Category: Bethany Stone
Maine, NH Lawmakers Split on Medicare Bill
WASHINGTON – As congressional negotiators put the final touches on a bill to revamp Medicare, New Hampshire and Maine lawmakers are split over whether to support the 10-year, $400 billion measure.
The bill would overhaul the senior citizens’ health care program with prescription drug benefits, a pilot program that would allow private insurance companies to compete with Medicare and a $25 billion spending increase for rural hospitals and physicians. Congress is expected to vote on the bill this weekend.
Because of last-minute negotiations on the bill’s language, members of Congress remained in the dark on its final contents until Thursday afternoon. Both Sens. John Sununu and Judd Gregg, both New Hampshire Republicans, said they had “significant concerns” about the bill and would have to read through the final version before deciding whether to support it. Both senators voted against an earlier version of the Medicare bill in June.
“This bill has some very serious flaws, in my opinion,” Gregg told reporters. “And I’ve got deep reservations about itá. “I’m going to take a very serious look at it.”
Rep. Charlie Bass (R-N.H.) said in an interview he would probably support the bill. While he did not favor all aspects of the legislation, he said, it was better than nothing.
“No bill is ever perfect, and nobody who supports the bill is going to believe that it is a perfect product,” Bass said. “But it’s a product that will provide a prescription drug benefit for seniors. And it’s way overdue.”
Both Bass and Rep. Jeb Bradley (R-N.H.) have said that in future sessions of Congress, they would like to revisit some parts of the legislation they disagree with, including a provision that would allow Americans to import some medication from Canada.
Bradley and Bass voted in favor of the House version of the Medicare bill in June. Negotiators have been working since then to reconcile differing provisions of the House and Senate bills.
Neither of Maine’s senators, Republicans Susan Collins and Olympia Snowe, have said whether they will vote for the bill. Both voted for the initial Senate version, but several provisions have changed since then. Collins said Congress needed to modernize Medicare, particularly by adding a prescription drug benefit for the first time.
Snowe, on the other hand, has joined a bipartisan group of senators who are circulating a letter to their colleagues in an attempt to remove a provision, called “premium support,” that would allow private insurance to compete with traditional Medicare for seniors’ business.
“This letter is an important message that we cannot accept an untested premium support program – one that could potentially impact the quality of health care for millions of seniors and effectively undercuts the traditional Medicare program,” Snowe said in a statement.
Earlier this week, the AARP, the nation’s largest organization of seniors, endorsed the Medicare bill, saying it would strengthen health security for millions of older Americans.
“We need to see bipartisan support,” said Steve Hahn, a spokesman for AARP. “We need to see legislation passed and enacted this year. AARP members have waited long enough.”
Nevertheless, some angry AARP members gathered in front of the organization’s Washington headquarters in the pouring rain Wednesday to protest the endorsement of the Medicare bill.
“This card is worthless,” shouted Genevieve Cervera, 64, of New York City, who crumpled her AARP membership card before television cameras. “Now you see it, now you don’t. That’s what [the AARP] did to us.”
“We got sold out,” she added. “We weren’t even informed.”
Cervera was among approximately 50 AARP members who traveled to the capital from New York with the progressive activist organization USAction.
Mike Naylor, AARP’s director of advocacy, said people do not understand the contents of the bill, and, if it becomes law, the AARP intends to spend “a lot of money” to educate people about it.
N.H. Students Share DC Internship Experiences
WASHINGTON - When Katy O'Meara was growing up in Alton, N.H., she dreamed of becoming either a professional skier or a doctor. She wanted to study pre-med at the University of Colorado at Boulder and hit the slopes in her free time.
She is doing neither.
Instead, O'Meara, 21, is a senior majoring in political science at George Washington University - in mountain-less Washington, D.C. She gave up the notion of skiing and doctoring after participating in political leadership programs in high school. Rather than making patients well, she hopes someday to make policy.
To succeed, O'Meara has chosen to do what has become the standard for college students looking to make connections and gain experience before entering the "real world": become an intern.
