Well, they’re at it again. Republicans on the House Foreign Affairs Committee are using smoke and mirrors to try to distract us all from their real intentions of being the most anti-woman, anti-life crusaders the U.S. Congress has seen in decades. But, we’re not falling for their thinly-veiled hypocrisy. And neither should the US public.

Republicans voted eleven separate times yesterday to block funding for the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA). That’s right, eleven separate times in the span of just three hours. What exactly were they voting against? For starters, they voted against continued funding for prevention and treatment of obstetric fistula, a debilitating condition that results from obstructed and prolonged labor and leaves women shunned by their families and their communities. Who could possibly vote to continue the needless suffering of such women? How about Rep. Chris Smith (R-NJ), who has made it his mantra to prevent and treat this exact condition? Yes, that’s right, the very man who never shies away from taking credit for the creation of USAID’s obstetric fistula program voted against support for this same service. But, he wasn’t the only one—all Republicans on the committee voted against funding for the prevention and treatment of obstetric fistula.

Then there are the Republicans who voted against continued reproductive health care in the aftermath of natural disasters like the earthquake in Haiti and the tsunami in Southeast Asia. And the Republicans who voted against funding for programs that help survivors of gender-based violence in the Democratic Republic of Congo where rape is a part of everyday life for millions of women and girls. How about the Republicans who voted against efforts to eliminate female genital mutilation, a horrific practice that robs young girls of their dignity and their genitalia? And, of course, there are the Republicans who voted against continued funding of UNFPA’s efforts to prevent forced marriage of girls, some of whom are as young as four, if not younger, when they are promised in marriage to much older men. Sadly, in every one of these instances, every single Republican on the House Foreign Affairs Committee chose to vote against women, against girls, and against services that could save their lives. How one can claim the pro-life mantle while simultaneously voting against continued funding for life-saving health services is beyond me. But, that’s exactly what the Republicans did. And they did it eleven times over.

But, let’s be real. The committee’s approval of a bill to defund UNFPA (H.R. 2059), on a strict party-line vote of 23-17 no less, was never about women or about girls or even about protecting life. It was about scoring political points in a politically motivated smear campaign against UNFPA, which provides essential reproductive health services for women, men, and young people in 150 countries worldwide. When pressed, Republicans wholeheartedly admitted that UNFPA does amazing work that improves women’s and children’s lives around the globe. But, they say that cannot excuse the fact that UNFPA works in China and, therefore, must be, as a matter of fact, supporting China’s one-child policy. What they fail to produce is any evidence, any evidence at all, that this is true. And that’s because there isn’t any. Period. But, that didn’t stop committee members from continuing to make unsubstantiated claims throughout the entire three-hour debate. Time and time again, they cited a 2008 State Department report that claimed UNFPA was complicit in the Chinese government’s coercive population control program. They conveniently forgot to mention a more recent 2009 State Department report that found the exact opposite.

No problem because there’s always the old “guilt by association” tactic. Yes, that’s right, the fact that UNFPA operates in some of the same counties where the Chinese one-child policy operates is enough to prove complicity, at least according to Republicans on the committee. Several Democratic members on the committee, including Ranking Member Howard Berman (CA) and Rep. Gerry Connolly (VA), tested the Republican consistency on that front as well. They argued that if guilt by association is the way we should be making policy, then shouldn’t we also be holding US corporations that operate in China culpable in China’s one-child policy? And what about tourists who travel to China; are they complicit as well since they also spend money in those same counties? Or how about holding the entire US government culpable because, after all, we provide export subsidies to China and provide China with most favored nation trading status? Selectively applying arguments only when it suits your ideology is one of the oldest tricks in the book, and unfortunately, we see it all too often in Washington these days.

