The Reporter, September 2013

PoPulation ConneCtion

Volume 45, Issue 3 September 2013

The RepoRTeR2013 Congressional Report Card Issue

The Reporter — September 2013

In his legendary 1948 campaign, President Harry Truman barnstormed across the nation. Everywhere, he railed against the “Do Nothing Congress.”

The plainspoken Missourian would level the same charge today. Not much gets done on Capitol Hill these days—though there are still some truly dedicated, able legislators on our side. The main “accomplishment” of the House this year has been to vote to repeal Obamacare no less than 40 times. And zealots oppose family planning programs at every turn.

Despite the gridlock on Capitol Hill, we always find ways to move forward effectively. At Population Connection we focus 100 percent of our effort in two areas: education and advocacy.

As the only nationwide provider of K-12 Population Education, we trained 11,000 educators in 2012 at 542 work-shops on 164 college campuses and elsewhere. Some 50,000 American teachers use our materials in subjects ranging from math to science to social studies, from language arts to early childhood education. Three million students annually gain valuable insights into population issues through our hands-on activities carefully designed to meet constantly changing cur-riculum requirements.

In terms of grassroots advocacy, we battle every single day against that strange bunch who hold some of the most powerful political offices. We work closely with the Obama Administration and our beleaguered, stalwart congressional allies so that vital programs get funded—albeit not fully.

In just the past year alone, America’s investment in interna-tional family planning:

• Provided birth control to 31.6 million women and couples• Prevented 9.4 million unintended pregnancies• Prevented 4.1 million unplanned births• Averted 4 million abortions• Saved the lives of 22,000 women

In the developing world, an estimated 222 million women have an unmet need for contraception. They want to avoid pregnancy, but face all sorts of obstacles. The U.S. share of the total investment that is needed to fulfill unmet need amounts to an additional $300 million a year—about one dollar per American.

In terms of both education and advocacy, we know what needs to be done. And we know how to do it.

We’re never satisfied with the pace of progress. That’s why we’re always seeking ways to train more teachers, reach more students, and reduce population growth through access to family planning here at home and around the world. Despite all the obstacles we face, with your help we are making real and measurable progress toward the critical goal of zero population growth.

President’s Note

John Seager [email protected]

Economic Experts: A Healthy Economy Doesn’t Require Population GrowthA broad panel of experts in business, economics, demography, and aging agree: Economic growth does not depend on population growth. That’s the conclusion reached by Population Connection’s Pathways project. The research portion of the project—available for download on our website at www.popconnect.org/pathways—is the culmination of more than a year’s worth of surveys, inter-views, and focus groups. The project also found that heightened productivity, later retirement, and increased female participation in the workforce can help offset the economic effects of population aging. Fortunately, research shows that the United States can raise its productivity with a smaller workforce, but it must first invest in human capital and address age discrimination.

www.popconnect.org September 2013 — The Reporter 1

2 Editor’s Note

3 Letters to the Editor

4 Pop Facts

6 In the News

26 Washington View

28 Field & Outreach

30 PopEd

32 Cartoon

33 Editorial Excerpts

Board ChairJ. Joseph Speidel

President and CEOJohn Seager

Editor and DesignerMarian Starkey

ContributorsRebecca Harrington, Stacie Murphy, John Seager, Marian Starkey, Pamela Wasserman

Overpopulation threatens the quality of life for people everywhere. Population Connection is the national grassroots population organization that educates young people and advocates progressive action to stabilize world population at a level that can be sustained by earth’s resources.

Annual membership includes a one-year subscription to The Reporter. Annual membership, $25. All contributions, bequests, and gifts are fully tax-deductible in accordance with current laws.

The Reporter (ISSN 0199-0071)Population Connection2120 L Street, NW, Suite 500Washington, DC 20037(202) 332-2200(800) 767-1956(202) 332-2302 [email protected]

www.PopulationConnection.orgwww.PopulationEducation.orgwww.Facebook.com/PopulationConnectionhttp://Twitter.com/popconnectwww.PopConnect.org/ConnectingDots

Cover PhotoU.S. Capitol Building, Washington, DCPhoto: Mval, Dreamstime.com

The ReporterVolume 45, Issue 3September 2013

8 House of Representatives Report Card

20 Senate Report Card

24 House of Representatives Appropriations Committee Votes

25 Senate Appropriations Committee Votes

2 The Reporter — September 2013

In looking for news items to report and votes to score in this year’s Congressional Report Card, I was struck by how thoroughly abortion legislation dominated coverage

of reproductive health issues over these past few months. It seems like every time I check the news, another clinic is threatened with closure and yet another state has restricted access to the procedure.

I suppose I shouldn’t be surprised by any abortion-related leg-islation at this point, no matter how mean-spirited or inane. After all, I have been a volunteer as a patient greeter at my local family planning clinic for six years and have witnessed vitriolic outbursts by crazed protesters week after frustrating week. They pace back and forth in front of the clinic, holding gruesome signs and shouting at scared and vulnerable patients who are attempting to do nothing but mind their own business and access legal health care services. They say they’ll help the women raise their babies and that it’s bad for their health to have an abortion. When that fails to elicit the desired reaction, they scream threats such as, “We will wrap your legs in barbed wire, and you will burn in hellfire!” Recently, when a fellow greeter and I were commenting to each other about the sum-mer heat, one of the protesters warned, “You think it’s hot out here? Imagine what hell will feel like.”

Loony bin stuff aside, in the first half of 2013, a variety of states adopted 43 restrictive abortion measures—the second highest in history (a whopping 80 restrictions were enacted in the first half of 2011). Right-wing politicians are try-ing to deny abortion access through all sorts of infuriatingly creative, medically moronic measures: mandating completely unnecessary hospital admitting privileges for abortion doctors; enacting Targeted Regulation of Abortion Providers (TRAP) laws requiring abortion clinics to meet the same building standards as brand new ambulatory surgical centers; applying onerous waiting periods; requiring intrusive ultrasounds; ban-ning the use of telemedicine for medication abortion; and even demanding that women complete courses on adoption—as if

they are unaware that the option exists. Not to mention all their attempts to restrict the period that abortion is legal to as short as six weeks after conception, as in the case of the “fetal heartbeat bills” facing legislatures in several states. At that early stage, many women don’t even know that they are pregnant—which is the point, of course.

These restrictions and requirements have forced clinics to close around the country. In Mississippi, North Dakota, South Dakota, and Wyoming, only one abortion clinic per state remains. Nationwide, one-third of women must travel more than 25 miles to access abortion services; 17 percent must go at least 50 miles. For these women, especially, telemedicine can ensure that an abortion occurs as soon as the decision to ter-minate is made, rather than after the money has been raised, the childcare has been arranged, and the time has been taken off work. In Iowa, where telemedicine for abortion originated (and where it has since been targeted), data show that this is exactly what happened.

But don’t let me get carried away with reason and logic. We all know that plays no part in today’s abortion debates.

Take a look at how your members of Congress voted in this year’s floor and committee votes. The 2013 Congressional Report Card is a valuable resource for determining whether your elected officials truly represent your interests and con-cerns. If they do, take the time to thank them. If they don’t, raise a fuss. Write, call, and—most importantly—vote. Women around the country, and the world, depend on it.

Editor’s Note

Marian [email protected]


Letters to the Editor

Re: “America is Doomed Unless Women Start Having More Babies,” June 2013.

Women have been culturally programmed to have chil-dren to complete their “ideal” families. The fairy tale movies’ depiction of a loving, financially-supportive husband and wonderfully behaved children could indeed be a satisfying life. Unfortunately, the statistics, and particularly those for single parents, are staggeringly different from the ideal. It is scarcely mentioned what an enormous sacrifice women in particular make to raise their children.

Having worked in the counseling field, I can recount difficult stories of heartbreak of women who were forced to have chil-dren they didn’t want, either due to religious convictions or not having sufficient funds or knowledge to prevent pregnancy. Is it really fair to those children who were never welcomed? The psychological damages inflicted on unwanted children can haunt them the rest of their lives.

