Thirty-two years and JAC is still pounding the marble halls of Congress and finding doors wide open.  We are welcomed into offices with words of praise for our support of a strong US-Israel relationship, freedom of reproductive health and choice, and separation of religion and state.  The hallmark of JAC is members who are not only passionate about our issues, but are well-briefed.  When we go into offices to ask for support of Enhanced Security and Sanctions Against Iran, we know the history, the underlying points and the reasons that the bill should be passed.  When we go into the offices to discuss the reauthorization of VAWA (Violence Against Women Act), we know why VAWA is reviewed every five years and what the evolutions mean in context of the current population.  Our days in DC are marked by briefings from policy experts and are supplemented with background materials from primary sources.

But it is not all work!  Tuesday night, prior to the conference opening on Wednesday, Representative Susan Davis (D-CA) opened her house for an informal dinner for our members and some members of Congress.  Over omlettes and lox, we chatted with Rep. Ted Deutch from Florida, who has a warm smile, dry wit and a desire to speak on behalf of others.  We bonded with two women who are running for the first time in New Jersey and Pennsylvania.  If Shelley Adler were to win in South Jersey, she would be the only female in the entire NJ delegation to Congress.  If Kathy Boockvar were to win, she would join our friend Rep. Allyson Schwartz as the second woman in the PA delegation.  Representative Joe Crowley dropped by to speak about JAC and our support on behalf of women's reproductive rights. 

One of the first to arrive and last to leave was Rep. Shelley Berkley (D-NV), who is leaving a very safe seat in the House to run for the Senate.  On a personal level, Shelley joined JAC before she ran for Congress - she is one of us.  Shelley spoke passionately about her reasons for running for the Senate.  On another level, Shelley is a leading advocate for Israel.  She is one of the strongest supporters of Israel in either body and speaks from her roots about her love of Israel.  She is also an outspoken leader for a woman's right to choose.  But it is for the elderly and the veterans, both very large percentages of the population in Nevada, that she is willing to battle.  She knows that the elderly who live only on their Social Security benefit of $1,100 a month cannot sustain the threat of an additional $6,000 a year in Medicare payments.  She knows that homeless veterans, many of them women, must be protected.  Those of us who heard Shelley vowed to travel to Nevada to work on Get Out The Vote and to give to her campaign, which is really our campaign.  Many of the Congressional women who normally come to our annual dinner had been invited to an event honoring former Representative Gabby Giffords and were unable to attend, but Representative Jan Schakowsky (D-IL) stopped in to welcome us and encourage us to fight the war on women.

The conference began early Wednesday morning as Stacy Bernard Davis, Senior Advisor to the Special Envoy to Monitor and Combat Anti-Semitism (State Department), briefed us on events in Sweden and the Netherlands.  As always in times of economic stress, the need for a scapegoat emerges and Jews generally fill the role.  Right now the department is operating on a number of fronts and Hannah Rosenthal, the Special Envoy, is busy educating and developing coalitions with different faith groups.

We boarded buses and met in the Old Executive Office Building.  Jarrod Bernstein, Director of Jewish Outreach, White House Office of Public Engagement, gave us an overview of steps taken to work on Iran and women's issues.  From other speakers we learned about the work that is being done against trafficking in the US and many aspects of violence against women.  There are concrete steps and procedures in place to address these issues.  The Council on Women and Girls, created in 2009 by Executive Order, is represented by federal entities but they are reaching out for partners on local levels.  We were assured that the President stands firm on his commitment to adhere to the recommendations from the Institute of Medicine that contraception is a vital part of women's health and should be part of routine health care.

Steve Simon, Senior Director for Middle East and North Africa, National Security Staff, spoke to us about peace in the Middle East and Iran sanctions.  Because of his role, he could assure us that many areas of cooperation between the US and Israel beyond the Iron Dome Missile Defense System were occurring.  He spoke about the US-Israel military exchange on-ground program, which has been expanded.

The buses then took us to the Senate side of the Capitol where we had lunch with Senators.  The Senators all spoke for contraception, against the War on Women, for passing VAWA, and for strong sanctions on Iran.  Senators Patty Murray (D-WA) and Sherrod Brown (D-OH) were passionate in their words for reproductive rights and told us that our presence on the Hill mattered.  Senator Murray praised our efforts and said our voices are important.  Representatives Tammy Baldwin (D-WI) and Martin Heinrich (D-NM), who are running for Senate seats, echoed these views.  All stayed and answered questions before dashing off to vote for VAWA and the Post Office bills.

Fortified, we met with a large number of Senators and staff.  We were able to advocate on our issues and found out how we can help support them in the vital work that they do.

The day was indeed long.  I always leave exhausted but stimulated and driven by a desire to do more.  Being with JAC, I learn that if not me, who, if not now, when?  I also learn that I am not alone, I am part of a coterie of incredible women and men who feel passionately about social justice and the rights of others.  These people put aside their normal daily routines to speak for those who cannot or will not speak out.  JAC in DC is a time for bonding, working and energizing one's inner core.  It is always a worthwhile experience - I hope to see you there next time.

The Republican party war against women has turned to their battle for stay-at-home Moms. The Romney campaign jumped on the remarks of Hillary Rosen, a democratic strategist with no formal ties to the Obama campaign or administration, and blamed Obama. Taking her comments about Ann Romney never having worked out of context and meaning, Romney and the GOP see it as a way to capture women’s votes.

It would be a far more substantive debate if Romney would avow his support for women reaching parity in pay. His statement that he would not repeal the Lily Ledbetter Act is not a statement of what he would do to achieve equality. Women still receive approximately 78 cents on a dollar for the same work that men receive. Would he go against the conservatives in his party who voted against this act? Since the two women he asked to speak against Rosen voted against the act it does not seem promising.

Perhaps now he and Ann will call out Rush Limbaugh for his remarks about women who dare to speak out instead of a tepid, "I would not have used that language.” President Obama, his wife and Vice President Biden were quick to disavow Rosen’s remark and to speak up for women who work or stay at home.

Or maybe Romney has now decided that women who are moms and who do work should get their contraception covered by insurance as a benefit of employment. That would help put more money on the table and allow women to spend money for other needs.

The good news is that Romney must be reconsidering his “Planned Parenthood has to go” statement since he sees that women need to have affordable health care. Or that gutting programs for women and children do not allow women to stay at home if they so choose.

