The House GOP's Plan to Redefine Rape

HR 3, the so-called "Stupak on Steroids" bill offered by Rep. Chris Smith (R-NJ), would do much more than restrict access to abortion.  It is seeking to redefine rape in order to limit just what would qualify for abortion coverage exceptions.

Rape is only really rape if it involves force. So says the new House Republican majority as it now moves to change abortion law.

For years, federal laws restricting the use of government funds to pay for abortions have included exemptions for pregnancies resulting from rape or incest. (Another exemption covers pregnancies that could endanger the life of the woman.) But the "No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion Act," a bill with 173 mostly Republican co-sponsors that House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) has dubbed a top priority in the new Congress, contains a provision that would rewrite the rules to limit drastically the definition of rape and incest in these cases.

Read more at Mother Jones

Push for Stricter Abortion Limits Is Expected in House

Rep. Joe Pitts of PA has been selected as the incoming Chairman of the Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on Health.  Rep. Pitts is strongly opposed to reproductive rights and his opposition to abortion access is a key part of his agenda as a Representative.  He co-authored the Stupak Amendment to the Health Care Reform Act, and his appointment signals a new assault on women and reproductive rights in the new Congress.

A leading Congressional opponent of abortion rights, who is in line to take charge of an influential House panel, plans to press for much stricter limits on the procedure.

The selection of the lawmaker, Representative Joe Pitts, Republican of Pennsylvania, as chairman of the Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on Health presages a major shift on abortion and family planning, according to opponents and supporters of abortion rights.

Opponents of abortion gained about 45 seats in the midterm elections, and they count the next speaker, Representative John A. Boehner, Republican of Ohio, as a staunch ally, virtually guaranteeing more conflicts with the White House on the issue.

Read more at  The New York Times

Groups fighting abortion restriction in health reform bill

JAC members and leadership will be in Washington, DC this week to participate in the National Day of Action and Rally, as well as lobby Senators about the dangers of eliminating abortion coverage and restricting women's rights.

WASHINGTON (JTA) -- Several Jewish groups are fighting a controversial measure in health reform legislation that would have the effect of eliminating insurance coverage for abortion for millions of women.

At issue is the Stupak Amendment, a measure included at the last minute in the health care bill passed Nov. 7 by the U.S. House of Representatives.

Several organizations -- including the Religious Action Center of Reform Judaism, the National Council of Jewish Women, the American Jewish Congress and the Chicago-based Joint Action Committee -- have spoken out or are lobbying to make sure the amendment does not end up either in the Senate version of health care legislation or the final bill that emerges from a conference committee.

Abortion ban must be stricken from health care bill: Connie Schultz

Language matters, so let's be clear: Women's reproductive health is not a "social issue."

Deciding whether to carry the red purse or the black bag to dinner Saturday night? That's a social issue. Wondering why your child wasn't invited to her classmate's birthday party? That, too, is a social issue.

Attempting to limit women's access to legal and safe abortions? Not even remotely a social issue. So let's stop calling it that as we debate the Stupak-Pitts amendment, which is the latest effort in Congress to prohibit insurance coverage for abortion. The sooner we reject this dismissive casting of a woman's essential right, the sooner elected officials will understand it's not theirs for the tinkering.