jbauer21ahsgov - Tumblr blog

[jbauer21ahsgov]

Blog Post 9 Final Infographic

[jbauer21ahsgov]

Civic Action Assessment of Issue

I have volunteered my time to respond to the issue of women’s rights by attending the Zoom held by the League of Women Voters. This experience was so interesting and enlightening for me! For one, the woman who represented the League was amazing and very knowledgeable in the realm of women’s history and involvement. In the presentation, we learned about women such as Carrie Chapman Catt (the founder of the League, 100 years ago!), Abigail Adams, Maria Miller Steward, Elizabeth Katy Stanton, Harriet Tubman, Rosa Parks, Tye Leung Schulze, and so many more inspiring women! It is amazing to hear about the immense effort and work that goes into starting a movement and continuing it through the years and has really inspired me to look more into the women’s rights movement on my own time.

Not only is the historical background incredibly fascinating, but there are also so many bills being passed that concern women’s reproductive and human rights- something that is very important! I also think it is so cool that the League of Women Voters is and has been made up of women from all over the world. I honestly had never heard of several of the women who have changed the movement entirely. An example of one of these women is Marie Louise Bottineau Baldwin, a Native American, women’s suffrage activist. Marie believed that Native Americans, women included, should be recognized as a member of society and be incorporated into the predominantly white, male workplace. Aside from being a trailblazer for the cultural aspects of the women’s rights movement, Marie was also a writer and musician and was very active in the passage of the Indian Citizenship Act (1924).

Even over Zoom, this is experience was so memorable for me and I hope to one day be even one tenth as knowledgeable and engaged as these women! I will absolutely keep myself more informed about upcoming events and bills relating to women’s rights from now on.

[jbauer21ahsgov]

Legislative and Executive Action

The most recent bill is titled the Continuing Appropriations Act, 2021. This bill was first introduced on September 22, 2020.

The Continuing Appropriations Act originated in the Senate.

It has passed both houses. This bill allows federal agencies in the fiscal 2021 year to address issues surrounding health care, surface transportation, and other health-related issues. One of the sections this bill addresses is sec. 2103. This section extends through December 11, 2020 and helps to fund prevents and educated adolescents about pregnancy and sexually transmitted infections. Other applicable sections are sec. 2104 (education on abstinence) and sec. 2106 (annual leave for more than 60 days can be granted by the Public Health Service). These sections will allow for greater health resources for women and those who require extra financial and educational aid. Because of this, public health services are able to provide more inclusive education concerning sexual health, which is especially important to women because it lessens the stress they might be experiencing in unhealthy relationships and so on.

The Continuing Appropriation Act was sponsored by Nita Lowey (primary sponsor), a Democrat. The democratic party tends to have a more progressive view on health rights and resources, so it makes sense that this bill was sponsored by a Democrat since it is very “for the people”.

This bill was assigned to House Appropriations and House Budget.

I would encourage my representative to vote yea to this bill because it is incredibly inclusive to not only women’s health, but minorities, as well. With the passing of this bill, health rights have been extended and more gracious to those who really need the extra support.

“Coronavirus stops with me”- this does not pertain to my civic action issue.

The secretary of HHS is Alex Azar, President Trump’s Secretary of Health and Human Services as of January 2018. He served as General Counsel, second tour of duty at the HHS Department, and then Deputy Secretary in the 200s. Azar has spent most of his career working in senior healthcare and is the 24th U.S. Secretary of Health and Human Services.

Education & Training Opportunities because it applies to the importance of medical education and health care research training. Another service is Safety from Violence & Abuse, which pertains indirectly to abortion and women’s reproductive rights.

[jbauer21ahsgov]

California Proposition Assessment

1. Prop 4: “Waiting Period and Parental Notification Before Termination of Minor’s Pregnancy”, 2008

2. Proposition 4 prohibits minors from undergoing abortion until 48 hours after the physician notifies the minor’s parent or guadian. If the minor has a parental waiver, medical exception, or issue with their parents regarding Child Protective Services, notification is not required. Permits to go through with the procedure must provide parental consent and evidence of the minor’s maturity and intentions.