Working in the office of Rep. Jeb Bradley (R-N.H.), O'Meara said she enjoys seeing first-hand the congressional debates and bill passages -- things she used to read about in textbooks and newspapers.
With a wealth of politics, media and history, Washington has become home to thousands of interns each year.
MIXED REVIEWS
Roland Bowe, a University of New Hampshire student from Dover, N.H., decided to spend the semester in Washington to build up his rÚsumÚ. So he applied to The Washington Center, which places college students in internships working in Congress, for mass communications companies and in the criminal justice system.
In September, he began an internship in the office of Rep. Dana Rohrabacher (R-Calif.). Bowe said he found himself performing tasks a "high school dropout could do," including lying to people on the phone about the whereabouts of his boss. Rohrabacher spokesman Aaron Lewis said staffers did not tell Bowe to mislead callers.
Although he was working on Capitol Hill, Bowe said he was unable to learn as much as he would have liked about the democratic process, particularly about how bills go through Congress.
"I had a general idea of what it was like, but I've just never seen the process for myself, and that's why I wanted to work on the Hill," he said.
"I wanted to actually do stuff besides shuffling papers around and grabbing ice for the office and making coffee," said Bowe, 21.
Bowe said he was bored and looking for a challenge. So in October, he left Congress and started interning for lawyer David A. Branch. He now spends his days doing research on discrimination cases.
"I'm actually helping people," Bowe said. "I actually read stuff and use my head.".
The small office, with Bowe, two attorneys and an assistant, is close-knit, he said. Bowe still has the occasional minor duty to perform, but he is happy.
Branch said Bowe is "well on his way to a promising legal career." Bowe, a junior, who has a double major in English and philosophy, plans to focus on criminal or international law. He will remain at UNH for a fifth year, to make up for credits he lost when he transferred from Boston University after his freshman year.
He advises other interns to "just research and know what you're getting into."
A DIFFERENT OFFICE, A DIFFERENT EXPERIENCE
O'Meara is the first person visitors to Bradley's office see on Mondays and Fridays. She sits at the front desk and answers phones, opens letters from constituents and greets visitors.
"To intern here, it's a great experience," she said. "It's a learning experience. It's hands-on."
She is quick to discount the stigma that has been attached to the title "intern" following the Monica Lewinsky scandal and the murder of federal intern Chandra Levy.
"The vast majority of interns go about their work, do their stuff, come in when they're supposed to, leave and not a lot is said about that," O'Meara said.
Interns are an important part of the dynamic of Bradley's office, according to a spokesman, T.J. Crawford.
"They're just an incredible resource for the staff, from small tasks to larger tasks, their input on everything is valued," he said. "And we try to make it as much of a learning experience for them as possible, too, because that's why they're here."
O'Meara said she applied to work for Bradley because he is from Wolfeboro, where O'Meara's family moved when she left for college three years ago. She will continue to work for him throughout the school year.
"I liked the fact that, yes, Bradley is from my hometown," O'Meara said. "And I also liked the fact that he was a freshman because that means that you're kind of walking into an office á [where] they haven't been here too long. They probably have a lot of energy, and I liked that idea."
Before working in Bradley's office, O'Meara had two other internships. During her junior year, she traveled to South Africa to teach first-grade students, many of whom were stricken with the HIV virus.
That internship made O'Meara realize she wanted to help set U.S. education policy. But first, she said, she needs to see what's happening in the schools.
"Before you can even begin to try and influence things through policy, you need hands-on experience," she said. "And I think the best way you can do that would be to teach for a while in our country, to get a grasp on what the education's really like and then maybe go on and come back to the policy aspect of things."
O'Meara also worked during the first semester of her sophomore year for Fianna F½il, Ireland's largest political party, in Dublin. She said it was similar to working for Bradley, because both offices worked to maintain good relationships with constituents.
A BALANCING ACT
Part of being an intern is balancing time. Besides going to his internship four-and-a-half days a week, Bowe is expected to attend a weekly three-hour class in peace studies, to participate in embassy visits and to attend lectures.
