Healthcare Prof:
Sen. Richard Durbin (D-Ill.), a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, on Wednesday said Supreme Court nominee Judge Samuel Alito told him that he “spent far more time worrying and working” on his opinion within the 1991 Planned Parenthood v. Casey case than any other decision he has produced on the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, the New York Times reports. Durbin stated Alito told him that he struggled to interpret Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O’Connor’s opinions about prohibiting abortion restrictions that place an “undue burden” on a woman’s appropriate to have the procedure, not the broader question of no matter whether abortion rights are constitutionally protected. “He said it happened within the 1st year he was on the bench, and he said it was a tough case to determine what was an ‘undue burden’ on a woman looking for an abortion,” Durbin said, adding, “I told him I was glad to hear that simply because when I looked at it I struggled with how he had come to that.” A White Home spokesperson did not dispute Durbin’s comments, based on the Times (Kirkpatrick, New York Times, 11/3). Within the Casey case, Alito joined his colleagues on a three-judge panel with the 3rd Circuit Court in upholding certain provisions of a Pennsylvania law that calls for doctors to inform women with the potential “medical dangers” of abortion and alternatives to the procedure. However, he dissented from a ruling striking down a provision inside the law that would have required married women looking for abortions to 1st notify their husbands (Kaiser Daily Women’s Well being Policy Report, 11/2). Durbin also stated Alito told him he believes the Constitution consists of a correct to privacy, which was utilised as a “building block” in the Supreme Court’s decision in the 1973 Roe v. Wade case, which successfully outlawed state abortion bans, the AP/Long Island Newsday reports (Holland, AP/Long Island Newsday, 11/3).
Other Senators’ Comments
Some Republican senators who support abortion rights expressed concerns about Alito’s nomination, while some moderate Democratic senators said they agree with his apparent stance on abortion rights, USA Today reports. Sen. Lincoln Chaffee (R-R.I.), who supports abortion rights, stated Alito “has taken a lot of positions that appear to location him at odds with the protection of key fundamental rights.” Chaffee’s concerns had been “echoed” by Sen. Olympia Snowe (R-Maine), according to USA Today (Kiely, USA Today, 11/3). Sen. Ben Nelson (D-Neb.) complimented Alito soon after meeting the judge on Wednesday, adding, “He assured me that he desires to go to the bench with out a political agenda, that he isn’t bringing a hammer and chisel to hammer away and chisel away at existing law” (Reynolds, Los Angeles Times, 11/3). Sen. Mike DeWine (R-Ohio), who doesn’t support abortion rights, dismissed concerns that Alito might vote to overturn Roe, saying, “This nominee really should not have shocked anybody. … George Bush won the election” (USA Today, 11/3).
NPR’s “All Items Considered” on Wednesday included an interview with Senate Judiciary Committee Chair Arlen Specter (R-Pa.) about Alito’s confirmation hearings, at which “abortion will probably be front and center” (Totenberg, “All Things Regarded as,” NPR, 11/2). The total segment is accessible on-line in RealPlayer.
“Reprinted with permission from http://www.kaisernetwork.org. It is possible to view the whole Kaiser Day-to-day Wellness Policy Report, search the archives, or sign up for e-mail delivery at http://www.kaisernetwork.org/dailyreports/healthpolicy. The Kaiser Daily Wellness Policy Report is published for kaisernetwork.org, a cost-free service of the Henry J. Kaiser Household Foundation . 2005 Advisory Board Business and Kaiser Family members Foundation. All rights reserved.
