My twins were born in February. As a result, I've been extremely happy. Sleep deprived, but honestly, happier than I've ever been. My kids are an unending source of joy and wonder, and my wife and I have been very blessed. I love to talk about 'em too, which is no doubt a relief to those of you who aren't on my private "babies" filter.

I mention all this because it takes a monumental outrage to piss me off these days. We crossed that line this morning, when the following news broke:

The Bush administration is proposing a set of rule changes at their new right-wing bastion, the US Department of Health and Human Services, which would redefine "abortion" to include many types of birth control. The proposed rules also protect the jobs of pharmacists, doctors and other medical service providers who object to dispensing abortifacients and contraception on moral grounds.

Their disrespect for the rule of law has no bounds. They haven't managed to overturn a Supreme Court decision (Roe) yet, so instead they're sleazily manipulating the definition of abortion to push a fundamentalist, religious agenda. Again.

[The rules would require recipients of aid to certify that] they would not refuse to hire nurses and other providers who object to abortion and even certain types of birth control. Hospitals, clinics, researchers and medical schools would have to sign “written certifications” as a prerequisite to getting money under any program run by the Department of Health and Human Services. Such certification would also be required of state and local governments, forbidden to discriminate, in areas like grant-making, against hospitals and other institutions that have policies against providing abortion.

The proposal, which circulated in the department on Monday, says the new requirement is needed to ensure that federal money does not “support morally coercive or discriminatory practices or policies in violation of federal law.” The administration said Congress had passed a number of laws to ensure that doctors, hospitals and health plans would not be forced to perform abortions.

In the proposal, obtained by The New York Times, the administration says it could cut off federal aid to individuals or entities that discriminate against people who object to abortion on the basis of “religious beliefs or moral convictions.”

The proposal defines abortion as follows: “any of the various procedures — including the prescription, dispensing and administration of any drug or the performance of any procedure or any other action — that results in the termination of the life of a human being in utero between conception and natural birth, whether before or after implantation.”

"Mary Jane Gallagher, president of the National Family Planning and Reproductive Health Association, said, "The proposed definition of abortion is so broad that it would cover many types of birth control, including oral contraceptives and emergency contraception." She added, "We worry that under the proposal, contraceptive services would become less available to low-income and uninsured women." Nancy Keenan, president of NARAL Pro-Choice America, said, "Why on earth is the Bush administration trying to discourage doctors and clinics from providing contraception to women who need it?"" That's a great question, Ms. Keenan. You wanna know the answer? They don't give a damn about the women who need it.

What kinds of birth control would be redefined as abortifacients? Intrauterine Devices, birth control pills and patches, NuvaRing, the DepoProvera shot and the Emergency Contraception Pill. Possibly FemCap.

Reproductive Health Reality Check has an extensive post up about this. They also have a PDF of the proposed rules memo that circulated at HHS on Monday:

In a spectacular act of complicity with the religious right, the Department of Health and Human Services Monday released a proposal that allows any federal grant recipient to obstruct a woman's access to contraception. In order to do this, the Department is attempting to redefine many forms of contraception, the birth control 40% of Americans use, as abortion. Doing so protects extremists under the Weldon and Church amendments. Those laws prohibit federal grant recipients from requiring employees to help provide or refer for abortion services. The "Definitions" section of the HHS proposal states:

Abortion: An abortion is the termination of a pregnancy. There are two commonly held views on the question of when a pregnancy begins. Some consider a pregnancy to begin at conception (that is, the fertilization of the egg by the sperm), while others consider it to begin with implantation (when the embryo implants in the lining of the uterus). A 2001 Zogby International American Values poll revealed that 49% of Americans believe that human life begins at conception. Presumably many who hold this belief think that any action that destroys human life after conception is the termination of a pregnancy, and so would be included in their definition of the term "abortion." Those who believe pregnancy begins at implantation believe the term "abortion" only includes the destruction of a human being after it has implanted in the lining of the uterus.

The proposal continues,

Both definitions of pregnancy inform medical practice. Some medical authorities, like the American Medical Association and the British Medical Association, have defined the term "established pregnancy" as occurring after implantation. Other medical authorities present different definitions. Stedman's Medical Dictionary, for example, defines pregnancy as "[t]he state of a female after conception and until the termination of the gestation." Dorland's Medical Dictionary defines pregnancy, in relevant part, as "the condition of having a developing embryo or fetus in the body, after union of an oocyte and spermatozoon.

Up until now, the federal government followed the definition of pregnancy accepted by the American Medical Association and our nation's pregnancy experts, the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, which is: pregnancy begins at implantation. With this proposal, however, HHS is dismissing medical experts and opting instead to accept a definition of pregnancy based on polling data. It now claims that pregnancy begins at some biologically unknowable moment (there's no test to determine if a woman's egg has been fertilized). Under these new standards there would be no way for a woman to prove she's not pregnant. Thus, any woman could be denied contraception under HHS' new science. (Emphasis mine.)

Unsurprisingly, the religious right-wing approves of the proposed rules.

It is important to note that right now, this is only a proposal. So.... what can we do?

* Tell HHS what you think. (Limited to 160 characters.)
* Or, use Planned Parenthood's Online Form
* Contact your Senator
* Contact your House Representative