Some progressives are too confident in women not supporting anti-birth control candidates

[Green_Lantern]

For instance Rachel Maddow is being overly confident that just because 90% of women use birth control that they'll reject Republicans who oppose mandating insurance coverage of contraception. She pretty much forgets that this is all about framing the debate.

Republicans are trying to get independent middle class women voters on board with this by making this appear to be about irresponsible women wanting a handout. Unfortunately Obama played into their frame by saying this is free birth control.

They should've sold this as being an earned benefit or responsibility of insurance to cover medicine since the person paid for the benefit. Using the word free may have been a bad idea.

[shraby]

1. Sounds like someone is off base here. I'm a retired middle class woman with no cause to

use birth control methods and am terrible offended by the republican's attempt to shut down freer access to the pills by low income women which includes students from high school through college.
I even refuse to capitalize the word republican anymore. They haven't earned it.

[HockeyMom]

2. I was an Independent for 30 years

Besides which, as the thread I started said, I, and COUNTLESS other girls and women, take the Pill for MEDICAL REASONS, not only birth control.

Suffer in silence? Well, I hope they are prepared for the HOSPITALIZATION costs then because they will happen.

[Green_Lantern]

5. see that's the thing

A lot of women with good doctors and insurance already can already get it paid for by citing medical necessity.

Those women may not see this a threat.

[muriel_volestrangler]

39. That's because they have the good insurance the Repubs want to deny people

If they have some empathy, they'll see that other people being denied what they rely on is a bad thing.

[Green_Lantern]

42. we can't just hope they'll have empathy

We have to tell them why it is a good thing.

[muriel_volestrangler]

45. They have the cover; they know it's a good thing

The people without empathy are probably permanent Republican voters.

[Green_Lantern]

51. so let's just assume that and only go after liberals?

They probably don't lack empathy...they may just have a false narrative based on personal experience.

Even people who lean liberal can buy into it.

[muriel_volestrangler]

55. Now you seem to be advocating reacting to public opinion

I'm saying that expanding contraceptive coverage, without copayment, to everyone in the country, was an active policy that will attract those with empathy. The minority without empathy are pretty much unreachable anyway - they'll vote Republican for this and other reasons (they don't like welfare, they want low taxes for the rich, etc.). That doesn't mean all Republicans, necessarily, and certainly not independents. There will be a section of the public, male and female, that you can never reach. The 27% 'backwash', for instance.

[Green_Lantern]

57. No...I'm saying we need to tell voters even conservatives why progressive benefit everyone

Most people have liberal and conservative values and we can play to the liberal values.

[Green_Lantern]

3. I'm not saying it'll work on all middle class women...

They aren't framing it for socially progressive women who post on DU. I don't assume all women judge issues as how it affects all women as a whole.

[HockeyMom]

20. When 98% of all women use them?

Then that is the old "Do as I say, not as I do". Look at that hearing where there we no women. No REPUBLICAN women. If these Republican women SUPPORTED THIS, why weren't they there?????? Let them SPEAK out to the country? They aren't. Republican women, other than Snow and Collins the "RINOS" of the Party, are silent. They know this is a losing issue.

These women were ASHAMED to show their faces and be a part of the male inquisition.

[Green_Lantern]

22. I agree it's do as I do not as I say...

But many voters are like that. For instance support aid like Medicare but want spending cut on Medicaid. Again, it is framing.

Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins are from Blue States.

[jwirr]

16. I am 70 and I am angry. They have no right to make these moral judgements against women. I am

ready to take to the streets again if I have to. This is insanity exemplified.

[Green_Lantern]

19. We don't need anger we need to be proactive

And turn this into a debate on overall healthcare.

[jwirr]

21. So why can't we do both?

[Green_Lantern]

23. we can be motivated by anger

But we need to use positive words in our argument.

[jwirr]

24. Absolutely.

[kiranon]

30. Another 70 year old who will be right there with you.

Fought this battle before and will do so again. Best defense is a good offense. If no birth control for women, take the argument right back to these men - life begins with a sperm and there should be no wasted sperm. Capture them all and go looking for hundreds of thousands of women to have their babies or live the life of a non sexual being. Think of all the ads on line seeking eggs/wombs. When I was widowed very young with 2 very young children, most men were not interested in having an instant family. Men who want or can afford a lot of children, IMHO, are few and far between. All the men I know support birth control and those men are Democrats and Republicans.

[jwirr]

32. Your post makes me smile. So true. If men think about it they would be the ones fighting for birth

control not us. Today our schools actually have a social worker come to class to explain how they can be tested to prove paternity and become responsible for a child they will probably not raise for the first 18 years of that child's life.