Lost in this uproar are some real issues. There are indeed women who elect to give up careers and raise their children. They generally are women whose households do not need two incomes to survive. It is fortunate and wonderful that Ann Romney could choose to stay at home.  Of course, raising children and running a household is work, hard work. It does not have any real value in society’s eyes.  I, like Mrs. Romney, was able to stay at home and not work for pay while my children were growing up. But I can still hear the “what do you do?” when I met a new person. And I can see th eye rolling and the subtle turn away for a more interesting person when I said I did not work for pay. Clearly, we need to give value to moms who are able to stay at home. Perhaps, they should have 401 Ks and stay-at-home Moms  insurance (which will cover their contraception. That is a debate worth having.

The crux of the problem is the debate. In 2012 it is still a debate about moms who stay home and moms who work. Why? Do we debate dads who stay home versus dads who work? Women are in the work force outside of the home for the same reasons as men. They drive our economy, enrich our businesses and are functioning members of the work world. Why is it women they have to strive to have it all. Perhaps, the debate is about equality. The sexes are equal in their ability to run businesses and homes. Let this debate go to the real issue. Stop the war on women by trying to control their reproductive health. Stop the war on women by not paying them on the same scale as men.  The war on women is about some men wanting dominance.  Taking Hillary Rosen’s personal comments and attributing them to Obama is foolish. If Romney cares about moms,  he should disavow personhood, stop supporting gun laws that endanger all and care about about women’s health.

Call the local media and ask them to ask them the real questions about women and the economy.

Gail Yamner, JAC President

Last night I dreamt of being cloaked and shuffling around in a black burka.  This burka covered my eyes and prevented me from seeing anything outside my line of sight.  I remember the feeling of being suffocated and restricted as I fought the cloth around me.  Fortunately, I awoke in my nice suburban bed, stretched my unencumbered limbs and questioned the genesis of my dream.

Then I remembered the newly proposed law in Arizona that would permit a woman's employer to ask for proof of a medical prescription if the woman claimed to need contraception coverage for non-reproductive reasons.  Somehow the sponsor, Majority Whip Debbie Lasko (R-Glendale), sees this as a First amendment right of religious freedom.  Once again the twisted logic of the right of "conscience" to opt out of providing birth control is rearing its illogical and ugly head.  No one who objects to birth control has to use it, but that is not the point.  The point is the promotion of a religious belief that is against birth control for any woman in our democracy.  What about the religious freedom of a woman who believes that she does not want to have a child?  What about the invasion into a woman's private medical history?  The First Amendment protects religious freedom, but is also provides freedom from religion.  And further insult is that according to Arizona's employer at will laws, a woman could be summarily fired if her boss is unhappy with her decision to take birth control pills that are covered by his employer-provided insurance.

I also thought of Texas, where Governor Perry's avowed antipathy toward Planned Parenthood has made him reject federal funds for both Planned Parenthood clinics and clinics who are associated with them.  Because of this, thousands of lower income families will go without healthcare as of the end of April.  Starting this week, the federal government is withholding funding to a Texas Medicaid program specifically for women's health because Planned Parenthood was excluded by the state legislature from receiving any funds.  Once again women's health care is being subjected to the arbitrary will of religious conservatives.

How far can we be from a burka-society when women's health care is being dismantled state by state, law by law?  We decry the treatment of women in other countries.  But are we looking to our own country?  Do we as a nation even understand the threat, the potential outcome - women as second class citizens with no legal standing and no rights?

Frankly, as a woman who thought that Roe v. Wade was the settled law of the land and that women had gained the right to control their own bodies, I am furious.  This fight, this right was settled.  And now it is back in full force.  While women in their 20s, 30s, and 40s are pursuing careers and/or raising families, the rights that their mothers and grandmothers fought for are being legislated away.  Their right to control their own health is on the line.  While women in their 60s and 70s who thought that they could sit back, read novels and savor their efforts are seeing the rights that they gained are disappearing.

At JAC we have been on the front lines to advocate for the rights of women.  We have worked for years to ensure that these rights remain and to support those who support our rights.  Recently, we have joined coalitions with other groups dedicated to working together to stop this assault on women and women's health.  Working together we have an even greater voice. 

Next week The Coalition to Protect Women's Health Care is sending videos that ordinary citizens have made to show how the Patient and Affordable Health Care Act has helped them and their families.  We encourage our members to submit videos of their own as part of this effort.  By joining forces we are more powerful.  By working together, we have a greater voice.  But the only way to help all women throw off the burkas, both figuratively and literally, is to speak out, act, and vote. 

The JAC Conference in Washington, DC is an excellent place to make yourself heard with other loud voices and strong women.  If you can't make the conference, make an extra donation to JAC to help us continue the fight.  Support JAC, get your friends to join, tweet about us, follow us on Facebook.  The election in November is critical - get out and vote for candidates who will defeat these bills.  Help us continue to fight for our basic rights.

The image of five religious male officials testifying on women's health perfectly frames the assault on women's health.  It is men dictating to women and deciding for them.  It is a particular religious view of conception imposing itself on women's health.  These males - priests, pastors and a rabbi - were the "experts" chosen by Rep. Darrell Issa (R-CA), Chair of the House Oversight Committee hearing titled, "Lines Crossed: Separation of Church and State.  Has the Obama Administration Trampled on Freedom of Religion and Freedom of Conscience?"  Were these men constitutional scholars who could debate if any first amendment issues were actually involved?  Were they physicians who deal with women's health?  Were these men able to give birth themselves?  After listening to them, there is no clear answer on why they were called to testify, if not to impose a narrow religious view on the nation.

One of the panel of experts chose to explore the topic by comparing women's rights to having contraceptives covered by her employer-based health insurance plan to a "Parable of a Jewish Deli."  The eating of pork became a metaphor for contraceptive coverage.  In this tale, the government mandated that all restaurants serve pork with a religious exemption for a kosher caterer associated with a synagogue.  The story wove through the views of Orthodox and non-Orthodox views of eating pork and continued until it triumphantly declared it is absurd for the state to use its coercive power to make someone buy and eat a ham sandwich when it is a free option a few doors down.  According to this "expert," women's health is not chopped liver but a ham on rye!

The other testimonies were no more enlightening.  But there was someone in the room who had come prepared to testify but was not considered as knowledgeable as these men.  The young woman, Sandra Fluke, a third-year law student at Georgetown University, is a female and is past president of the school's Students for Reproductive Justice group.  She has lobbied the administration at Georgetown for three years to include birth control in its student health plans.  While her testimony was not heard at the hearing, she spoke out last night on The Ed Show on MSNBC.