The other trick we see all too often in Washington is the good ol’ fungibility argument. You know, this is the popular one that Republicans have used on the domestic front to try to defund Planned Parenthood. They say that even though no US funding for UNFPA is spent in China (due to existing congressional restrictions), the very fact that US funding goes to support UNFPA in the other 149 countries in which it operates, allows funding to be freed up to support China’s abhorrent practices. If that reasoning held true, Rep. Gary Ackerman (D-NY) argued, Republicans should also oppose funding that subsidizes transportation costs that help the Catholic Church operate schools and charitable programs because this then frees up money that supports the cover-up of sexual abuse. Carrying the Republicans’ logic of fungibility to the Catholic Church quickly fell on deaf ears as far as the Republicans were concerned. No surprise there as consistency has never been a hallmark of ideology.

Speaking of consistency, or lack thereof, how about the “we just can’t afford it” argument? This one is my favorite. The US is broke. Period. Therefore, we just cannot afford to send the taxpayers’ hard-earned money overseas when so many of our own are hurting. I get it. Times are tough and we need to be smart about our investments. Why then cut funding to some of the most cost-effective programs we have, programs that support voluntary family planning, reduce maternal and infant mortality, and create more equitable and stable communities? If House Republicans were honest in their efforts to cut spending, it would be one thing. But, to argue that we simply cannot afford life-saving care for women and girls around the world all the while the Speaker of the House authorizes a tripling of the amount of taxpayers’ hard-earned money used to defend an inherently discriminatory Defense of Marriage Act is hypocrisy at its most extreme.

Well, when you farm out policymaking to the masses, that’s to be expected, right? During the committee’s debate, Republicans touted the fact that H.R. 2059 was the first winner of Majority Leader Eric Cantor’s “YouCut” program. In an effort to bring Washington to the people, this website affords citizens the opportunity to vote on programs they want to see cut, programs cherry-picked by Republican leaders. I’m all about educating voters and ensuring that a multitude of voices and opinions are expressed to our elected officials. What I’m not about is delegating legislative duties to unelected individuals in a manner akin to “American Idol” or “Dancing with the Stars.” Reality shows may be big business for the entertainment industry, but last I checked our system of government was built on principles of fairness and democracy, not on an online popularity contest.

In an era of fiscal restraint, we should absolutely scrutinize funding decisions. But, we must do so honestly and in good faith. Selectively applying arguments when it supports your ideological agenda may be a convenient way to dismantle programs you disagree with, but it’s no way to run a government.  It’s time we all got real and call this what it truly is—deficit and moral hypocrisy. The real losers here are not the elected leaders who taint the system or even the public citizens who lose faith in those elected leaders. No, it’s the millions of women, men, and young people around the world who rely on UNFPA to keep them healthy, safe, and alive.

Last week, the US Senate took several important steps forward in supporting the sexual and reproductive health and rights of women, men, and young people in the Global South. While deficit reduction talks and threats of a government shut-down loomed over the US Capitol, the Senate Appropriations Committee carried on with business as usual and approved its annual funding bill for foreign assistance programs, including global health programs. In a direct repudiation of the House of Representatives’ ongoing ideological attacks on women, the Senate committee voted to fund international family planning and reproductive health programs at $700 million, which is $239 million more than the House proposed and $85 million more than current funding levels. The Senate committee-approved bill also sets aside $40 million of the $700 million for the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA), which provides essential reproductive health services for women, men, and young people in 150 countries worldwide. This is in contrast to the House committee-approved bill which completely strips UNFPA of all US funding. This strong showing of support from the Senate is significant particularly given the tight fiscal climate and the intractable and bitter partisan battles of the 112th Congress.