3. The health and social services cost ranges between an annual of $4 million to $5 million for California and $2 million for each county. There was also a one-time Medi-Cal automation cost of around a few million dollars. Law enforcement for this proposition ranged between $5 million and $6 million per year.

4. Proposition 4 was not passed. 52% of the votes were against Prop 4 and 48% were for. Although I am not surprised by the outcome, I was not expecting the votes to be so close. Access to abortion has become slightly more available, although not entirely. I am happy that this proposition was defeated, otherwise abortion would likely be much more difficult to come by today.

5. A total of $10,504,042 was contributed to the campaign in favor of defeating the proposition. I can imagine this was a massive deal at the time because the majority of the donors provided well over $100,000. The highest donation amount was given by Planned Parenthood Mar Monte with $1,119,182, which is so cool to see. I am glad that the resources themselves (the clinics) were able to get involved and support their demographic, although I hope they did it for moral reasons and not economic, considering about half of the donors are from various Planned Parenthood clinics throughout California.

6. Arguments for the proposition were, if a minor obtains an abortion without their family knowing, there could be serious health complications. Minors who do not tell their parents about the procedure may be unable to keep up with proper after care or may not be aware of their medical history. If the minor was sexually violated, it is important that the minor informs their family of the issue because the abortion clinic may not report the crime.

Arguments against the proposition were that no law can mandate family communication, therefore mandated parental notifications should not be enforced. Minors could be potentially abused or kicked out by their parents if they tell them they are getting a procedure or have been intimate with someone. There is a strong potential for delayed procedures, which may lead to it being too late for the procedure to be completed. It is common for minors, in this situation, to turn to self-induced abortions or suicide.

7. I would have voted against the proposition. Abortion is a very personal and sensitive topic. If someone, regardless of their age, does not feel comfortable confronting their family about their pregnancy, especially if it was non consensual, that is final. No law should prevent someone from doing what makes them comfortable when it comes to their body. It is not the parents’ responsibility to choose how their child feels about abortion and child birth.

8. I thought the list of supporters of Proposition 4 was really interesting. Few supporters actually work among abortion clinics, which makes sense. There were a couple gynecologists, but the list is primarily sheriffs, district attorneys, a pediatrician, a CPS worker, and a school board member. The most surprising supporter of Proposition 4 by far was Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger.

[jbauer21ahsgov]

Political Interest Groups and PACs Assessment

Interest Group

Name: Center for Reproductive Rights

Mission: The Center of Reproductive Rights mission is to use law to make reproductive rights equal to fundamental human rights across the world.

 Advocacies: 

Their goal is to expand access to reproductive healthcare resources such as birth control, prenatal and obstetric care, safe abortion, and unbiased information and education about their reproductive rights and resources.

The center documents abuses, work with policymakers in order to promote reproductive freedom, and foster legal scholarships to teach people about reproductive health and human rights.

The center initiated “El Golpe” in Ecuador, Guatemala, and Nicaragua at the United Nations Human Rights Committee. The goals of this launch in 2019 were to reform abortion laws in the area, especially young teenagers experiencing young and unplanned pregnancies being denied abortion.

The center supports Kansas Governor Laura Kelly in her ruling for the right to personal autonomy, including the right to abortion, being strengthened apart from what is mentioned in the Constitution.

The center has assisted the High Court in Kenya’s decision making surrounding abortion laws, making availability to education and processes more accessible, unbiased, and supportive of women seeking safe abortion.

Endorsed Legislation: In August 2020, the Center worked with the Inter-American Court of Human Rights on the Paola Guzmán Albarracín v. Ecuador case. This case was the Court’s first sexual abuse in a school setting case. The Center of Reproductive Rights partnered and brought this case to the Court and clarified her right to equality, non-discrimination, education, and right to live without gender violence. The Center was successful in this case and additionally raised awareness about how often cases such as these occur, but are left unaddressed. 

