Washington Post (USA)
Virginia’s Republican-led House of Delegates passed a bill Thursday to eliminate the state’s 2007 requirement that girls receive the vaccine against the human papillomavirus before enrolling in sixth grade.

New York Times (USA)
This month the Obama administration, citing the medical case for birth control, made a politically charged decision that the new health care law requires insurance plans at Catholic institutions to cover birth control without co-payments for employees, and that may be extended to students. But Catholic organizations are resisting the rule.

WGGB (USA)
According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, in 2010, about 72- percent of women were screened for breast cancer. That’s below the target of 81 percent. Cervical cancer, 83 percent of women were tested and the target is 93 percent.

Onlookers predict the bill’s momentum will not be curbed this time around, as the committee already voted to advance the severe bill to the Senate floor.  Forced ultrasound legislation has become an increasingly common and intrusive method of restricting access to abortion procedures by placing undue burden on pregnant women.  Supporters of the severe effort refuse to acknowledge the financially and mentally taxing nature of the bill, which offers no evidence to support its effectiveness in reducing rates of said procedures, and ignores the extreme violations endured by both the doctor and patient.

Requiring health care providers perform government mandated procedures is both costly, and intrusive.  This type of anti-choice effort erodes patient’s confidence in the medical provider by disrupting the physician’s ability to practice medicine with integrity, free of special interests.  Further, the severe bill forces women to endure an unnecessary medical procedure, which disrupts the traditionally confidential doctor-patient relationships, and violates basic rights to individual privacy.   

If Virginia’s state legislature’s recent anti-choice agenda is any indication, choice advocates fear the forced ultrasound legislation is likely to pass.

Colorado Independent (CO)
A new survey released from the National Latina Institute for Reproductive Health found that “strong majorities” of Latina/os registered to vote support “access to legal abortion, affirm that they would offer support to a close friend or family member who had an abortion, and oppose politicians interfering in personal, private decisions about abortion,” the group reports.

Austin Statesman (TX)
The Austin City Council repealed an ordinance to encourage transparency by requiring some centers that counsel women with unplanned pregnancies to post entrance signs saying they don’t offer or refer clients to abortion or birth control services.

The Republic (HA)
According to a measure before the Legislature, sexually assaulted women would be entitled to information about emergency contraception while they are being treated in Hawaii hospitals and emergency rooms.

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.