I, too, was one of the women who believed in living happily ever after, but the reality was that I became a single mother and had to fend for myself and my children without finan-cial support. My children were planned, but I could have never imagined my subsequent single-parent reality.

I worked seven days a week at three different jobs to pay for all the expenses. How much I would have loved some help or a day off. I felt guilty for having to work so much and not spending more quality time with my children. For them it was no picnic, either.

I can honestly say after seven decades of living that I support any woman’s choice not to have children, for they are enormous responsibilities and financial liabilities lasting over decades.

One would assume that having helped healthy children to adulthood, one would have earned some personal space and

time. But so often, parents are called upon to take care of their aging parents and their adult children who return home for support, often with their own children in tow. I am in the potential boat of having to start raising children—my grand-children—all over again.

It certainly is not a matter of not loving one’s children, but a contemplation of duties and responsibilities that should ideally ease with advanced age.

Family planning is a most important aspect of life, and every woman MUST be able to decide whether to have children or not. In my opinion, those in favor of forcing women to bring children into this world should be made responsible to take care of them, paying all expenses to adulthood.

A solution to the so-called problem of low fertility lies indeed in the closing statement of the above-mentioned article: “If women don’t want to have more children, then instead of abandoning women’s equality as a goal, we should rework our economic system so it doesn’t rely on a steadily growing popu-lation to function.”

We have gained enormous insights as a society, but we still have to outgrow the handed-down beliefs that are attempting to make women the perpetual babymakers and caretakers of the world. Living in the 21st century should ideally reflect some of the wisdom gained from former generations and world affairs. Personal freedom to make one’s own childbearing choices and access to birth control have to rank near the top.

—A still-not-so-liberated grandmother

Send correspondence to [email protected]. Letters are also accepted via postal mail. Letters may be edited for clarity and length.

Attn: Marian Starkey Population Connection 2120 L St., NW, Ste. 500 Washington, DC 20037

4 The Reporter — October 2012

It is now

estimated that

48 percent of the

world’s population lives in low-

fertility countries, where women

have fewer than 2.1 children on average

over their lifetimes.

World Population Projected to Reach 9.6 Billion by 2050

= 1 billion

World Population Projections

2013

2025

2050

1.45 billion

20281.45

billion

The population of India is expected to surpass that

of China around 2028, when both countries will

have populations of around 1.45 billion.

By the end of the century, Nigeria could

start to rival China as the second most

populous country in the world.

>Nigeria

China

2013

2050

2100

Popu

latio

n in

bill

ions

10

9

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

1

02013 2050

Developing regions

Developed regions

Developing vs. Developed Regions

Growth is expected to be most rapid in the

49 least developed countries, which are projected to double in

size from around 900 million inhabitants in 2013 to

1.8 billion in 2050. More than half of global population growth between now and 2050 is expected to occur in Africa.

= 1 billion

Results presented are based on the UN’s “medium-variant” projection, which assumes a substantial reduction in the fertility levels of intermediate- and high-fertility countries in the coming years.

Source: United Nations Press Release re: World Population Prospects: The 2012 Revision, UN Population Division

Design by Rebecca Dodelin

Rapid population increase in Africa is anticipated even if there is a substantial reduction of fertility levels

in the near future. The medium-variant projection assumes that fertility will fall from 4.9 children

per woman in 2005-2010 to 3.1 in 2045-2050, reaching 2.1 by 2095-2100.

5www.popconnect.org October 2012 — The Reporter

It is now

estimated that

48 percent of the

world’s population lives in low-

fertility countries, where women

have fewer than 2.1 children on average

over their lifetimes.

World Population Projected to Reach 9.6 Billion by 2050

= 1 billion

World Population Projections

2013

2025

2050

1.45 billion

20281.45

billion

The population of India is expected to surpass that

of China around 2028, when both countries will

have populations of around 1.45 billion.

By the end of the century, Nigeria could

start to rival China as the second most

populous country in the world.

>Nigeria

China

2013

2050

2100

Popu

latio

n in

bill

ions

10

9

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

1

02013 2050

Developing regions

Developed regions

Developing vs. Developed Regions

Growth is expected to be most rapid in the

49 least developed countries, which are projected to double in

size from around 900 million inhabitants in 2013 to

1.8 billion in 2050. More than half of global population growth between now and 2050 is expected to occur in Africa.

= 1 billion

Results presented are based on the UN’s “medium-variant” projection, which assumes a substantial reduction in the fertility levels of intermediate- and high-fertility countries in the coming years.

Source: United Nations Press Release re: World Population Prospects: The 2012 Revision, UN Population Division

Design by Rebecca Dodelin

Rapid population increase in Africa is anticipated even if there is a substantial reduction of fertility levels

in the near future. The medium-variant projection assumes that fertility will fall from 4.9 children

per woman in 2005-2010 to 3.1 in 2045-2050, reaching 2.1 by 2095-2100.


U.S. Fertility Rate Stabilizes in 2012The general fertility rate (the number of births per 1,000 women of childbearing age) appears to be stabilizing after several years of decline. Data from the National Center for Health Statistics (part of the CDC) found that there were 63.2 births per 1,000 women ages 15-44 in 2012, down infinitesimally from 2011. The rate decreased nearly 3 percent per year from 2007 to 2010; it decreased about 1 per-cent from 2010 to 2011.

The total fertility rate (the number of children the average woman would bear over her lifetime if current age-specific fertility rates remained constant over time) stood at 1.9—also unchanged from the year before.

Estimates show that 1.3 million births were averted between 2007 and 2011 due to suppressed fertility. Those births may be made up in the coming years though, as couples who waited to have children until the recession abated begin to make up for lost time. Evidence supports this theory, as fertility rates for women ages 30-39 were up in 2012, at the same time that fertility rates for women in their 20s continued to drop.

The birth rates in Idaho, Kansas, North Dakota, and Ohio all saw increases. The rates decreased, however, in Alabama, Alaska, Colorado, Connecticut, Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Massachusetts, Mississippi, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Jersey, and North Carolina. The rates in the remaining 33 states stayed

the same as they were in 2011. Utah had the highest rate and New Hampshire had the lowest rate in 2012.

The teen birth rate hit a new record low in 2012—29.4 births per 1,000 women ages 15-19. The peak rate was 61.8, in 1991. The birth rate for young women was also at a record low in 2012, at 83.1 births per 1,000 women ages 20-24.

Customers of Any AgeCan Buy Plan B One-StepWithout a PrescriptionIn June, the Justice Department dropped its argument against Judge Edward Korman’s ruling to make Plan B One-Step emergency contraception available to customers of all ages. Since August, the pill has been available over-the-coun-ter without proof of age. The two-pill version will still be subject to the age requirement set by the Administration (15 years of age).

Teva Pharmaceuticals, the company that manufactures Plan B, will have exclu-sive marketing rights for three years and will be the only morning-after pill available to all ages without a prescrip-tion. The drug retails for $50-70. The price will likely drop after 2016, when Teva Pharmaceuticals will lose exclusive rights to over-the-counter sales.

Final Ruling on Contraceptive MandateThe Obama Administration issued the final ruling in June that requires most employers with over 50 employ-ees to offer insurance plans that cover

contraception at no cost. Houses of wor-ship will be excluded from the rule.

The Administration considered over 400,000 comments to the original con-traceptive mandate before announcing its final ruling.

Hobby Lobby Wins Stay Against Contraceptive MandateFederal Judge Joe Heaton issued a pre-liminary injunction that exempts the crafts chain store Hobby Lobby and its affiliated Christian bookstore, Mardel, from the contraceptive mandate included in the Affordable Care Act. The case is on hold until October 1.

Medicaid Patients Can Access Planned Parenthood in IN, Judge RulesU.S. District Judge Tanya Walton Pratt ruled in August that Indiana cannot pre-vent Medicaid patients from accessing services at Planned Parenthood clinics. The 2011 law was halted by a permanent injunction that affirmed an earlier pre-liminary injunction, on the grounds that Indiana cannot violate Medicaid’s “free-dom of choice” provision.

