Much to everyone's surprise, a handful of anti-reproductive rights measures met with defeat and several victories were secured before Congress completed business in October. These actions capped the otherwise relentlessly anti-abortion, anti-contraception record of the 105th Congress.  Fifty-three key reproductive rights measures passed - 39 restrict access to services.

NOW Action Center staff members and interns attend the vigil at the US Capitol to honor slain doctor Barnett Slepian. NOW showed support for abortion rights and those who continue to help provide access to full reproductive services. Photo by Beth Corbin. 

The most important action was the Senate vote to sustain the President's veto of the abortion procedures ban (H.R. 1122); the breathtakingly narrow three-vote margin held fast. This vaguely-worded and unconstitutional bill would have meant that before- and after-viability abortions would be prohibited, with no exception for the health of the woman and a very narrow life exception.

Other actions:

• Federal Employees Health Benefit Plans will now be required to provide coverage for five Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved contraception medications - even though opponents had tried to pull the provision in conference committee. Support from even those members who normally oppose reproductive rights helped restore the requirement, perhaps motivated by the fact that they-as federal employees-and members of their families would benefit.
• The more comprehensive Equity in Prescription Insurance and Contraception Coverage Act that would require private insurance companies who cover the costs of prescription medication to also cover contraception costs was denied a floor vote in the Senate. Advocates will make a more determined effort in the 106th Congress to pass this important bill.
• The "Teen Endangerment Act," as some dubbed it, went down in the closing days of the session, much to NOW's relief. Entitled the Child Custody Protection Act (S.1645), the bill would have made it a felony to take female minors across state lines for the purpose of obtaining an abortion if doing so would enable the young woman to avoid the parental consent or notification laws of her home state.  Had the bill passed, the states would be facing the prospect of jailing grandmothers, aunts or ministers if they assisted adolescents facing a crisis pregnancy.
• The House's determination to deny teens access to reproductive health services at Title X clinics also met defeat. Conservative legislators passed an amendment requiring adolescents seeking prescription contraceptive drugs and devices to either provide written parental consent or wait five business days while the clinic sent a written notice to a parent or legal guardian. One of the intentions of House contraception opponents was to limit the use of emergency contraception, a key advance in controlling adolescent pregnancy rates. Fortunately, the Senate refused to add this restriction in the final Omnibus Appropriations Bill.
• In another victory for reproductive rights supporters, House and Senate Agriculture spending bill conferees refused to include language that would have withdrawn funds from the FDA for the review and approval of drugs for early medical abortion. The primary objective was to prevent mifepristone (RU-486) from being released for general use; it is expected to be available sometime in 1999.
• The infamous "global gag rule" that would impose free speech constraints-unconstitutional in this country-on family planning organizations operating in other countries was dropped during final budget negotations. Approved by the House, this variation of the Mexico City policy would have denied U.S. family planning funds to organizations that discuss abortion law and policy with colleagues or government representatives, even if they did so with their own non-U.S. funds.  The gag rule language was included earlier this year in a separate State Department authorization, but President Clinton vetoed it.
• International family planning funding remained the same as last year ($385 million), but will be doled out in small monthly amounts, making program operations very difficult, if not impossible for smaller programs. Opponents also withdrew the $20 million U.S. contribution to the United National Population Fund because they objected to the agency resuming work in China.
• Good news generally prevailed in the funding arena. Title X family planning programs gained an increase of $15 million for a Fiscal Year 1999 total of $215 million. Congress increased the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention program for combating sexually-transmitted diseases by $11.6  million (to total $124 million) and approved a $16 million increase for breast and cervical cancer screening (for a total of $159 million).
• The Adolescent Family Life program, which advocates sexual abstinence for teens, was funded at $17.7 million. However, at President's Clinton's request, Congress cut a sizable $390 million from the $1.909 billion Social Services Block Grant (Title XX) program which funds local family planning clinics as well as a myriad other vital programs.

The Nov. 3 general election produced a number of pleasant surprises. The most welcome news: reproductive rights supporters made small, but important, gains in the House of Representatives and held onto at least 65 votes in the Senate to oppose the abortion procedures ban.

In the States

A slight gain in favor of reproductive rights occurred in state legislative elections, with the number of legislative bodies having anti-choice majorities declining from 62 to 60 and the number of pro-choice majorities remaining the same at 26.  The difference appears in the number of closely divided legislative Houses and Senates, up from 12 to 14.  Some of the pro-choice legislative bodies, though, may not always have a majority voting correctly on a given bill.

The states elected one additional governor who supports reproductive rights, Tom Vilsack, D-Iowa, producing a breakdown of 20 supportive governors, 20 opposed and 10 with mixed records. The state analysis, however, is preliminary and subject to change pending further information.