Fluke's testimony was full of facts about the impact of contraceptives on the health of women.  It showed how contraceptives are important for birth control as well as health issues that require the use of hormonal treatments.  She cited an example of a 32-year old woman who will now face life-long complications and possibly the inability to have children because of the refusal of medication from the Georgetown health clinic.  Although she had a doctor's diagnosis and a prescription, she could not obtain the medication that would treat her condition because it was a contraceptive.  It is hard to reconcile this with a religion and a movement that claims to be pro-life.  Again and again, it is only when a fetus is concerned that it is considered a life issue.

The debate on when life begins is spurious.  The real debate is when men will view women as other than chattel, when will they view women as equals, as intelligent human beings who can make their own health and well-being decisions.  It is not up to these five religious men, the chair of an oversight committee with his own political agenda or a group of bishops to make any decisions about a woman's health.  It is not up to them to dictate their religious beliefs on a woman.  These so-called "experts" will allow, as a matter of religious liberty, a woman to be denied paid coverage for polycystic ovarian disease while a man has unfettered access to erectile dysfunction drugs?  One is a medical condition which may eventually destroy her health, while the other is a matter of male sexual gratification or male ego.  This is outrageous, irrational and utterly a matter of male domination.

And where are the women?  Women were not allowed to testify about their own health.  They are under-represented in Congress.  They were largely ignored in the media before President Obama issued his accommodation. 

Where are the women's voices?  Where is the outrage at laws that allow women's bodies to be penetrated against their will, as in Virginia's proposed mandatory trans-vaginal ultrasound law in which neither women nor their doctors may refuse the procedure if a woman is seeking an abortion?  Where is the outcry as more and more states require longer and longer waiting periods before obtaining a legal abortion?  Where is the outcry as more and more states seriously consider "personhood" legislation that could outlaw contraception and invitro-fertilization?  Where are they?  If women do not write, email, call, and support candidates and organizations who support them, do not exercise the rights we have fought so long for, women will find that they are back in the kitchens with their ancestors, with no rights at all.

Join JAC today, send this to a friend and get them to join us.  We must continue to elect and support those who will not abrogate the rights of women today or tomorrow.  Like us on Facebook, follow us on Twitter.  Come with us to Washington, participate in action alerts.  We must be the ones to protect and expand our rights - we cannot leave it up to others.  The time is now.

In the abstract, it is relatively easy to pass laws about a woman's reproductive rights.  Religious beliefs or ethics of  some groups are black and white - abortion is murder.  But faced with real life women and families who speak of their emotional anguish and actual cases, it is not so easy for legislators.  The issue has many shades of gray.  Flesh and blood and real life change the dynamic.

Last week in Virginia, a woman courageously explained her decision to terminate her pregnancy to the Health and Education Committee of the Virginia State Senate.  With tears and sobs, she detailed how she had reached her decision in the best interest of her family which included this pregnancy.  If born, the child would face a short life of pain and suffering.  The family would be devastated emotionally and financially.

The woman explained that if the Senate passed the 20 week fetal pain law, it might have compelled her to abort without seeing if there was a chance for the fetus.  And it might have caused her a life of second guessing.  Her words speak for all the families who are confronted with difficult choices and who are unable to have their voices heard:

"Each family has the right to follow their own conscience in making this most profoundly personal family decision," she said.  "There is no black and white, right and wrong decision.  All of it is awful."

Senator Obenshain's fetal pain bill, she said, "is the ultimate in invasive government intrusion into a family's life."

The bill stalled in committee when one of the Republican Senators recognized that it was not his decision to make.  Confronted with the flesh and blood person who would be impacted by the fetal pain bill and not some abstract woman who has been painted as unfeeling or too ignorant  to make a rational decision, he realized that he had no right to restrict or legislate away a woman's right to choose.  Perhaps, that is the only way to bring sanity to the legislators.  Let families come and talk about the way these laws destroy them.  Let the politicians consider what they would do if it were their daughters, wives, or sisters who were facing these difficult situations.  Would they want a stranger controlling them?

While this bill stalled, the same group of lawmakers passed a bill out of committee mandating that women must have an ultrasound and hear a description of the fetus, must have signed form authorizing consent in their medical records and observe a waiting period prior to having an abortion.  One wonders if one of their family members had to have an unnecessary, expensive medical procedure how they would react.  The law mandates that a woman must have an ultrasound before she can have an abortion. In the case of the early stages of pregnancy in order to see anything, it is often necessary to have a trans-vaginal ultrasound, which is very invasive.  It is the forcing of an object into the woman's vagina by law.  And this from a country that objected to and stopped water boarding. (This same legislature voted to stripped an amendment to require men to undergo invasive examination and waiting period to obtain a prescription for an erectile dysfunction medication)??

Laws that dare to interfere in a family's most private decision mock democracy.  American democracy and the Constitution give us the right to privacy.  The government cannot arbitrarily invade our homes and they cannot invade our bodies.  How are laws like this possible in light of the FBI's new definition of rape: "the penetration, no matter how slight, of the vagina or anus with any body part or object," without the consent of the patient victim?  One could argue the woman must give consent to undergo the procedure, but that is purely semantics.  Requiring anyone to undergo an unnecessary, invasive, and expensive medical procedure, essentially forcing their consent in order to obtain an abortion, is simply immoral and anti-democratic.  It is time for lawmakers to stop this war against women and it is time to make our voices heard.

We saw last week how by banding together to protect women's health, we can make change happen or even reverse changes that will harm women's health services.  We cannot be silent, we cannot stand on the sidelines hoping someone else will stop these attacks.  When you hear or read of pending legislation that will infringe on women's health, reproductive rights, or contraception tweet it, share it on Facebook or Google+.  Use social media.  Make the calls to local, state, and federal government offices - take to the phones, forward the emails, sign the petitions, announce the latest attack so they are not overlooked or done quietly.  Women's health is more than the right to an abortion, despite what some might say.  

JACPAC works everyday to stop these assaults.  We need your help in exposing the people who are passing these laws.  Donate to JAC and work with us by using your online connections to promote our efforts.  Work with us to support candidates who support women's health and reproductive rights.  Together we can make a difference.  Together we are the change we are looking for.