In addition to funding, the Senate bill also included a few important policy provisions which support young women’s sexual and reproductive health and rights. Senator Frank Lautenberg (D-NJ) introduced an amendment that would permanently repeal the Global Gag Rule, which was adopted on an 18-12 vote, including support from three Republicans (Senators Collins (ME), Murkowski (AK), and Kirk (IL)). The Global Gag Rule, also known as the Mexico City Policy, prevents foreign non-governmental organizations that receive US family planning money from using their own, non-US funds to provide legal abortion services, advocate for abortion law reform in their own countries, or even provide accurate medical counseling or referrals for abortion. Officially created through an executive order by President Regan in 1984, the Global Gag Rule is a perennial football that gets tossed back and forth with every change in power in the White House. While not currently in effect, without a permanent ban on reinstatement, there is nothing to prevent a future president from issuing another executive order bringing it back. This continual back-and-forth policy shift undermines young people’s access to reproductive health care, stifles free speech, creates a chilling effect on organizations, and jeopardizes young people’s lives in the name of pure ideology, plain and simple.

More...

This morning, 13 U.S. Senators unveiled a new video for the "It Gets Better" project.  In the video, they discuss the struggles of friends and classmates who were unable to come out when they were in school as well as the efforts they are undertaking today in the Senate to protect LGBTQ youth from discrimination and bullying.  Check out the video and be sure to thank Senators Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio), Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.), Chris Coons (D-Del.), Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), Al Franken (D-Minn.), Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.), Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.), Mark Udall (D-Colo.), Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.), and Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) for their efforts.

Today, the United Nations Human Rights Council adopted the first-ever UN resolution on the human rights of lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender persons. Imagine that…LGBT individuals are finally considered worthy of human rights protections! Let’s ignore the fact that a longstanding principle of international human rights law is that human rights are universal and therefore apply to ALL individuals as an inalienable right of being human. Yes, that’s right, LGBT individuals were just not considered human beings, I guess.

Until today, that is. The UN resolution, offered by South Africa and approved on a vote of 23-19, does three things: 1) it expresses grave concern at acts of violence and discrimination perpetrated against individuals based on their sexual orientation and gender identity (SOGI), 2) it calls for a study on violence and discrimination on the grounds of SOGI, and 3) it commits to convening a panel to discuss this study and the issue of discriminatory laws and practices as well as violence against LGBT individuals. For the first time EVER, LGBT individuals have an international mechanism to report discrimination and abuse, somewhere to turn to for assistance when their own governments refuse to acknowledge their existence or their inalienable human rights. This is a big deal, a really big deal, folks!

Reports to the Human Rights Commission that have come in just in the past year have documented executions of LGBT individuals via stonings, stabbings, and incinerations, as well as torture, gang rapes, so-called “corrective rapes,” and death threats. While the cases are numerous, one in particular just goes to show the extent of the torture and discrimination. It’s the case of Paula, a transgendered woman in El Salvador, who was brutally attacked and shot by a group of men when she was leaving a nightclub. At the hospital, she was treated with disdain by health care providers because she was transgender and HIV-positive. Later, she was imprisoned in a male prison where she was put in a cell with gang members who raped her over 100 times, all the while prison officials turned a blind eye.

Of course, we know that many repressive governments have long denied the rights of LGBT citizens, including 76 countries that criminalize homosexuality and 5 countries that impose the death penalty on LGBT individuals. And many of those same countries not surprisingly voted against the UN resolution…see below for a full record of votes (only countries sitting on the Human Rights Council were eligible to vote, though any UN Member State can cosponsor a resolution). Changing these laws will not happen overnight, but this UN resolution will raise the stakes on LGBT rights and send an unequivocal message to repressive regimes that their discrimination will not be tolerated by the international community. 

Voted FOR the UN Resolution: Argentina, Belgium, Brazil, Chile, Cuba, Ecuador, France, Guatemala, Hungary, Korea, Japan, Mauritius, Mexico, Norway, Poland, Slovakia, Spain, Switzerland, Thailand, Ukraine, United Kingdom, United States, and Uruguay.

Voted AGAINST the UN Resolution: Angola, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Cameroon, Djibouti, Gabon, Ghana, Jordan, Malaysia, Maldives, Mauritania, Moldova, Nigeria, Pakistan, Qatar, Russia, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, and Uganda.

