Hawaii | Sponsor: Takumi (D)/Hee (D) | Latest Action: Passed House Committee on Labor and Public Employment 01/31/2012

Paid Sick and Safe Leave

State: Hawaii
Subject: Paid Sick Days, Job-Protected Leave, Domestic Violence
Bill: H.B. 2089/S.B. 2507
Sponsor: Takumi (D)/Hee (D)
Date Introduced: 01/20/2012
Referred to House Committees on Economic Revitalization and Business; Finance; and Labor and Public Employment: 01/20/2012
Referred to Senate Committees on Judiciary and Labor; and Ways and Means: 01/23/2012
Passed House Committee on Labor and Public Employment: 01/31/2012

Summary:

Guarantees a minimum of one hour of paid sick and safe leave for every 30 hours worked, up to 40 hours per year for businesses with fewer than ten employees and 72 hours per year for all other businesses.

Workers may use the leave to care for themselves or a family member who is ill, needs medical care or is a victim of domestic violence, sexual assault or stalking.

“Family member” is defined as a child, parent, spouse or civil union partner, grandparent, grandchild, sibling or any other individual related by blood or affinity.

We had a fabulous inaugural conversation for state-based consumer advocates working on health IT implementation this week! If Monday was any indication, future discussions will be can't-miss events.

BLOG POST | Eva Powell | 02.03.12
Consumer Advocates Connect on Inaugural Webinar

We had a fabulous inaugural conversation for state-based consumer advocates working on health IT implementation this week! For those of you who missed it, you can listen to the recording here.

If Monday was any indication, future discussions will be can’t-miss events. We learned a great deal about what kinds of issues state and local consumer advocates are facing, including:

1. Engagement in eligibility and enrollment integration with health IT
2. Advocating for capability to connect consumers to culturally-competent health materials
3. Advocacy in a local effort working to connect social services and clinical services for care coordination
4. Direct work with consumers, helping them to understand what health IT is and become comfortable with it
5. Advocacy in an effort to connect mental and behavioral health services to clinical services for purposes of care coordination
6. Advocacy for consumer-friendly privacy policies governing health information exchange

Our participants had lots of fabulous suggestions for how the National Partnership can support the great work all of you are already doing. In the coming weeks you can look for the following from us:

1. A schedule of upcoming discussions. You are encouraged to attend as many as you can!
2. Resources for use by state and local advocates to help engage non-consumer stakeholders.
3. An inventory of who is working on health IT in the consumer advocate world, and what they are doing.

We here at the National Partnership are SO excited about working with all of you our colleagues in bringing the consumer voice to these critical discussions about health IT! Please be in touch — we want your feedback about how we can make this site more useful, what resources you need, and what your experiences working on this issue have been. Post a comment here, or send us an email by clicking the link above.

And don’t forget to spread the word about this site and the CPeH community to your fellow consumer advocates working on health IT implementation!



[[S28:EMBED:7403]]


Back to Health IT »

The typically apolitical Susan G. Komen for the Cure finds itself at the center of the abortion-rights debate after ending its funding to Planned Parenthood affiliates, although the group maintains that the decision was not politically motivated, Politico reports.

Planned Parenthood Cutoff Puts Komen at Center of Abortion-Rights Debate

February 2, 2012 — The typically apolitical Susan G. Komen for the Cure finds itself at the center of the abortion-rights debate after ending its funding to Planned Parenthood affiliates, although the group maintains that the decision was not politically motivated, Politico reports (Nocera, Politico, 2/1). In the wake of the announcement, Komen faced an outpouring of criticism from women's health advocates, some of whom speculate that pressure from within the Komen organization influenced the decision (Rovner, "Shots," NPR, 2/1).

Komen announced Tuesday that it would end funding for Planned Parenthood's breast cancer screening and education programs because the foundation had adopted a new rule prohibiting grants to groups that are under investigation by local, state or federal authorities. According to Komen, the new rule applies to Planned Parenthood because of an investigation launched by Rep. Cliff Stearns (R) in September 2011 to look into the organization's operations. Nineteen of Planned Parenthood's affiliates received about $680,000 from the breast cancer foundation last year (Women's Health Policy Report, 2/1).

Brinker in a YouTube video and statement denied that politics played a role in the decision, adding that Komen's actions have been "mischaracterized." She said that the decision was part of a broader effort to use donations more efficiently and that suggestions of political motives are a "dangerous distraction" from the fight against breast cancer (Stein, "Shots," NPR, 2/2).

Questions About Motives

In the past, Komen maintained a "relatively nonpartisan" reputation, despite that founder and CEO Nancy Brinker was a political appointee in the George W. Bush administration, according to Politico (Politico, 2/1). During Bush's presidency, Brinker served as chief of protocol and an U.S. ambassador to Hungary (Pratley et al., "Political Ticker," CNN, 1/31).

Many abortion-rights advocates suggested that Tuesday's decision could be tied to Komen's hiring last year of Karen Handel, a former secretary of state in Georgia who made an unsuccessful run for governor in 2011, the Los Angeles Times' "Booster Shots" reports. Komen hired Handel in April to serve as vice president of public policy.

Although there is no direct evidence that Handel influenced the Planned Parenthood decision, she was vocal about her opposition to abortion rights and the organization during her campaign for governor.