Telemedicine Banned for Early Abortions in IAA program pioneered in Iowa in 2008 to distribute abortion medication via video conference will end in November. The program allows women who live in rural areas to visit one of 15 clinics where they receive an examination by a nurse to determine whether the pregnancy is

In the news


early enough to terminate with pills. A doctor (usually located in Des Moines) then prescribes the medication and instructs the patient to take the first pill via video conference. The second pill is taken later, at home. The patient must report back for a follow-up appointment with a nurse to ensure that the preg-nancy was successfully terminated and that there have been no complications.

The state’s medical board voted 8-2 in August to end the program by requiring doctors to be physically present when they dispense the abortion-inducing pills, virtually cutting off the option of medication abortion for many women who live too far from a clinic with an abortion doctor.

Earlier efforts to end telemedicine abor-tion failed in the legislature. The Board of Medicine took no action in 2010 when abortion opponents first petitioned them to vote to end the practice. Since then, the make-up of the Board has changed, with appointees from anti-choice Gov. Terry Branstad providing the necessary voting power to end the practice.

ND Abortion Restrictions Blocked by JudgeThe country’s most restrictive ban on abortion, set to go into effect in North Dakota on August 1, was blocked by a federal judge in July. The restriction would have banned abortion once a fetal heartbeat is detected, about six weeks into pregnancy. Many women are not even aware that they’re pregnant that early in a pregnancy.

The judge issued a temporary injunction that will stand until the trial.

TX Abortion Clinics Close Under New RegulationsTexas Gov. Rick Perry signed a bill in July that implemented some of the country’s most restrictive abortion regu-lations. The bill bans abortions after 20 weeks, requires certain structural adapta-tions to make clinics comply with new ambulatory surgery center requirements, and requires doctors to have admitting privileges at hospitals within 30 miles of their clinics.

Texas had 42 abortion clinics when the bill went into effect; two have already closed and at least four more are prepar-ing to close under the new law when it goes into effect in late October.

Most physicians agree that fetus viability doesn’t occur until 24 weeks. Proponents of the bill argue that fetuses can feel pain as early as 20 weeks—a claim that is heavily disputed by physicians.

Federal Judge Blocks WI Admitting Privileges LawA new Wisconsin law that would have required abortion doctors to have admit-ting privileges at a nearby hospital was put on hold by a federal judge in July. The hold was extended by four months in early August.

Judge William M. Conley, who issued the holds, will make a final ruling after the trial, which is scheduled for November 25. He has said that he

believes admitting privileges don’t pro-tect women’s health or indicate quality of care.

Female Inmates Sterilized Against PolicyAt least 148 prisoners at the California Institution for Women in Corona and Valley State Prison in Chowchilla were given unapproved, medically unneces-sary tubal ligations from 2006 to 2010. Ten additional women claim that they were subject to other forms of steriliza-tion, including ovariectomy.

The California Joint Legislative Audit Committee unanimously approved an investigation and told the auditors to make the review their top priority. In the meantime, the doctors who rec-ommended the procedures have been removed from their positions at the cor-rectional institutions.

Unsafe Abortion in AfricaUnsafe abortion takes the lives of 29,000 women each year in Africa, accord-ing to the World Health Organization. Another 1.7 million women are hospi-talized due to complications.

Abortion is illegal in 14 African coun-tries and is restricted in all others except South Africa, Cape Verde, Tunisia, and Zambia. As a result, more than 6 million unsafe abortions occur each year in the region—making up the vast majority (97 percent) of all abortions obtained.

To read the original articles from which these summaries were taken, see www.popconnect.org/news


113th U.S. CongressHouse of Representatives

Roman: RepublicanItalic: DemocratBold: Independent

Ryan Budget Blueprint (H.Con.Res.25)3/21/2013 The House voted on the budget blueprint authored by Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI). It called for dramatic cuts to foreign assistance funding that would have a devastating impact on U.S. international family planning programs. Our position: OpposeResult: Passed 221-207, 4 Not Voting

20-Week Abortion Ban (H.R.1797)6/18/2013Introduced by Rep. Trent Franks (R-AZ), the so-called Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act bans all abortions after 20 weeks of pregnancy. The bill contained only very limited exceptions (there were no exceptions for fetal anomalies or health risks to the woman).Our position: OpposeResult: Passed 228-196, 10 Not Voting

Global Democracy Promotion Act (H.R.2738)Introduced 7/18/2013Introduced by Rep. Nita Lowey (D-NY), the Global Democracy Promotion Act (GDPA) would prevent a future president from acting unilaterally to reinstate the Global Gag Rule.Our position: Support

U.S. Capitol Dome. Illustration: Eric Pohl, Dreamstime.com

State District Representative RyanBudget

FranksBill

GDPACo-Sponsor

Alabama 1 Jo Bonner x –2 Martha Roby x x3 Mike D. Rogers x x4 Robert Aderholt x x5 Mo Brooks x x6 Spencer Bachus x x7 Terri Sewell √ √

Alaska Don Young x xArizona 1 Ann Kirkpatrick √ √ •

2 Ron Barber √ √3 Raúl Grijalva √ √ •4 Paul Gosar x x5 Matt Salmon x x6 David Schweikert x x7 Ed Pastor √ √8 Trent Franks x x9 Kyrsten Sinema √ √ •

Arkansas 1 Rick Crawford √ x

“The incidence of rape resulting in pregnancy

[is] very low.”—Rep. Trent Franks

re his 20-week abortion ban


√ supported Population Connection positionx opposed Population Connection position– no vote recordedI ineligible• co-sponsor


FranksBill

GDPACo-Sponsor

2 Tim Griffin x x3 Steve Womack x x4 Tom Cotton x x

California 1 Doug LaMalfa x x2 Jared Huffman √ √ •3 John Garamendi √ √ •4 Tom McClintock x x5 Mike Thompson √ √ •6 Doris Matsui √ √ •7 Ami Bera √ √ •8 Paul Cook x x9 Jerry McNerney √ √10 Jeff Denham x x11 George Miller – √ •12 Nancy Pelosi √ √13 Barbara Lee √ √ •14 Jackie Speier √ √ •15 Eric Swalwell √ √ •16 Jim Costa √ √17 Mike Honda √ √ •18 Anna Eshoo √ √ •19 Zoe Lofgren √ √ •20 Sam Farr √ √ •21 David Valadao x x22 Devin Nunes x x23 Kevin McCarthy x x24 Lois Capps √ √ •25 Howard McKeon x x

California 26 Julia Brownley √ √ •27 Judy Chu √ √ •28 Adam Schiff √ √ •29 Tony Cardenas √ √ •30 Brad Sherman √ √ •31 Gary Miller x x32 Grace Napolitano √ √33 Henry Waxman √ √ •34 Xavier Becerra √ √35 Gloria Negrete McLeod √ √

“I just find it astonishing to hear a phrase repeated that the incidence of pregnancy from rape is low. There’s no scientific basis for that. And the idea that the Republican men on this committee can tell the women of America that they have to carry to term the product of a rape is outrageous.”