O'Meara spends about nine-and-a-half hours a week at her internship, 15 hours in class and 12 hours working as a nanny for a family in nearby Virginia. She also volunteers on Saturdays for Our Place, a program to educate children whose parents are incarcerated.
"It's very balanced," she said. "I've always been someone who's always very busy and always have a million different things going. I think that the structure of it works very well for me."
NO PLACE LIKE HOME
Despite their busy schedules, both interns set aside time to enjoy the capital.
Bowe said he likes the nightlife. O'Meara likes to explore the museums of the Smithsonian Institution and to sip coffee in Georgetown, which bustles with students, shoppers and tourists.
Having been in the capital for three years now, O'Meara has become adjusted to city life. When she returns home, she is reminded how special New Hampshire is to her.
And what is one of the things O'Meara misses most? The slopes.
"If I miss one thing about being in D.C. and not having gone to a school either in Colorado or New Hampshire or up north somewhere, I miss skiing," she said.
Thousands of Letters Reach N.H., Maine Lawmakers Yearly
WASHINGTON - Put it this way: If every piece of correspondence and phone call to Sen. John Sununu (R-N.H.) were a dollar bill, he'd be a millionaire twice over by the end of his six-year term.
And he answers them all.
"One of Sen. Sununu's top priorities is to provide the very best constituent service possible, and he appreciates it when constituents contact him with their questions, comments and concerns," said Sununu's spokeswoman, Barbara Riley. Sununu's office receives an average of 1,200 letters, e-mails, faxes and phone calls every day of the year, she said.
Of course, the senator can't personally respond to each one. If he did, he'd have no time left to cast votes, author legislation or take care of the issues his constituents are contacting him about. But the senator makes sure his staff answers every missive and call.
Regular Americans from all over the country constantly write and call their representatives in Congress to let them know what they think. Writers to New Hampshire's four senators and House members will always receive responses, but not necessarily from the lawmakers themselves.
"Occasionally, [Rep. Charlie Bass] will respond himself, but that's not the norm," said Sally Tibbetts, spokeswoman for the New Hampshire Republican. "I'm sure you can understand, given the volume of mail. He wouldn't have time to do anything else."
Bass receives approximately 22,000 to 25,000 letters, phone calls, faxes and e-mails annually, according to Tibbetts. This year, however, an additional 3,000 to 5,000 constituents are expected to contact Bass to air their views on the battle against terrorism and the war in Iraq, she added.
Iraq is the number one topic of most letters and phone calls to the office of Rep. Jeb Bradley (R-N.H.), said spokesman T.J. Crawford.
"Obviously, with the magnitude of an issue á there's going to be more interest with constituents," Crawford said.
People writing to and calling Bradley's office can expect a response in no more than three weeks, depending on the issue, Crawford said. He added that the congressman reviews every response.
"Every answer to a letter, to an e-mail, to a fax, to a phone call that's going out of this office, the congressman makes sure that he sees and personally approves," Crawford said. "Nothing goes out without him seeing it, which is obviously important.
"With the volume of correspondence coming in, it's tough to respond to everyone as fast as you'd like, but we make sure that it's one of the priorities to get a response out of the door as soon as possible."
It takes longer for members of Congress to receive mail since two senators received letters containing anthrax spores two years ago. Now, letters sent to the Capitol complex undergo intense screening, including X-rays. Because it typically takes two weeks to a month for mail to reach them, lawmakers suggest constituents communicate to them via e-mail or fax.
Once letters arrive in the office of Sen. Olympia Snowe (R-Maine), writers can expect a two-week response time. Snowe also approves all of the responses to her constituents, said spokesman, Jason Galanes.
"It's basically to ensure that very individual concern is addressed as thoroughly as possible," Galanes said.
Snowe wants to make sure that her positions on issues are represented accurately, he said.