In a July 2010 blog post, she wrote, "Since I am pro-life, I do not support the mission of Planned Parenthood," adding, "[I]n fact, state and federal law prohibits the use of taxpayer funds for abortions or abortion related services and I strongly support those laws. Since grants like these are from the state, I'll eliminate them as your next governor."

Vicky Saporta, president and CEO of the National Abortion Federation, said she suspects Handel could have influenced the decision. "A single individual's personal, political beliefs should not get in their way to provide necessary health care to women who need that care," Saporta said (Khan/Roan, "Booster Shots," Los Angeles Times, 2/1).

John Raffaelli, a Komen board member and lobbyist, disputed the notion that Handel influenced the decision. He said her job is to urge state governments to fund breast cancer screenings and the fact that she is a Republican might resonate in many states (Harris/Belluck, New York Times, 2/1).

Fundraising Fallout

Some observers say the controversy surrounding Komen's decision could affect the foundation's ability to fundraise, according to Politico (Politico, 2/1). The foundation's Facebook page was bombarded with comments from people saying they would no longer participate in the foundation's events or donate money (Baker, "Healthwatch," The Hill, 2/1).

Although some comments on Facebook, Twitter and online message boards supported Komen, an analysis by a Washington, D.C.-based public relations firm showed that 75% of people who posted about the decision made negative comments, while 25% made positive remarks (Preston, "The Lede," New York Times, 2/1).

"They've really hurt their own cause," said Judith Waxman, vice president of health and reproductive rights at the National Women's Law Center ("Healthwatch," The Hill, 2/1). "I can't say whether the decision they made was politically motivated or not," Waxman said, adding, "They've certainly put themselves in a political position which I believe will hurt them ultimately and the women they want to help" (Politico, 2/1).

Several Democratic lawmakers -- including party campaign chiefs Sen. Patty Murray (Wash.) and Rep. Steve Israel (N.Y.) -- urged Komen to reconsider the decision ("Healthwatch," The Hill, 2/1).

Meanwhile, Planned Parenthood raised over $400,000 from more than 6,000 donors as of Wednesday afternoon, according to Tait Sye, a spokesperson for the organization. "People respond powerfully when they see politics interfering with women's health," Sye said (Kliff/Sun, Washington Post, 2/1).

Washington Post Interviews

The Washington Post's "Wonkblog" on Wednesday posted excerpts from an interview with Planned Parenthood Federation of America President and CEO Cecile Richards about the challenges the group faced in 2011 and what she foresees for 2012. Richards said attacks on Planned Parenthood in Congress galvanized supporters in many ways.

"Our support actually grew over the past year, not only in terms of activists and particularly a lot of young people who had never been active on issues related to Planned Parenthood, but also just in the American public's eye, and I think it was because there was such a focus on services we provide, the breadth of health care we provide, and I think you've seen all the numbers on Congress at record lows," she said (Kliff [1], "Wonkblog," Washington Post, 2/1).

"Wonkblog" also featured an interview with Ann Hogan, board president of Komen for the Cure Connecticut, who said she is "absolutely frustrated" by the national foundation's decision on Planned Parenthood. She said her group has a "great partnership with Planned Parenthood" to provide breast cancer screenings and education, adding that she hopes the congressional investigation will be finished by the time that Komen Connecticut's grant to the organization runs out in June (Kliff [2], "Wonkblog," Washington Post, 2/1).

Under mounting pressure from women's health advocates, lawmakers and the public, Susan G. Komen for the Cure on Friday announced it would reverse a decision to end grants to Planned Parenthood for breast cancer screening and education programs, Politico reports.

Komen Will Continue Grants to Planned Parenthood

February 3, 2012 — Under mounting pressure from women's health advocates, lawmakers and the public, Susan G. Komen for the Cure on Friday announced it would reverse a decision to end grants to Planned Parenthood for breast cancer screening and education programs, Politico reports (Nather, Politico Pro, 2/4). In a press release Friday morning, Komen apologized "for recent decisions that cast doubt upon our commitment to our mission of savings women's lives" (Komen press release, 2/3).

When initially announcing that it would end the grants, Komen said it could no longer fund Planned Parenthood because it had adopted a new rule prohibiting grants to groups that are under investigation by local, state or federal authorities. Komen said at the time that the new rule applied to Planned Parenthood because of an investigation launched by Rep. Cliff Stearns (R-Fla.) in September 2011 to look into the organization's operations (Women's Health Policy Report, 2/2).

Komen's decision to end the funding prompted charges that the move was politically motivated and meant to defuse pressure from abortion-rights opponents who oppose Planned Parenthood. Although Komen denied any political motivations, it faced an uphill public relations battle in trying to maintain its image as an apolitical women's health organization.

In the announcement Friday, Komen officials said they were "amend[ing] the criteria to make clear that disqualifying investigations must be criminal and conclusive in nature and not political," adding, "Amending our criteria will ensure that politics has no place in our grant process" (Nather, Politico, 2/4).

Shifting Explanations

Friday's announcement followed efforts by Komen officials the previous day to reframe their explanation for ending Planned Parenthood funding by saying that the decision was not tied to Stearns' investigation, the Washington Post reports (Sun et al., Washington Post, 2/2).

Komen CEO and founder Nancy Brinker on Thursday said Komen's new policy prioritizes grants to organizations that provide mammography services, not just breast screenings and referrals, adding that the foundation's board came to a consensus on the new policy (Nocera/Nather, Politico, 2/2).