—Rep. Zoe Lofgren (D-CA)





FranksBill

GDPACo-Sponsor

36 Raul Ruiz √ √37 Karen Bass √ √ •38 Linda Sánchez √ √ •39 Ed Royce x x40 Lucille Roybal-Allard √ √41 Mark Takano √ √ •42 Ken Calvert x x43 Maxine Waters √ √ •44 Janice Hahn √ √45 John Campbell x –46 Loretta Sánchez √ √47 Alan Lowenthal √ √ •48 Dana Rohrabacher x x49 Darrell Issa x x50 Duncan D. Hunter x –51 Juan Vargas √ √52 Scott Peters √ √ •53 Susan Davis √ √ •

Colorado 1 Diana DeGette √ √ •2 Jared Polis √ √ •3 Scott Tipton x x4 Cory Gardner x x5 Doug Lamborn x x6 Mike Coffman x x7 Ed Perlmutter √ √

Connecticut 1 John B. Larson √ √2 Joe Courtney √ √3 Rosa DeLauro √ √ •4 Jim Himes √ √

Connecticut 5 Elizabeth Esty √ √ •Delaware John Carney √ √D.C. Eleanor Holmes Norton •Florida 1 Jeff Miller x x

2 Steve Southerland x x3 Ted Yoho x x4 Ander Crenshaw x x5 Corrine Brown √ √ •6 Ron DeSantis x x




FranksBill

GDPACo-Sponsor

7 John Mica x x8 Bill Posey x x9 Alan Grayson √ √ •10 Daniel Webster x x11 Rich Nugent x x12 Gus Bilirakis x x13 Bill Young x x14 Kathy Castor √ √15 Dennis Ross x x16 Vern Buchanan x x17 Tom Rooney x x18 Patrick Murphy √ √ •19 Trey Radel x x20 Alcee Hastings √ √ •21 Ted Deutch √ √ •22 Lois Frankel √ √ •23 Debbie Wasserman Schultz – √ •24 Frederica Wilson √ √ •25 Mario Diaz-Balart x x26 Joe Garcia √ √ •27 Ileana Ros-Lehtinen x x

Georgia 1 Jack Kingston x x2 Sanford Bishop √ √3 Lynn Westmoreland x x4 Hank Johnson √ √ •5 John Lewis √ √ •6 Tom Price x x7 Rob Woodall x √8 Austin Scott x x9 Doug Collins x x

Georgia 10 Paul Broun √ √11 Phil Gingrey √ x12 John Barrow √ √13 David Scott √ √14 Tom Graves x x

Hawaii 1 Colleen Hanabusa √ √ •2 Tulsi Gabbard √ √

Idaho 1 Raúl Labrador x x





FranksBill

GDPACo-Sponsor

2 Mike Simpson x xIllinois 1 Bobby Rush √ √ •

2 Robin Kelly I √3 Dan Lipinski √ x4 Luis Gutiérrez √ √ •5 Mike Quigley √ √ •6 Peter Roskam x x7 Danny K. Davis √ √ •8 Tammy Duckworth √ √ •9 Jan Schakowsky √ √ •10 Brad Schneider √ √ •11 Bill Foster √ √ •12 William Enyart √ √13 Rodney L. Davis x x14 Randy Hultgren x x15 John Shimkus x x16 Adam Kinzinger x x17 Cheri Bustos √ √18 Aaron Schock x –

Indiana 1 Pete Visclosky √ √2 Jackie Walorski x x3 Marlin Stutzman x x4 Todd Rokita x x5 Susan Brooks x x6 Luke Messer x x7 André Carson √ √8 Larry Bucshon x x9 Todd Young x x

Iowa 1 Bruce Braley √ √ •2 David Loebsack √ √ •3 Tom Latham x x

Iowa 4 Steve King x xKansas 1 Tim Huelskamp x x

2 Lynn Jenkins x x3 Kevin Yoder x x4 Mike Pompeo x x

Kentucky 1 Ed Whitfield x x2 Brett Guthrie x x




FranksBill

GDPACo-Sponsor

3 John Yarmuth √ – •4 Thomas Massie √ x5 Hal Rogers x –6 Andy Barr x x

Louisiana 1 Steve Scalise x x2 Cedric Richmond √ √3 Charles Boustany x x4 John Fleming x x5 Rodney Alexander x x6 Bill Cassidy x x

Maine 1 Chellie Pingree √ √ •2 Mike Michaud √ √

Maryland 1 Andy Harris x x2 Dutch Ruppersberger √ √3 John Sarbanes √ √4 Donna Edwards √ √ •5 Steny Hoyer √ √6 John Delaney √ √7 Elijah Cummings √ √8 Chris Van Hollen √ √ •

Massachusetts 1 Richard Neal √ √2 Jim McGovern √ √ •3 Niki Tsongas √ √ •4 Joe Kennedy √ √ •5 Ed Markey √ –6 John Tierney √ √ •7 Mike Capuano √ √ •8 Stephen Lynch √ √9 Bill Keating √ √ •

Michigan 1 Dan Benishek x x2 Bill Huizenga x x3 Justin Amash √ x

Michigan 4 David Camp x x5 Dan Kildee √ √ •6 Fred Upton x x7 Tim Walberg x x8 Mike Rogers x x9 Sander Levin √ √ •





FranksBill

GDPACo-Sponsor

10 Candice Miller x x11 Kerry Bentivolio x x12 John Dingell √ √13 John Conyers √ √ •14 Gary Peters √ √ •

Minnesota 1 Tim Walz √ √2 John Kline x x3 Erik Paulsen x x4 Betty McCollum √ √ •5 Keith Ellison √ √ •6 Michele Bachmann x x7 Collin Peterson √ x8 Rick Nolan √ √

Mississippi 1 Alan Nunnelee x x2 Bernie Thompson √ √3 Gregg Harper x x4 Steven Palazzo x x

Missouri 1 William Clay √ √ •2 Ann Wagner x x3 Blaine Luetkemeyer x x4 Vicky Hartzler x x5 Emanuel Cleaver √ √ •6 Sam Graves x x7 Billy Long x x8 Jason Smith I x

Montana Steve Daines x xNebraska 1 Jeff Fortenberry x x

2 Lee Terry x x3 Adrian Smith x x

Nevada 1 Dina Titus √ √ •2 Mark Amodei – x3 Joe Heck √ x4 Steven Horsford √ √

New Hampshire 1 Carol Shea-Porter √ √2 Ann McLane Kuster √ √ •

New Jersey 1 Rob Andrews √ √2 Frank LoBiondo x x3 Jon Runyan x √




FranksBill

GDPACo-Sponsor

4 Chris Smith x x5 Scott Garrett x x6 Frank Pallone √ √ •7 Leonard Lance x x8 Albio Sires √ √ •9 Bill Pascrell √ –10 Donald Payne, Jr. √ √ •11 Rodney Frelinghuysen x √12 Rush Holt, Jr. √ √ •

New Mexico 1 Michelle Lujan Grisham √ √ •2 Steven Pearce x x3 Ben Luján √ √

New York 1 Tim Bishop √ √2 Peter King x x3 Steve Israel √ √ •4 Carolyn McCarthy √ –5 Gregory Meeks √ √6 Grace Meng √ √ •7 Nydia Velázquez √ √8 Hakeem Jeffries √ √9 Yvette Clarke √ √ •10 Jerrold Nadler √ √ •11 Michael Grimm x x12 Carolyn Maloney √ √ •13 Charles Rangel √ √ •14 Joseph Crowley √ √ •15 José Serrano √ √16 Eliot Engel – √ •17 Nita Lowey √ √ •18 Sean Patrick Maloney √ √ •19 Chris Gibson √ x20 Paul Tonko √ √21 Bill Owens √ √22 Richard Hanna x √

New York 23 Tom Reed x x24 Dan Maffei √ √ •25 Louise Slaughter √ √ •26 Brian Higgins √ √ •





FranksBill

GDPACo-Sponsor

27 Chris Collins x xNorth Carolina 1 George Butterfield √ √

2 Renee Ellmers x x3 Walter Jones √ x4 David Price √ √ •5 Virginia Foxx x x6 Howard Coble x x7 Mike McIntyre √ x8 Richard Hudson x x9 Robert Pittenger x x10 Patrick McHenry x x11 Mark Meadows x x12 Mel Watt √ √13 George Holding x x

North Dakota Kevin Cramer x xOhio 1 Steve Chabot x x

2 Brad Wenstrup x x3 Joyce Beatty √ √4 Jim Jordan x x5 Bob Latta x x6 Bill Johnson x x7 Bob Gibbs x x8 John Boehner x I9 Marcy Kaptur √ √10 Mike Turner x x11 Marcia Fudge √ √12 Pat Tiberi x x13 Tim Ryan √ √14 David Joyce x x15 Steve Stivers x x16 Jim Renacci x x

Oklahoma 1 Jim Bridenstine x x2 Markwayne Mullin x x3 Frank Lucas x x4 Tom Cole x x