This has got to be political because the big families I remember have all but disappeared today. I do not see what they think they are going to gain but I am upset simply because they are even attacking the use of birth control. STUPID.

[MineralMan]

4. We don't need all women to do it.

We just need a bunch of them to vote against those morons. And according to the most recent polls, it's working.

Nobody can ever convince everyone to do anything. It's not necessary.

[Green_Lantern]

8. the polls are a progressive weakness

The GOP proactively shape public opinion whereas we react to public opinion.

We are silly to think just laying out the facts and hoping people will support progressives is a good strategy.

[muriel_volestrangler]

40. Obama designed the rules saying all insurance must cover birth control

That was not just 'reacting to public opinion' - though it's clear it is very popular. I'd say introducing new rules is very much 'shaping public opinion'; the GOP is just digging in its heels, saying "religion trumps everything".

[Green_Lantern]

43. Obama is the one who balked and put in the religion exemption...

He was either being dumb or reacting.

[muriel_volestrangler]

46. He changed the rules so that all women will be covered

The last change was so that the insurance companies are nominally paying for it. They still get the coverage.

[Green_Lantern]

52. he could have just done that in the first place

Putting in the exemption was silly.

[muriel_volestrangler]

54. Huh? What exemption are you saying he put in?

The nearest thing to an 'exemption' is the last thing he did - which was to say that organisations owned by religions could say their payments didn't go towards contraception. You seem to think there was some earlier 'silly' exemption that Obama introduced.

[Green_Lantern]

60. there was an exemption for religious institutions in the original requirement

"The guidelines also include an amendment that allows religious institutions that offer insurance to their employees the choice of whether or not to cover contraception services."
http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2011/08/white-house-announces-new-guidelines-for-womens-health-care/

[muriel_volestrangler]

62. That's churches themselves, not church-run hospitals, universities and so on

An amendment to the prevention regulation allows religious institutions that offer insurance to their employees the choice of whether or not to cover contraception services. HHS defines the policy as follows:

Group health plans sponsored by certain religious employers, and group health insurance coverage in connection with such plans, are exempt from the requirement to cover contraceptive services. A religious employer is one that: (1) has the inculcation of religious values as its purpose; (2) primarily employs persons who share its religious tenets; (3) primarily serves persons who share its religious tenets; and (4) is a non-profit organization under Internal Revenue Code section 6033(a)(1) and section 6033(a)(3)(A)(i) or (iii). 45 C.F.R. §147.130(a)(1)(iv)(B). See the Federal Register Notice: Group Health Plans and Health Insurance Issuers Relating to Coverage of Preventive Services under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PDF - 108 KB)

This regulation is modeled on the most common accommodation for churches available in the majority of the 28 states that already require insurance companies to cover contraception. "HHS welcomes comment on this policy," noted the statement.

http://www.rhrealitycheck.org/blog/2011/08/01/adopts-recommendations-reproductive-health-care-exempts-religious-employers-birth-control-coverage

Yeah, in an ideal world, we'd be able to tell a church that its direct employees have to get coverage too; but sometimes, you can't push against the adoration of religion that the US people has. The policy was designed to get coverage for the hospital etc. employees; and that was why the Catholic bishops tried to get Obama to back down back in November:

Regulations promulgated by HHS this summer mandate coverage in all employee-based health plans of contraceptive methods without a co-pay. The current provision includes what many already consider to be a sweeping refusal clause, exempting certain religious organizations for which religious values are their primary purpose; that primarily employ persons who share the religious tenets of the organization; that primarily serve persons who share the religious tenets of the organization; and that are nonprofit organizations. The regulations would still require institutions such as Catholic hospitals--for which one assumes the primary purpose is evidence-based health care--and universities (primary purpose, education?) to offer insurance that covers contraception without a co-pay. Nothing (repeat: NOTHING) in this new benefit requires an organization to dispense birth control, or an individual to take it. This is simply a matter of ensuring women have access to affordable preventive care by providing it with no co-pays. For an excellent and thorough review of this issue, read the testimony of Catholics for Choice President Jon O'Brien.

http://www.rhrealitycheck.org/article/2011/11/16/obama-and-the-bishops-is-the-white-house-caving-on-birth-control-coverage

[Green_Lantern]

69. an ideal world?

Many states already had the requirement with no religious exemptions.

Putting in the exemption and then distinguishing between which institutions were secular enough to not deserve exemption opened it up to a 1st Amendment issue.

[muriel_volestrangler]

80. Are you sure that includes the religions themselves?

Which states?

[mick063]

6. Birth Control is a losing issue for the GOP.

Rachel is correct.

