WASHINGTON — House Republicans Tuesday unveiled legislation to get rid of AmeriCorps, the national service program, and cut off federal funding for National Public Radio, public television and Planned Parenthood.
The moves would come in a controversial spending bill that pays for labor, health and education programs for the budget year beginning Oct. 1.
The measure is dead on arrival with Democrats but contains many provisions to please tea party conservatives.
“This bill is an extremely partisan proposal, stands little chance of even being brought up on the House floor, and will rightly be disregarded by both the Senate and the president,” said Rep. Norm Dicks of Washington, top Democrat on the Appropriations Committee.
The cuts to community service programs, funded at $1 billion this year, would slash such programs by 74 percent on the path to eliminating them entirely, save for a program for senior citizens. National Public Radio and the Public Broadcasting Service are familiar targets, too, but have been rejected before. NPR is seen as left-leaning while Republicans say PBS could get along just fine without taxpayer help.
But to find the $6.3 billion in cuts across the measure, Republicans went well beyond simply slashing Democratic initiatives. Funding of $10.7 billion to administer the Social Security program, for instance, would be cut $1.1 billion below President Barack Obama’s request, cutting funding for computers upgrades, new hires and “program integrity” money designed to find mistakes and combat fraud. Medicare and the Medicaid health program for the poor and disabled would absorb an even larger cut to operating funds.
The legislation would, however, maintain heating subsidies for the poor at $3.4 billion and Title I school funding at $15 billion and give a slight boost to special education for the disabled. Head Start would get a small increase and grants for local community action groups that serve the elderly and the poor would be maintained at the current budget of $712 million.
h/t: HuffPost Politics
Stay classy, Mississippi
I’d also like to point out that Mississippi has one of the top teenage pregnancy rates in the country. In 2010, it was in the top five states with the highest teen pregnancy rate*. Teenage are the demographic that is least likely to terminate a pregnancy but for those teenagers in Mississippi who DO want to terminate, what are they supposed to do?
Mississippi is just going to increase it’s teenage birthrate, which is already the highest in the country according to the CDC.
Love,
Rabble
*Not that this is the pregnancy rate, not teen birthrate. Those two thins are not the same. The study that is linked goes into more detail if anyone is interested in it.
(via becauseiamawoman)
by
Wisconsin Republican Governor Scott Walker on Good Friday night signed several evil anti-women, anti-worker, and even anti-children bills into law. The bills include a repeal of workers’ rights to sue, a bill mandating only abstinence-only sex education, a law that places new state limits on abortion.
The mere fact that Walker signed these bills into law quietly, late on Good Friday, as the holiday weekend had already begun, speaks volumes.
Click the link above to read the full article.
*these laws don’t just affect women
In addition to being misogynistic, oppressive, antiquated and, quite frankly, unconstitutional, politicians who support anti-abortion laws and seek to defund Planned Parenthood are just not very smart politicians. When someone is elected into an executive position, every decision they make will change and shape the history of a nation. Because of this, it is important to have a vision that goes beyond just being elected.
Mitt Romney, who I believe will win the Republican nomination (but not the election), has said the following regarding abortion and Planned Parenthood:
“Planned Parenthood, we’re going to get rid of that.” (source)
“Let me say it. I’d be delighted to sign that bill [overturning Roe v. Wade]. But that’s not where we are. That’s not where America is today. Where America is is ready to overturn Roe v. Wade and return to the states that authority. But if the Congress got there, we had that kind of consensus in the country, terrific.” (source)
So, if you’re elected President Mitt, you’re going to defund Planned Parenthood [which would place 27,000 employees on the unemployment list during record unemployment rates while leaving Planned Parenthood’s 5 million annual clients without a health resource (source)], you’re going to cut social spending, removing other health resources and make abortion illegal, despite population predictions of 9.22 billion people by 2075 (source). On average, Planned Parenthood performs 300,000 abortions a year (source), which would mean almost one million more citizens by the time Mitt would hit his “potential” reelection year. One million more people without access to health resources, without access to social programs like Medicare and Medicaid, which Romney also wants to phase out, replacing it with privatized choices for those who qualify (source). In addition, Romney seems quite concerned with the rights and recognition of a fetus but disregards the rights and agency of many actual living groups of American citizens. Of the almost million abortions that would not be legally performed in his first term, how will Romney feel when they are undocumented? LBGTQ? FAAB? low-income? The question is rhetorical, because his stance on these “issues” is quite clear - he just doesn’t care.