Depending on the current issues in Maine, Congress and around the world, the volume of correspondence and calls from constituents fluctuates every day, Galanes said. Besides Iraq, Mainers have expressed concern in the regulation of national fisheries and what is known as Amendment 13, which would end over-fishing, he added.
"That's a topic closer to home, so Mainers definitely felt they needed to communicate with Sen. Snowe about that," Galanes said.
Responses to the 900 or so pieces of correspondence received daily in the office of Sen. Judd Gregg (R-N.H.) often contain excerpts from Gregg's speeches on the Senate floor, according to spokesman Jeff Turcotte.
"It's better to use his own words, and certainly if he's spoken on the floor, then that's a very accurate description of how he's feeling," Turcotte said.
The volume of correspondence Gregg receives tends to decrease in the summer and during holidays when Congress is in recess, he added.
Sometimes lawmakers are even given celebrity-like status by their letter-writers.
"You get sort of fan mail, you know, constituents writing, praising your efforts, or just unabashed admiration for the congressman," Tibbetts said of correspondence sent to Bass.
One recent e-mail sent to Bradley's office was more emotional. An Arizona woman, whose brother from New Hampshire is a soldier in Iraq, attached a photo of Bradley with her brother during the congressman's recent visit to the region. When she received word that a helicopter was downed Sunday in Iraq, killing 15 Americans, she worried that her brother was involved. A few minutes later, her brother e-mailed her a new photo and informed her that he was safe.
"We love correspondence like that," Crawford said.
Then there are the children.
"Some of the best letters we've gotten are from younger kids, writing in for a school project, wanting to know how the congressman feels about being a congressman," Crawford said.
"It's a fun change sometimes from some of the more serious questions," he said. "That lightens things up a bit."
Bradley Visits IRAQ, Talks With NH Troops
WASHINGTON - U.S. Rep. Jeb Bradley (R-N.H.) returned to the capital Tuesday night from a six-day trip to Iraq, where he met with New Hampshire troops and Iraqi police officers and discussed their work to rebuild the country and heal the wounds of the country's violent past.
Bradley said soldiers from New Hampshire urged him to ask Americans to continue to support the troops as they work to rebuild Iraq.
The New Hampshire troops "feel that they're making a difference, that they're making progress," Bradley said in a telephone press conference Wednesday from his Capitol Hill office. "That isn't to say that there aren't challenges and obstacles, but these kids are capable of meeting challenges and obstacles.
"But they want to know that they have the fortitude and the backbone at home to support their efforts because they'll get the job done if we continue to support their efforts."
Bradley backed the Bush administration's plans to increase the use of Iraqi police and military forces.
"I think that it's not necessary to send more American troops today," he said. "What is necessary is to get more of the civilian defense force of Iraqis, the Iraqi policemen, border guards and a newly constituted army so that these people, the Iraqis, whose country it is, are actually doing the security and protection work in their country.á
"The Iraqi people are going to be much more comfortable with their own police force doing the intelligence and having us as support," rather than the other way around, he said.
Bradley said the American soldiers and Iraqi police told him that most Iraqis supported the American invasion.
"They felt that the vast majority of Iraqis that they were dealing with are happy that we're there," Bradley said. "There are some that are neutral and then, clearly, there are some that oppose our presence. And for the most part, these are either foreign infiltrators -- the type of people that crash jetliners into tall buildings -- and the remnants of the Saddam Hussein regime."
There has been no proof that Iraq played any role in the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks on America, though both the Bush administration and its critics say terrorists now are gathering in Iraq.
Bradley acknowledged that those loyal to former Iraqi President Hussein continued to launch as many as 35 attacks a day on coalition forces.
Bradley said that both American soldiers and Iraqi police forces worked under dangerous conditions - he was in a C-130 plane heading from Kuwait to Tikrit, Iraq, when an American helicopter was downed Sunday, leaving 15 dead -- but that the Iraqis in particular were focused on the greater goal of rebuilding.
"They're thankful for the fact that America has liberated their country, giving them the opportunity to rebuild it," Bradley said. "And they are willing to fight and die for the opportunity to rebuild their country, and that was pretty heartwarming for me to hear the Iraqi people say that."