Location/Opportunities: The Center for Reproductive Rights headquarter is in New York City, but is available in media across the US and world. I was not able to find any local opportunities or dates for future meetings to join.

Volunteer Opportunities: The website is somewhat unclear of where or when they meet together locally, although they have frequent marches globally, made up of smaller gatherings off the larger interest group. These marches and protests are often in San Francisco and bordering cities.

Additional Development: The Center helped to expand access to in-vitro fertilization (IVF) in Maryland around June 2020. This allows unmarried individuals and couples to have insurance coverage for IVF, which helps them carry out a safe transfer between the sperm sample and transferred embryos.

Super PAC

Name: Women Vote!

Goal: This PAC’s goal is to persuade and enable women to vote more women into power, specifically those who are pro-choice and Democratic. 

Money Raised: They have raised $36,262,453 total and $31,985,958 in independent expenditures.

Money Raised For/Against Democrats/Republicans: $10,649,774 have been spent for Democrats. $2,436,841 have been spent against Democrats. $0 have been spent for Republicans. $18,889,343 have been spent against Republicans. This is generally what I expected to see, although I am a bit confused as to why there are so many Republicans who support and donate to this program despite zero dollars from this PAC being for them. From what I have read so far, Democrats are much more progressive when it comes to women’s rights and their place in office and power, so seeing how much money is in support of Democrats makes sense.

Donors: Thomas Secunda (Bloomberg), Laura Ricketts (business woman), Laurie Michaels (psychologist), Michelle Mercer (leadership consultant), Jeffrey Walker (philanthropist). Most of the people listed are not well known, but are very generous to the cause of letting more women into power. Ricketts, for example, is a business woman herself, which makes sense why she would want more women in the corporate world. Mercer is a leadership consultant, likely making her trustworthy to know what kind of people should be in power (women in this case). This shows that this PAC has a lot of generous donors who actually work in this area and are dedicated to the women’s movement and advancement of diversity in government, which is really cool! The majority of the donors’ jobs are focused around other’s well-beings and business, which shows a lot about the values of the Women Vote! PAC.

[jbauer21ahsgov]

Election 2020 Presidential Candidates Assessment

Howie Hawkins/Angela Nicole Walker (Green):

Howie Hawkins’ position on women’s rights: supports the decriminalization of prostitution as long as the worker is safe and the government does not get involved - this would allow a larger possibility of fraud and force. He does not, however, support the legalization of prostitution because it promotes law enforcement in their industry which will only lead to an increase in incarceration. Hawkins supports the Equal Rights Amendment, promotes women’s equality, is anti sex trafficking, believes in stronger law enforcement for discrimination and sexual harassment of women in the workplace, supports equal pay for women, does not support Trump eliminating healthcare because it would limit abortion resources for women, and supports Proportional Representation in Congress.

Do you agree with the position? Why or why not?: I do agree with Hawkins’ position because he takes a very progressive perspective to women’s rights. He addresses the “me too” movement, prostitution, pro-choice, and several amendments that are pro-women’s rights and anti-discrimination. I agree with all of his women’s rights points aside from some government issues he brought up concerning prostitution.

Does their position support/conflict the Green platform?: Hawkins’ position does not conflict the Green platform but rather expands upon it much more than what was disclosed in the Green party platform summary. This is very respectable and I personally appreciate his openness to the movement!

Donald J. Trump/Michael R. Pence (Republican):

Donald Trump’s position on women’s rights: believes that universal healthcare should be replaced with private healthcare, pro-life, supports the defunding of abortion service providers, believes the Mexico City Policy should ban US foreign aid to organization providing abortions, and signed a bill that allows states to restrict Planned Parenthood Funding.

Do you agree with the position? Why or why not?: I do not agree with anything Trump stands by concerning women’s rights. He is pro-life and I am pro-choice. He believes universal healthcare should be replaced with private healthcare and I think healthcare should be more accessible (which is in part because I’m pro-choice and he is pro-life). Trump also believes in the defunding of abortion clinics and services while I think we need more funding and more availability of clinics.