Oklahoma 5 James Lankford x xOregon 1 Suzanne Bonamici √ √ •

2 Greg Walden x x




FranksBill

GDPACo-Sponsor

3 Earl Blumenauer √ √ •4 Peter DeFazio √ √ •5 Kurt Schrader √ √

Pennsylvania 1 Bob Brady √ √2 Chaka Fattah √ √3 Mike Kelly x x4 Scott Perry x x5 Glenn Thompson x x6 Jim Gerlach x x7 Pat Meehan x x8 Mike Fitzpatrick x x9 Bill Shuster x x10 Tom Marino x x11 Lou Barletta x x12 Keith Rothfus x x13 Allyson Schwartz √ √14 Michael Doyle √ √15 Charlie Dent x √16 Joe Pitts x x17 Matt Cartwright √ √18 Timothy F. Murphy x x

Rhode Island 1 David Cicilline √ √ •2 Jim Langevin √ √

South Carolina 1 Mark Sanford I x2 Joe Wilson x x3 Jeff Duncan x x4 Trey Gowdy x x5 Mick Mulvaney x x6 Jim Clyburn √ √7 Tom Rice x x

South Dakota Kristi Noem x xTennessee 1 Phil Roe x x

2 Jimmy Duncan x x3 Chuck Fleischmann x x4 Scott DesJarlais x x5 Jim Cooper √ √

Tennessee 6 Diane Black x x7 Marsha Blackburn x x





FranksBill

GDPACo-Sponsor

8 Stephen Fincher x x9 Steve Cohen √ √ •

Texas 1 Louie Gohmert x x2 Ted Poe x x3 Sam Johnson x x4 Ralph Hall x x5 Jeb Hensarling x x6 Joe Barton x x7 John Culberson x x8 Kevin Brady x x9 Al Green √ √10 Michael McCaul x x11 Mike Conaway x x12 Kay Granger x x13 Mac Thornberry x x14 Randy Weber x x15 Rubén Hinojosa √ √16 Beto O’Rourke √ √ •17 Bill Flores x x18 Sheila Jackson Lee √ √ •19 Randy Neugebauer x x20 Joaquín Castro √ √21 Lamar S. Smith x x22 Pete Olson x x23 Pete Gallego √ √24 Kenny Marchant x x25 Roger Williams x x26 Michael Burgess x x27 Blake Farenthold x x28 Henry Cuellar √ x29 Gene Green √ √30 Eddie Johnson √ √31 John Carter x x32 Pete Sessions x x33 Marc Veasey √ √ •34 Filemon Vela, Jr. √ √35 Lloyd Doggett √ √ •

Texas 36 Steve Stockman x x




FranksBill

GDPACo-Sponsor

Utah 1 Rob Bishop x x2 Chris Stewart x x3 Jason Chaffetz x x4 Jim Matheson √ x

Vermont Peter Welch √ √ •Virginia 1 Rob Wittman x x

2 Scott Rigell x x3 Robert Scott √ √ •4 Randy Forbes √ x5 Robert Hurt x x6 Bob Goodlatte x x7 Eric Cantor x x8 Jim Moran √ √ •9 Morgan Griffith x x10 Frank Wolf x x11 Gerry Connolly √ √ •

Washington 1 Suzan DelBene √ √ •2 Rick Larsen √ – •3 Jaime Herrera Beutler x x4 Doc Hastings x x5 Cathy McMorris Rodgers x x6 Derek Kilmer √ √ •7 Jim McDermott √ √ •8 Dave Reichert x x9 Adam Smith √ √ •10 Dennis Heck √ √ •

West Virginia 1 David McKinley √ x2 Shelley Moore Capito x x3 Nick Rahall √ x

Wisconsin 1 Paul Ryan x x2 Mark Pocan √ √ •3 Ron Kind √ √4 Gwen Moore √ √ •5 Jim Sensenbrenner x x6 Tom Petri x x7 Sean Duffy x x8 Reid Ribble x x

Wyoming Cynthia Lummis x x



113th U.S. CongressSenate

Fischer Amendment3/22/2013During debate on the Fiscal Year 2014 budget, Sen. Deb Fischer (R-NE) offered an amendment to repeal the no-copay birth control benefit offered under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act.Our Position: OpposeResult: Failed 44-55, 1 Not Voting

Shaheen Amendment3/22/2013During debate on the Fiscal Year 2014 budget, Sen. Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH) offered an amendment designed to reaffirm the no-copay birth control benefit offered under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act.Our Position: SupportResult: Passed 56-43, 1 Not Voting

Cruz Amendment3/23/2013During debate on the Fiscal Year 2014 budget, Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) offered an amendment to ban all U.S. funding to any agency of the United Nations in the event that any member state of the UN were found to be involved in coercive abortion.Our Position: OpposeResult: Failed 38-61, 1 Not Voting

Global Democracy Promotion Act (S. 119)Introduced 1/23/2013Introduced by Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-CA), the Global Democracy Promotion Act (GDPA) would prevent a future president from acting unilaterally to reinstate the Global Gag Rule. Our Position: Support

“I recognize that members of this body have dif-fering views on the right to life, but surely all of us can be agreed that for a woman to be forced against her will to abort her child is a horrific evil.”

—Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX)

“No one—no one in this body supports forced abor-tions. No one. However, the United Nations has no authority to control the acts of any individual nation. Instead of punishing the country that maybe—that is carrying out the bad policy, [the Cruz] Amendment would go after an entity that has no control over the policy and all the while negatively impacting our national interest.”

—Sen. Robert Menendez (D-NJ)

Rob

ert M

enen

dez.

Phot

o: S

cott

And

erso

n | D

ream

stim

e.com



State Senator Fischer Amendment

Shaheen Amendment

Cruz Amendment

GDPACo-Sponsor

Alabama Richard Shelby x x xJeff Sessions x x √

Alaska Lisa Murkowski √ √ √Mark Begich √ √ √ •

Arizona John McCain x x √Jeff Flake x x √

Arkansas Mark Pryor x √ √John Boozman x x x

California Dianne Feinstein √ √ √ •Barbara Boxer √ √ √ •

Colorado Mark Udall √ √ √ •Michael Bennet √ √ √

Connecticut Richard Blumenthal √ √ √ •Chris Murphy √ √ √ •

Delaware Tom Carper √ √ √Chris Coons √ √ √ •

Florida Bill Nelson √ √ √Marco Rubio x x x

Georgia Saxby Chambliss x x xJohnny Isakson x x x

Hawaii Brian Schatz √ √ √Mazie Hirono √ √ √

Idaho Mike Crapo x x xJim Risch x x x

Illinois Dick Durbin √ √ √ •Mark Kirk √ √ √

Indiana Dan Coats x x xJoe Donnelly √ √ √

Iowa Chuck Grassley x x xTom Harkin √ √ √

Kansas Pat Roberts x x xJerry Moran x x x

Kentucky Mitch McConnell x x xRand Paul x x x

Louisiana Mary Landrieu √ √ √David Vitter x x x

Maine Susan Collins √ √ √ •Angus King √ √ √





Shaheen Amendment

Cruz Amendment

GDPACo-Sponsor

Maryland Barbara Mikulski √ √ √Ben Cardin √ √ √ •

Massachusetts Elizabeth Warren √ √ √ •Mo Cowan √ √ √

Michigan Carl Levin √ √ √Debbie Stabenow √ √ √

Minnesota Amy Klobuchar √ √ √Al Franken √ √ √

Mississippi Thad Cochran x x xRoger Wicker x x √

Missouri Claire McCaskill √ √ √Roy Blunt x x √

Montana Max Baucus √ √ √Jon Tester √ √ √ •

Nebraska Mike Johanns x x xDeb Fischer x x x

Nevada Harry Reid √ √ √Dean Heller x x x

New Hampshire Jeanne Shaheen √ √ √ •Kelly Ayotte x x x

New Jersey Frank Lautenberg – – – •Bob Menendez √ √ √

New Mexico Tom Udall √ √ √Martin Heinrich √ √ √

New York Chuck Schumer √ √ √Kirsten Gillibrand √ √ √ •

North Carolina Richard Burr x x xKay Hagan √ √ √

North Dakota John Hoeven x x xHeidi Heitkamp √ √ √

Ohio Sherrod Brown √ √ √Rob Portman x x x

Oklahoma Jim Inhofe x x xTom Coburn x x x

Oregon Ron Wyden √ √ √ •Jeff Merkley √ √ √ •

Pennsylvania Bob Casey, Jr. √ √ √Pat Toomey x x x





Shaheen Amendment

Cruz Amendment

GDPACo-Sponsor

Rhode Island Jack Reed √ √ √Sheldon Whitehouse √ √ √ •

South Carolina Lindsey Graham x x xTim Scott x x x

South Dakota Tim Johnson √ √ √John Thune x x x

Tennessee Lamar Alexander x x xBob Corker x x x

Texas John Cornyn x x xTed Cruz x x x

Utah Orrin Hatch x x xMike Lee x x x

Vermont Patrick Leahy √ √ √Bernie Sanders √ √ √ •

Virginia Mark Warner √ √ √Tim Kaine √ √ √

Washington Patty Murray √ √ √Maria Cantwell √ √ √

West Virginia Jay Rockefeller √ √ √Joe Manchin, III x x x

Wisconsin Ron Johnson x x xTammy Baldwin √ √ √

Wyoming Mike Enzi x x xJohn Barrasso x x x

“Sadly, the U.S. has one of the highest rates of unintended pregnancy in the industrialized world. And preventing unintended pregnancy just makes fiscal sense.”