"We have decided not to fund, wherever possible, pass-through grants," Brinker said. She added, "We were giving [Planned Parenthood] money, they were sending women out for mammograms. What we would like to have are clinics where we can directly fund mammograms" (Kliff [1], "Wonkblog," Washington Post, 2/2).

Komen did not address the issue of the referrals in its statement on Friday (Kliff, "Wonkblog," Washington Post, 2/3).

In an interview with MSNBC's Andrea Mitchell on Thursday, Brinker refuted assertions that the decision was tied to Komen's hiring of former Georgia gubernatorial candidate Karen Handel, who has publicly opposed abortion rights and Planned Parenthood. "This was decided at the board level and also by our mission," Brinker said, adding, "We are not defunding Planned Parenthood" (Lee, Politico, 2/2).

Brinker also fired back against claims that the decision was linked to pressure from antiabortion-rights groups. "This has been a contentious issue and one where the essence of our organization's position has been lost," Brinker said (Washington Post, 2/2).

Brinker's comments "directly contradicted" statements provided by John Raffaelli, a Komen board member and lobbyist, according to the New York Times. Raffaelli on Wednesday said the policy change was made with the intention of ending the relationship with Planned Parenthood because of fear that the Stearns investigation would jeopardize Komen's relationship with donors (Preston/Harris, New York Times, 2/2).

Dissent Within Komen Organization

Reports also surfaced this week about conflicts within the Komen organization regarding the Planned Parenthood decision, The Hill's "Healthwatch" reports (Baker, "Healthwatch," The Hill, 2/2). The Atlantic reports that Komen's top public health official, Mollie Williams, resigned in December, immediately following the board's decision to change the grant policy. Williams in a statement on Thursday said she would not respond to questions about the decision but believes "it would be a mistake for any organization to bow to political pressure and compromise its mission" (Goldberg, The Atlantic, 2/2).

The defunding decision prompted some Komen affiliates to consider ending their ties to the organization, according to the Post (Sun et al., Washington Post, 2/2). Komen's seven California affiliates sent a statement to the state's congressional delegation in opposition to the new policy. "This is a misstep in that journey and we want to assure all Californians that we will do whatever it takes to do what is right for the health of women and men in California," the group stated (Kliff [2], "Wonkblog," Washington Post, 2/2).

Deb Anthony, executive director of Komen's Los Angeles County affiliate, announced her resignation and said "several decisions that Komen has made in the past year have led me to decide that my skills and talents no longer fit their model" (Nocera/Nather, Politico, 2/2).

Democrats, AAUW Denounce Defunding Decision

Twenty-six Senate Democrats on Thursday sent a letter urging Komen to reverse its decision and restore grants to Planned Parenthood, "Healthwatch" reports. The letter states, "It would be tragic if any woman -- let alone thousands of women -- lost access to these potentially life-saving screenings because of a politically motivated attack."

Rep. Mike Honda (D-Calif.) was gathering signatures from House members for a similar letter ("Healthwatch," The Hill, 2/2). House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) said she is "sad that this decision ... is to the detriment of women's health."

Meanwhile, the American Association of University Women announced it would no longer sponsor the Komen Race for the Cure and released a statement expressing disappointment "that some are playing politics with women's health" (Lee, Politico, 2/2).

The White House on Thursday defended its decision on a religious exemption to new contraceptive coverage rules and said it would not yield to pressure from Catholics and conservatives to broaden the exemption, the AP/San Francisco Chronicle reports.

White House Stands Firm on Contraceptive Coverage Decision

February 3, 2012 — The White House on Thursday defended its decision on a religious exemption to new contraceptive coverage rules and said it would not yield to pressure from Catholics and conservatives to broaden the exemption, the AP/San Francisco Chronicle reports (Alonso-Zaldivar, AP/San Francisco Chronicle, 2/2).

White House officials arranged a conference call to discuss what they called "confusion" over the policy, which implements a provision in the federal health reform law (PL 111-148) that requires health plans to cover preventive services without copayments or deductibles.

The policy exempts certain religious employers, such as houses of worship, from providing contraceptive coverage, but Catholic hospitals, schools and other organizations had pressured HHS to expand the exemption to cover them, too (Radnofsky, "Washington Wire," Wall Street Journal, 2/2). HHS announced on Jan. 20 that it would not expand the exemption but would give religiously affiliated employers an extra year to comply, meaning they will have until Aug. 1, 2013, to begin providing the coverage (Women's Health Policy Report, 1/31).

Administration officials on Thursday stressed that they are not reconsidering the decision, noting at the beginning of the call that they "aren't here to make any new policy announcements or any changes." They reiterated that the decision "strikes the appropriate balance" between religious freedom and women's access to preventive services.

White House press secretary Jay Carney said the administration is willing to work with the affected religious organizations to help them implement the new policy. He also noted that the decision was not influenced by the potential impact on the November presidential election. The religious exemption is consistent with laws in 28 states that require contraceptive coverage, he said.

Carney framed the decision as a women's health issue and not a political matter. He also cast it as a matter of economics, noting that on average, U.S. women use contraception for 30 years at a cost of $50 per month (Condon, National Journal, 2/2).