Listening to the dialogue by the candidates in the Republican primary in South Carolina, I heard blatant misogyny, anti-feminism, sexism, racism, xenophobia, and religious bias.  As these candidates espoused philosophies more and more to the right, they reminded me of little children who are vying for whose gadget/parent/toy is bigger and better.  During the course of several debates and rallies, the candidates promised to put prayer back in schools while accusing President Obama of a war against religion; they spoke of the sanctity of life by promising to end abortion in all cases, even if the woman will die; they pledged to end food stamps and put "people" back to work without any explanation as to how; they promised to blow up Iran even though that could trigger an attack on the US or Israel; and they raised the specter of a socialist society because of the Affordable Health Care Act.  Moderate or socially liberal but fiscally conservative Republicans no longer have a place in the party.  Even Mitt Romney, who was once considered a moderate, pushed his anti-choice credentials and spoke of President Obama as an "other."  It took a comedian to offer an option to moderates in his unsuccessful attempt to be on the SC ballot.

Stephen Colbert, along with his Super PAC run by Jon Stewart, ran ads and held a rally with Herman Cain to promote himself.  He devised a clever, stealth method of being on the ballot and providing a protest vote.  South Carolinians were asked to vote for Cain, which was really a vote for Colbert.  In looking at the unofficial results of the SC primary, the tactic worked.  Stephen Colbert can proudly be considered a 1%-er.  His 6,324 votes were more than Perry, Huntsman, and Bachmann each received.  With his elevation to a one percenter, he can claim the mantle of the answer for moderates in the Republican party.  It also attests to the power of Super PACs and lends credence to the fight against the Citizen's United ruling.

Colbert's and Stewart's fight against the Citizen's United decision to allow corporations to give unlimited funds to PACs without disclosing their names gained traction in the SC primary.  A short time before the primary, the two showed on air how easy is it for candidates and Super PACs to communicate, bypassing the rules that ban coordination with a wink and a nod.  By showing that Colbert could transfer control of his Super PAC to Stewart with a one-page document and then to have them communicate simply by Colbert watching Stewart's Daily Show, they exposed the whole fallacy of the Super PAC in a five minute comedy skit.

As funny as their actions were, it is no laughing matter that Super PACs are flooding the airwaves with ads that distort records and character.  Neither the candidates nor the donors are held responsible for wild claims and outright falsehoods.  During the SC primary, all the candidates resorted to these types of ads through their PACs.  Code words for African Americans, phrases meant to demean a woman's right to choose, words to promote a Christian America and hawk-like calls for a fight against Iran dominated these ads.

It is time for US citizens to take back America, just as many of these candidates urge.  Take it back for its citizens, not for Citizen's United.  Let's take it back to the 21st century and begin to move it forward again.  We need a society where all people can move up the ladder, where women are not relegated back to the home, where religious doctrine is a personal belief and not public policy forced on all, and where we believe once again in diplomacy.  Let's take it back to a nation where we hold each other up, cheer for our fellow Americans, and work together for the greater good instead of knocking each other down, dividing our nation and living in darkness and suspicion of our differences. 

Support JAC as we fight for these values.  Renew your membership, join for the first time, or simply donate generously now to help us fight against the extremism that is growing.

How long will it take for women to be free to control their own bodies?  How long will it take before government backs out of bedrooms?  How long will it take before women rise up and fight the assaults on their freedoms?  History and 2011's increase in reproductive restrictions do not present reassuring answers to these questions.

Despite Abigail Adams' admonition to her husband to 'remember the ladies' as he attended the Constitutional Convention, the rights of women were not laid out during the very founding of our county; thereby not granting them equal parity legally and allowing abuses to occur.   In the 1800s, women began organizing and achieved some minor successes, but no equality either legally or socially.  After years of struggles and a bitter fight for the right to vote, the 19th Amendment was ratified in 1920.  Three years later the Equal Rights Amendment was proposed. 83 years after its initial introduction, the ERA has yet to be ratified.

Throughout most of the 20th century, women were prisoners of their own biology.  In many cases, they were unable to legally purchase contraception, husbands could force their wives to have sex and it was not considered rape, and women could not obtain safe, legal abortions.  Finally, on January 22, 1973, American women won a major victory with the Roe vs. Wade decision by the Supreme Court.

For those of us who remember the days before Roe vs. Wade, this decision changed the landscape for women.  I can remember hearing sirens on my college campus as young women resorted to coat hangers, stairs, or medication to handle unwanted pregnancies.  I can remember women pooling their funds and going to clinics where doctors performed abortions at night.  I can remember women who lost their ability to have children or who lost their lives to back alley abortions.  Roe vs. Wade offered a life line, freedom to choose.

Sadly, Roe vs. Wade did not stop the war on women's rights.  The fight against abortion has not ended, and it worsened drastically in the last few years.  According to the Guttmacher Institute, 2011 had a record number of anti-abortion measures proposed.  Across the 50 states, there were more than 1,100 reproductive health- and reproductive rights-related provisions introduced.  While in the U.S. House of Representatives, draconian laws, such as HR 358: the "Let Women Die Act," passed easily.

The anti-abortion forces have launched full-scale attacks on a number of fronts.  One tact targets coverage of abortion and/or contraception in health insurance plans, insuring that people of modest means are unable to pay for these services.  Another abuse of privacy is the requirement that women undergo abortion counseling.  It is the ultimate paternalistic reasoning that women are not smart enough to make informed decisions on their own, and it is another example of the government invading the most private of spheres.  According to the most extreme laws, a woman must go to a crisis pregnancy center, where her medical privacy is invaded and where non-medically trained personnel give incorrect information and may even prostelytize if she is of another faith. In a number of states, "personhood" has either been proposed by the legislature, is scheduled to be proposed, or is on a ballot initiative.  This measure would give the fetus more rights than the living woman carrying it.  It regards her as a vessel that has no worth except as an incubator for the fetus.  "Personhood" conveys all rights to the fetus.  That means if a woman needs a life-saving abortion due to an ectopic pregnancy, she cannot get it because it would be considered murder.  Now mind you, the fetus would not ever survive in that case, but under "personshood" the fetus would be considered more important.  It would also mean that many types of contraception would be outlawed and that in vitro fertilization, as well as stem cell research, would not be lawful procedures.  In fact, if a woman did not know she was pregnant and she fell or engaged in what the state consided "risky activity," she could be charged with murder if she had a miscarriage.