Healthcare Prof:
Article Opinions:1 posts
About 51% of likely California voters support a Nov. 8 particular election ballot initiative that would demand abortion providers to notify the parents or guardians of minors looking for abortion, 39% oppose the measure and 10% are undecided, according to a Los Angeles Times poll published on Wednesday, the Times reports (Finnegan, Los Angeles Times, 11/3). The initiative, which is recognized as Proposition 73, would amend the state constitution to call for that wellness care providers notify the parents or guardians of an unmarried minor 48 hours before they carry out an abortion. Proposition 73 includes exceptions for medical emergencies and when a parent or guardian signs a waiver allowing the procedure to happen sooner. The proposal also states that abortion providers would have to record statistics on the number of abortions performed on minors and that failure to comply together with the regulations could lead to civil fines (Kaiser Everyday Women’s Well being Policy Report, 10/27). Nationwide, California has the 7th-highest rate of teen pregnancies along with the 4th-highest rate of teen abortions (Serjeant, Reuters, 11/2). Based on the Times poll, men are more most likely to support the measure than girls, with one-sixth of male respondents in favor of it and female respondents split nearly evenly. Nearly two-thirds of men and women who attend religious services at the least as soon as a month support the measure, which also is most popular among Republicans, conservatives and the elderly, the poll shows. Proposition 73 is least popular among Democrats and liberals, based on the poll. The Times poll contacted 1,778 adults in California by telephone Oct. 26-31. Of those, 940 had been determined most likely to vote within the particular election. The poll utilized a split sample, so 459 respondents were asked about Proposition 73. The margin of error for all likely voters is 3 percentage points and for the split sample, the margin of error is five percentage points (Los Angeles Times, 11/3).
Field Poll
A survey published on Wednesday by Field Poll found that 41% of likely voters support the initiative and 49% oppose it, based on the San Francisco Chronicle (Lucas, San Francisco Chronicle, 11/2). Voter preferences on the measure are substantially divided between party affiliation, religious affiliation and sex, in accordance with the poll (Field Poll results, 11/2). Field Poll surveyed 581 most likely voters in between Oct. 25 and Oct. 30. The margin of error for concerns on Proposition 73 was six percentage points (Elias, AP/San Jose Mercury News, 11/2).
Times Examines Advocacy Efforts Related to Proposition 73
The Times on Tuesday examined how advocates and opponents of Proposition 73 are utilizing experiences of other states’ parental notification requirements to “bolster their campaign claims.” Both sides of the debate are referencing Texas’ law simply because it’s “a large state using a diverse population like California’s,” in accordance with the Times. Supporters of Proposition 73 say that Texas’ law has been a “resounding success,” leading to a lower number of abortions among teens and ensuring parental involvement in their daughters’ reproductive choices, the Times reports. Even so, opponents of the initiative say that other elements, which includes increased access to emergency contraception and decisions by some teens to have abortions outside the state, account for Texas’ decrease in teen abortions. They add that the law increases the “trauma of an unplanned pregnancy for girls who are orphans or live in troubled homes,” in accordance with the Times (Warren, Los Angeles Times, 11/2). Although Proposition 73 is “the most divisive” initiative on the ballot, it has “been drowned out by noise surrounding” other measures relating to teacher tenure, political contributions from unions, the state budget and redistricting, Reuters reports (Reuters, 11/2).
NPR’s “Morning Edition” on Wednesday reported on how Republican strategists in California think that even though Proposition 73 was not Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger’s (R) “idea,” the measure “can aid the governor’s cause.” Based on NPR, even though Schwarzenegger lately has campaigned for initiatives addressing “less hot-button concerns,” Republican strategists hope that motivating voters who are “passionately opposed to abortion” may possibly increase the number of votes for Schwarzenegger’s reform initiatives. The NPR segment consists of comments from Karen Hanretty, spokesperson for the California Republican Party; Republican consultant Dan Schnur; and Dawn Wilcox, spokesperson for the Campaign for Teen Safety (Jaffe, “Morning Edition,” NPR, 11/2). The total segment is obtainable on the internet in RealPlayer.
“Reprinted with permission from http://www.kaisernetwork.org. You’ll be able to view the entire Kaiser Every day Wellness Policy Report, search the archives, or sign up for email delivery at http://www.kaisernetwork.org/dailyreports/healthpolicy. The Kaiser Everyday Wellness Policy Report is published for kaisernetwork.org, a totally free service of the Henry J. Kaiser Loved ones Foundation . 2005 Advisory Board Organization and Kaiser Family Foundation. All rights reserved.