Does their position support/conflict the Republican platform?: Trump rarely speaks upon his support for women’s rights whereas the Republican platform talks quite a bit about their support of equality as well as support abortion, but they will not fund the process. Similar to the platform, Trump does believe in women requiring the father of the child to make decisions alongside the mother during decisions like abortion and lifestyle. 

Gloria La Riva/Sunil Freeman (Peace and Freedom):

Gloria La Riva’s position on women’s rights: has personally defended women’s reproductive health clinics. She supports the Black Fire Fighters Association as they end racism, sexism, and discrimination in the San Francisco fire department. Gloria has participated in marches about LGBTQ rights and has protested the passage of the anti-marriage equality Prop 8 in California. Supports women in the workplace.

Do you agree with the position? Why or why not?: I completely agree with her position towards women’s equality. It’s awesome that she personally marches and protests for and against such progressive issues. She supports women’s rights, regardless of their sexual orientation which is great!

Does their position support/conflict the Peace and Freedom platform?: Gloria’s position does support the Peace and Freedom platform and even takes it a few steps further because she actively participates in the change and promotion of equality.

Roque de La Fuente “Rocky” Guerra/Kanye Omari West (American Independent):

Roque de La Fuente Guerra’s position on women’s rights: pro-choice, believes that government should not intervene in a couple’s religious decisions (regarding same sex marriage). Gay couples should have the same rights as straight couples as long as they pass the same background checks. The government should continue to fund Planned Parenthood. Healthcare insurance providers should offer free birth control, gender identity should be included in anti-discrimination laws, and women need to be equally experienced and trained to enter a workplace (just because they are a woman doesn’t mean they can immediately work in government, for example).

Do you agree with the position? Why or why not?: I do agree with the majority of his position on women’s rights, although some of his points come across a bit terse and stubborn. Although I do agree that there should be no ‘special treatment’ for certain groups, the way he phrases this sounds less supportive and more neutral or indifferent, as though he isn’t as active in his political beliefs.

Does their position support/conflict the American Independent platform?: not entirely, no. The American Independent platform believes that marriage should only be between a man and a woman and depends their beliefs on God specifically, making the platform less religiously inclusive than Guerra appears. The American Independent platform is also pro-life and pro-constitution.

Jo Jorgenson/Jeremy “Spike” Cohen (Libertarian):

Jo Jorgenson’s position on women’s rights: pro-choice. Government should be kept out of the decision-making process for abortion - it’s a sensitive issue and completely depends on the choice and side of the family. Jorgenson has voted for candidates that are pro-life and pro-choice, the main thing she cares about is that the issue is privately and sensitively addressed according to the family. Jorgenson believes that employers should not be required to pay men and women equal salary because there are too many other variables (education, experience, tenure) that should be the main reason for determining salary. Women should be allowed in the military as long as they have been equally trained and tested as men have. Businesses should not be required to have women on their board of directors - it solely depends on the qualifications the woman has, not their gender. Health insurance should not be required to offer free birth control.

Do you agree with the position? Why or why not?: I generally do not agree with Jorgenson’s position. Although I do agree with her on being pro-choice, the way she addresses the issues surrounding abortion are very vague and borderline neutral. She also does not believe health insurance should offer free birth control which is something I disagree with. I do appreciate how she addresses the sensitivity of abortion, but I would personally support her more if she were to talk about it more and not make it seem so taboo and unspoken.

Does their position support/conflict the Libertarian platform?: Jorgenson’s position mostly supports the Libertarian platform. Of course she has her own other opinions, but the Libertarian platform’s ideology always seems very “you do you”, and Jorgenson is primarily neutral, too.

