The 95-10 Initiative makes a comeback — just in time for the election

Jill at Feministe has a good item on some interesting abortion-related legislation that’s going to be unveiled this week, both of which are worth paying attention to.

Rep. Lincoln Davis (D-Tenn.), who opposes abortion rights, on Wednesday is scheduled to announce he is introducing a bill that would aim to reduce the number of abortions by establishing health care- and child care-related programs to support pregnant women, Roll Call reports. The measure — called the Pregnant Women Support Act — is modeled after Democrats for Life of America’s “95-10 Initiative,” which aims to reduce the U.S. abortion rate by 95% over the next 10 years.

According to Roll Call, another bill (HR 6067) — which was introduced last week by Rep. Tim Ryan (D-Ohio), who opposes abortion rights, and Rep. Rosa DeLauro (D-Conn.), who supports abortion rights — also is modeled in part on the 95-10 Initiative (Yanchin, Roll Call, 9/20). Ryan and DeLauro’s bill would require states to cover contraceptives for women with incomes of up to 200% of the federal poverty level, establish grants for sex education programs and require programs with a focus on abstinence to include thorough instruction on contraceptives.

The measure, which includes 20 initiatives, also would increase funding for health care for low-income women with children, provide no-cost visits from nurses to teens and women who have given birth for the first time, expand a tax credit for adoption and fund child care services for parents in college.

For pro-choice advocates, there’s plenty to like — the “95-10” approach expands women’s health care programs, emphasizes contraception equity in health care plans, and makes adoption tax credits permanent. Better yet, it would demand full funding for the federal WIC program.

But let’s not forget that there’s a flip-side to all of this.

I haven’t seen the details of Davis’ “Pregnant Women Support Act” or the Ryan/DeLauro bill, so it’s too soon to say with any certainty whether the legislation will stick to the original “95-10 Initiative” or not, but when the plan was crafted last year, the “95-10” framework emphasized prevention of unwanted pregnancies — but also included a ban on late-term abortions and a new parental-notification law.

To be sure, the whole idea is very popular with pro-life Dems. Back in April 2005, Democrats For Life of America joined Dem Reps. Tim Ryan, Bart Stupak, and Lincoln Davis at a national press conference at the Democratic National Committee to unveil the idea. Since then, Sen. Ben Nelson (D-Neb.) has signed on as a supporter, as has Reps. Jerry Costello (D-Ill.) and Collin Peterson (D-Minn.). Former congressman and 9-11 Commission member Tim Roemer has not only endorsed the policy, but promised to help lobby for it.

Late last year, even some pro-choice Dems were warming up to the idea.

Obviously, with the session nearly complete, there’s simply no way that these bills will even get a cursory glance. Instead, proponents probably look at this as an opportunity to help chance the discussion a bit.

Republicans and conservative activists have already rejected anything that looks like a compromise, but if Dems take back Congress, this is the kind of legislative effort that’s likely to get a serious look. Stay tuned.

The only drawback is “a ban on late-term abortions and a new parental-notification law”?

Provided there are exceptions to handle such beastly things as rape (especially by a parent or guardian), and provided it doesn’t override states’ rights, I have no problem with this. I’m speaking as a matter of principle, of course, since there’s no likelihood I’ll ever get pregnant myself (unless a star riseth in the East, that is).

Leave it to the Dems, though, to shoot themselves (and thereby the rest of us) in the foot over this.

  • Anti-abortion?? Watch The Twilight of the Golds and tell me if you still feel the same way.

    Anti-late term abortion?? Let me know if you still feel the same way when you discover certain conditions only detectable late-term, such as your baby having a brain stem but no brain.

    Pro-parental notification? Talk to some of the girls who have been kicked out of their homes and churches by self-righteous, bigotted so-called xtians and let me know if you still feel the same way.

    Sheesh!!!

  • The first two comments on this bill are from Men…I would think the women should comment…so I will. If the bill is as CB presented it even with the late term abortion and parental notification this would be a good thing. More education, more access to contraception are good things. As to the later term abortions, perhaps exceptions could be written in regarding both the mothers health and the the fetus’s. But this will never pass…it is too sensible!
    One of the things the choice people need to do is to convince the others that they are not baby killers…We ( I count myself one of the choice perople) should be trying our best to get a bill that covers contraception…if the fetus is not concieved, there will be no need for an abortion. And abstinence has been proven to be counter productive.

  • Just goes to show, you mention the “A” word and some people lose all ability to think rationally.

    A school nurse can’t offer an aspirin without parental consent, and somehow abortion is an exception?

    Sheesh indeed.

  • A school nurse can’t offer an aspirin without parental consent, and somehow abortion is an exception?

    What an incredibly inept comparison, which just goes to prove your point that abortion is an issue where some people lose all ability to think rationally.

    Have families ever been torn apart over a daughter’s desire to take an aspirin?
    Have you ever heard of parents exerting tremendous pressure on their child to prevent them from taking aspirin?
    Are the privacy concerns even remotely comparable?

    Yup, sheesh indeed.

  • Comments are closed.