July 1, 2014

Greg Abbott and Dan Patrick Celebrate Reduced Access to Contraceptives

Today, the United States Supreme Court ruled in favor of Hobby Lobby in a case that weighed the rights of private companies to deny their employees access to contraceptives under their insurance plans.

While many view this as a damaging reduction in access to some of the most effective preventative medicine for family planning services, two of the statewide candidates for public office in Texas chose to take to Twitter to celebrate the news. Greg Abbott, the GOP's gubernatorial candidate, and Dan Patrick, who secured the nomination for Lieutenant Governor after his runoff, both hail the decision as a victory for religious liberty - though it comes at the expense of women's health.

It should come as no surprise that these two lawmakers see the Supreme Court's ruling in Hobby Lobby's favor as reason to celebrate. Their party just approved an incredibly anti-woman platform, including explicit support for the rights of those working in the medical field to express their religious freedom by refusing to provide birth control.

One only needs to look at their statements to see it clearly: for these candidates, religious freedom only applies to those who are attempting to limit access to reproductive healthcare.

More at http://www.burntorangereport.com/diary/15389/greg-abbott-and-dan-patrick-celebrate-reduced-access-to-contraceptives .

July 1, 2014

Limited Abortion Access Endangers South Texas Women

One year after Wendy Davis filibustered HB 2, the abortion restrictions are unsurprisingly affecting women of color and low-income women disproportionately.

Last week, The Atlantic reported on the rise of unsupervised medical abortion performed by women in South Texas using misoprostol purchased at flea markets.

Misoprostol, which is available over-the-counter in Mexico, can be used as an abortifacient during the first trimester of pregnancy.

After the omnibus abortion legislation passed in 2013, women in Texas seeking a medical abortion must endure four doctor's visits and a 24-hour waiting period to take the pills.

More at http://www.burntorangereport.com/diary/15390/limited-abortion-access-endangers-south-texas-women .

July 1, 2014

Why Dallas Should Host The 2016 Republican National Convention

Texas Democrats wrapped their political convention in Dallas on Saturday, but in two years "The Big D" may be seeing another political convention taking over the city. Last week, the National Republican Party narrowed their list of host sites for the 2016 Republican National Convention to two cities: Dallas and Cleveland. Eliminated were Kansas City and Denver.

If Dallas is selected, Republicans from across the country would head to the American Airlines Center, home of the Dallas Mavericks and Dallas Stars, for a full week in either late July or early August of 2016.

But why would national Republicans want to host their convention in a solidly Democratic city and county such as Dallas which is within a solidly red state such as Texas?

The last time the voters of Dallas County elected a Republican in a contested, countywide race was 2004. Since then, if a Democrat has appeared on the ballot countywide in Dallas county, the Democrat has won. While the city of Dallas had that unfortunate incident electing Tom Leppert as Mayor in 2007, who went on to run and lose as a Republican for US Senate in 2012, the municipality has largely supported Democrats for citywide offices over the last decade. For the state of Texas, Democrats last won a statewide race in 1994, but efforts have been made in the last two years to create the political infrastructure necessary to change the losing streak.

More at http://www.burntorangereport.com/diary/15391/dallas-finalist-to-host-2016-republican-national-convention-and-why-dallas-should-host .

July 1, 2014

Texas Responds to Hobby Lobby Contraception Case

This morning, the United States Supreme Court ruled that family-owned businesses like Hobby Lobby can decide to not provide contraception through their health insurance if it does not fit their religious beliefs. Now advocates for reproductive rights in Texas are condemning the decision.

While the original suit was filed outside of Texas, this state has been ground zero for the reproductive rights battle. Democratic gubernatorial candidate Sen. Wendy Davis, D-Fort Worth, fired back:

"Today's disappointing decision to restrict access to birth control puts employers between women and their doctors. We need to trust women to make their own healthcare decisions – not corporations, the Supreme Court, or (Attorney General) Greg Abbott."