Abstained: Burkina Faso, China, Zambia

Absent: Kyrgyzstan, Libya (suspended from membership on the Council)

Cosponsored the Resolution (including non-HRC Members): Albania, Argentina, Australia, Austria, Belgium, Bolivia, Brazil, Canada, Chile, Colombia, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Honduras, Iceland, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Luxembourg, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Serbia, Slovenia, South Africa (original sponsor), Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Timor-Leste, UK, USA, and Uruguay.

Editor's Note: This post is part of the 2011 Amplify International Women's Day Blogathon. Click here to learn more about how you can join this week of action.

Today marks the 100th anniversary of International Women's Day. While we've come a long way over the last century, the fact remains that in many parts of the world, life is still a significant challenge for women, particularly young women. Whether she lives in a refugee camp, a rural village, or the capital of her country, a young woman often wages a daily battle against poverty, gender-based violence, child marriage, and inadequate access to family planning and reproductive health information and services, just to name a few.

Maybe it's this stark reality that helps explain why International Women's Day is more widely known in some regions of the world than others. I have to admit, I knew very little about the importance of March 8th before I moved overseas. I don't recall ever learning about it in school or ever seeing anyone celebrate it or even mention its significance when I was growing up. Yet millions of women across the globe have celebrated this day for 100 years and counting. It never occurred to me that I would have to travel thousands of miles to learn a lesson that should have been ingrained in me from an early age.

So, this March 8th, I want to take a moment to reflect on the strength and courage I have gained from 45 very special young women I had the privilege of calling my sisters. You see, for two years, I had the great fortune of helping to run an afterschool center for young women, aged 12-24, in Mauritania, West Africa. We utilized an array of activities from tutoring and internet workshops to life skills and health lessons, all in an effort to build self-esteem and encourage girls to stay in school and delay marriage and childbirth when possible. The most exciting event every year at the Center was our celebration of International Women's Day. Run by and for the young women themselves, this event always featured skits, essays, and songs written and performed by them, along with presentations from local women who had succeeded in becoming community leaders and role models. It was the one day of the year that my 45 sisters could really focus on themselves and their future aspirations. It was the one day of the year they didn't have to hear someone tell them they weren't worthy of dreaming of something better. And it was the one day of the year they didn't have to worry about being forced to leave school because of an arranged marriage with a much older man. Just imagine what the world would be like if every day was International Women's Day.



Fortunately, there are many things we can do to promote and celebrate women on this International Women's Day. Check out this great video posted by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton who makes the following case for prioritizing women in foreign policy:

"It's not just the right thing to do. It's the smart thing. Women and girls drive our economies. They build peace and prosperity. Investing in them means investing in global economic progress, political stability, and greater prosperity for everyone—the world over."

Yesterday, leading LGBTQ activist David Kato was brutally attacked and murdered in his home outside Kampala, Uganda. For those of you who have been following the situation in Uganda, you know that David’s photo and address had been published in the Ugandan tabloid newspaper, Rolling Stone, along with a headline advocating for death by hanging for all homosexuals. David and two other activists filed suit against the newspaper seeking an injunction against further publication. And just recently, the High Court of Uganda ruled in their favor, citing a constitutional right to privacy and human dignity that was violated by the newspaper’s incitement to violence. Unfortunately, this legal victory was quickly overshadowed by David’s violent murder.

When is enough enough? It’s one thing to support free speech; it’s another thing to promote the spread of hate speech. It’s one thing to respect the sovereignty of individual nation-states around the world; it’s another thing to stand idly by and say nothing when those nation-states fail to protect the fundamental human rights of all individuals.

Fortunately, US Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton, just released a statement condemning David Kato's brutal murder. In it she states that we must,

"reaffirm that human rights apply to everyone, no exceptions, and that the human rights of LGBT individuals cannot be separated from the human rights of all persons."

"Our ambassadors and diplomats around the world will continue to advance a comprehensive human rights policy, and to stand with those who, with their courage, make the world a more just place where every person can live up to his or her God-given potential. We honor David’s legacy by continuing the important work to which he devoted his life."  