The White House further clarified its position in a blog post by Cecilia Munoz, director of the House Domestic Policy Council. Munoz wrote that the new rule would not force individual health care providers to prescribe birth control, nor would it force women to buy or use it. She also said that the policy would not cover drugs that cause abortion. Further, Munoz noted that most women -- including 98% of Catholics -- have used contraception at some point in their lives (Jackson, USA Today, 2/2).

House Speaker Boehner Blasts Rules

Earlier in the day, House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) criticized the new requirement on contraceptive coverage, saying it is unconstitutional, The Hill's "Healthwatch" reports (Baker, "Healthwatch," The Hill, 2/2).

"I think this mandate violates our Constitution," Boehner told reporters, adding, "I think it violates the rights of these religious organizations, and I would hope that the administration would back up and take another look at this."

Rep. Joe Pitts (R-Pa.) said on the House floor that "institutions across the country are facing an impossible choice. Do they continue in their mission to provide for their employees, or do they violate their conscience?" (Norman, CQ HealthBeat, 2/2). According to the Washington Post, the decision could emerge as a campaign issue, and conservatives already are using it to argue that Obama has declared a "war on religion" (Boorstein/Nakamura, Washington Post, 2/2).

We've compiled some of the most thought-provoking commentaries from around the Web. Catch up on the conversation with bloggers from Ms. Magazine, Law Students for Reproductive Justice and more.

Blogs Comment on Komen Foundation's Decision To End Funding for Planned Parenthood, Other Topics

February 3, 2012 — We've compiled some of the most thought-provoking commentaries from around the Web. Catch up on the conversation with bloggers from Ms. Magazine, Law Students for Reproductive Justice and more.

KOMEN'S DECISION ON PLANNED PARENTHOOD: "Komen and the Dangers of Corporate-Funded Causes," Mara Einstein, Ms. Magazine blog: Einstein writes that she suspects the fear of losing money from corporate sponsors -- who were swayed by pressure from groups opposing abortion rights -- was behind Susan G. Komen for the Cure's decision to end grants to Planned Parenthood affiliates. She writes, "Nothing causes a business to stop in its tracks faster than the fear of a) losing money, and b) bad publicity. It is not that anti-choicers have so much influence on Komen; it's that they can have so much influence on Komen's sponsors" (Einstein, Ms. Magazine blog, 2/1).

What others are saying about the Komen decision:

~ "On Planned Parenthood and Komen: What You Can Do," Cecile Richards, Planned Parenthood Action Fund's "Women are Watching."

~ "Standing with Planned Parenthood Without Apologizing for Abortion," Angi Becker Stevens, RH Reality Check.

~ "Susan G. Komen: Can You Trust a Breast Cancer Organization Whose Staff and Board Members Lie About Breast Cancer?" Jodi Jacobson, RH Reality Check.

~ "In True Anti-Choice Coward Fashion, Komen Now Says Its Decision Was 'For the Sake of Women,'" Jodi Jacobson, RH Reality Check.

~ "Susan G. Komen Foundation's Next Step: Political PAC?" Jessica Pieklo, Care2.

~ "Rep. Speier Pulls Support From Breast Cancer Foundation Over Decision To Sever Ties With Planned Parenthood," Tanya Somanader, ThinkProgress.

~ "Save the Screenings (And Women's Lives Too)," Alison Channon, National Women's Law Center blog.

~ "Politics over Women's Health?" Sean Wagman, EMILY's List blog.

~ "Komen's Planned Parenthood Decision All About Politics," Lori Stahl, Washington Post's "She the People."

~ "Three Reasons I Wish I Could Quit You, Susan G. Komen!" Katie Halper, Feministing.

~ "Komen Shedding Leadership as Backlash Grows," Jessica Pieklo, Care2.

~ "Susan G. Komen Foundation Also Stops Funding Embryonic Stem Cell Research," Jessica Pieklo, Care2.

~ "Komen Head Claims Response To Planned Parenthood Decision is 'Very Very Favorable,'" Tanya Somanader, ThinkProgress.

~ "Facts, Myths and Blankety-Blank Lies About Planned Parenthood and the Susan G. Komen Foundation," Caperton, Feministe.

~ "Komen's Conflicts: Defunding Planned Parenthood Exposes the Politics of Breast Cancer's Biggest Fundraiser," Christine Cupaiuolo, Our Bodies, Our Blog.

~ "Repost: What Planned Parenthood Actually Does, in One Chart," Ezra Klein, Washington Post's "Wonkblog."

~ "In Komen Fallout, Abortion-Breast Cancer Myth is Resurrected," Shari Roan, Los Angeles Times' "Booster Shots."

~ "Shattering the Susan G. Komen Pinkwashing," E.J. Graff, The American Prospect.

~ "Muddying the Pink Ribbon," Andrew Rosenthal, New York Times' "The Loyal Opposition."


CONTRACEPTIVE COVERAGE: "The Impact of a Religious Exemption for Birth Control to University Students," Emily Wolf, Law Students for Reproductive Justice's "Repo Repro": Wolf, vice president of Fordham Law Students for Reproductive Justice, writes that the group "recently had a small victory when the [Catholic] university updated the health center's website to clarify that birth control will not be prescribed at Fordham unless the student has a medical exception." Wolf also praises new federal rules on contraceptive coverage because they "will ensure that all students who attend religious universities will be able to receive contraceptive[s] at a more reasonable cost without a copay" (Wolf, "Repo Repro," Law Students for Reproductive Justice, 2/1).

