Washington Post (USA)
The Virginia Board of Health is developing permanent state regulations governing clinics that perform abortion procedures to reduce access to the procedure through bureaucratic channels.  The board plans to hold a public hearing in Richmond on Friday.

Seattle Times (WA)
State lawmakers are moving ahead with a bill that would require most health insurers offering maternity care to also cover elective abortions.

Omaha World Herald (NE)
Nebraska lawmakers shot down a common sense bill Wednesday aimed at curbing the high rates of sexually transmitted diseases in the state.

Huffington Post (USA)
Rep. Trent Franks (R-Ariz.) drew a heap of criticism from Washington, D.C., locals on Monday when he introduced a bill that would ban D.C. women from having abortions after 20 weeks of pregnancy.

Wall Street Journal (USA)
An increasingly popular strategy that shortens radiation treatment for patients with early-stage breast cancer is drawing scrutiny from researchers concerned that it is being rapidly adopted before important questions are answered about its efficacy.

The Union Leader (NH)
In New Hampshire, abortion took center stage at a Judiciary Committee hearing Tuesday.  Lawmakers heard testimony on four bills aimed in various ways at reducing or discouraging legal access to abortions.

Without mentioning him by name, Obama’s speech subtly criticized likely GOP frontrunner Mitt Romney by calling on the wealthiest Americans to pay their share, and level the playing field.  Romney responded to the subtle jab arguing, “What he’s proposing is more of the same: more taxes, more spending, and more regulation.”  President Obama also touched on his supposed pro-business policies more than once, without directly addressing mounting criticisms that the Administration favors legislation, which purposely stunts and regulates the private sector.

Republican Governor Mitch Daniels (IN) gave the Party rebuttal to the President’s address, which focused on holding the President accountable for the present state of affairs.  Daniels asserted, “”He was elected on a promise to fix them, and he cannot claim that the last three years have made things anything but worse.”

Kaiser Health News (USA)
Catholic Healthcare West, one of the nation’s largest hospital systems, is ending its governing board’s affiliation with the Catholic Church and changing its name, two steps intended to help the system expand throughout the states in which it operates — California, Arizona and Nevada — and beyond.

News 4 (FL)   
Florida’s perennial abortion battle re-emerged Tuesday, as a House panel approved bills that would block abortions after 20 weeks, impose 24-hour waiting periods and target procedures based on unsubstantiated suspicions of race or gender discrimination.

The District of Columbia’s at-large Congressional Delegate Eleanor Holmes Norton immediately recognized Franks’ manipulative tactics to propel the subjective measure, publicly challenging the Representative; “If Rep. Franks is so intent on such a bill, I think he should add Arizona to the jurisdiction to which his bill would apply…Why would anyone do something to us that he wouldn’t do to his own district?”

The well-funded anti-choice group, National Right to Life Committee, reinforced suspicions surrounding Franks’ D.C. strategy, explaining that the District of Columbia, “has long been dismayed by the abortion policy that is currently in place in one jurisdiction that is under the direct constitutional authority of the Congress: the Federal District (District of Columbia).”

The most alarming aspect of this bill is not the sponsor’s surreptitious assertion of Congressional authority, but that the anti-choice proposal lacks fundamental medical certainties.  The bill’s language makes no secret of the subjective argument within the text, and in the absence of proven scientific data or universally accepted medical conclusions, H.R. 3803 relies on, “evidence [which] indicates…” While multiple medical presumptions and conclusions are cited within the pages of H.R. 3803, Franks fails to establish a logical, indisputable connection between hard facts cited, and his wildly subjective argument.

Earlier this year, Washington D.C. was highlighted within the House appropriations package, and the final resolution to bridge budget gaps for the remainder of FY2012 included a provision to renew the D.C. abortion rider.  Although Rep. Franks’ latest legislative ploy to further his anti-choice agenda is highly unlikely to move through the Democrat controlled Senate, onlookers expect the bill to gain momentum in the House, where the anti-choice bills dominated the 112^th calendar at the expense of economic discussions and solutions.

Huffington Post (USA)
Failed presidential candidate Rep. Michele Bachmann dramatically pronounced that the November elections will end abortion, without providing any factual evidence to support her claim and blatant efforts to legislate behavior.