These laws should strike fear in anyone who is female or who loves a female.  There is no regard for the safety and value of a woman's life and rights.  The anti-abortion forces speak of the sanctity of life without any regard for the life of a woman.  They impose their own convictions on her and are willing to sacrifice her for their own religious beliefs.

The time has come.  The time is now.  We must work very hard to support those who value women's lives.  There is not one candidate running in the Republican presidential primary who is pro-choice.  Not one of them supports the right to choose.  In fact, most of them vow to appoint judges who would overturn Roe vs. Wade.  A number of them would like a constitutional amendment banning abortion. Every Congressperson in the House of Representatives is up for reelection this November, including each and every Representative who sponsored and voted for HR 358 and other outrageous bills to curtail women's health and freedoms.  One third of the Senate is up for reelection as well.  Now is the time to make sure those who are against reproductive rights do not get sent back to Washington to continue their harsh attacks on women.

This is not only about the right to choose, it is about the right to be and the right to be free.  How long will it take?  The time to stop asking and start answering that question is now.  Give your time and your money to candidates who believe in women.  By joining JAC, you join a national network of people committed to electing those who support a woman's right to choose, separation of religion and state, and the US-Israel relationship.  Recommend your friends join, attend local JAC events or host one in your area.  Look at how your elected officials voted on issues important to us all.   Use JACPAC to make your donations to candidates, help us all increase our voices and our impact together.

This year marks the 39th anniversary of Roe vs. Wade.  Let's make sure there is a 40th anniversary, a 50th anniversary, a 100th anniversary.  The time is now.

The Protect Life Act, HR 358, is a sham, a violation of the most basic rights of a woman - the right to life-saving emergency care for pregnant woman and the right to make her own medical decisions. This law wraps itself in the guise of preventing tax payer funding of abortion.  This is a non issue since taxpayer funding of abortion has been prohibited since the Hyde Amendment was enacted in the late 1970s.  This law seeks to prevent insurance coverage of abortion in insurance exchanges, even in some plans where people are receiving no federal funds and are paying in full for their health insurance.  This law would allow public hospitals to turn away critically ill pregnant women if their treatment would violate the hospital's or the treating doctor's religious beliefs.  This law could stop insurance funding of contraception and in vitro fertilization.  This law is an outrageous assault on a women's right to choose life - her own.

HR 358 gambles with the life of a woman.  Roulette belongs in Vegas, not in hospitals.  Case in point, a pregnant woman was in a religious hospital in a life-threatening situation.  She was bleeding profusely.  Her doctor said she was dying, but the doctor could not begin to save her life until the fetus no longer had a heart beat, according to the hospital's regulations.  How does this protect life?  When does the born woman have the same right to life as a fertilized egg?

To paraphrase Rep. Speier, this law discriminates against once class of citizens - pregnant women.  Hospitals, doctors, and clinics must treat all other classes of citizens in life threatening situations.  When did it become open season on pregnant women?  When did becoming pregnant mean forfeiting the right to federal protection?  EMTALA, enacted in 1986, states hospitals must provide emergency care to all comers, regardless of their ability to pay or other factors if they are in a potentially life-threatening condition.  Hospitals do not have to provide free care to everyone that arrives at their doorstep under EMTALA -- but they do have to stabilize them and provide them with emergency care without factoring in their ability to pay for it.  If a hospital cannot provide the care a patient needs - either due to lack of facility or staff -  it is required to transfer that patient to a hospital that can, and the receiving hospital is required to accept that patient.  There is no exemption clause in EMTALA for religious objections.

HR 358 just passed the House with 236 votes.  The decision to bring this bill to the floor shows that the House majority is much more concerned with attacking women then dealing with jobs.  Better to vote to put women in chains by denying their right to choose and their right to medical care than to work on the difficult issues facing this country.  This bill was introduced and voted on even though the President has said he would veto it and the Senate probably would not pass it. Somehow the control of women has consumed the House. The number of anti-woman bills considered and passed by the House since the Republicans gained majority status is mind-boggling. To listen to the pious remarks by men in suits about what abortion does to a woman's mental health is nauseating. They throw out ridiculous statistics, claiming that over 80% of women who have abortions suffer lifetime mental and physical problems. Again, they are turning science upside down to prove their own points. Most women who have an abortion do not make the decision lightly, but do what is in their and their families' best interest. They do not need strange men to legislate their family planning. Women are not chattel nor are their incapable of deciding their own fates.  Women have the constitutional right to privacy. Many of these issues were settled by Roe vs Wade and it is time to move on and work together to improve the economy.  

Too many of us are ignoring the attacks on women's reproductive rights, including the Washington Beltway media and the mainstream media.  While the attention of the media and many citizens is focused on other issues, some vital and some downright trivial, the conservative and anti-abortion groups are mounting legislative attacks on both the state and federal levels across the country.  Pro-choice (those who care about all life) individuals must begin their own movement.  It is time to work for candidates who will voice our concerns.  It is time to put on our sneakers and march to DC to show that we know what is going on.  Being silent is not an option when laws tike HR 358 are an election away from being the law of the land.  Another President, a different Senate, and Roe v Wade could well be overturned.  It is time to support women's right to choose.

The frantic efforts of the past few weeks to avert or delay the Palestinian bid for statehood at the UN are reaching a crescendo as September 20th approaches.  The US State Department is working behind the scenes with former Prime Minister Tony Blair taking the lead for the Quartet to negotiate a way for the Israelis and the Palestinians to resume direct negotiations.  At this time, Blair, along with American envoys David M. Hale and Dennis B. Ross, are brokering a compromise with Mr. Abbas.  According to Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton no matter what happens at the UN, "...The only way of getting a lasting solution is through direct negotiations between the parties, and the rout to that lies in Jerusalem and Ramallah, not in New York."

Since peace talks broke down, the road for a two-state solution has been mired in stark suggestions by the PA that Israel stop all settlement building and Israel's insistence that there be no preconditions for the talks.  Mr. Abbas is using the stalled talks as the reason for applying to the UN for Palestinian statehood.  This bid has ramifications and risks for both sides that are both predictable and unforeseen.