—Sen. Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH)

$4.7

$5.6

$6.2

$9.6

$11.3

$12.6

$0 $5 $10 $15

Lower

Mean

Upper

Billions of Dollars

Es-m

ates

Unplanned Pregnancy: Cost to Taxpayers

Annual Cost to Taxpayers

Savings by PrevenFng Unintended Pregnancy

Data from Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health, 2011, 43(2):88–93



113th U.S. CongressHouse of RepresentativesAppropriations CommitteeState D Representative 1 2 3Alabama 1 Jo Bonner x x x

4 Robert Aderholt x x xArizona 7 Ed Pastor √ √ √Arkansas 3 Steve Womack x x xCalifornia 13 Barbara Lee √ √ √

17 Mike Honda √ √ √20 Sam Farr √ √ √21 David Valadao x x x28 Adam Schiff √ √ √40 Lucille Roybal-Allard √ √ √42 Ken Calvert x x x

Connecticut 3 Rosa DeLauro √ √ √Florida 4 Ander Crenshaw x x xFlorida 13 Bill Young x x x

17 Tom Rooney x x x23 Debbie Wasserman Schultz √ √ √25 Mario Diaz-Balart x x x

Georgia 1 Jack Kingston x x x2 Sanford Bishop √ √ √14 Tom Graves x x x

Idaho 2 Mike Simpson x x xIllinois 5 Mike Quigley √ √ √Indiana 1 Pete Visclosky √ √ √Iowa 3 Tom Latham x x xKansas 3 Kevin Yoder x x xKentucky 5 Hal Rogers x x xLouisiana 5 Rodney Alexander x x xMaine 1 Chellie Pingree √ √ √Maryland 1 Andrew Harris x x xMinnesota 4 Betty McCollum √ √ √Mississippi 1 Alan Nunnelee x x xNebraska 1 Jeff Fortenberry x x xNew Jersey 11 Rodney Frelinghuysen √ √ √New York 15 Jose Serrano √ √ √

17 Nita Lowey √ √ √21 Bill Owens √ √ √

North Carolina 4 David Price √ √ √Ohio 9 Marcy Kaptur √ √ √

State D Representative 1 2 313 Tim Ryan √ √ √14 David Joyce x x x

Oklahoma 4 Tom Cole x x xPennsylvania 2 Chaka Fattah √ √ –

15 Charlie Dent √ √ √Tennessee 3 Chuck Fleischmann x x xTexas 7 John Culberson x x x

12 Kay Granger x x x28 Henry Cuellar √ √ √31 John Carter x x x

Virginia 8 Jim Moran √ √ √10 Frank Wolf x x x

Washington 3 Jaime Herrera Beutler – – –

1. Lowey Amendment7/24/2013During mark-up of the Fiscal Year 2014 State Department/Foreign Operations Appropriations Bill, Rep. Nita Lowey (D-NY) offered an amendment to strike language reinstating the Global Gag Rule and to restore funding to the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA).Our Position: SupportResult: Failed 24-26, 1 Not Voting

2. DeLauro Amendment7/24/2013During mark-up of the Fiscal Year 2014 State Department/Foreign Operations Appropriations Bill, Rep. Rosa DeLauro (D-CT) offered an amendment to fund UNFPA only for very specific purposes. Examples include providing contraception, encouraging safe childbirth, ending female genital mutilation, and eliminating child marriage.Our Position: SupportResult: Failed 24-26, 1 Not Voting

3. Lee Amendment7/24/2013During mark-up of the Fiscal Year 2014 State Department/Foreign Operations Appropriations Bill, Rep. Barbara Lee (D-CA) offered an amendment to fund UNFPA only in several high-need countries where the United States does not currently have any bilateral family planning program.Our Position: SupportResult: Failed 23-26, 2 Not Voting



Shaheen Amendment7/25/2013During mark-up of the Fiscal Year 2014 State Department/Foreign Operations Appropriations Bill, Sen. Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH) offered an amendment to permanently repeal the Global Gag Rule.Our Position: SupportResult: Passed 19-11

State Senator VoteAlabama Richard Shelby xAlaska Lisa Murkowski √

Mark Begich √Arkansas Mark Pryor √

John Boozman xCalifornia Dianne Feinstein √Delaware Chris Coons √Illinois Dick Durbin √

Mark Kirk √Indiana Dan Coats xIowa Tom Harkin √Kansas Jerry Moran xKentucky Mitch McConnell xLouisiana Mary Landrieu √Maine Susan Collins √

State Senator VoteMaryland Barbara Mikulski √Mississippi Thad Cochran xMissouri Roy Blunt xMontana Jon Tester √Nebraska Mike Johanns xNew Hampshire Jeanne Shaheen √New Mexico Tom Udall √North Dakota John Hoeven xOregon Jeff Merkley √Rhode Island Jack Reed √South Carolina Lindsey Graham xSouth Dakota Tim Johnson √Tennessee Lamar Alexander xVermont Patrick Leahy √Washington Patty Murray √

113th U.S. CongressSenateAppropriations Committee

“When it was in place, the Global Gag Rule blocked funding for basic family-planning services, contraception, and pre-ventative care for women around the world. The policy needs to be per-manently repealed so that this funding isn’t jeopardized in the future and women have access to the reproductive care they need.”

—Sen. Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH)

Julia

Fre

eman

-woo

lper

t | D

ream

stim

e.com


The Fiscal Year is set to end on September 30th, so it’s time for Congress to pass a new budget

for FY 2014. Of course, with a deeply divided House and Senate and ongoing debates about long-term fiscal policy, doing so will take patience and time.

In fact, it’s probable that neither cham-ber will be able to debate and vote on all of the various spending bills coming out of subcommittees before the deadline. And even if it were to happen, it’s even more unlikely that the House and Senate will be able to come to an agreement on the vastly different versions of the bills they’re likely to produce.

That means that the bills we are seeing right now are only opening plays in a longer negotiation, one that will likely take months to resolve. Nevertheless, the decisions being made right now could end up having a profound impact on the strength and effectiveness of our interna-tional family planning programs. And for those programs, the House and Senate visions could not be more different.

The House Makes a StatementBefore adjourning for the August recess, the House Appropriations Committee finished its work on the Fiscal Year 2014 State Department/Foreign Operations

funding bill—the primary source of funding and policy relating to U.S. inter-national family planning programs. The draft version of the bill was terrible—it cut more than $100 million from fam-ily planning, capping our contribution at $461 million. It also banned any funding for the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA), and reinstated the Global Gag Rule.

Family planning champions on the committee were unable to fix the many problems with the bill, despite mounting a valiant effort. Although they knew they were outnumbered, several committee members offered amendments intended to highlight the vital work done by fam-ily planning programs around the world:

• Rep. Nita Lowey (D-NY) offered a broad amendment to both strike the Global Gag Rule language from the bill and restore funding to UNFPA.