Ticketamerica.com has college athletic teams with great records that include the Tennessee Volunteers and the Texas A&M Aggies
plus Texas Longhorns University student section.
Healthcare Prof:
Iowa Agriculture Secretary Patty Judge on Monday criticized fellow Democratic gubernatorial candidate and former U.S. Rep. Mike Blouin for his opposition to abortion rights, the AP/Cedar Rapids Gazette reports (AP/Cedar Rapids Gazette, 11/1). Although in Congress in the 1970s, Blouin sponsored two constitutional amendments that would have banned abortion except to save the life of a woman. “These anti-choice amendments show that Mike Blouin is out of touch together with the views of Iowa Democrats,” Judge said in a ready statement, adding, “As Democrats, we want a candidate who will tell you that they’re pro-choice” (Higgins, Des Moines Register, 11/1). Abortion has been an “underlying issue” for the Democratic candidates for governor, the AP/Gazette reports. All the candidates except Blouin support abortion rights and had sought to avoid the concern (AP/Cedar Rapids Gazette, 11/1). Blouin stated in a statement on Monday, “As I have stated prior to, Roe v. Wade may be the law with the land. My campaign isn’t a discussion with the past but rather of the future. It is a reflection of my desire to deal meaningfully with well being care, education and job creation.” Other Democratic gubernatorial candidates incorporate state Rep. Ed Fallon, Shenandoah Mayor Gregg Connell, Sioux City engineer Sal Mohamed and Wallingford Mayor Mark Yackle. Iowa Secretary of State Chet Culver is expected to announce his candidacy on Thursday. U.S. Rep. Jim Nussle and Sioux City businessman Bob Vander Plaats are looking for the Republican nomination (Des Moines Register, 11/1).
“Reprinted with permission from http://www.kaisernetwork.org. You are able to view the entire Kaiser Everyday Health Policy Report, search the archives, or sign up for e-mail delivery at http://www.kaisernetwork.org/dailyreports/healthpolicy. The Kaiser Daily Health Policy Report is published for kaisernetwork.org, a free service with the Henry J. Kaiser Family members Foundation . 2005 Advisory Board Company and Kaiser Loved ones Foundation. All rights reserved.
Healthcare Prof:
5 (1 votes)
The Wisconsin Assembly on Tuesday approved 61-34 a bill (AB 175) that would further restrict minors’ access to abortion, the AP/St. Paul Pioneer Press reports. Under current state law, minors searching for abortion are necessary to obtain written consent from a parent, guardian, adult family members member or foster parent. Minors can request a waiver by petitioning a court, members of the clergy can request a court waiver on behalf of a minor and psychiatrists or psychologists can supply a waiver if they determine a minor is far more most likely to attempt suicide instead of seek consent. The new measure would grant only a custodial parent or legal guardian the authority to consent to abortion for minors and would demand them to sign a consent form within the presence of a public notary. The bill also would bar members of the clergy from petitioning the court on behalf of a minor and eliminate the option of a waiver from a psychiatrist or psychologist. The bill now moves towards the state Senate. If approved, Gov. Jim Doyle (D) stated he would veto the bill, based on a spokesperson. “Wisconsin already has a strong parental consent law, and it really is working,” Doyle spokesperson Dan Leistikow stated. In accordance with the Wisconsin Department of Wellness and Family Services, 737 Wisconsin minors received abortions in 2003. In 62 of those situations, the minor received permission from an adult family member, an option that would be eliminated below the bill (Ross, AP/St. Paul Pioneer Press, 11/1).