Congress is wrapping up its work for the year and we need you to make sure they don’t leave town without taking action to eliminate the harmful practice of child marriage. I recently wrote about Senate passage of the International Protecting Girls by Preventing Child Marriage Act. This groundbreaking legislation would require the president to develop a strategy to combat child marriage, integrate the issue of child marriage into relevant U.S. development programs, and require the State Department to report on the practice in its annual Human Rights Report.

In order for the Act to become law, we need the House of Representatives to follow the Senate’s lead and pass this legislation before Congress adjourns for the year. This is where you come in! Your voice is an important and powerful one—please make sure you use it to let your Representative know where you stand on child marriage.

Need a reason to take action? How about 60 million reasons? That’s the number of young women between the ages of 20 and 24 who were married before the age of 18. Let that sink in for a minute…and now do something about it!

Please take action TODAY!

Can you hear that high-pitched siren? See those flashing lights? Unlike the emergency broadcasts you sometimes see on t.v., this time you won’t hear that common refrain, “This is a test. This is only a test.” That’s because we’re experiencing a real emergency here. The U.S. is about to self-destruct and it’s all because of women. Yeah, women! Who knew? I mean, I know we’re powerful and all, but I had no idea that we could single-handedly destroy the universe.

Well, that’s what conservative groups like the Heritage Foundation believe. For the first time in eight long years, the U.S. Senate held a hearing on U.S. ratification of the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW, or the Women’s Treaty). During the hearing, Steven Groves from the Heritage Foundation testified about all the evils that would be bestowed upon us if the U.S. took the radical approach of joining 186 other nations in supporting CEDAW. Apparently ratifying a treaty to protect and promote women’s rights simultaneously undermines and threatens those same rights. Wait, what? That is the most circular logic I’ve ever heard. Since when does access to educational opportunities, the right to vote, and the ability to own and inherit property pose a threat to women? How do laws protecting women from violence, sex trafficking, child marriage, and female genital cutting undermine women’s rights? Oh right, I forgot…we’d be subjecting ourselves to “scrutiny by a committee of gender experts that has established a record of promoting policies that do not comport with existing American norms and that encourages national governments to engage in social engineering on a massive scale.” I can’t believe I forgot that promoting the participation of women in the political process was counter to existing American norms! Who’s going to tell that to the millions of women who voted in the mid-terms? And how could I not realize that ratifying CEDAW would require the U.S. to abandon Mother’s Day? Silly me! 

Think you’ve had enough? Not so fast, there’s more. Groves went on to testify that the U.S. already does a pretty good job of protecting and promoting women’s rights so there’s really no need to ratify CEDAW. He painstakingly points out all the federal laws that have helped advance women’s access to employment, compensation, housing, and education. So, what’s the problem? Why not just ratify the treaty then? Well, I guess it’s because he wants it both ways. On the one hand, CEDAW promotes policies that do not comport with existing American norms, but on the other hand, we have most of these protections ingrained in existing American law already anyway. Huh? I’m getting whiplash just trying to wrap my head around these competing arguments.  

Fortunately, Senator Dick Durbin, the Chair of the Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on Human Rights and the Law, took Mr. Groves to task for his organization’s opposition to CEDAW. Remember that well-founded fear about a committee of gender experts engaging in social engineering on a massive scale? Well, Mr. Groves and his fellow CEDAW opponents claim that the CEDAW Committee is a quasi-judicial body whose recommendations carry more weight than they actually do. When challenged by Senator Durbin, Groves was forced to admit that the Committee’s reports are non-binding – “that’s why I said, ‘quasi-judicial.’” Durbin retorted, “I say it’s quasi-true!” 

Of course, the hearing wasn't just a series of animated exchanges between these two men (though there were plenty of them).  As Groves pointed out when he began his testimony, he was feeling a bit outnumbered in the room full of CEDAW supporters--so many supporters in fact that an overflow room had to be set up to accommodate them all. 