What others are saying about contraceptive coverage:

~ "Critics Get It Wrong on Contraceptive Coverage," Marcia Greenberger, National Women's Law Center blog.

~ "Anti-Gay Forces Back Lawsuit Challenging Obama's Birth Control Regulation," Igor Volsky, ThinkProgress.

~ "Obama Stands Up to Bishops. Finally." Katha Pollitt, The Nation's "Subject to Debate."

~ "Hey Media: It's About the Health of Women and Families," Leila Abolfazli, National Women's Law Center blog.

MATERNITY CARE: "Facing Maternity Care Gaps, Midwives Push for Birthing Justice," Michelle Chen, Huffington Post blogs: Chen notes that home-based births increased by 29% from 2004 to 2009. She adds that while several states "have policies that support some medical coverage for out-of-hospital birth, ... access to midwife care remains inconsistent." She outlines various efforts to improve access to home birth, including initiatives aimed at expanding birth options for women of color (Chen, Huffington Post blogs, 2/2).

ATTACKS ON REPRODUCTIVE RIGHTS: "Am I a Woman or Am I a Puppet?" Linda Bergthold, Huffington Post blogs: Given recent "aggressive attack on women's health," Bergthold wonders, "Am I a woman or am I a puppet?" Bergthold notes that women's "strings are being pulled far to the right, and many of us are fed up." She urges action against efforts to limit reproductive health care access -- including attacks on contraception and Planned Parenthood -- concluding that "we need to pull our own strings and stand up for what we believe" (Bergthold, Huffington Post blogs, 2/1).

Recent editorial in the Baltimore Sun, Los Angeles Times and New York Times, as well as a column in the Daily Beast, commented on Susan G. Komen for the Cure's announcement that it would end funding for Planned Parenthood's breast cancer screening and education programs.

Editorials, Columnist React to Komen Decision

February 3, 2012 — Recent editorial in the Baltimore Sun, Los Angeles Times and New York Times, as well as a column in the Daily Beast, commented on Susan G. Komen for the Cure's announcement that it would end funding for Planned Parenthood's breast cancer screening and education programs. Komen said it has adopted a new rule prohibiting grants to groups that are under investigation by local, state or federal authorities, which applies to Planned Parenthood because of an investigation launched by Rep. Cliff Stearns (R) in September 2011.

~ Baltimore Sun: "The Stearns investigation is part of an all-out assault on Planned Parenthood by those who oppose a woman's right to choose," the editorial states. "Surely Mr. Stearns wouldn't be the first to launch an investigation for political purposes, but Komen may be the first one to fall for it hook, line and sinker if, indeed, the organization is not a willing accomplice," the editorial states. The editorial notes that the foundation last year hired Karen Handel, who was vocal about her opposition to abortion rights and Planned Parenthood during her campaign for Georgia governor . The Sun questions if Komen has "adopted an antiabortion stance, too," adding, "Given the obvious political motivations behind the Stearns investigation, it's hard not to see the decision as announcing that" (Baltimore Sun, 2/1).

~ Michelle Goldberg, Daily Beast: "The right has run a systematic campaign to demonize and discredit Planned Parenthood, and Komen's decision shows that it's working," Goldberg writes. She adds that the Komen foundation "has always been fairly conservative" but typically "wore its politics lightly." Goldberg argues that the hiring of Handel and pressure from Republican lawmakers ensured that there "was probably no way Komen could maintain links to both Planned Parenthood and the GOP." She writes, "Komen's shift reifies the right-wing myth that Planned Parenthood merely pretends to offer legitimate medical services. It represents a blow to the idea that any aspect of women's health care can remain unpoliticitized" (Goldberg, Daily Beast, 2/2).

~ Los Angeles Times: Komen's leaders "made a premature and unfortunate decision," which "might end up doing more harm to [the organization] than to Planned Parenthood," a Los Angeles Times editorial states. The editorial notes, "Many abortion-rights advocates have supported Komen over the years, and they're not pleased by the foundation's decision. But antiabortion advocates never donated to Planned Parenthood; it loses no part of its donor base." The editorial continues that Komen's decision "will probably prompt more attacks on Planned Parenthood, which has long provided low-cost medical care to women in need," while a significant drop in donations to Komen could hurt breast cancer research and treatment. The editorial concludes, "In the end, it's women in need of medical care who stand to lose the most" (Los Angeles Times, 2/3).

~ New York Times: "Stearns' 'investigation' is nothing more than a political witch hunt, stirred up by Republican leaders and by a right-wing anti-choice group, Americans United for Life, which now displays the pink ribbon on its website as part of a fund-raising campaign for Komen," a New York Times editorial states. The editorial notes that abortion services account for only about 3% of Planned Parenthood's services, "but most of this crowd also objects to its leading role in providing access to contraceptives." The editorial says that Komen's leaders should decry "this abuse of congressional power." It adds, "At the least, [they] should have the decency and good sense not to do or say anything that even implies an endorsement" (New York Times, 2/2).

The emergency contraceptive ulipristal acetate -- sold in the U.S. under the brand name Ella -- is effective at controlling excessive bleeding associated with uterine fibroids, according to two studies in the New England Journal of Medicine, MedPage Today reports.