Bradley, however, spent each night of his trip in Kuwait, flying back and forth between the neighboring countries every day for security reasons, said his spokesman, T.J. Crawford.
In Kuwait, Bradley met with representatives of the Kuwait Chamber of Commerce and visited Camp Wolf, where American troops stop before returning to the United States for 15-day breaks.
"It is clearly a morale booster, and I was glad to see that our troops are getting this opportunity," Bradley wrote in e-mail update to reporters during his trip.
It was during his flights back to Kuwait that Bradley saw lights on in Iraqi homes. During a briefing with L. Paul Bremer, the American overseeing Iraqi reconstruction, Bradley learned that electricity had been restored to pre-war levels.
Bradley said he got a first-hand look at evidence of torture under Hussein's regime when he toured the Abu Gharib prison, where approximately 80,000 Iraqis were tortured and killed. Bradley said he saw the torture chambers and victims' "disturbing" final messages on the walls of the execution room.
He also viewed a dramatic re-enactment of an execution. "Even as I describe it now, it is sickening. It's disgusting and á I was left speechless," he said.
Too Early to Tell Effects of NCLB Federal Funding
WASHINGTON - Ever since the No Child Left Behind act was signed into law in 2001, educators, New Hampshire legislators and federal officials have been debating whether the federal government is providing New Hampshire enough money to pay for the law's requirements.
Lorraine Patusky of the Office of Accountability of the New Hampshire Board of Education said it was too early to tell what kind of financial impact the new requirements will have on schools in the Granite State.
"The truth is we don't know," Patusky said. "The truth is we're much too early into this and we really don't know what the effects are going be because the effects aren't short term."
The law is intended to raise the standards of schools across the country by holding schools accountable for low test scores and unqualified teachers. Under the law, schools are expected to test their students annually, hire and retain higher-quality teachers and identify students needing special education.
U.S. Department of Education officials have defended the amount of federal funds allotted to New Hampshire schools, saying the state is expected to receive approximately $167.9 million in 2004, up $32.4 million from when President Bush entered the White House. Approximately $62.9 million is directed toward No Child Left Behind reforms.
But New Hampshire educators insist that the dollars are not enough, especially because of the costs of implementing the accountability tests within each school.
"What we've learned is that the testing that has to be done under this law is very expensive," said Steven Sacks, staff attorney for the National Education Association-New Hampshire. "And I question whether the Congress understood á the cost it would entail to undertake all this testing when they passed the law."
The U.S. Department of Education could not provide numbers on the cost of the new accountability testing. A report from the New Hampshire School Administrators Association, however, says implementing annual tests will cost approximately $5.5 million a year.
Patusky said part of the fiscal problem is that state legislators have cut education funding because of the expectation that the federal government will pick up the check, she said.
"If you look at the legislature, they're seeing that all of this money is coming into the state for No Child Left Behind," Patusky said. "So why do they need to fund things on a state level anymore?"
"That creates a feeling in the state that there's not enough money, when in fact the legislature had been appropriating money on an annual basis for [education], and they just stopped the funding."
One of the key goals of the No Child Left Behind law is to ensure the presence of high-quality teachers in the school system. Washington is expected to provide $13.6 million to New Hampshire in 2004 to help meet that goal, according to the U.S. Department of Education.
A report by the Concord-based Josiah Bartlett Center for Public Policy in February states that attracting and retaining high-quality teachers would cost New Hampshire schools approximately $11.5 million in 2004. However, a report last November from the New Hampshire School Administrators Association (NHSAA) put the cost at approximately $28 million.
The Bartlett report also concludes that the federal government is providing adequate funds if schools manage their money well, while the NHSAA report accuses Washington of failing to provide enough.
Patusky said the real financial effects of No Child Left Behind are probably "somewhere in the middle" of the two reports, and "neither one is probably accurate."
Part of the problem could be a disconnect in communication between the federal government and the state government, especially when it comes to specific financial figures, said the NEA's Sacks.
