LANSING, Mich. - The Violence Against Women Act has been renewed twice with bipartisan support since originally passed in 1994, but this year's reauthorization has become the object of an election year political battle. The Senate has approved a version of the bill that includes immigrants, Native Americans, and LBGT victims of domestic abuse, but the House passed a version that excluded those protections. The National Organization for Women is opposed to the House version, which it calls an "atrocious bill".

Mary Pollack, legislative vice president for Michigan NOW, says that's because the House bill excludes many domestic abuse victims who historically have fallen through the cracks.

"Especially immigrant women are especially vulnerable, because some of them are victims of domestic violence and are very afraid of calling the police or calling for help."

Leaders of more than 30 religious groups are also opposed to the House bill, because they say it rolls back current protections for "battered non-citizens." House Republican leaders say their bill protects all victims and that there is no reason for the bill to single out certain groups.

Pollock says the two Senators from Michigan, Debbie Stabenow and Carl Levin, did the right thing by voting for the Senate reauthorization bill.

"It's the bill that we want, and the Republicans seem to be dead set against anything that women's rights advocates want."

Proponents of the Senate bill cited studies that show the rate of domestic abuse among lesbian, gay, and transgender people to be about the same as among the general population, yet that abuse is reported less.

Pollock thinks House Republicans are afraid to face reality.

"They cannot vote on anything that recognizes that there may be more discrimination against that group than other groups. It is the civil rights topic of our time."

Pollock calls the House bill anti-gay, anti-woman and anti-immigrant. House Republicans accuse Senate Democrats of playing politics with the issue.

The Violence Against Women Act expires in September. Both sides say they support reauthorization. No official negotiations have been scheduled to work out a compromise. President Obama has threatened to veto the House version.

The Senate bill is S.1925; the House bill is H.R.4970.

A NOW statement is at tinyurl.com/7kd2qjv.





get more stories like this via email

By Jennifer Weiss-Wolf for Ms. Magazine.
Broadcast version by Eric Galatas for Colorado News Connection reporting for the Ms. Magazine-Public News Service Collaboration

The United States was designated a backsliding democracy in late 2021, when it appeared on a prominent European think tank’s annual global ranking. Today, half of the world’s democratic governments are on the decline, according to The Global State of Democracy, a report released by the International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance (IDEA) this past November.

Six months before the Supreme Court decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, with Texas SB 8 already in effect—the U.S. made its disconcerting debut on the list. Advocates raised real-time questions about the correlation between regression on abortion rights and degraded democracies. A New York Times article asserted that such a descent is precisely when “curbs on women’s rights tend to accelerate.”

We think that’s a proposition worth flipping on its head. What if, instead, we looked at the United States’ persistent abysmal track record on gender equity as the potential smoking gun for its downward spiral? While the timing of the United States’ inaugural inclusion on the IDEA list made it easy to point to the grift of Trump and the rise of Trump-ism as the culprit, the hard truth is that our democracy has been flailing—by failing women, particularly women of color—as it has designed to, since the nation’s founding.

Equal Rights Amendment

Let’s start with the century-long fight to enshrine equality in the U.S. Constitution.

Eighty-five percent of United Nations member states currently have explicit constitutional provisions that prohibit discrimination on the basis of sex and/or gender. The United States is an outlier. Even as the federal Equal Rights Amendment navigates the path to ratification—and some 30 states have ERAs or comparable language in their own constitutions and/or active mobilization efforts—women in this country have no guarantee of equality.

Women’s Political Representation

The United States also lags in meaningful political representation.

We’re currently experiencing an uptick in women’s leadership on Capitol Hill, with an all-time high in the 118th Congress, where just over 28 percent (149 members) are women. In the House, women broke records in the 2022 midterms, with 124 now serving, 27 of whom are Black and 18 are Latina. On the Supreme Court, women account for four out of nine justices, two of whom are women of color. Vice President Kamala Harris is the first woman (and person of color) to serve in the role. 

At the state level, more than 30 percent of elected executives are women, including 12 serving as governor—a new record. Nevada is the first state to have a majority women legislature, followed by Colorado just this year; Michigan has a trifecta of women at the helm in the roles of governor, attorney general and secretary of state. Last year also marked the first time in U.S. history where at least one LGBTQ+ candidate ran for office in every state. In California, 10 percent of the state legislature is LGBTQ; across the country nine trans lawmakers now serve in state legislatures.

But these raw numbers are a far cry from robust or even remotely relative representation. There remain zero Black women in the U.S. Senate beyond Kamala Harris, who leads the body in her role as vice president; a Black woman has never served as a state governor. And the U.S. totals pale in comparison to women’s leadership and authority in much of the world, especially among our peer democracies.

Reproductive Freedom

The United States performs dreadfully on myriad ingredients needed to ensure equitable participation in the body politic.

While maternal mortality rates have decreased globally, they remain on the rise in the United States, which by the most recent count is ranked 46th in the world—a crisis that is exponentially acute for Black women, who are three times more likely to die during pregnancy and childbirth in the United States than white women.

Globally, paid maternity leave averages 29 weeks; the United States is one of only six countries, and the only wealthy nation, without national paid leave.

Across federal and state agencies, abusive institutional practices are all too common, from compulsory sterilization and forced induction of labor, to the denial or withholding of menstrual products and even the practice of shackling women during childbirth.

U.S. Abortion Rights Backslide

And then, of course, there is our current standing on abortion. For the past two decades, as much of the world has expanded access, the United States is one of just four countries—joining El Salvador, Nicaragua and Poland—actively rolling back rights. Though most Americans support legal abortion, and even well before the Supreme Court wielded its sledgehammer in its majority ruling in Dobbs, we’d witnessed then-unconstitutional laws glide through state legislatures only to be met with staggering indifference in the courts.