Unsurprisingly, her Republican challenger for the governor's mansion was far more supportive of the SCOTUS decision:

“Today’s ruling is a major victory for religious freedom and another blow to the heavy-handed way the Obama Administration has tried to force the misguided Obamacare law on Americans. Once again, the Supreme Court has stricken down an overreaching regulation by the Obama Administration—and once again Obamacare has proven to be an illegal intrusion into the lives of so many Americans across the country.”

Yvonne Gutierrez, executive director of Planned Parenthood Texas Votes, positively rolled her eyes at his glee over the ruling.

"It’s unbelievable that we are still fighting for access to birth control in 2014. And simply preposterous that Greg Abbott would state that limiting access to birth control is 'protecting life.' Texas women have already suffered numerous clinic closures and loss of access to basic care, including birth control. But Greg Abbott wants to see their access to health care limited even more."

More at http://www.austinchronicle.com/daily/news/2014-06-30/texas-responds-to-hobby-lobby-contraception-case/ .

July 1, 2014

In other mews, it's time to play Meownopoly!

How can it be a tokin’ cat without catnip?

Tuxedo Cat--all dressed up with nowhere to GO.

The doggie token is banished.

TxT’s opinion about the catnip: It’s GREAT!

If you're a fan of Monopoly then you know that about a year ago Parker Brothers said bye bye, iron, and hello, kitty. The board game that's been around since the 1930s introduced a cat that will replace the iron as one of the tokens, or game pieces. (Don't worry, the thimble is hanging in).

Purists of the board game might not like the move, but game-maker Hasbro let the cat -- in huge form -- roam around London.

The celebri-cat was photographed posing on Millennium Bridge, approaching a Tube station and visiting the Battersea Dogs & Cats Home, where at least one dog jumped on its back. And maybe the Scottie dog token will have some competition now that the cat joins the other choices of race car, thimble, shoe, battleship, top hat and wheelbarrow.

Earlier in the year fans from more than 185 countries weighed in on Facebook to select the cat as the new token over a robot, diamond ring, helicopter or standard guitar.

"While we're a bit sad to see the iron go, the cat token is a fantastic choice by the fans and we have no doubt it will become just as iconic as the original tokens," Eric Nyman, senior vice president and global brand leader for Hasbro Gaming, says in a statement.

http://www.latimes.com/travel/deals/la-trb-london-cat-monopoly-game-20130730,0,7997793.story?track=rss

[font color=green]The cat lover’s edition doesn’t have an excise tax, but $75 for catnip? Yes, my fur is ruffled.

Meanwhile, instead of railroads there is the yarn, box, paper bag and scratching post. The utilities were replaced by mouse and fish. But what really hurts is that the income tax was replaced by litter box maintenance. However, I also think they missed on a mew oppurrtunities by not substituting “Window Sill Cat Perch” fur “Free Parking” and “Go to Vet” instead of “Go to Jail” with a picture of a cat carrier.[/font]

June 30, 2014

Harris v. Quinn: Will the Supreme Court Abolish Public Sector Unions on Monday?

Mainstream accounts of American history are almost completely devoid of the brutal efforts to suppress the organization of workers to gain basic rights, like workplace safety, fair wages, and limits on the length of the workday. Here are some examples of the ferocity of union-breaking efforts:

One of the first great strike waves of this country occured on the railways in 1877; in that strike, US federal troops repeatedly opened fire on strikers battling with the monopolistic railways, killing twelve people in Baltimore, killing twenty-five in Pittsburg, and using troops throughout the country to break the strike. Local police in Pittsburg had actually supported the strikers because public opinion so supported the strike, but President Hayes made sure federal troops were used to defend the railroad monopolies.