• Rep. Rosa DeLauro (D-CT) offered an amendment to fund UNFPA only for the purposes of nine very specific objectives, including things like providing contraceptive ser-vices, preventing coercive practices, promoting safe childbirth, prevent-ing and treating obstetric fistula, eliminating female genital mutila-tion, and eliminating child marriage.

• Finally, Rep. Barbara Lee (D-CA) offered an even narrower amend-ment to fund UNFPA only in a few high-need countries where the U.S. does not currently have any family planning program.

The Lowey and DeLauro amendments failed 24-26, while the Lee amendment failed 23-26. Two Republicans—Reps. Rodney Frelinghuysen (R-NJ) and Charlie Dent (R-PA)—broke other-wise solid party ranks and joined every Democrat present in supporting each amendment. The defeat of all three of these amendments highlights the seemingly reflexive rejection by House conservatives of family planning aid in any form.

And that attitude can have real conse-quences. If the budget bill passed by the House Appropriations Committee were to be enacted, the impact on women and families in the developing world would be devastating. Analysis suggests that cuts of the magnitude contained in the bill would lead to more than 5 million women losing access to birth control. There could be up to 1.5 million more unintended pregnancies, and 700,000 more abortions. Those additional unintended pregnancies and the often-unsafe abortions that would follow

Wa

shin

gto

n V

ieW

Budget Battle: House and Senate Set to Clash Over 2014 SpendingBy Stacie Murphy


could ultimately result in about 4,000 additional women dying of pregnancy-related causes.

And the Senate RespondsOnly a day after the House commit-tee passed its funding bill, the Senate Appropriations Committee began work on its own version of the measure. It is a vast improvement over the House bill.

The Senate committee voted for $669.5 million in international family planning funding, with $39.5 million for UNFPA. And it includes an amendment offered by Sen. Jeanne Shaheen to prevent a future president from reinstating the Global Gag Rule. Unlike in the House, that amendment had bipartisan support, passing 19-11.

The Senate bill also includes language to allow the Peace Corps to pay for abor-tion services for volunteers who have been raped, or whose lives are endan-gered by their pregnancies.

After the votes in the House committee, it was reassuring to know that there are still strong advocates for family planning in positions of power on Capitol Hill.

Beyond the Budget BattleIn mid-July, Rep. Lowey reintroduced

the Global Democracy Promotion Act (GDPA, H.R.2738) in the House of Representatives. The bill, which would permanently bar a future president from unilaterally reinstating the Global Gag Rule, had 114 original co-sponsors, all Democrats. The high number of original co-sponsors is a strong statement of sup-port in a House that will certainly not allow the bill to come to the floor.

Blatantly unconstitutional abortion restrictions, however, have a smoother path to a floor vote. Earlier this year, Rep. Trent Franks (R-AZ) introduced the Pain Capable Unborn Child Protection Act, which bans nearly all abortions after 20 weeks of pregnancy. Supporters of the bill assert that at 20 weeks gesta-tion, a fetus has the ability to feel pain and should therefore be entitled to legal protection, a position which puts the bill directly in conflict with Roe v. Wade. In reality, science does not support that assertion, with most mainstream research indicating that the brain struc-tures necessary to perceive pain do not develop until much later—well into the third trimester.

At any rate, when the House Judiciary Committee considered the bill in mid-June, the outcome was a foregone conclusion. Democrats on the committee

offered amendments to include excep-tions for the life and health of the mother, as well as a rape and incest exception. All were rejected along party lines.

The bill went to the House floor for a vote only days later, where, after the addi-tion of a much narrower rape exception than the one rejected by the committee, the measure passed, 228-196. The bill has no chance of becoming law, since it could not pass in the Senate. Even if it somehow did, President Obama would certainly veto it. However, it is a further demonstration of the willingness of this House of Representatives to take every opportunity to restrict abortion access and engage in grandstanding around issues of women’s health.

Looking AheadIt may be months before we know the final outcome of the FY 2014 appropriations process, but one thing is already perfectly clear: this House of Representatives is unbelievably hostile to family planning. And whether by attacking its funding or through the introduction of inflam-matory bills, there’s plenty of evidence to suggest they will continue to attempt to restrict women’s access to family plan-ning and reproductive health care, both here in the U.S. and around the world.


Derrick Belgarde, a graduate student in Seattle, says that he has enjoyed working with

Population Connection and attending Capitol Hill Days (CHD) for the past two years, but that getting involved initially was challenging. As an introvert, CHD—a large and interactive event—really pushed him out of his comfort zone. His first Capitol Hill Days was particularly hard, as he attended on his own, and didn’t know any of the other participants prior to the trip. He recalls that he thought about backing out, but channeled “inner strength,” confronted his trepidation, and ultimately decided that it was important that he push himself to attend.

Derrick describes experiencing “total culture shock” upon his arrival in D.C. “I thought I was coming from a big city, but when I got [to D.C.] I began to shrink. Everyone was in a rush. The Metro system was quite scary. I felt like a kid having to ride the bus for the first time. So I was very nervous, but to my surprise I began calming down after I checked in and met a few people. I soon realized that everyone was there for dif-ferent reasons. And some people there were as clueless as I was as to what we were all expected to do!”

The opportunity to lobby is what first drew Derrick to Capitol Hill Days in the spring of 2012. As a student at Seattle University majoring in Public Affairs, meeting with his legislators on Capitol Hill struck him as a unique complement to his academic work. Once he arrived in D.C., however, and learned more about the struggles women face to access family planning, he began to view the opportunity through a different lens.

As he watched the documentary Mother: Caring for 7 Billion and listened to expert speakers, he was astounded by “how women are denied equal opportunity in this country, and around the world.” As a father, he wants to build a better world for his 11-year-old daughter—one in which she’s “empowered and doesn’t have to cower to men.”

Derrick, 40, returned to college a couple of years ago after working, raising chil-dren, and overcoming some personal struggles. This life experience allowed Derrick to bring an informed, real-world perspective to his studies and volunteerism.

To that end, Derrick is a committed com-munity advocate in Seattle. While still an undergraduate, Derrick began work-ing for El Centro de la Raza, a Seattle

non-profit that works to empower the Latino community, but provides services to people of all races and ethnicities. He now works at El Centro full time. In his role there, Derrick is an assistant to the Director of Community Programs, where he supports low income and tran-sitional housing programs, promotes volunteerism, engages in immigrant and civil rights advocacy, and helps to coordi-nate social justice and cultural events. He is passionate about advocating for the homeless, a problem he’s witnessed in his own community (Derrick is an enrolled member of the Confederated Tribes of Siletz, and is also part Chippewa-Cree).

Derrick has also contributed volunteer time to Native American Engagement in HIV Clinical Research (NAEHCR), a partnership between the Legacy Project in Seattle and the National Native American AIDS Prevention Center. He’s worked with NAEHCR to develop community education outreach strate-gies to create awareness in the Native American community about ongoing HIV/AIDS clinical research.

Since he first learned about our work in 2012, Derrick has organized and participated in several in-district lobby meetings for Population Connection with Reps. Dave Reichert (R-WA) and

Fiel

d &

ou

trea

ch

Volunteer Spotlight: Derrick BelgardeBy Rebecca Harrington


Suzan DelBene (D-WA). He returned to D.C. with his wife, Lua—also a par-ticipant—for Capitol Hill Days 2013, where they served as excellent role mod-els for the less-experienced activists in the group.

In considering why he is committed to the empowerment of women through access to family planning, Derrick says:

“I believe there is a direct correlation between the state of the world’s affairs and the disrespectful way women are treated. I was taught that the harmony and balance of all things was knocked out of whack when male domination and male-dominating religions took over the world and spread the belief that it was not only man’s right, but his duty and responsibility to conquer, dominate, and suppress women and everything feminine. The earth being feminine in nature—because she nur-tures, shelters, and takes care of all our needs—is treated in the same destruc-tive manner. I know it may be hard for a non-Native to tie the two (women and earth) together, but everything is intertwined, and all is related. I was taught that as soon as we begin to honor and respect our women as sacred again, the world will find its balance and once again find harmony. ”

In June, Derrick graduated magna cum laude from Seattle University, with a degree in Public Affairs and a minor in Sociology. This fall, he will begin a mas-ter’s program in Public Administration at Seattle U. His career ambitions include one day founding a non-profit organiza-tion that focuses on either homelessness in the Native American community or youth education and empowerment.