“Reprinted with permission from http://www.kaisernetwork.org. You can view the whole Kaiser Everyday Wellness Policy Report, search the archives, or sign up for e-mail delivery at http://www.kaisernetwork.org/dailyreports/healthpolicy. The Kaiser Everyday Health Policy Report is published for kaisernetwork.org, a totally free service of the Henry J. Kaiser Loved ones Foundation . 2005 Advisory Board Business and Kaiser Family members Foundation. All rights reserved.
Healthcare Prof:
The 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Cincinnati on Wednesday heard arguments regarding the constitutionality of a Tennessee law that authorizes the production and sale of “Choose Life” specialty license plates, the AP/Tennessean reports (Kinney, AP/Tennessean, 11/2). The measure authorizing the production of the plates was enacted by the state Legislature, and Gov. Phil Bredesen (D) allowed it to turn into law without his signature in June 2003. Planned Parenthood Federation of America and the American Civil Liberties Union in November 2003 filed a lawsuit in U.S. District Court to avoid the state from distributing Select Life plates, alleging that the manner in which the state approves license plates is unconstitutional and enables the state to endorse some political issues while ignoring others. U.S. District Judge Todd Campbell in September 2004 ruled that the law is unconstitutional due to the fact the government is engaging in “viewpoint discrimination.” Campbell applied the same reasoning judges have used in equivalent instances in other states, saying that the suit is about cost-free speech, not abortion. “The lead to this case would be the same if the statute authorized a ‘Pro-Choice’ license plate rather of the ‘Choose Life’ license plate,” Campbell wrote, adding, “Either way, it’s unconstitutional viewpoint discrimination in violation of the Very first Amendment.” Campbell didn’t invalidate the state’s entire specialty license plate program, a move that the ACLU had suggested as a possible solution within the case (Kaiser Day-to-day Women’s Wellness Policy Report, 9/28/04).
Arguments
New Life Resources, a group related with Tennessee Proper to Life and a beneficiary of the dollars collected by means of the sale with the plates, appealed the district court ruling. The group contends the plate’s message is equivalent to government-sponsored public service announcements urging individuals to quit smoking or students to stay in school, according to the AP/Southern Standard (AP/Southern Standard, 11/3). Tennessee Correct to Life President Brian Harris said in a statement, “Legislatures have not only the proper to create policy decisions which favor certain viewpoints, they also have a responsibility to do so” (Tennessee Correct to Life release, 11/1). ACLU lawyer Julie Sternberg argued that the legislation allowing the plates must have included an abortion-rights alternative, and she urged the three-judge panel to uphold the lower court ruling (AP/Southern Standard, 11/3). “When the state of Tennessee approved an antiabortion license plate and failed to do the same for a pro-choice plate, it effectively cut off public discussion,” Sternberg stated, adding, “The lower court made clear that the state can not open up a forum for public debate on abortion with no allowing each sides an equal opportunity to express their position. We are hopeful that the appeals court will do the same” (ACLU release, 11/2). The panel gave no indication of when it’ll rule (AP/Tennessean, 11/2).
“Reprinted with permission from http://www.kaisernetwork.org. It is possible to view the whole Kaiser Day-to-day Well being Policy Report, search the archives, or sign up for e-mail delivery at http://www.kaisernetwork.org/dailyreports/healthpolicy. The Kaiser Everyday Wellness Policy Report is published for kaisernetwork.org, a totally free service with the Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation . 2005 Advisory Board Organization and Kaiser Family Foundation. All rights reserved.