In July of 1892, Carnegie Steel declared war on the Amalgamated union of iron, steel and tin workers as they went on strike. A private Pinkerton army marched against the union’s position armed with Winchester rifles–seven strikers died and three Pinkertons died from return fire…

Unions found that if they struck, the government would issue an injunction and members would be jailed; if they called for a boycott, they’d be bankrupted by the courts* or threatened with imprisonment. At the same time, attempts by unions to use legislation such as limits to the working day or minimum-wage laws were voided by the courts (until 1937 and the New Deal). Unions found that whether through the ballot, through a strike, or through speech and boycotts–the employers and government would attack them.

In 1912, a massive strike in the wool mills of Lawrence, MA showed where employer violence overstepped its bounds and backfired. Despite the deployment of the militia and the arrest of strike leaders, the company could not break the strike. In order to survive economically, unionists planned to send their children to supporters in other states. The company and its supporters declared that no children would be allowed to leave the city. When the strike committee undertook to take the children to the railway station, the police and militia surrounded the station, the police closed in and began to beat mothers and children mericilessly. Despite the jailing of 296 strikers, public protest and continued resistance forced the company to raise wages although the union was never recognized.

Possibly the most bloody attack on unionists was Ludlow, Colorado in 1913 where J.D. Rockefeller and his Colorado Fuel and Iron Company had state militia and hired special deputies attack and try to crush coal miners there. Conflict ranged for months until the militia opened machine-fire on a tent city of mineworkers family and then soaked tents in oil and put them to the torch. Women and children huddled in pits to escape the falmes; in one, eleven children and two women were found burned to death at the hands of the militia.

-snip-

So what’s Harris v. Quinn?

I’m glad you asked. LA Times:

(Harris vs. Quinn) asks whether a state may compel even those public employees who elect not to join a union to pay fees to the union, since they benefit from the collective bargaining agreements it negotiates.

A “yes” answer would compromise the rights of workers to disassociate themselves from a union, rights grounded in the freedoms of speech and association. A “no” answer would compromise the rights of workers to form a union that can robustly defend their most fundamental interests.

So, will the Roberts Court rule in favor of free-rider public employees and weakening public sector unions? I’m guessing yes (the rational decision on cell phone search — “Get a warrant” — being a sop to cellphone users in the political and professional classes). But perhaps I’m too cynical. We can hope that the Court doesn’t double down, especially if they want elders to be taken care of by home health workers who are treated like humans instead of slaves. Public News Service:

Harris vs. Quinn could stop home-care workers and child-care providers from joining public-sector unions that automatically include employees in paying dues and enjoying contract benefits.

Millions of women who help people raise children and care for aging parents deserve the ability to join a union and make progress on issues such as pay equity, said Jennifer Munt, spokeswoman for the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees. …

“When women join unions, we gain a voice on the job,” she said. “Many of these jobs pay too little, and they don’t provide women with a path out of poverty so they can support their own families.”

Munt said nearly 60 percent of women would make more if they were paid the same as men, and the overall poverty rate would be cut in half as a result. She said she believes union representation is key for that to happen.

“Public-sector unions have shown,” she said, “that if women enjoy collective-bargaining rights and have a strong voice in the workplace, the inequalities of the past begin to fade away.”

But we’re not talking just home-care workers. We’re talking all public sector unions. PR Watch:

Joel Rogers, a professor of law and sociology at the University of Wisconsin, calls it “the most important labor law case the court has considered in decades.”

This is because when the Supreme Court decided to take on the case, the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation dramatically expanded the scope of the case beyond the home health care workers to include all public sector workers, from teachers and firefighters to sanitation workers to librarians. If the court follows National Right to Work’s lead, every state in the country would essentially turn into an anti-union “right to work” state, which would be a significant blow to public sector unions’ collective bargaining efforts and also complicate thousands of existing contracts between organized workers and municipalities, cities, counties, and states across the country.

More at http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2014/06/harris-v-quinn-will-supreme-court-abolish-public-sector-unions-monday.html#comment-2260820 .

Cross-posted in the Socialists Progressives Group.