In an article in the Wall Street Journal, Bret Stevens outlines the recent spate of physical and verbal attacks against Israel.  In August, after terrorists slipped into Israel via the Sinai and killed eight Israelis, Israeli soldiers chased them to the border and fired into Egypt.  Three Egyptian soldiers were killed in the firing, triggering outrage for their deaths with no regard for the actual reason for the attack or the Israeli lives lost.  Israel apologized for the deaths but that did not stop an angry, secular mob from tearing down a security wall surrounding the Israeli Embassy in Cairo and breaking into the embassy.  The mob threatened the lives of those in the building and stole documents found on the premises.  The mob was frustrated about issues in Egypt, yet used Israel as their scapegoat. Prime Minister Netanyahu reached out to President Obama for help for his embattled embassy.  The response was immediate and action was swift.  President Obama was able to reach Egyptian government officials to help protect members of the embassy mission until they could be evacuated.  Other assaults on Israel occurred during August when rockets were repeatedly fired from Gaza into Israel, resulting in over 160 rocket attacks.  Some of these rockets were successfully repelled by Iron Dome, but others landed in populated areas causing harm to people and homes. 

On the verbal front, the rhetoric has ramped up from Turkey.  In early September the long-awaited UN report about the flotilla incident was published.  Both Israel and Turkey had agreed to the legitimacy of the report.  The report found that Israel had the legal right to prevent ships from entering Gaza by sea and said that the flotillas were a provocation, noting that some of the people onboard had fired at the Israeli soldiers as they boarded the ships.  Turkey disavowed the results, even though the report found Israel at fault for being to aggressive in some of its actions.  Turkey is now speaking about helping other flotillas and preventing an agreement for gas and oil exploration between Israel and Cyprus by patrolling waters in the northern Mediterranean.

Since the flotilla incident in Spring 2010, the diplomatic and strategic relations between Israel and Turkey have been in a downward spiral.  According to Jeffrey Goldberg in Business Week, there are different interpretations regarding the recent anger at Israel.  One is that the Arab Spring has not changed the course of the economy and the governments in the Middle East, and Israel is an easy scapegoat.  The other is the anger that many of the Arab countries harbor against Israel as an "occupier" of Palestinian land.  Goldberg argues that when Prime Minister Ariel Sharon decided to remove Israelis from Gaza and give the land over to Palestinian control, the results were disastrous.  Settlements, greenhouses, and infrastructure which could have served as the basis for a new economy were destroyed, Hamas was elected to be part of the government and the area became a launching pad for rockets fired and terrorist attacks launched into Israel.  In fact, Goldberg says that Israel having to blockade Gaza to protect itself from these attacks essentially led to the flotilla.  He also claims that because Israel had given back the Sinai, it was unable to establish a security area to protect against attacks now that Egypt is in turmoil.  Goldberg is not against the concept of territorial swaps and compromises, but he does point out why Israel may be reluctant to do so again.

David Makovsky of the Washington Institute for Middle East Policy has written an in-depth analysis about the UN bid with many of the risks outlined.  He concludes that whether the bid succeeds or fails, the Palestinian Authority may still collapse.  Mahmoud Abbas will be blamed if it fails and would have to resign.  If it passes, statehood will not improve the economy nor will it make life any easier for the Palestinian people.  If the bid passes, Israel may retaliate by withholding customs funds.  The United States Congress is considering a withdrawal of billions of dollars in aid to the PA as well as funds to the UN.  There is much being written about the wisdom of stopping the aid, but there are widely differing views on the issue.

There are concerns that the PA could go to the ICC (International Criminal Court) and bring charges against Israel for "violations" of human rights.  This could result in a bitter battle about Israel protecting its interests and citizens from terrorist attacks at The Hague.

While Abbas claims that he still wants to negotiate, his call for mass demonstrations on the day he goes to the UN could spark violence throughout the already fragile Middle East.  This violence could spread worldwide and be directed at American, Israeli, and European citizens.

The Arab Spring has overthrown dictators, resulted in changed governments and regimes, but it has not brought about the economic recovery or the freedoms that the revolutionaries desired, certainly not in the quick way they envisioned.  Much is unknown about the winter of these changes.  Without a negotiated peace, the same conundrum is present for Israel and the PA.  Will the West Bank be stable?  Will the partial truce and cooperation be possible?  Will either side be willing to trust the other and work for a peaceful two-state solution?

It is the old adage - be careful what you wish for.  The risks might outweigh the benefits.

Will there be choice after 2012? The matter of choice largely depends on which party gains control of the White House and the Congress. Yesterday Republican hopefuls railed at the role and size of government  in our lives. Of course, the intervention of government into the private lives of citizens apparently does not apply to the right to reproductive choice. According to the NY Times, “Candidates were asked whether the Congress should intervene legislatively to make sure states cannot allow abortion. Most pledged instead to work toward a constitutional amendment banning abortion.” Now, these are the same candidates also decried the role of activist judges who do not respect the Constitution or established law.  Hmmm, Roe vs Wade seems to fall into the category of the right to privacy guaranteed in the Constitution and is established law.

Combine the pledge by candidates to ban abortion with the new laws restricting abortion and the goals of the anti-abortion forces are fast becoming a sad reality for too many women.  Fortunately, brave individuals and advocates for women are challenging these laws in the courts. In Idaho Jennifer McCormack has challenged the fetal pain law. She highlights the issue that women in Idaho must travel to obtain abortions to satisfy all the conditions of this law. If she is successful women in southeastern Idaho may be able to exercise their legal rights to abortion.  In Texas, a federal judge issued a temporary injunction against the forced sonogram law. This suit was filed on behalf of medical clinics and doctors and of course, the women it would impact.  This law is an over-reaching intrusion of the state into the lives of individuals and medical professionals.  Federal judges have temporarily blocked implementation of restrictive abortion laws in Kansas, South Dakota and North Carolina. 

These reprieves may be temporary and do not insure that the laws won’t eventually be implemented. The threats are real.  New laws will replace these laws and more restrictions will be placed upon women. The anti-abortion agenda has powerful advocates in the Conservative movement and is advancing its case through a populist outcry of too many government regulations while it is busy regulating and interfering with women.

For those of us who believe in the right of a woman to make her own family planning and health decisions, the path to save choice lies in fighting the ever-increasing assaults on abortion rights. The fact is there is no choice but to elect officials who will respect the right of women to choose. For each of us there is a line beyond which we cannot go. For me, it is the rights of women. Please work me to support those who will protect your right to reproductive health and choice.  Please consider joining JAC today.

August 11th was an "amen" weekend.  In Iowa, Michele Bachman was proclaimed the winner of the Straw Poll and, in South Carolina, Governor Rick Perry announced his long-rumored entry into the Republican Presidential line up.  These two staunch Christian conservatives see themselves as the Christian salvation of America and promise to firmly establish Christian values and root out the evils of the Democrats and social democracy.