Emergency Contraceptive Pill Effective at Treating Uterine Fibroids, Studies Find

February 3, 2012 — The emergency contraceptive ulipristal acetate -- sold in the U.S. under the brand name Ella -- is effective at controlling excessive bleeding associated with uterine fibroids, according to two studies in the New England Journal of Medicine, MedPage Today reports.

The studies compared UA with a placebo and leuprolide acetate -- an established medication for fibroids that also is called Lupron. Lupron is effective in treating fibroid-related uterine bleeding, but it can cause hot flashes and has long-term effects on bone density.

In the first study, women who took five milligrams or 10 mg of UA for 13 weeks had less bleeding and a significant reduction in fibroid volume compared with women who took a placebo.

In the second study, the median time for uterine bleeding to cease was seven days for women on the lower dose of UA and five days for the higher dose, while bleeding lasted up to 21 days for women receiving Lupron. Hot flashes also were better controlled, with 11% of women taking the low dose of UA and 10% taking the high dose reporting moderate-to-severe hot flashes, compared with 40% of those receiving Lupron.

In an editorial accompanying the study, Elizabeth Stewart of the Mayo Clinic said the findings "represent an important step" toward medical therapy for fibroids (Smith, MedPage Today, 2/1).

CDC officials on Thursday recommended that boys and young men receive the human papillomavirus vaccine to protect against genital warts and several types of cancer, according to a new immunization schedule published in the Annals of Internal Medicine, the New York Times reports.

New CDC Vaccine Schedule Recommends HPV Vaccine for Boys

February 3, 2012 — CDC officials on Thursday recommended that boys and young men receive the human papillomavirus vaccine to protect against genital warts and several types of cancer, according to a new immunization schedule published in the Annals of Internal Medicine, the New York Times reports (O'Connor, New York Times, 2/2).

CDC has recommended the vaccine for girls and young women since 2006 to protect against strains of HPV that cause cervical cancer and genital warts (O'Connor, "Well," New York Times, 2/2). CDC's announcement follows a recommendation from its Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices in October that boys and young men receive the vaccine. Although CDC is not required to follow ACIP's recommendations, it often does (Women's Health Policy Report, 10/26/11).

Recent data showing that the vaccine is "very effective" in preventing genital warts in both sexes encouraged the change in policy, according to CDC researcher Eileen Dunne. The new guidelines apply to boys ages 11 and 12 and advise "catch-up" vaccinations for boys and young men ages 13 to 21 ("Well," New York Times, 2/2).

The new guidelines were endorsed by the American Academy of Pediatrics, which applauded CDC for embracing a comprehensive strategy to preventing the spread of HPV. Michael Brady, chair of AAP's Committee on Infectious Diseases, said, "Currently, our approach isn't effective from a public health perspective since males are also participants in the transmission of HPV," adding, "By expanding the vaccine to both genders, we would reduce the overall transmission of HPV" (Gordon, HealthDay/U.S. News & World Report, 2/1).

A federal judge heard closing arguments on Wednesday in a lawsuit over a Washington state rule requiring pharmacies to stock and dispense emergency contraception, the AP/San Francisco Chronicle reports.

Wash. Judge Hears Arguments on Emergency Contraception Dispensing Rule

February 3, 2012 — A federal judge heard closing arguments on Wednesday in a lawsuit over a Washington state rule requiring pharmacies to stock and dispense emergency contraception, the AP/San Francisco Chronicle reports. U.S. District Judge Ronald Leighton said he expects to issue a decision in a few weeks.

Under state law, pharmacies are required to provide all medications for which there is a community need and to stock a representative variety of drugs needed by their patients. The state permits individual pharmacists to defer prescriptions to other pharmacists at the same location, as long as doing so does not create delays.

A drug store and two pharmacists sued in 2007, arguing that dispensing EC would infringe on their religious beliefs. Leighton blocked the state from enforcing the rule, but a panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said he applied the wrong legal standard and sent the case back to him. The panel said the law is neutral and does not directly target religious views.

Leighton on Wednesday said he would frame his ruling to encourage the 9th Circuit and the U.S. Supreme Court to address whether pharmacists have a right to due process that allows them to refuse to provide the drugs. Leighton also noted that the rule does not apply to hospitals. "The poor people who rely on emergency rooms don't get the so-called benefit of the rule," he said, adding, "It's riddled with exceptions and holes" (Johnson, AP/San Francisco Chronicle, 2/1).

Iowa | Sponsor: Isenhart (D), Hunter (D), Kearns (D) | Latest Action: Referred to Labor Committee 01/18/2012

Healthy and Safe Families and Workplaces Act

State: Iowa
Subject: Paid Sick Days, Job-Protected Leave, Domestic Violence
Bill: H.B. 2047
Sponsor: Isenhart (D), Hunter (D), Kearns (D)
Date Introduced: 01/18/2012
Referred to Labor Committee: 01/18/2012

Summary:

Guarantees a minimum of approximately five and a half hours of sick and safe leave for every 40 hours worked, up to 144 hours per year.

The leave may be used for self-care or to care for a family member, defined as a child, parent, spouse or domestic partner, grandparent, grandchild, sibling or any other individual related by blood or affinity.

The time may also be used to recover from domestic violence, sexual assault or stalking, or for work or school closures due to a public health emergency.

