This NY Times article, though unfortunately referring to it as a measure that “protects health providers,” gives us some important updates on Bush’s proposed anti-choice DHHS rule.
Bad News: Bush still looks determined to instate the rule.
Good News: Members of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, including those appointed by Bush, are voicing protest against the rule, saying it is unnecessary and would “overturn 40 years of civil rights law prohibiting job discrimination based on religion.” In addition, it’s being vocally opposed by the National Association of Chain Drug Stores, the American Medical Association, the American Hospital Association, a bunch of senators and congressional representatives, and the attorney generals of 13 states.
Good News: President-Elect Barack Obama has stated his opposition to the proposal, and the NY Times describes his position as believing it would “raise new hurdles to women seeking reproductive health services, like abortion and some contraceptives.” Obama apparently plans to attempt to rescind the rule if it goes into effect. As I said in my last post on the subject, this is probably the best we can hope for at this point.
Bad News: Rescinding the rule would take three to six months.
To summarize even further, I’m hugely pessimistic for the short-term, but optimistic about where this is going to go come January.