The first Amens are that both view their candidacies as the will of God. Perry prayed with two pastors the New Apostolic Reformation movement in September 2009 who spoke of prophecies where God had anointed Texas as the Prophet State and the governor of Texas would led America into a more Godly state, while  Bachman, in a speech in 2006, spoke of her belief that God led her through her husband who told her to run for office.

The second Amen revolves around abortion and the belief that women are vessels. Abortion promises to be one of the targets of their campaigns. Based on the many anti-abortion laws that Governor Perry has initiated or signed in Texas, there is no question that Roe vs Wade would be eviscerated, if not so restricted that it would no longer exist. Congresswoman Bachman is equally strong in her opposition to abortion.

The other amens are part of the movements against contraceptives, stem cell research, same sex marriage and Planned Parenthood. These two candidates see themselves as Christian soldiers (albeit it generals) who will make America a Christian nation led by God’s will as they believe it to be.

With either of them as American President, the wall between separation of religion and state will be largely ignored. With either of them as President women’s health and reproductive rights will revert to back room alley choices and the bad outcomes of yesterday.

At this time most of America is turned off and disgusted at Federal and State governments that seem to focus on all the wrong issues. Attacks against Planned Parenthood and abortion stimulate the conservative base but not job creation. Attacks against entitlement programs like Medicaid do not grow the economy.  But we at JAC are aware that our focus must be on the threat that the current resurgence of the religious right and their front runners pose. It is not just the presidential election we must be aware of - many people chose to sit out the 2010 election and we are now reaping the results of that outcome, as seen in the recent budget fight and resulting credit downgrade.  All seats in the House are up for re-election, as are many Senate seats. 

We have to fight their rhetoric with our own strong support for our values. We have to support candidates who believe as we do.  We are needed more then ever. Our voices and votes do matter.  Without our engagement, without our activism, and without our participation we may wake up to a jarring reality in November 2012.  Now is the time.  And let us say, amen.

On Saturday the much heralded "The Response: a Call to Prayer For a Nation in Crisis" was held in Houston. The event was the brain child of Governor Rick Perry and was sponsored by the American Family Association. Governor Perry led the seven-hour day of praying and fasting, which was attended by some 30,000 people. The day was billed as a Christian Prayer event but the sponsors were quick to say it was open to all religions though the prayers were offered in Jesus’s name, and a spokesman stated that non-Christians would be urged to "seek out the living Christ."

Held at Reliant Stadium with three massive projection screens and streamed live into 1300 religious communities, Governor Perry’s larger-than-life image towered over the crowd as he asked for blessings for the country. In his prayers and talking points he asked that God guide our political leaders.

Attendees from across the state and country joined in prayer, with many on their feet, waving hands, weeping and singing songs about repentance and salvation. It was a combination rock concert and old time revival with people affirming their Christian values and their belief that this county needs to turn to God to solve our problems.  Prayers for the country were offered by leaders of several Evangelical denominations, including Mike Bickel of the International House of Prayer in Kansas.  Mr. Bickel, who gained recent notoriety by stating that Oprah Winfrey was the precursor of the anti-Christ, led the crowd in prayer saying, "Heal the financial crisis in this nation.  Heal the families of this nation, Jesus.  Lord, forgive us abortion."

While Governor Perry said this was not a political event, he used his prestige, his office, the state government’s website and other resources to advertise and promote the event.   During his 13 minute address he prayed for guidance on the many issues facing our country. The use of official Governor’s material is skirting or perhaps crossing the separation of religion and state, even in a state known for blurring that line. For an acting governor to hold a rally that is designed for followers of one single faith is a dangerous precedent.  It adds an official stamp to an event that has nothing to do with his job and casts an uneasy feeling on those who do not believe as he does.

The money for the day was raised by donations to the American Family Association, whose chief spokesman is Bryan Fischer, and which has been labelled a hate group by the Southern Poverty Law Center. The AFA has written and spoken out against gays and Jews and has long been a promoter of "traditional moral values."   That Governor Perry has no problem associating with this group is frightening on many levels. Some critics think that Perry used this day to build a national profile for himself and that it is the first concrete step in announcing for a presidential bid. If this is true, and he is scheduled to make an announcement this weekend, I wonder what he owes to AFA? He obviously agrees with their positions on many issues and he might be indebted to them for their role in helping him promote the day.  He has even been seen recently retracting statements about the new gay marriage law in NY to put himself more in line with their beliefs.

Other individuals and organizations that promoted and endorsed this event included James Dobson of the Family Research Council and Focus on the Family, Pastor John Hagee, and Tony Perkins of the Family Research Council, who was co-chair of this event.  This was a who's who of the religious right in this country, a direct appeal to the so-called Evangelical base of the Republican party. 

Perry invited President Obama, Vice President Biden, state, Congressional and Senate leaders and the country’s governors to this event.  The only one to attend and speak was Sam Brownback, the Republican Governor of Kansas.  Florida Governor Rick Scott taped a message but did not attend.

Historically, in times of great economic turmoil and money woes, people turn to religion for answers, looking for some meaning and even for scapegoats.  Looking at the pictures from this rally and reading many comments from those who drove hours to attend, I could see the fervor, sense the hunger that people have for answers and I fear the potential repercussions of such a rally. Governor Perry seems to be shaping himself as a "political messiah," someone who is charismatic, sympathetic, and offers hope in a time of crisis. A candidate who can lift up his followers and offer them a way out of the difficult times simply through prayer and faith, with no mention of cohesion as a country, working together as one nation.  

Many religions have a tradition of praying for a nation's leadership, including Judaism.  Frequently these prayers are beautiful in nature and sentiment.  Prayer, especially in times of crisis, is a natural coping mechanism and something that our country gives us the freedom to pursue.  Prayer gives people a chance to feel as if they are a part of something bigger than themselves, gives us a sense of security and closeness with others, especially in a time of uncertainty.  However, it is not something that should be endorsed and funded by the state.

It is a dangerous message that Governor Perry is sending. He used the power of his office to promote himself and his religion. In so doing he violated the Constitutional separation of church and state.  He has shown how he leads Texas and how he would lead America.  He has shown that his religion would guide how he governs, not the Constitution. This is not a promising opening for a would-be president.

