstances like that, the debate is going to continue and the will of the people may or may not change”.The governor admitted that abortions performed in the exceptions of rape and incest are increasingly “reflecting the broad view of Americans” but acknowledged that the issue is “still a very divided [topic].”However, whether Hutchinson will ask lawmakers to consider the exceptions during the state’s upcoming legislative special session remains to be seen.Meanwhile, in Ohio, the Republican governor, Mike DeWine, has refused to comment on the state’s recently enacted “heartbeat bill”, which makes abortions illegal after six weeks into a pregnancy. As a result of the state’s strict abortion laws, a 10-year-old rape victim from the state had to travel to Indiana to receive an abortion.DeWine condemned the case as a “horrible, horrible tragedy” but did not signal whether he would amend abortion restrictions in the state. Speaking to reporters last month, DeWine refused to advocate for specific abortion policies and said that he is “going to let the debate play out a little bit”, referring to the legislative debate that is expected to happen in a few months.“We’re going to hear from medical experts, we’re going to hear from other people,” he said, adding: “then there’ll be a time when I’ll certainly weigh in.”Since Roe got overturned, Virginia’s top Republican lawmaker has been expressing similar sentiments to DeWine’s. In June, Governor Glenn Youngkin told an anti-abortion group that he would “happily and gleefully” sign any bill that would protect life, which he believes begins at conception.Youngkin has expressed support for a ban on abortions after 15 weeks with exceptions for rape, incest and risk to the mother’s health.Youngkin did not specify his support for any particular policies, although he acknowledged the divisive nature of the issue and called for a legislative process to hash out nuances in abortion ban bills.“I’m a pro-life governor and I will sign a bill that comes to my desk that protects life and I look forward to that. But as of now, what we need is the process to start and to take the next four or five or six months and to work on a bill that can be supported on a bipartisan basis,” he said.As Republicans across the country face a widening divide over the particularities of implementing abortion bans, a leading anti-abortion group has been urging Republicans in Congress not to leave the issue to the states. Many anti-abortion activists worry that extreme measures by Republican state lawmakers may cost Republican lawmakers seats nationally, especially with midterms on the horizon.At the same time, in the wake of the Kansas referendum result, many Democratic strategists now believe public opinion, even in many red states, will be on their side. The issue can be used to shore up under-threat Democrats and wielded as a weapon against Republican candidates who can be portrayed as out of step with most Americans.In a memo from Susan B Anthony Pro-Life America sent out in July, Republican lawmakers were encouraged to stay away from phrases such as “nationwide ban” and were urged not to relay the issue to state lawmakers.“It is vitally important that pro-life Members of Congress highlight the abortion extremism of Democrats, who support abortion on demand, up until the moment of birth, paid for the taxpayer,” the memo said.TopicsRoe v WadeAbortionRepublicansUS politicsfeaturesReuse this content More