Reuters (USA)
Getting a legal abortion is much safer than giving birth, suggests a new U.S. study published Monday.  Researchers found that women were about 14 times more likely to die during or after giving birth to a live baby than to die from complications of an abortion.

Phoenix News (AZ)
Arizona Congressman Trent Franks yesterday introduced a bill into Congress that would dictate when women in Washington D.C. are allowed to end a pregnancy.

There is no argument that during this incredibly tumultuous time, political priorities are focused on economic solutions and job creation.  However, by ignoring the importance of Roe v. Wade, and casting it aside as a B or C list priority, we are nearing the point of no return. Extreme groups are clandestinely, and successfully pushing legislative efforts to increase government regulation of medical decisions, surreptitiously destroying citizens’ basic rights to privacy and the traditional doctor-patient relationship.

Politicians have turned Roe v. Wade into a campaign issue, exhibiting blatant disregard for the fundamental rights to privacy, choice and unfettered access to preventative health services.  As legislators attempt to turn Roe into a black and white issue about the sanctity of life, they do so in the absence of substantiated, universally accepted medical conclusions. The right to privately select medical procedures, medications and a confidential doctor-patient relationship are not political bargaining chips to be used as a litmus test for Party loyalty or reelection efforts.

To those who have yet to realize the connection between economic solutions and the right to choice, it is incredibly simple.  Smart social policy supports sound economics.  Investing in prevention and education ultimately lessens costs to families and taxpayers long-term, and reduces rates of abortion procedures, disease and unintended pregnancies.  The numbers are indisputable; supporting choice and programs promoting prevention are far less expensive than the alternatives- expensive, prolonged treatments for undetected illnesses, teen motherhood and increased rates of infectious diseases.  Roe v Wade is not a political issue, it is common sense.  The underlying principles embedded in Roe; limited government, individual liberty and preventative safeguards apply to economics as much as social  policy.

We are toeing a dangerous line as state and federal legislators further legal efforts to diminish the legality of Roe v Wade and increase governmental insertion in daily lives- placing the rights to privacy and individual freedom in serious jeopardy.  If we do not stand up for these basic rights, and stand against these severe governmental intrusions, we risk setting frightening precedents, and losing these freedoms for good.  In order to preserve our rights, we must defend them and denounce the politicization of reproductive health, privacy and personal freedom.

News

Washington Post (USA)
It is the 39th anniversary of the Roe v. Wade Supreme Court decision, and abortion it has become one of the most common medical procedures performed. Yet, few issues today are as contentious as abortion, and the battles over access are only become more and more heated. This year alone, states enacted 80 new legal provisions seeking to restrict access to abortion services, representing a sharp increase from 2010.

Examiner.com (USA)
In a victory for mainstream America, and American women, the Administration has ruled that religious institutions must follow a new federal mandate and offer employees free birth control through their health insurance coverage.

During this morning’s announcement, Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius said, “I believe this proposal strikes the appropriate balance between respecting religious freedom and increasing access to important preventive services.”  However, reports are already predicting that conservative members of Congress will work to overturn the decision and expand the exemption for religious organizations, despite the fact that said institutions serve individuals of all religions. 

In a rare moment, Mitt Romney was caught off guard when asked if he would release 12 years worth of tax returns, following the example set by his father.  Romney was visibly uncomfortable in his response, which essentially translated to, “maybe, but probably not.”        

Towards the end of the debate, personal attacks fizzled and candidates were once again questioned on the issue of choice.   When Gingrich pointed out that Romney previously appointed pro-choice judges during his time as governor, Romney’s response was particularly noteworthy.  Romney responded, “We don’t have a litmus test for appointing judges, asking them if they’re pro-life or not pro-life.”

Although Romney is presently advertising himself as an anti-choice candidate, he makes an interesting point.  There is no Party litmus test for allegiance, yet the remaining candidates all feel it necessary to denounce the legality of choice, and continue making campaign promises to appoint staunch anti-choice judges, in hopes of posing a threat to Roe v. Wade.   Americans remain dissatisfied with Congress, the Administration and the current field of presidential possibilities.  The four Republicans remaining in the race will do well to put a stop to political pandering and pay attention to the issues that matter the to main stream majority; job creation, tax rates and economic stability.