To put it simply, the vision of the GOP is misogynistic, oppressive, antiquated, and near-sited. Romney’s flip-flopping on the issues reveals that he is more concerned with “winning” than he is with the idealism of creating change in this country. Although the ability for politicians to actually create change is, in my opinion, greatly limited, their greatest ability is in institutionalizing and legitimizing particular ideologies, contributing and participating in a collective consciousness that is then distributed via federal funded curriculums, the media, government funded programs and, lastly, particular mouthpieces (we see extensive evidence with this in the recent political climate: the GOP has allowed and encouraged the anti-woman legislation that has swept across many states). Put simply, they control the stories we are told. Whether I believe in the governments ability to truly create positive change doesn’t really matter - what does matter is that, at the very least, a presidential candidate should have the foresight to create a political narrative that is actually good for the country. And when I say good, I mean that it brings more people together than is drives them apart, gives more rights to people (actual people, not conceptual people) than takes them away, creates more opportunities for equality than inequality and can recognize the very real fact that the decisions they make once elected really do effect the history of a nation.
Montana and New Jersey have eliminated altogether their state family planning programs. New Hampshire cut its funding by 57 percent and five other states made more modest program trims.
But the biggest impact, by far, has been in Texas.
State lawmakers last fall cut family-planning funds by two-thirds, or nearly $74 million over two years. Within months, half the state-supported family planning clinics in Texas had closed.
The state network, which once provided 220,000 women a year free and low-cost birth control, cervical cancer tests and diabetes screenings, will now serve just 40,000 to 60,000, officials said.
Another 130,000 low-income Texas women who get free exams and contraceptives through Medicaid could lose those benefits by month’s end, due to a dispute between the state and federal governments over whether Planned Parenthood should be allowed to serve women on that program.
"States slash birth control subsidies as federal debate rages (via pantslessprogressive)
This is what happens when the GOP decides to declare a war on reproductive rights. It doesn’t just stop at abortion rights.
What are all of the people being affected by this going to do? Who is going to help them when Planned Parenthood doesn’t have the funding?
It is unacceptable that people are okay with letting so many people who NEED these services fall through the cracks. Reproductive health and family planning are not some frivolous type of medical care. These services are necessary, breast exams are necessary, pelvic exams and pap smears are necessary, IUDs are necessary, STI screenings are fucking necessary. ALL of these things save lives and make a healthier population.
People shouldn’t have to go to the ER because they had trouble peeing, thought they had an STI that would clear up on its own, and then find out that they actually have stage four prostate cancer. A reproductive health clinic (and the funding that goes with it) could prevent something like that from happening.
Love,
Rabble
(via rabbleprochoice)
(via becauseiamawoman)
New Hampshire GOP Proposes Bill That Will Prevent Police from Protecting Domestic Abuse Victims
Since the 1970s, New Hampshire police have operated under a progressive policy for handling domestic violence cases that has saved countless lives. Under current law the presumption is that an arrest will be made when police observe evidence of abuse. They have a large degree of discretion and don’t need to witness the assault firsthand or obtain a legal warrant before they can separate the alleged attacker from his victim.
All that will change if Republicans get their way. The state’s GOP legislators are pushing two bills that will reverse a half century of progress, the Concord Monitor reports:
Domestic violence is no longer taken lightly legally or by society. That’s the way it should be, but two bills under consideration by this most unusual of legislatures, would undo that progress and put lives in danger. Both deserve a speedy defeat.