"The federal government has been pushing No Child Left Behind and the advantages of it without looking at the realities," Sacks said. "It frustrates educators because they're the ones that are dealing with the reality of this law on a day-to-day basis."
NH Schools See Potential Challenges in Visa System
WASHINGTON - New Hampshire college officials are voicing concern that the newly tightened U.S. visa system could seriously delay the student visa application process and hurt their chances of attracting quality foreign students who may choose to go elsewhere for their education.
Recently, a Rwandan doctoral student in environmental studies at Antioch New England Graduate School missed his first semester of classes because of a delay in his visa application.
The school allowed "plenty of time" for him to receive his visa, but the need for clearance in Washington caused delays, according to Laura Andrews, Antioch's associate director of admissions. The student finally received his visa in August after months of delays and was able to begin his studies in September.
"That I don't think would have happened prior to Sept. 11," Andrews said.
Since the government instituted higher scrutiny of non-immigrant visas in response to the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, New Hampshire college officials have been concerned that international students might be deterred by the lengthy and more in-depth application process.
Testifying before a subcommittee of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee last week, John Aber, the University of New Hampshire's vice president for research and public service, praised the federal government's work in strengthening the country's immigration process to avoid another terrorist attack but raised concern about the impact on foreign students.Since 2001, the United States has stepped up border security, requested more data from visa applicants and asked schools to report on the activities of foreign students.
To date student visa applications at UNH have not been affected by the government's increased scrutiny, Aber told the International Operations and Terrorism Subcommittee, which Sen. John Sununu (R-N.H.) chairs. The university receives approximately 800 applications a year from international students, scholars and families, and two to four of them are rejected each year because of suspicions of terrorist affiliations, he reported. That number has not increased since before the terrorist attacks.
But international students could begin looking to other countries for schooling to avoid long waits for non-immigrant visas - a three- to nine-month process -- leading to a sharp decline in science and technology students, Aber said. He said one-third of U.S. science and engineering doctoral degrees are awarded to foreign students.
"There is general agreement that the optimum management of our research enterprise requires free and open access by U.S. universities and laboratories to the pool of aspiring students and scholars who hold citizenship in other countries," he said. "This pool provides a significant part of the energy and talent that drives our technological advancement."
Other countries, such as Canada, have begun to compete for these scholars by boasting faster visa applications processes, Aber said. Because of the lengthy process, some foreign students attending American universities have been prohibited from traveling home to visit their families during holidays, he testified.
But Antioch's Andrews said that many of the college's approximately 20 international students- have had few problems when returning to the United States after a holiday. She has heard from some students that crossing the border has become a "smoother" experience."
"None of them are from the particular countries which are being watched, but from what I've [heard] á none of our students have any trouble," Andrews said.
None of the international students who started at Franklin Pierce College this fall were denied visas, but added interview requirements have lengthened the application process, said Susan Oehlschlaeger, the school's director of international student services.
"The worst impact on maybe one or two of them was that they actually had to change their travel arrangements," she said.
Students at Keene State College have not seen many problems either, according to Angela Yang, director of national and international exchange. One student attending the college under an exchange program did, however, miss a portion of his semester when his visa application was delayed.
"We haven't had immediate or direct experiences in terms of what the students have been able to share with us of their experiences," Yang said.
For Oehlschlaeger, the tightened visa system requires better communication with international applicants.
"I think mostly what it tells us is the warning that we have to give to students about how long this process is going to take," she said.
Senate Passes Abortion Ban
WASHINGTON - The Senate voted Tuesday to ban a rarely used abortion procedure and sent the bill to President Bush for his promised signature.
Abortion-rights advocates have promised to pursue an immediate injunction. to block the legislation from taking effect. It would be the first ban on a specific abortion procedure since the Supreme Court's 1973 Roe v. Wade ruling that a woman has a constitutional right to have an abortion.