Arizona | Sponsor: Patterson (D) | Latest Action: Referred to Committees on Health and Human Services; Banking and Insurance; and Rules 01/17/2012

Family Leave Insurance

State: Arizona
Subject: Paid Family Leave, Job-Protected Leave
Bill: H.B. 2306
Sponsor: Patterson (D)
Date Introduced: 01/17/2012
Referred to House Committees on Health and Human Services; Banking and Insurance; and Rules: 01/17/2012

Summary:

Creates a paid family leave insurance program, which workers would be able to use to address their own serious health condition; care for a new child, a family member with a serious health condition or a qualifying service member who is family; or to deal with exigencies arising from the deployment of a service member.

Benefits are payable for five weeks in an application year.

Washington | Sponsor: Dickerson (D)/Keiser (D) | Latest Action: Public Hearings in Senate Committee 01/24/2012, 01/26/2012

An Act Relating to Establishing Minimum Standards for Sick and Safe Leave from Employment

State: Washington
Subject: Paid Sick Days, Job-Protected Leave, Domestic Violence
Bill: H.B. 2508/S.B. 6229
Sponsor: Dickerson (D)/Keiser (D)
Date Introduced: 01/16/2012
Referred to House Committee on Labor and Workforce Development: 01/16/2012
Referred to Senate Committee on Labor, Commerce and Consumer Protection: 01/16/2012
Public Hearing in the House Committee: 01/25/2012
Public Hearings in Senate Committee: 01/24/2012, 01/26/2012

Summary:

Guarantees workers a minimum amount of paid sick and safe leave to be used to care for themselves or a family member who is ill, needs medical care or is a victim of domestic violence, sexual assault or stalking.

A worker in a business with between five and 49 employees shall accrue at least one hour of leave for every 40 hours worked, up to 40 hours per year. A worker in a business with between 50 and 249 employees shall accrue at least one hour of leave for every 40 hours worked, up to 56 hours per year. A worker in a business with 250 or more employees shall accrue at least one hour for every 30 hours worked, up to 72 hours per year.

“Family member” is defined as a child, parent, spouse or civil union partner, grandparent, grandchild, sibling or any other individual related by blood or affinity.

This bill was patterned on the paid sick days law that was passed in the city of Seattle in 2011.

New Jersey | Sponsor: Watson Coleman (D) | Latest Action: Referred to Committee on Labor 01/10/2012

Small Necessities Leave

State: New Jersey
Subject: Small Necessities, Job-Protected Leave
Bill: A.B. 1421
Sponsor: Watson Coleman (D)
Date Introduced: 01/10/2012
Referred to Committee on Labor: 01/10/2012

Summary:

Guarantees eight hours of leave in a 12-month period for workers to attend any school-related conference, meeting, function or other event requested or required by a school teacher, administrator or staffperson. Workers who are parents of a child in public school, who have been employed for at least 12 months and who have worked at least 1,000 hours in the previous 12 months are eligible.

Requires the school principal to provide notice to the parent, which the parent must then provide to their employer. Both parents are entitled to leave whether employed by the same or a different employer.

Virginia | Sponsor: Ramadan (R) | Latest Action: Referred to Committee on Finance 01/11/2012

Relating to Telework Expenses Tax Credit

State: Virginia
Subject: Telecommuting
Bill: H.B. 1000
Sponsor: Ramadan (R)
Date Introduced: 01/11/2012
Referred to Committee on Finance: 01/11/2012

Summary: Expands the Telework Tax Incentive Act of 2011 (Va. Code Ann. Sec. 58.1-439.12:07) by raising the maximum tax credit amount for an employer who conducts a telework assessment from $50,000 to $75,000 and increasing the total amount of all tax credits provided by the state from $1 million to $1.5 million.

Virginia | Sponsor: Ramadan (R) | Latest Action: Referred to Committee on Finance 01/11/2012

Relating to Telework Expenses Tax Credit

State: Virginia
Subject: Telecommuting
Bill: H.B. 999
Sponsor: Ramadan (R)
Date Introduced: 01/11/2012
Referred to Committee on Finance: 01/11/2012

Summary: Allows workers who telework at least 20 hours a week to claim a maximum tax credit of $500 in the taxable years between January 1, 2012 and January 1, 2017.

Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) on Monday introduced a bill (S 2043) that would block new federal rules requiring health plans to cover contraceptive services for employees without cost-sharing, The Hill's "Floor Action Blog" reports.

Senate Bill Seeks To Overturn Contraceptive Coverage Requirement

January 31, 2011 — Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) on Monday introduced a bill (S 2043) that would block new federal rules requiring health plans to cover contraceptive services for employees without cost-sharing, The Hill's "Floor Action Blog" reports.

The new rules are part of a provision in the federal health reform law (PL 111-148). Rubio's bill would amend the law to state that "no guideline or regulation ... shall require any individual or entity to offer, provide or purchase coverage for a contraceptive or sterilization service, or related education or counseling, to which that individual or entity is opposed on the basis of religious belief."

Rubio said the Obama administration should have created a broader exemption to the rules so that religiously affiliated hospitals and universities could refuse to offer contraceptive coverage to their employees (Kasperowicz, "Floor Action Blog," The Hill, 1/31). Under the current exemption, not-for-profit employers do not have to offer the coverage if they have the inculcation of religious values as their purpose, primarily employ individuals who hold certain religious beliefs and primarily serve a population with those religious tenets (Women's Health Policy Report, 1/30).