In politics, any reaction is typically an over reaction.

In other words: America is going to take a hard turn left to get the ship back on course toward their desired "middle".

[Green_Lantern]

11. I like Rachel but she can be naive

When she thinks just laying out the facts will win over voters.

People vote based on a narrative not cold facts.

[yellowcanine]

7. I don't know - there are some signs already of a backlash against the Republicans on this....

For example, the huge disparity in support of unmarried women for Romney vs. Obama. May not be the only reason, but it seems to me that it must be a factor.

November 2011 Obama 54, Romney 37
January 2012 Obama 60 Romney 34
February 2012 Obama 65 Romney 30

http://www.democraticunderground.com/125113312

[AtomicKitten]

9. You underestimate the impact of this GOP theater.

If we are discussing issues settled in the 1960s, the GOP loses.

[Green_Lantern]

13. only if the issues are debated at face value

The GOP aren't dumb enough to do that.

[AtomicKitten]

15. The GOP is tone deaf on women's issues and I agree they use subterfuge

to sway their base. However, I think the Democrats have done a pretty good job of keeping this discussion on topic. Santorum's opposition to birth control is overt and specific, and the other knucklehead GOP contenders have jumped on that sinking ship.

[Green_Lantern]

18. Santorum is a gift to us

He says thing are political dynamite. He is just an idiot.

[justiceischeap]

10. It effects men too -- are you too confident in men too?

If, goodness forbid, we ever got to a place where women couldn't access contraceptives and contraception was left solely to men, I predict child support payments becoming an issue. I'm not stating ALL men would have unprotected sex but just pointing out an issue that seems to be overlooked.

[Green_Lantern]

17. depends on the man

But I'm not sure most men worry about it. They probably assume it is the woman's responsibility.

[justiceischeap]

34. Until they end up paying child support

and then some cry foul, the woman should have been on the pill. If these as*es get their way, they won't have that excuse anymore.

[FarLeftFist]

12. You're not confident enough that women will stand up for their own well-being against the GOP.

Even though the polls show people siding with Obama by a 3 to 1 margin on this issue.

[Green_Lantern]

14. no I'm not

People vote against their interests all the time.

Polls don't give me confidence when the right frames the debate.

[Proud Liberal Dem]

44. Lots of things "could" happen and nobody can predict the future

but there are things that are *more likely* to happen than not. If the GOP keeps up their attacks on Planned Parenthood, birth control, abortion, etc. in Congress and in the states, then I think that it is utimately *more likely* that women will refuse to vote for the GOP in November. This may, in fact, motivate them even MORE to GOTV for Democrats and President Obama. This issue is a loser for the GOP but there are, of course, no laws against them committing political suicide. Most reasonable people don't consider the President's policy to be an assault on religious liberty and even fewer do with the "compromise" policy he later introduced.

[Green_Lantern]

53. I agree the GOP going too far right may just hurt them..

But you could have said the same with Bush v. Kerry.

The good thing is someone like Santorum uses nutty language that'll turn off voters.

[Proud Liberal Dem]

58. 2004 was much different

9/11 was still pretty fresh in most people's minds and that took a lot of people's minds off some of the other things Bush/Cheney/GOP were pushing and kept them from focusing on the things that Kerry was promoting. Plus, back then the GOP was better able to "keep a lid" on the crazies. Nowadays, the crazies are the "base" of the GOP and are more or less running things and are visible everywhere you turn.

[HockeyMom]

25. Male Vasectomies SHOULD be covered too

If a man wants to be responsible for BC, why should he be denied? Fair is Fair. Although this would probably have even less support, especially among other men, than women's contraceptive coverage.

[Green_Lantern]

26. insurance would oppose covering that without copay

Surgery costs aren't worth what they'd save.

[HockeyMom]

27. My husband's in '84 was outpaitent and had a co-pay

All surgery had co-pays. This was considered "elective" but not "cosmetic" surgey and covered. Probably today most doctors would do it in their office. No anesthesia (local) and it only took about 20 minutes. I sat in the waiting room and then took him home. It wasn't very expensive as I remember. Once it is over, other than followup doctor visits every few months for 6 months, it's over. When a woman is on the Pill she can use it for years and will need doctor visits every six months. In the long run a woman on the Pill will probably will cost more to the insurance company than a one-time vasectomy.

[mick063]

28. My wife really pestered me to become a "sport model"

I'm glad I did. Lots of unmitigated whooopee.


Then I had to endure menopause. Make no mistake. Both of us must endure it.

Please don't take offense females. I fundamentally believe you should be in control of your own body.