House Bill 1581 would turn the clock back 40 years to an age when a police officer could not make an arrest in a domestic violence case without first getting a warrant unless he or she actually witnessed the crime. That’s an exceedingly dangerous change. Consider the following scenario, one outlined for lawmakers by retired Henniker police chief Tim Russell:
An officer is called to a home where she sees clear evidence that an assault has occurred. The furniture is overturned, the children are sobbing, and the face of the woman of the house is bruised and bleeding. It’s obvious who the assailant was, but the officer arrived after the assault occurred. It’s a small department, and no one else on the force is available to keep the peace until the officer finds a judge or justice of the peace to issue a warrant. The officer leaves, and the abuser renews his attack with even more ferocity, punishing his victim for having called for help. […]
It’s impossible to say how many lives the policy, in place since the 1970s, has saved or how many injuries it’s prevented. If they adopt House Bill 1581, lawmakers might find out, but the price paid could be extraordinarily high.
The other bill Republicans have proposed, HB 1608, limits judges’ ability to order the arrest of someone who has violated a domestic violence restraining order by contacting or abusing the person named in the order. It would also prevent judges from ordering defendants to surrender their weapons or block them from buying guns.
Police say the bill stops them from intervening to protect victims. For instance, they would be stripped of their power to arrest someone who is threatening to use violence against a victim or child. It’s unclear why New Hampshire Republicans have set their sights on repealing protections for abuse victims when promised to focus on economic priorities.
And people wonder why I’ve stopped regarding Republicans with any sort of human dignity. They kinda forfeit that right by doing shit like this.
If this passes I’m going to have so much rage.
(Source: thepoliticalfreakshow)
Santorum: States Have the Right to Declare Birth Control Illegal
In light of 2011’s war on the uterus, presidential candidate Rick Santorum is kicking 2012 off with even more utero-hate by stating that “The state has a right to [outlaw birth control], I have never questioned that the state has a right to do that. It is not a constitutional right, the state has the right to pass whatever statutes they have. That is the thing I have said about the activism of the Supreme Court, they are creating right, and they should be left up to the people to decide.”
I would like to personally extend a kind, warm, “fuck you” to Rick Santorum, who proves every time he opens his mouth that he just doesn’t give a shit about the bodily autonomy of, well, anybody.
(Source: masenko-your-face)
Orthodox Rabbis Warn of “Dangerous Homosexualist” Named Mittens
by Evan Hurst
Oh, Mittens! You’ve gone and rustled up the ire of the wackiest fringe rabbis in the land! Why, they have given you a new title, that of “dangerous homosexualist!” Oh, dear:
The statement today comes from the Rabbinical Alliance of America, which describes itself as an organization of 850 Orthodox Jewish rabbis in the U.S. and Canada, who serve some 500,000 religious Jews.
[…]
The statement attributed to Rabbi Yehuda Levin said that Hannukah marks the defeat of the Syrian Greek efforts “to impose their pagan culture on the Jewish people.” That included, he said, the increased emphasis on homosexual behavior.
“While our organization does not make any endorsements of political candidates, in view of the disastrous national decline in morality, we are compelled to condemn Mitt Romney’s support and promotion of the immoral homosexual lifestyle and agenda,” his statement said. “While we sympathize with those challenged by homosexual urges, or a desire for minors or adultery, they all remain prohibited activities that debase the practitioners and demoralize society. Gov. Romney over a long political career has earned the title: ‘Dangerous Homosexualist’ – one who constantly advances the militant anti-religious, anti-society, immoral homosexual agenda to the detriment of family people.”
Oh, Yehuda, for him to “constantly” be advancing anything, he’d have to be capable of having a single opinion on an issue for more than five minutes.
I am happy, though, to have a new thing to call him: Mittens The Dangerous Homosexualist. It’s like a whole new Mormon superhero!
Gingrich: Discrimination Against Blacks May Be Wrong But Against Gays Is Right
by
Newt Gingrich explains that discrimination against blacks may be wrong — “you have to decide whether you’re going to tolerate discrimination based on race,” — but against gays is perfectly acceptable, suggesting that there actually is no discrimination against gays because gay people can drink from the same water fountains as straight people. Note that Gingrich doesn’t actually come out against discrimination against blacks, stating that “you have to decide whether you’re going to tolerate” it.Click the link above to read the full article and watch the video.
Reproductive Agents: The Right-Wing Vilification of Immigrant Women’s Fertility
[pregnant people, not just women]