Derrick has grown tremendously as an advocate since he made his first appre-hensive trip to D.C. We are grateful for his dedication and commitment to the

population cause, and look forward to an ongoing partnership with him as we continue our grassroots outreach efforts in Washington State.

“Positive change is possible, and we don’t all have to be on the exact same page with each other, or subscribe to the exact same set of beliefs in order to make that change a real-ity. We just have to agree on the same end goal. In this case—a happy and healthy world for people, plants, animals, and all other things in this web of life.”

—Derrick Belgarde

Derrick and his wife, Lua, at Capitol Hill Days 2013. Photo: Jonathan Look, Jr.


Leadership Weekend in the Tar Heel StateEach summer, PopEd brings together an impressive group of educators from around the country to participate in a weekend-long Leadership Institute, designed to prepare them to facilitate workshops in their local areas. This year’s event, held July 26-28 in Chapel Hill, North Carolina, included 35 university faculty, K-12 teachers, and nonformal educators from 18 states.

The weekend kicked off with a wel-come reception Friday afternoon on the lush grounds of the Rizzo Conference Center, once a private estate, and now part of UNC’s Business School. Rizzo’s state-of-the-art meeting space was ideal for Saturday and Sunday’s agenda, which featured hands-on activities on population dynamics, environmental connections, and global development.

Outside of the conference center, attend-ees enjoyed networking and sharing their PopEd ideas over some mouth-watering local fare such as shrimp and grits, bar-becue, and peach pie. As a final activity, participants identified future presenta-tion opportunities—many of which are already scheduled for the new school year. Those who teach future teachers (more than half of our attendees) will

be introducing PopEd to college stu-dents on campuses from West Virginia to Washington State this fall. Others will be presenting to teachers in school dis-tricts, conferences, and at nature centers.

Thank you for your recent workshop. It was one of the best-organized, enjoyable, and relevant workshops I have attended. I’m very eager to start implementing the PopEd activities.

Howard Aprill Wehr Nature Center Franklin, Wisconsin

What an amazing experience. I truly appreciate and value the information and expertise presented by you and your staff. I look forward to working closely with you this semester to provide workshops to my pre-service teachers.

Christine Mayfield California State University

Fullerton, California

There are not enough kind words that I could say about how much I enjoyed this training—literally the BEST that I have ever attended!

Sarah Lee Meigs Intermediate School

Middleton, Ohio

I had an absolutely fabulous time. I learned so much, and I’m super excited to get to work with the PopEd information.

Wendy Scott Old Dominion University

Norfolk, Virginia

You have an awesome team! You are doing a wonderful job. I am excited to be one of your ambassadors and look forward to embed-ding the themes and principles of PopEd in everything I teach. Thank you for an awe-some weekend full of great experiences. You should be proud of what you are doing!!!

Comfort Ateh Providence College

Providence, Rhode Island

PoPe

d

Teachers Across the Nation Praise PopEdBy Pamela Wasserman

2013 Leadership Institute participants and staff in Chapel Hill, NC. Photo: Robert Campell


Teachers Across the Nation Praise PopEdBy Pamela Wasserman

PopEd by the Numbers—Measuring Our ImpactOur staff and volunteer trainers can tell you that teachers (and future teach-ers) seem to enjoy our workshops—the hands-on activities, lively discussions, and discoveries. But what happens after the workshops? Do the activities make it into classrooms and engage students? Do teachers share their PopEd materials with colleagues?

To help us evaluate the effectiveness of our teacher education program, we solicit the feedback of past workshop participants through a biennial online survey. This past spring, we emailed attendees from 2011 and 2012 work-shops to find out whether and how they’ve implemented PopEd in their classrooms. Within a week, we had over 1,400 responses, more than enough to help us gauge our impact.

Here are some of the findings:

• 97 percent of PopEd workshop attendees rated the demonstrated materials as Excellent or Good.

• 80 percent of respondents rated our workshops as better than other pro-fessional development workshops they’ve attended as far as content, usefulness, and presentation quality.

• 96 percent of workshop participants have used or plan to use the activi-ties in their classrooms.

• 60 percent of educators who have taught with Population Education materials used them to fulfill state or national content standards.

• Teachers who have used our curri-cula have done so in several subject areas, most notably: social studies (52 percent), science (41 percent), and math (20 percent). Many used it to teach multiple subjects.

• 9 in 10 teachers found that PopEd materials effectively engaged their students.

• 94 percent of teachers saw an increase in their students’ awareness of population issues after sharing

PopEd lessons in their classrooms.• 4 in 5 teachers discovered a change

in their students’ thinking regarding population growth after presenting Population Education materials.

• 86 percent of teachers saw our mate-rials increase their students’ critical thinking and/or problem solving skills.

Our results confirm that our workshops and curricula are valued by teachers, and that supporting PopEd is a worthwhile investment in building population lit-eracy among young people.

For more information about our teacher training workshops, visit our website at www.populationeducation.org.

256 272 366 254

763 705 572 649

317 345 312 414

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Content

Usefulness

Hand-outs

Presentatio

n

In comparison to other professional development workshops you've attended, how did the Population

Education workshop compare in terms of...

Superior

Above Average

Average

Below Average

Poor


cartoon

Used with the permission of Clay Bennett, the Washington Post Writers Group, and the Cartoonist Group. All rights reserved.


editorial excerPts

With the population galloping toward the 100-million mark, the Philippines will be among one of several developing nations leading global population growth in the coming years, according to the United Nations.

With limited resources and economic growth failing to keep pace with the population boom, this means more people get-ting an ever-shrinking share of the pie.

Persistent urban blight is testament to the continually growing demand for jobs, housing, and the most basic necessities such as water, food, and sanitation.

Maternal and child mortality rates remain high because of the weakness of reproductive health programs. Large, unplanned families make poverty alleviation more difficult.

While landmark legislation was finally passed by the 15th Congress to promote reproductive health, the measure remains stalled in the Supreme Court, and opponents have vowed to derail its implementation. In the meantime, women and chil-dren suffer from poor health and the many other afflictions that hit the impoverished, and strong economic growth figures are meaningless to millions of Filipinos.

—June 17, 2013

Beginning this month, the Affordable Care Act requires that most health insurance plans give women access to FDA-approved contraception methods, including birth control pills and the “morning after pill.” The law is right to require this: The Institute of Medicine and common sense say contracep-tion is basic health care for women, and the prevention of unplanned pregnancies can cut abortion rates and give women a better chance at education, work, and planning family size.

Ultimately, the issue is one of balance. The effect of health insurance on business owners is indirect. Employees may or may not use insurance to pay for birth control, just as they may or may not use their salary to pay for something that would violate the company owners’ faith.

The circumstance might be discomforting. But the alternative—granting religious exemptions to private organi-zations—is more troubling. It would be open to abuse, putting the government in the position of determining which business owners were sufficiently religious.

That is an outcome neither side should want.

—August 11, 2013

Mandaluyong City, Philippines McLean, Virginia


Population Connection2120 L Street, NW, Suite 500Washington, DC 20037

NON PROFIT ORGUS POSTAGE PAID

POPULATION CONNECTION

Your legacy...people and the planet in balance

If you’ve already included Zero Population Growth (ZPG) in your estate plans, there is no need to change any language. We proudly maintain the name and the mission.

Have you considered leaving a legacy gift ensuring that your commitment to zero population growth continues well into the future? By remembering Population Connection in your will or estate plan, you can make a meaningful contribution to stabilizing population and improving the quality of life for everyone, everywhere. We also offer charitable gift annuities, which provide guaranteed lifetime payments and significant tax advantages. We are proud to honor our legacy donors as members of The ZPG Society. For more information, please contact Shauna Scherer, Director of Development, at [email protected] or (202) 974-7730.

Population Connection members Katharine and Julian Donahue, visiting Iguazu Falls in Brazil.

The Reporter, September 2013

Documents