But.....body chemistry is a fascinating science

[HockeyMom]

29. Guys, your woman will really appreciate it, during MENOPAUSE

It took me almost 2 years. Yea, it's over. Then little surprise one month. Damn. No, it's NOT over. I suppose this is why so many women years ago had those so called "change of life" babies. When your man has had a vasectomy, you will not have to worry if it is "really over now", or any little surprise babies when you are sending your kids off to college.

While I think the Pill is wonderful, I did question using it for almost 30 YEARS. I feel PERMANENT birth control is much better, when your family, whatever that may be, is complete.

[CTyankee]

31. Do you have a link where republicans are framing on the issue of "free" birth control?

I've not seen or heard of this argument, as least not yet.

When you say they are characterizing women as being "irresponsible" it sounds off to me. Irresponsible is what they used to call women who did not use birth control and "used" abortion as birth control. So I don't see it being so neatly turned around on them. The argument that it will reduce abortions further dilutes the argument that being "free" is somehow a bad thing.

Having said that, I realize that this is certainly something that the repubs will try to use. They are probably furiously focus grouping this thing as we speak.

[Green_Lantern]

49. No, I was saying they are framing it as a handout...

"Forcing Catholics opposed to birth control to pay for their contraceptives."

I'm basing the irresponsibility thing on the fact they seem be saying that contraception shouldn't be treated as a medical necessity and covered by insurance.

http://www.nationaljournal.com/2012-presidential-campaign/santorum-birth-control-is-cheap-and-should-not-be-covered-20120210

[CTyankee]

50. And what I am trying to tell you is that women hear what you have just said and think

instinctively that it is simply not true. It is not true in their lives. Quite the contrary. Sure a tiny fringe of RW religiously extreme women would not, but we know that they are a tiny fringe. Plus, men would stand to be better off as well if their partners were protected against an unplanned pregnancy.

You really have to think a little harder here, GL...

[Green_Lantern]

56. oh, definitely on Santorum I agree

Women know contraception isn't cheap. If all Republicans phrased issues like he does 98% of women would vote Democratic.

[CTyankee]

68. and if he is the repub. nominee for president, what will other republicans do?

Either they go with their standard bearer or they go "off the reservation" politically. The only time in recent history that I can recall that happening was with Goldwater in 1964. I was old enough to vote then but I'm not sure I remember what the liberal republicans did as a result of goldwater's candidacy...

[Green_Lantern]

70. If Santorum gets nominated I bet he'll focus on the economy and be more general on

Social issues. He really isn't running much more right of Reagan.

[CTyankee]

81. do you honestly believe that the Dems will let him run only on the economy?

He can TRY to be more general on social issues. I don't think Obama's campaign staff will let him DO that, tho!

Oh, it's going to be FUN...

[DearAbby]

33. I think you missed the point

This is an insult to women, those of us who take our healthcare seriously. They poo'poo'd had have mocked women's healthcare needs. Accused us of being sluts for demanding it. We have a New Hampshire GOPer saying Married couples should abstain from sex. (Sex is only for procreation)

There a law pending in Virginia, passed by both GOP houses to punish a woman for finding herself in need of an abortion, by legally raping her in the Doctor's chair. either to punish her or make the experience so horrible to deter women from seeking abortions. (I repeat, this is vaguely important. They will by law make a woman endure a vaginal probe exam without her consent. passed both houses and is currently on the governor's desk)

This is an outright assault and insult on women. The scene of that all Male panel has been seared into my mind, we are being told we have no voice regarding our own healthcare. YOU CAN BET this will be taught mother to daughter. I don't believe you understand women.

[CTyankee]

35. This is the critical point! I don't know if the OP is male or female but

perspective is everything on this issue. When Rep. Elijah Cummings was interviewed about the all male House panel he was asked about why this could happen. Cummings said he just thought the repub males not only didn't "see" the woman's perspective, they couldn't even imagine it. That told me something. Obviously, some men "get" it. Cummings certainly did. But there are men who simply cannot. And while it is true that the repubs have persuaded some people to vote against their own best interests on less personal issues, it doesn't prove that something as basic, as instinctual, as this birth control issue to women is in that category as it might be in another, less gut punching one for women.

And many men themselves, for a variety of reasons, would very well defend the use of birth control, not only on the issue of personal privacy but also on the purely economic ground of having to provide (under penalty from the state) for children they father. That could be serious deprivation of a man's personal liberty.

Posing this issue as a purely hypothetical one and just going back to a "What's the Matter with Kansas" scenario, as important as that scenario is, ignores or gravely discounts the reality of women's lives. Contraception, as a political issue, is unique and will always be.