Joseph R. Biden/Kamala D. Harris (Democratic):

Joe Biden’s position on women’s rights: acknowledges and wishes to address how much women of color have been underpaid, unseen, and undervalued for too long. Women in the caregiving and education workplace are very often underpaid or not paid at all, which is something Biden is against (against discrimination and unequal pay). Supports the increase in recognition and equality for women of color. Equal opportunities for women and men. “Every issue is a women’s issue–health care, the economy, education, national security”. Women are disproportionately treated by many policies. Biden wishes to improve economic security (equal pay, invest in women-owned small businesses, expand access to education/training, strengthen benefits and pay for women in the workplace), more access to health care, overcome health inequities, high-quality and affordable health care for all women, help women navigate the balance between work and family (affordable child care and care for older Americans/people with disabilities, paid leave, benefits, protections), end violence against women, empower and protect women globally.

Do you agree with the position? Why or why not?: I completely agree with Biden. One of the aspects that stood out the most to me about his platform is that he not only dedicated two entire drop-downs to women’s rights, but he addressed women of color, as well (which is something I haven’t seen yet among the other candidates’ platforms). I also agree with Biden’s inclusivity and acknowledgement of a wide variety of women’s rights violations and how he wishes to make it better.

Does their position support/conflict the Democratic platform?: Biden’s position supports most if not all of the points brought up in the Democratic party platform summary.

[jbauer21ahsgov]

Blog Post #3

Republican: In their statement, Republicans claim to support women in the workplace as well as in the army. They are anti-abortion and pro-life and believe that abortion is to commit “infanticide”. The Republican party believes that parental consent is necessary during abortion-related circumstances and that the father of the child has equal say in the birth of the child. Republicans support health and safety standards in abortion clinics, although they do not fund or subsidize abortion processes. The party believes in equal responsibility between the mother and father over their child and support those who help women fleeing abuse. Republicans are against the U.N. women’s rights movement.

Democratic: Democrats feel very strongly for the women’s rights movement and will fight for equal rights for women. The party believes in the ratification of the Equal Rights Amendment and will take “aggressive action” to end unequal pay by developing penalties against companies who discriminate against women. The Democratic party believes that women deserve quality healthcare, which includes a safe and legal abortion and “will fight” laws that are anti-women’s rights and anti-abortion. They also claim that they will take action for women’s rights in the workplace and believe women deserve reasonable accommodations for pregnancy, recent birth, and breastfeeding within the workplace. Democrats believe in paid sick days and universal paid family and medical leave. They support LGBTQ+ members and honor women in uniform, such as those in the military.

Libertarian: The Libertarian party has an overarching ideology that, as long as people aren’t discriminating or hurting others, people should be able to do what they want. This includes the idea that the government should not be involved in abortion, and should rather be carefully considered by the person giving birth. The party recognizes how sensitive the topic of abortion is and respect parental rights that a child can be raised however the parent wants regarding religion and beliefs. Similarly, Libertarians are anti-abuse and anti-neglect for children and believe people deserve equal treatment from government regardless of their status or identity. Libertarians are for the decriminalization of prostitution and believe that people are born equal.

Green Party: The Green Party supports women-owned businesses, equality, and believe that there are far too few women in elected office. This party promotes greater opportunity for women ownership in media outlets and acknowledge the increase in trafficking, particularly toward women. They support the punishment and consequences of traffickers. The Green Party supports abortion and is pro-choice. They also believe that women require more resources and availability when it comes to their reproductive rights.

Peace and Freedom: The Peace and Freedom party believes that men and women have equal status. This group is committed to women’s rights and feminism, as well as being pro equal pay and pro women in the workplace. The Peace and Freedom party believes that birth control information and education should be free for women at any age and that violence against women needs to be ended. They believe that unions need to do more to support and promote women’s leadership. Finally, Peace and Freedom believe in safe parental care and that women should get to choose their preferred birth alternatives.

Reflection: The party I identify the most with in regards to women’s rights is the Democratic party. I originally thought that I would most support the Libertarian party because that is the party I usually identify with. However, I noticed that the Democratic party most clearly and descriptively explained their unwavering support for the women’s rights movement. I usually identify more independently than toward a specific party because I often do not entirely agree with everything one side or the other says, but I really respect and appreciate the points the Democratic platform covered. They were surprisingly progressive! I would definitely vote for this party’s candidate if they for this supported all the points brought up in their statement. 