A recent Supreme Court decision that strengthened protections for religious freedom could give more weight to arguments from Catholic leaders resisting new federal rules on contraceptive coverage, the Los Angeles Times reports.

Recent Supreme Court Ruling on Religious Freedom Could Affect Contraceptive Coverage Case

January 31, 2012 — A recent Supreme Court decision that strengthened protections for religious freedom could give more weight to arguments from Catholic leaders resisting new federal rules on contraceptive coverage, the Los Angeles Times reports (Savage, Los Angeles Times, 1/30).

The new rules -- which are part of a provision in the federal health reform law (PL 111-148) -- require health plans to cover contraceptive services for employees without consumer cost-sharing. However, not-for-profit employers do not have to offer the coverage if they have the inculcation of religious values as their purpose, primarily employ individuals who hold certain religious beliefs and primarily serve a population with those religious tenets.

Catholic hospitals, universities and other organizations had pressured HHS to create an even broader exemption that would allow them to refuse to cover contraception for their employees, but HHS announced on Jan. 20 that it would not expand the exemption. HHS said it would give religiously affiliated employers an extra year to comply with the rule, meaning that they will have until Aug. 1, 2013, to begin providing the coverage (Women's Health Policy Report, 1/30).

Two colleges -- Belmont Abbey College and Colorado Christian University-- have filed lawsuits against HHS, saying the rules violate their right to religious freedom. The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops has not decided whether to join a lawsuit, but Anthony Picarello, the group's general council, said that "the bishops are eager to pursue every lawful means to stop this mandate."

Supreme Court Decision Could Influence Outcome

The Obama administration is expected to respond to the lawsuits next month. If the dispute reaches the Supreme Court, the religious groups might be bolstered by a recent 9-0 ruling that sided against the administration, according to the Times. In that case, the administration sided with a teacher who claimed she was unjustly fired from a Lutheran school.

The administration argued that churches and religious schools are not exempt from civil rights laws, but the court said the First Amendment gives "special solicitude to the rights of religious organizations" in making decisions about employees.

Judy Waxman of the National Women's Law Center said the contraceptive coverage rules do not impinge on religious freedom. "Religious freedom is guaranteed to the individual, and 98% of American women use contraception at some time in their lives. And that is true for Catholics as well," Waxman said (Los Angeles Times, 1/30).

Video Examines Antiabortion-Rights Legislation

Our weekly video roundup includes a unique assortment of Web videos hand-picked by our editors. This week, we feature reaction to HHS' decision on new contraceptive coverage rules, Susan G. Komen for the Cure's move to end funding for Planned Parenthood and an antiabortion bill in Virginia.

Weekly Video Round Up!

Our weekly video roundup includes a unique assortment of Web videos hand-picked by our editors. This week, we feature reaction to HHS' decision on new contraceptive coverage rules, Susan G. Komen for the Cure's move to end funding for Planned Parenthood and an antiabortion bill in Virginia.

 

Our weekly video roundup includes a unique assortment of Web videos hand-picked by our editors. This week, we feature reaction to HHS' decision on new contraceptive coverage rules, Susan G. Komen for the Cure's move to end funding for Planned Parenthood and an antiabortion bill in Virginia.

 

Videos Discuss HHS Contraception Decision, Susan G. Komen's Planned Parenthood Decision, State News

February 2, 2012 — The following summarizes select women's health-related videos.

Contraceptive coverage: A new TV ad from the Planned Parenthood Action Fund praises President Obama and HHS Secretary Sebelius for refusing to cave to pressure from Catholic groups that oppose new requirements for contraceptive coverage. The ad notes that birth control not only helps women plan their families, it is important for treating health issues such as endometriosis. The ad will run in Florida, Iowa, Michigan, Nevada, New Mexico, Ohio, Virginia and Wisconsin (PPAF, 1/31).

Nancy Brinker : Susan G. Komen for the Cure founder and CEO Nancy Brinker defends the group's decision to end funding to Planned Parenthood affiliates. She calls accusations that the move was politically motivated a "dangerous distraction" from the fight against breast cancer. Brinker says the decision will "free up more dollars for higher-impact programs" and allow Komen to "serve even more women." She adds that Komen is always looking for ways to make its programs more efficient and that the organization regrets having to end its collaboration with a longstanding partner like Planned Parenthood (Susan G. Komen for the Cure, 2/1).

Rep. Speier on Komen decision: Rep. Jackie Speier (D-Calif.), whose mother had breast cancer and who has supported Komen in the past, criticizes the foundation's decision regarding Planned Parenthood. Speier notes that thousands of women rely on the breast cancer screening services that Planned Parenthood provides. "We are putting women at risk because of a political agenda by the Republicans on abortion," she says, adding, "The solution is either Komen steps back from this position or we empower other breast cancer nonprofits in this country to pick up the slack" ("Jansing & Co.," MSNBC, 2/2).

Virginia amendment: Rachel Maddow reports on an amendment offered in the Virginia Senate that would require men to undergo rectal exams and cardiac stress tests before obtaining erectile dysfunction drugs. Virginia Sen. Janet Howell (D) offered the amendment during debate over a bill that would require women to receive an ultrasound before obtaining abortion services. The amendment failed by two votes, and the Senate went on to approve the underlying bill (Maddow, "The Rachel Maddow Show," MSNBC, 2/1).