[salin]

36. +++ to both this and the post to which is being replied.

[Green_Lantern]

41. and that's why the right is not overtly saying to ban birth control..

This is why Democrats lose elections. Even when bitching about Republicans we play their game.

They don't want to ban birth control, they want to use it to beat us in elections.

That is why they are arguing it as "forcing people to violate religious beliefs."

Secondly assuming the GOP is just dumb or doesn't get it is a bad idea. Unfortunately, they win elections this way because just hoping voters will listen to reason isn't enough.

And by the way, I'm not overlooking the reality of women's lives. The reality is not all women think the GOP want to limit their personal use of contraception.

[CTyankee]

47. Oh, but they ARE overtly saying to ban birth control...

Didn't you read what Santorum said the other day about favoring states to ban birth control?

And they are losing badly in the framing of the contraception issue as religious liberty. Once Santorum "elaborates" his position it becomes more and more obvious about contraception and the "relgious liberty" guise just goes away.

If women don't hear anything else from the republicans mouths but the words "banning birth control" that is enough to damn them.

Oh, and what about dear Foster Friess? You don't get much more in your face than that! How many times have you heard that clip played on MSNBC?

Morning Joe had Andrea Mitchell on this morning and she kept on talking about contraception and what it meant to women voters.

If you think that this is just the same old, same old politically, you are dead wrong...

[Green_Lantern]

64. as I said before Santorum is a different story...

He just blurts out extremist language and doesn't frame the issues.

I think the GOP has given up 2012.

[CTyankee]

67. I agree. They couldn't go over the cliff any more dramatically IMO...

[Green_Lantern]

37. insult or not...the frame of slutty women has worked for the right..

That is how they frame social issues.

[CTyankee]

48. You keep on saying how effective their strategy is...I am beginning to wonder about

what you are trying to tell us...

[Green_Lantern]

61. I'm not glad when they are effective..

I'm Catholic and I know the Church has pushed on social issues but I've never seen anything as blatantly partisan and offensive as that contraception letter.

I'm not even close to being in agreement with right-wing social policy.

[CTyankee]

65. It seems to me that the RW is only effective when they can marginalize issues to their

advantage. For instance, the whole partial birth abortion baloney. They make the issue about something extreme, not central. But the contraception issue is not extreme. It is central to the lives of women and men. And those women and men know it.

The RW has seriously and, IMO, fatally overplayed their hand by punching people, esp. women in the gut. It won't work.

[Green_Lantern]

72. Maybe but I never thought I'd hear a letter about contraception read at church either

[CTyankee]

74. and I'll bet you weren't the only Catholic who thought that!

The Church seriously overplayed its hand, too....

[Green_Lantern]

76. I said it was a free commercial for Obama...

I do know several families who don't use contraception on principle but they are younger couples who may just be naive.

[Rex]

59. Really?

I don't think it is working as well as you want to give them credit for.

[Green_Lantern]

63. it worked enough to reelect Bush..

It has pushed the GOP rightward.

[Rex]

66. No, the 'lockdown' in Ohio worked to get Bush relected

I am not aware of them deploying that gambit, are you refering to what they said about McCain during the run-up to the election? If so, kinda the same thing but not really.

[myrna minx]

38. Thank you. n/t

[marlakay]

71. If Santorum is the candidate they can be confident

I think most people believe Romney is just lying to get republican vote but he won't take it away.

But Santorum really would try that and I think most even Christian women are smart enough not to want that.

I know someone in the military a woman who is like what you said thinking certain people want hand outs. That's what they are being told day after day by republican leaders. But i find that kind of crazy since she gets free medical including birth control through the military....

But even that same lady said none of her Christian friends like the candidates because they go to far on birth control. They all use it...

[Green_Lantern]

73. a President cannot ban birth control without Congress

[LanternWaste]

75. What evidence, relative to this particular context,

What evidence, relative to this particular context, do you have illustrating that female voters will not in fact, trend generally towards the historic voting patterns of the past 35 years?

[Green_Lantern]

77. what do you mean? trend towards what?

Women voting Democratic?

[LanternWaste]

78. Historical voting trends for women in the past 35 years are contrary to this statement...

Historical voting trends for women in the past 35 years are contrary to this statement...

"Republicans are trying to get independent middle class women voters on board with this by making this appear to be about irresponsible women wanting a handout."

It then begs the question, how specifically will the GOP garner additional female votes by using the same social arguments that have been doing so already since Goldwater, and what specific evidence is there that it will work this time?

[Green_Lantern]

79. I never said additional female voters..

I'm talking about GOP losing female voters.

[TheKentuckian]

82. If they don't gain voters then what is the concern?