The past few weeks I have been inundated with calls from right wing religious and anti-abortion groups. The calls begin with addressing me by name then asking me to hold for an important message. After a brief interlude, a robo-voice begins a schpeil about "conservatives like us...."

In the beginning, I was mildly annoyed by a call from Mike Huckabee, who had a message for all Christians who care about keeping America on a certain path for certain people. After the second call, I gave a scathing response about not being Christian and not sharing their goals. On the third call in four days, I stayed on line and found the unsubscribe number. Mercifully I have not had my evenings interrupted, until tonight.

Tonight my caller ID flashed 855-814-9441. The voice intoned, "This is Concerned Women for America Legislative Action Committee." Blah. Blah. "... we work to bring Biblical principles into all levels of public policy."   I admit it, I was intrigued and waited to learn more. Within seconds a woman began a discourse on the "scientific documentation" about babies in the womb feeling pain at 20 weeks or less. She spoke of the "evidence" that was being ignored by those in the pro-Choice community and wanted to rally like-minded supporters to contact State legislatures.  She spoke of the victories achieved and the ones to come. I became enraged. I felt that my privacy in my home, and by extension my womb, were being invaded. I waited for a real person to ask for my support and experienced great satisfaction as I declared myself 100% pro-Choice and disgusted at their claims of scientific evidence proving fetal pain.

Generally, I am unhappy about any solicitation calls and try to ignore them, but caller id is not always available and I fall prey to them. What concerns me is the concerted effort by the right wing to spread their message, ask for donations and now for legislative help.  While I am offended by their assumptions that I am one of them, I understand the method and realize that they must reach a large number of people who can be swayed to be successful.  I do not advocate making such calls, but I am concerned about reaching more people who believe, as JAC does. in separation of religion and state and reproductive rights, and a strong US-Israel relationship.

How do we counter calls? How do we reach out? It occurred to me that we can join JAC’s Facebook page and ask our friends to do the same.  We can visit JAC’s website and suggest that our friends go there for information that is based on facts with links to these facts. We can send emails to our friends about how our cores principles are being threatened by well-organized, well-funded groups. Pass this blog on and spread JAC’s message and fight for our core issues.  Together we can make our voices heard and our issues strong.

During the Iranian Hostage Crisis a ticker ran with the days the hostages had been held, in NY there is a ticker with the national debt soaring upward, and on the Guttmacher Institute web pages there is a list of the ever-growing anti-abortion legislation that is being considered.  Given the lackluster job recovery, it is even more remarkable that so much attention would focus on diminishing the rights of women.  If state and federal legislators were as creative with ways to stimulate the economy and motivate businesses to hire more workers as they are with taking away the right to reproductive freedom, the economy would be booming.

Many of the laws revolve around the religious precepts of when life begins in the womb with little regard for scientific fact. Personhood at the moment of conception is a favorite of legislators but not voters who reject the concept whenever given the opportunity to vote for or against it.  Most voters understand the logical implications of such a law. It would render abortion impossible at any stage of pregnancy. Some of the laws revolving around this concept would allow the state to investigate miscarriages, stillbirths and any pregnancy not resulting in a live birth.  In Mississippi, Rennie Gibbs, a 15 year old, is charged with murder under the personhood law. At 36 weeks Rennie had a stillbirth. When it was discovered that she had a drug habit, she  was charged with “depraved-heart murder” of her child.  She faces a mandatory life sentence even though there is no medical proof that the drugs caused the stillbirth. Other states are also prosecuting pregnant women for crimes. Just as being a woman is a pre-existing condition to health insurers, a woman who is pregnant is being deprived of her constitutional rights. In Indiana Bei Bei Shuai is being held for murder because she tried to commit suicide after her boyfriend abandoned her. She lost the baby four days after the attempt. In Alabama women are being charged with crimes for chemical use during pregnancy. At the heart of these laws is the protection of the fetus from the moment of conception. The result is criminalization of women and depriving them of their rights. Many of the laws are being challenged in the courts. In the Rennie Gibbs case, Robert McDuff, a civil rights lawyer, asked the state supreme court, “If it's not a crime for a mother to intentionally end her pregnancy, how can it be a crime for her to do it unintentionally, whether by taking drugs or smoking or whatever it is.”

The newest salvo on attacking abortion and Planned Parenthood is the Pro-Life Wisconsin Group’s lawsuit aimed at the University of Wisconsin’s medical department for training medical students to provide abortions. They claim it violates the no taxpayer-funding of abortion rules.  To avoid this conflict the university sends its students to Planned Parenthood where they are trained. If this latest attack succeeds in Wisconsin and in other teaching hospitals, it will mean that new doctors will not know how to provide medically necessary D&C’s.  According to Dr. Fredrik Broekhuizen, the medical director for Planned Parenthood of Wisconsin, “It is vital for medical students to be trained in abortion services.  There are medically indicated pregnancy terminations, and physicians need to have skills to do that.  There are situations where patients have fetal death in utero at 16 to 18 weeks of gestation,” he says. “The mode of delivery in the case of a dead fetus is exactly the same procedure as an abortion procedure. So learning these techniques is an essential part of what an ob/gyn needs to know in order to provide comprehensive care to women, regardless of where they choose to practice.”

As the ticker clicks upward on more ways to prevent women from making their own reproductive and health choices, the damage to families and women is growing.  There are real emotional and physical implications for the people caught in this web.  Take the mother who is imprisoned for “chemical use” during pregnancy -- who cares for her child while she is jailed?  Who cares for the psychological damage to a family when a woman dies due to lack of medical intervention because of these laws?  Who has the right to invade the most private sphere of a woman and determine that she cannot control her own health and reproductive rights?  And when do we rise up and yell “Enough!”?  It is time to stand together and tell elected officials across the country, in state and federal government, "Focus on jobs and the economy and stay out of our wombs.

The Obama administration said Wednesday it will boycott a world conference against racism being held at U.N. headquarters in September because of concerns about anti-Semitism.

The U.N. summit marks the 10-year commemoration of the 2001 World Conference Against Racism that was held in the South African city of Durban. The U.S. and Israel walked out of that meeting over a draft resolution that criticized Israel and equated Zionism with racism.

The United States will not participate in the upcoming conference because the Durban process “included ugly displays of intolerance and anti-Semitism,” Joseph E. Macmanus, acting U.S. assistant secretary of state for legislative affairs, wrote in a letter to Democratic Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand.

Read more at Washington Post