Now that the protections afforded by Roe have been eviscerated, we exist in an ever more dangerous and cruel orbit—one where the threat of criminalization for pregnancy outcomes, including stillbirths and miscarriages, looms large; where a 10-year-old is transported across state lines to obtain an abortion amid a media maelstrom (while her status as a rape victim is called into question—as if a pregnant child could be anything but); where people experiencing ectopic and unviable pregnancies are left to bleed, suffer and deteriorate before doctors can provide life-saving care.

As we approach the 50th anniversary of the Roe decision and continue to grapple with the new status quo, this much is clear: The tenets of reproductive health, rights and justice—and those of a healthy democracy—are not only inextricably interconnected, but essential to our nation’s promise. The country’s status as a backsliding democracy says as much about the symptom as it does the disease. And our simultaneous failure to curb democratic dysfunctions, like partisan gerrymandering and voter suppression, inevitably go hand in hand with our failure to ensure women and girls have an equal chance to engage in and contribute to civic life—or to live freely at all.

Bringing us back to the original proposition: Are we merely witnessing the byproducts of a democracy on the decline, or are each of the examples above the drivers of our current status? The 2020 United Nations report suggests that the trajectory of “de-democratization” is rarely analyzed initially through the distinctive lens of gender equity and there are insufficient efforts to systematically examine the current implications.

Which is precisely why we plan to pursue this conversation, starting with a symposium at NYU School of Law this spring. We will bring together academics, advocates, policymakers and pundits to explore what it means to measure the ebb and flow of inclusive democracy, in the United States and globally, with principles of gender equity at the center. Ms. magazine and Rewire News Group will co-host, and we look forward to sharing a steady stream of content as we tackle these questions in the weeks and months to come.

Jennifer Weiss-Wolf wrote this article for Ms. Magazine.



get more stories like this via email

New mothers in Wyoming enrolled in the Medicaid Pregnant Women Program lose their health insurance 60 days after giving birth, but a new bill making its way through the state's 67th Legislature would extend coverage for a full year.

Marissa Carpio, policy associate for the Wyoming Women's Foundation, said having health insurance is the number one determinant of good health, for mothers and newborns.

"Having health insurance means that you're more likely to seek preventive care, or get that odd symptom checked out that maybe arose during birth or after birth," Carpio observed. "And to not have to sacrifice the funds for your food or your rent to go figure out those health complications."

House Bill 4, sponsored by the Joint Labor, Health and Social Services Interim Committee, is now on General File and could get its first vote today.

Some critics have argued expanding coverage for new mothers is unnecessary because assistance is already available through Medicaid's Family Planning program. Newborns remain eligible for health insurance during their first year.

Carpio pointed out the family planning program is not comprehensive, it only covers gynecological exams and lab tests. It does not cover health issues including heart disease or stroke, which are leading causes of death for new mothers.

Working women of childbearing age are currently the largest group in Wyoming without insurance, largely because they are less likely to get coverage through their employer.

"They're more likely to be working part-time, low-paying jobs that don't offer insurance anyway," Carpio noted. "This type of program that is so specific to new mothers in our state is very important for the success of babies and communities."

According to the Wyoming Department of Health, nearly one in five new mothers participating in the Medicaid Pregnant Women Program currently end up losing health insurance.

Carpio believes healing after birth is a long and important process, and access to care will help women avoid financial and health-related stress, return to work and attain economic self-sufficiency.

"The biggest and most important thing is that continuous coverage after birth," Carpio emphasized. "When you're trying to raise a newborn child, trying to get back to work, the last thing you want to do is try to get your health insurance back to go see the doctor. You should be able to see the doctor when your family needs to."

get more stories like this via email

Wyoming has managed to buck a national trend which has seen female students opting out of college at more than twice the rate of males since 2020.

Ben Moritz, deputy director of the Wyoming Community College Commission, said the percentage of women attending community college has been consistently on the rise, even during the pandemic. He believes one reason more women were able to continue their education is because the state took swift action to provide child care grants to student parents.

"Hundreds of students across the state were able to take advantage of this," Moritz explained. "Disproportionately female students, who perhaps otherwise would have had to drop out of school because they couldn't afford the child care while they were in class."

Federal CARES Act dollars were directed to Wyoming's Department of Family Services, which then partnered with community colleges to distribute child care grants. The state also directed funds to colleges to provide scholarships to students in financial need resulting from the pandemic.

Women are more likely to drop out to take care of children, parents or family members with health problems, according to the National Student Clearinghouse Research Center report, and many do not return to complete a certificate or degree.

Moritz pointed out women who do stop out are at much greater risk of facing long-term economic disadvantages than men who can stay in school.

"There's a lot of statistics that show that a student who starts a program but does not finish it," Moritz noted. "The difference between a student who starts a program and actually finishes the program -- as far as the wage earnings they get -- is significant."

Overall enrollment in community colleges and four-year institutions has been on the decline in Wyoming and across the nation during the pandemic, but Moritz emphasized Wyoming's falloff has not been as severe as other states.

He added Wyoming's decentralized, independently managed community colleges and universities have been able to react quickly to the needs of communities.

"Wyoming, as the smallest state in the union by population, is well positioned to pivot quickly," Moritz argued. "If you're turning an ocean liner around, they can't turn on a dime because they're so big. A smaller boat can turn a little bit quicker."

Support for this reporting was provided by Lumina Foundation.

get more stories like this via email