Lots of women support Hillary - does she really support us?
Everyone knows that Hillary Rodham Clinton is the presumptive Democratic nominee for 2008. The conventional wisdom is that she'll have massive support among women, but Women's eNews says that might not be so. Some feminist groups are not thrilled by many of her votes in the Senate and some of her issue positions.
Clinton has teamed up with Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid, a Democrat from Nevada who opposes abortion rights, to introduce legislation aimed at preventing pregnancy by enhancing access to contraception and reducing health care costs. Critics see the bill as an attempt to shift the debate away from the controversial issue of abortion rights.
"I would like Senator Clinton, as I would like all pro-choice representatives, to start any conversation about reproductive justice and reproductive health by saying, 'I support access to safe, affordable, legal abortions,' period," said Melody Drnach, action vice president at the Washington-based National Organization for Women.
Amen, sister. I think the Prevention First strategy is a good one for advocacy groups, especially in more conservative states. Big props to our friends at Planned Parenthood and NARAL Pro-Choice America for this very smart campaign. But as an issue position for a presidential candidate, it irritates me. It's a very Third Way position to take, which is not necessarily a bad thing. But given all the attacks on choice in the states, I want to hear federal candidates flat-out say whether they do or do not support a woman's right to choose. Supporting reproductive freedom is not a liberal position! What's more conservative than saying the government has no business legislating your personal decisions?
And here's the thing: Americans will vote for people they disagree with on some issues. They will. What matters to them is that elected officials take a stand and share their values. Part of what bothers me about some of HRC's votes, like supporting the war in Iraq, seem less like assertions of principle of belief and more like carefully focus-grouped weaseling. Voters will forgive a lot, but they don't forgive insincerity.
Here's my suggestion for a pro-choice and pro-prevention statement: "Unintended pregnancies can be tough situations. I believe in individual rights, and I believe that there are some decisions every person has to make for herself. So I think we should make sure everyone has access to all the information and services they need to make the best decision for themselves and their families: medically accurate sex education, contraception, prenatal care, adoption support, and safe, legal abortion."
And if we get out of Iraq, then we can actually afford to do all that.
Obviously there are several possible follow-up questions: what about exceptions for rape or incest? What about parental notification or consent? My answer, short version:
"I am against exceptions and qualifications. It is not the government's job to tell people what's moral or immoral. Moral decisions belong with individuals, to make on their own, with the support of their families, churches, and loved ones."
Long version:
"Furthermore, exceptions are just not practical. As a lawyer, I know how slowly the wheels of justice can turn. Pregnancy is a special case because there's that built-in nine-month deadline. And because these matters are so intensely personal and difficult to talk about, there's often very little evidence. The most common exceptions people support are those for rape and incest. Well, any lawyer - heck, anyone who's watched Law and Order - knows how hard it is to prove that rape or incest occurred. There's so much shame and fear, and it can come down to one person's word against another. Again, that puts these very personal and difficult decisions in the hands of lawyers and judges, and I don't think that's right. There are some places government just doesn't belong. We can offer you information and education that can help you make the decision, and we can offer you support after you've made it. But the government has no business dictating your decisions about family."
Comments
Last I knew Hillary was a NOW member. If we want women, feminists, in the political power structure we have to accept the limitations on individual power to give us everything we want when we want it. Think about how much her presence has prevented. We are not forced to wear burqas yet.
Posted by: Ruby | June 27, 2006 01:15 PM