Among the other influential witnesses was Melanne Verveer, Ambassador for Global Women's Issues, and Hollywood celebrity, Geena Davis, both of whom passionately urged ratification of CEDAW to help the U.S. promote and defend the rights of women across the globe. Perhaps most eloquent, however, was Wazhma Frogh, a leading women's rights activist from Afghanistan. She shared her story of growing up under Taliban rule--the constant oppression, rampant acid burnings, and daily fear of attack just for wanting to go to school, to have a job, or to leave home without a male escort.  Using CEDAW as a framework, women in Afghanistan have been able to achieve rights unheard of just a decade ago. Their story is one of survival, but they cannot do it alone. She pointed to the fact that conservative elements in her country use the failure of the U.S. to ratify CEDAW as an excuse to commit further atrocities against women. "They constantly ask us 'Why hasn't the United States ratified CEDAW?'  They say that if the United States believes in women's rights as a universal right, why haven't they signed onto CEDAW? Today, we don't have an answer.  Perhaps tomorrow, with your help, we can answer back."

Want to help Ms. Frogh answer back? Do your part and show that you support women's rights as human rights. Tell your Senators that young women and men, adult allies, and their constituents demand the U.S. ratification of CEDAW today!

And then call Senator Durbin (202-224-2152) to thank him for his support of CEDAW!  

Happy Birthday 19^th Amendment!

Believe it or not, it’s only been 90 years since the 19^th Amendment guaranteeing women the right to vote in our democracy was made part of the Constitution. Since 1971, we’ve celebrated the anniversary of August 26, 1920, as Women’s Equality Day.

One great way to celebrate would be to make sure that every eligible woman is registered to vote. That includes women turning 18 and those who have recently become naturalized citizens. After all, as important as the right to vote is, it’s even more important to use the vote to help shape the direction of our nation. So make sure you’re registered and encourage everyone you know to do the same.

Women’s Equality Day is also the perfect time to consider what the United States can do to advance women’s rights as human rights. A good place to start is with CEDAW —the Convention to Eliminate All Forms of Discrimination Against Women.

CEDAW is a landmark international agreement that affirms fundamental human rights and equality for women and girls. It was the first international agreement to address women’s rights comprehensively—politically, culturally, economically, socially and within the family. Around the world, CEDAW can be used to ensure primary education for girls; improve reproductive, maternal, and child health; pass laws against domestic violence and discrimination; promote the participation of women in the political system; and allow women to own and inherit property.

The United States played an important role in drafting CEDAW, which the United Nations adopted in 1979. But the U.S. remains one of only seven countries, including Iran, Sudan, Somalia, and three small Pacific Island countries (Nauru, Palau and Tonga), that have not yet ratified CEDAW.

That could change this year. It takes the votes of 67 senators to ratify a treaty, and President Obama and over 100 national organizations have expressed their support for the treaty’s ratification.

We know that CEDAW works: Australia, Brazil, Morocco, South Africa, Uganda, and others have incorporated provisions of CEDAW into their constitutions and domestic legal codes. And Egypt, Jordan, Nicaragua, and Pakistan have all seen significant increases in literacy rates after improving access to education for girls and women. 

Since youth comprise nearly half of the world’s population, protecting and promoting the fundamental human rights of young people will affect the health, well-being, and stability of this planet for generations to come. Ratifying the CEDAW treaty would strengthen the United States as a global leader in standing up for women and girls in countries around the world.

The CEDAW website —www.cedaw2010.org —has more information about CEDAW along with practical suggestions on how you can help the treaty become ratified.

The fight for women’s suffrage took more than 70 years of persistent advocacy, organizing and education and was only secured when a 24-year-old member of the Tennessee legislature, acting on a note from his mother, changed his vote from “no” to “yes” so Tennessee became the final state needed to ratify the 19^th Amendment.

This is but one example of the power of young voices to stand up and demand justice. Let’s make history again —and help ratify CEDAW.