Healthcare Prof:
Supreme Court nominee Judge Samuel Alito could be “reluctant” to overturn past court rulings — including the “most controversial” precedents, for example those on abortion rights — some of Alito’s associates and legal analysts say, the Washington Post reports. Senate Judiciary Committee Chair Arlen Specter (R-Pa.) last week after meeting with Alito said the judge told him he would evaluate precedent on a “sliding scale,” giving the most weight to decisions upheld by a large number of judges appointed by diverse presidents. Specter did not ask Alito particularly about Roe v. Wade, the 1973 Supreme Court case that successfully outlawed state abortion bans. The court upheld Roe 5-4 in the 1992 Planned Parenthood v. Casey decision, in which 4 of the 5 justices who were inside the majority had been not sitting on the court for the Roe decision (Lane, Washington Post, 11/6). Alito, while serving on the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in 1991, ruled on an appeal in the Casey case. He joined his colleagues on a three-judge panel with the court in upholding specific provisions of a Pennsylvania law that requires doctors to inform ladies of the prospective “medical dangers” of abortion and alternatives towards the process, but Alito dissented from a ruling striking down a provision within the law that would have required married females searching for abortions to 1st notify their husbands (Kaiser Day-to-day Women’s Wellness Policy Report, 11/3).
Analysis on Precedent
Some abortion-rights advocates say Alito’s ruling in Casey showed he is “willing to push the law inside the direction of his own policy preferences,” based on the Post. Nevertheless, 3rd Circuit Judge Leonard Garth, for whom Alito served as a clerk and later joined as a colleague, said, “If he learned anything from me, he learned the value of stare decisis,” the legal principle that courts really should generally steer clear of overturning precedent. Garth added, “If what you’re thinking is, ‘Would Sam overrule Roe?’ — he wouldn’t. He may well have restrictions and limitations, but it really is a precedent he’d honor.” Despite the fact that Alito’s rulings on the 3rd Circuit Court generally have reached “conservative results,” he has never ever “publicly articulated an overarching critique of current Supreme Court jurisprudence,” the Post reports. Jeffrey Wasserstein, a former Alito law clerk, said, “I’d be personally surprised if he lightly overruled a precedent that has been on the books for 30 years,” adding, “He is someone who, for his entire career, he’s looked in the practical applications of constitutional law” (Washington Post, 11/6).
Confirmation Procedure
President Bush on Friday said he is “disappointed in the date” of Alito’s confirmation hearing within the Senate “but happy they do have a firm date,” the New York Times reports. Specter last week stated leaders in both parties agreed to start the hearings on Jan. 9, 2006 (Kirkpatrick, New York Times, 11/5). Bush nominated Alito to replace retiring Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O’Connor, who has said she will stay on the court until her successor is confirmed (Kaiser Everyday Women’s Well being Policy Report, 10/31). Sen. Joe Biden (D-Del.) on Sunday on ABC’s “This Week” stated he does not expect Senate Democrats to filibuster Alito’s nomination (Hurt, Washington Times, 11/7).
NBC’s “Meet the Press” on Sunday included interviews with Sens. Tom Coburn (R-Okla.) and Edward Kennedy (D-Mass.) about how they would vote if a Supreme Court nominee stated he wanted to overturn Roe v. Wade (Russert, “Meet the Press,” NBC, 11/6). The complete transcript is offered on-line. A video excerpt of the interview with Coburn is accessible on the web in RealPlayer. A video excerpt with the interview with Kennedy is obtainable on the web in RealPlayer.
“Reprinted with permission from http://www.kaisernetwork.org. You are able to view the whole Kaiser Every day Health Policy Report, search the archives, or sign up for e-mail delivery at http://www.kaisernetwork.org/dailyreports/healthpolicy. The Kaiser Day-to-day Well being Policy Report is published for kaisernetwork.org, a free service of the Henry J. Kaiser Family members Foundation . 2005 Advisory Board Business and Kaiser Family members Foundation. All rights reserved.
