Category — Issue

AG Coakley told NECN’s This Week in Business that she would vote to pass the health care bill currently before the Senate, calling it 

a very strong bill.  I think it has all of the qualities we want in it — a strong public option, it covers pre-existing conditions — and frankly, it doesn’t have some of the things that you don’t want in this bill.

On creating jobs through innovation, Coakley said [Read more →]

[Read more →]

Does it surprise me that Pagliuca called a press conference to announce that he will be a reliable vote disregarding women?   Nah.  No surprise.  Pagliuca proved his lack of concern for women when he condoned objectifying women’s “square butts” to sell hamburgers.  We wrote about it here in September, when Pagliuca had entered the senate race but hat not yet resigned from the Burger King Board. 

So, thinking this logic through:  In Pagliuca’s value system it’s fine to use and objectify women’s bodies for profit.  However, should any of those women’s bodies turn out to be not objects after all, but human beings in need of complete health care, please don’t bother him with that reality.

Don’t miss today’s Globe column by Joan Vennochi:  Taking a hit on health:  Why, that’s women’s work!  And here’s the second great report of the day from Alison King at NECN:

If you have friends who are grappling with the Stupak amendment, here are some videos that might help.  The first has impact, the second has information.  Martha Coakley calls trading off women’s rights for health care reform a “false choice,” and would keep working on a bill until it provides both.

Catholics for Choice, one of the faith groups that will be represented at today’s press conference condemning the Stupak amendment, calls the Bishops who influenced Pelosi to include Stupak

a small group of men who don’t represent American Catholics, let alone the American populace.

They claim that 84% of American Catholics want insurance to cover abortions when the life of the mother is in danger, and that 50% want coverage any time a mother and her doctor decide it is appropriate.  The group warns:

If the electorate sees that a woman’s right to choose is not a core value but simply a bargaining chip to be laid on the table when the going gets tough, there will be a price to pay.  [Read more →]

Update:  Pagliuca issued a statement saying that he misunderstood the question and that [Read more →]

Tonight I played cards with the girls. Last week everyone except me was an undecided voter. Tonight they’re all fired up to vote for Martha Coakley because of her strong and courageous stance for choice.

Blogger Taylor Marsh is sensing excitiment about the issue, too. On today’s podcast, she says that since the House vote, she’s heard from a swell of concerned women.  And Coakley’s fired up, too.  In an interview with Marsh, she said:

This just seems incomprehensible that in 2009 we are taking steps back. And I just refuse to acknowledge that we have to make that [trade-0ff]… [Read more →]

Erin Matsen, VP of the National Organization for Women, today said that in its ratings of lawmakers, her group will score House votes in favor of the recently-passed health care bill to be anti-choice.  Asked whether that would be the case on ABC’s web program Top Line, she said:

Absolutely, but you know what? I’m not concerned about… Democrats, what I’m really concerned about are women on college campuses who are missing their periods. [Read more →]

Globe Columnist Scot Lehigh, in an article called “Political Pirouettes,” says about Capuano’s apparent change of position on the health care bill:

Oh my. For Capuano’s sake, let’s hope the congressional health plan offers coverage for candidates who become so dizzy from turning political somersaults that they suffer self-inflicted injuries to the foot. [Read more →]