Presidential Debate Assessment: Women’s rights was briefly discussed during the debate in regards to healthcare and the economy. Biden stated that removing healthcare would be hurtful toward women because it would make surgeries relating to pregnancy less obtainable. Although healthcare was not directly written about in the Democratic platform, Biden’s support for women’s reproductive rights is applicable to the statement, yes.

[jbauer21ahsgov]

Media Assessment of Issue

Although all three of these articles were written about Hillary Clinton and the women’s movement, each one portrayed her a different way. The first article, written by Matthew Lavietes for Reuters came from a more progressive and unbiased perspective. He included quotes from Hillary Clinton both 25 years ago and now when she spoke about her disappointment in the advancements of women’s rights. Lavietes also included statistics made by the International Labour Organization (ILO), which provided the rates of employment of women as compared to men. This article was factual, other than the opinions quoted by Hillary Clinton as she was the subject of the article itself. The audience of this article is assumably women, as Hillary spoke for the Georgetown Institute for Women, Peace and Security.

The next article I read was from The Atlantic. This article was written by Li Zhou, who has several articles on inclusivity, women’s rights, the school system, work-life, and inequality. Her article was more opinion-based, as she included quotes from university students, an actress, and colleagues. Although the article rarely included factual evidence or research, it was able to represent the “common person”, which was valuable for showing the ups and downs of Hillary’s career. With that said, there was some partiality throughout the article when Hillary was compared and contrasted with Bernie Sanders and his participation in the women’s movement. It is difficult to remain impartial during political conversations such as these and I think the article seemed more as such due to its lack of factual evidence.

The third article I read was from the National Review, in which the author, John Hirschauer, reflected on Hillary’s comment toward the “gutsy woman”, Margaret Thatcher. Hirschauer notes that Hillary believed Thatcher’s perception of women was misplaced and that Thatcher was hurting the women’s movement by portraying women such a way. Hirschauer calls this nonsense and then uses uncited evidence to then contradict what Hillary had said and warns women to “be careful with your answers”. Hirschauer writes about progressive topics such as the Black Lives Matter movement and pride month, although the majority of his articles, such as this one, are definitely opinion-based.

The article I agree with most is the first, objective one from Reuters. It stays generally impartial and states solely what Hillary Clinton and the ILO stated themselves. However, I do agree with Hillary in her statements, for the most part, so it may just be that I like what I’m reading because it’s what I want to hear.

Objective Article: https://www.reuters.com/article/idUSL1N2G7223

Left Leaning Article: https://www.theatlantic.com/author/li-zhou/

Conservative Article: https://www.nationalreview.com/2020/06/no-justice-no-peace-can-we-have-peace-now/#slide-1

[jbauer21ahsgov]

Blog Post #1

1. The civic action issue I chose is the general topic of women’s rights. This issue is very important to both our society and me, so I would really like to learn more about its history and what we can do to continue improvement of equality today.

2. I would define women’s rights as the movement to gain equality between genders, regardless of identity in any sort. No person should be above another person when it comes to worth and their abilities under law and that is what the feminist movement, in my mind, hopes to achieve! The women’s rights movement relates to government because women deserve to contribute to our government and society. The only thing holding them back seems to be dated stereotypes that we, as Americans, are finally acknowledging. Having equality between genders would allow more women to be payed equally and credited for their work, have more representation in governmental and corporate decision making, as well as making a huge advancement for equal treatment under law.

3. I think there are a lot of steps that need to be taken, but the first one should be acknowledgement and getting past all the dated stereotypes that should no longer be able to control what women can and can’t do. Acknowledgement has already been established, so now continuing to peacefully protest and being open to questioning the patriarchy and its motives are some paths that could really help us keep the movement going! It’s important to take advantage of our freedoms by protesting and participate in both local and national decision making.