Healthcare Prof:
The Los Angeles Times on Monday examined the “grassroots debate” over an abortion-related Nov. 8 particular election ballot initiative and how voters have heard concerning the initiative in a “place not routinely related with California politics — their neighborhood church” (Warren, Los Angeles Times, 11/7). The initiative, which is recognized as Proposition 73, would amend the state constitution to demand that wellness care providers notify the parents or guardians of an unmarried minor just before they carry out an abortion and also would adjust the definition with the procedure from a “medical treatment intended to induce the termination of a pregnancy” to causing the death of “a child conceived but not however born” (Kaiser Every day Women’s Wellness Policy Report, 10/27). Each sides with the debate over Proposition 73 have been “short on funds,” so the measure has been “hashed out largely below the radar with few mailers, a smattering of radio ads, some automated phone calls and only a single major-market TV ad,” the Times reports. The method of supporters has been to target conservative churches. Senior Pastor Francis Anfuso in the Rock, an evangelical Christian Church, has been telling church-goers that passage of the parental notification initiative will “protect” young girls from undergoing abortion. The initiative’s opponents — for example California Church Impact, which represents about 1.5 million Protestants in four,000 congregations — are spreading the message that the notification requirement will not encourage “healthy loved ones communication,” according to the Times. Barbara O’Connor, a professor of politics and media at California State University-Sacramento, said, “[I]n an election where men and women are getting inundated by a drumbeat of ads, this type of a lot more personal, one-on-one contact appropriate in their own church … is much more most likely to turn them out to vote.” Steve Smith, manager of the “No on 73″ campaign stated that the church organizing most likely will alter voter turnout by among 2% and 3%, but “if the turnout is down about 30% or 35%, the impact of those kinds of movements may be important.” Secretary of State Bruce McPherson said he expects 42% of registered voters go to the polls (Los Angeles Times, 11/7).
“Reprinted with permission from http://www.kaisernetwork.org. You can view the entire Kaiser Day-to-day Wellness Policy Report, search the archives, or sign up for email delivery at http://www.kaisernetwork.org/dailyreports/healthpolicy. The Kaiser Day-to-day Health Policy Report is published for kaisernetwork.org, a free of charge service of the Henry J. Kaiser Family members Foundation . 2005 Advisory Board Organization and Kaiser Family Foundation. All rights reserved.
Healthcare Prof:
If the Supreme Court does not return decisions on the two abortion-related circumstances it’s scheduled to hear on Nov. 30 by mid-January — when the Senate is expected to approve the nomination of Judge Samuel Alito to replace retiring Justice Sandra Day O’Connor — O’Connor’s votes will not count, the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette reports. If confirmed, Alito likely would join the court on Jan. 23, and O’Connor’s vote would not be counted in any ruling handed down right after that time. The scenario would only matter in situations in which O’Connor cast the deciding vote in a 5-4 decision, leading to a tie and possibly a reargument with the case just before the new court. This “uncertainty” concerns abortion-rights supporters, who fear that Alito might not be as supportive of abortion rights as O’Connor, according to the Post-Gazette (McGough, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, 11/7). The court is scheduled to hear for the third time a case aimed at determining regardless of whether antiabortion protesters may be sued below a federal racketeering law. The case — Scheidler v. National Organization for Women — stems from a lawsuit originally filed in 1986 by the National Organization for Girls and other women’s rights groups against several antiabortion groups and people, which includes Operation Rescue/Operation Save America along with the Pro-Life Action League, alleging the antiabortion advocates used aggressive and illegal indicates to protest against and try to close abortion clinics (Kaiser Daily Women’s Wellness Policy Report, 6/29). The court also is scheduled to hear arguments in Ayotte v. Planned Parenthood, an appeal relating to the constitutionality of a new Hampshire abortion parental notification law (HB 763) that was struck down by a lower court due to the fact it lacks an exception for a pregnant minor’s well being (Kaiser Every day Women’s Health Policy Report, 5/24).
“Reprinted with permission from http://www.kaisernetwork.org. You are able to view the entire Kaiser Everyday Well being Policy Report, search the archives, or sign up for email delivery at http://www.kaisernetwork.org/dailyreports/healthpolicy. The Kaiser Day-to-day Health Policy Report is published for kaisernetwork.org, a totally free service of the Henry J. Kaiser Household Foundation . 2005 Advisory Board Company and Kaiser Loved ones Foundation. All rights reserved.