The Senate voted 64-34 on the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban of 2003, which the House approved three weeks ago. Both New Hampshire senators, Republicans Judd Gregg and John Sununu, voted for the ban, while both Maine senators, Republicans Susan Collins and Olympia Snowe, voted against it.
"We cannot put women's health and lives at risk by substituting the judgment of politicians for the judgment of medical doctors," Snowe said.
The bill's sponsors said it would outlaw a procedure performed late in a pregnancy in which a fetus is partially delivered before being aborted. Abortion-rights advocates argue that procedure is extremely rare, but add that the bill could also prohibit some safe and common abortion procedures performed as early as 12 weeks into a pregnancy.
Three years ago, the Supreme Court struck down a Nebraska law banning so-called partial-birth abortions because it did not contain an exception for the woman's health and because the procedure might be the safest way of terminating a pregnancy.
Officials from the Center for Reproductive Rights, which successfully argued that case on behalf of Dr. LeRoy Carhart, a physician who challenged the Nebraska law, said they plan to challenge the federal law, in part because it also contains no health exceptions.
"We're basically seeking to defend our precedent and our victory and Dr. Carhart's victory," said Priscilla Smith, the director of the center's domestic legal program. The Planned Parenthood Federation of American, on behalf of its affiliates nationwide, and the American Civil Liberties Union, representing the National Abortion Federation, also are expected to take the issue to court.
The Center for Reproductive Rights will also seek an injunction to keep the law from going into effect immediately after the President signs it.
"You go in for immediate injunctive relief," Smith said. She said the center wanted to ensure the law "won't stop physicians from providing safe procedures and won't require them to impose risks on their patients."
N.H. Fears Chilling Effect of Federal Abortion Ban
WASHINGTON - Congress is expected send President Bush a bill this month that would ban a rarely used abortion procedure, a decision abortion-rights advocates say would create a chilling effect on doctors who perform other types of abortions.
As senators prepare to vote on the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act of 2003 -- which the House passed earlier this month and the President has said he will sign into law -- New Hampshire abortion-rights advocates predict the bill's language actually could affect more-common abortion procedures.
"Because the law is so vague, it's likely that abortion providers will feel the risk of prosecution," said Jennifer Frizzell, public affairs director for Planned Parenthood of Northern New England. "Doctors won't be able to consider the best and most appropriate abortion-care options for their patients without the threat of prosecution hanging over their heads."
If signed into law, the bill would represent the first ban on a specific abortion procedure since the Supreme Court guaranteed a woman's right to abortion in its 1973 Roe v. Wade ruling. House and Senate negotiators omitted a clause in the Senate bill that would have affirmed that landmark ruling.
The House passed the partial-birth ban in early October by a vote of 281-142. Both New Hampshire House members, Rep. Charlie Bass and Rep. Jeb Bradley, voted in favor of the legislation.
The Senate passed a similar measure early this year and is expected to pass this one as well. President Clinton twice vetoed bans on partial-birth abortions. Both Sen. Judd Gregg (R-N.H.) and Sen. John Sununu (R-N.H.) voted for the bill when the Senate first took it up.
The legislation describes partial-birth abortion as a procedure in which a physician kills a partially delivered fetus. Doctors who refuse to comply with the law could face fines and up to two years in jail.
The bill contains an exception only when a mother's life - but not her health - is in danger. It's a critical distinction. Abortion-rights advocates have said they will move quickly to challenge the law in court, citing a Supreme Court ruling three years ago that struck down a Nebraska ban because it didn't contain a health exception.
The bill states that partial-birth abortions are "never necessary" to preserve a woman's health.
"The vast majority of them are done on healthy women, and healthy babies of healthy women," said Roger Stenson, executive director of New Hampshire Citizens for Life, an affiliate of the National Right to Life Committee. "It's not done for the hard cases."
Abortion-rights supporters contend the procedure has been used to protect women's health. Claire Ebel, executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union in New Hampshire, said the procedure has been used in emergency situations when a fetus' deformed skull has swelled with fluids to a point that it would harm a woman if delivered vaginally.
"The procedure performed in the later stages of pregnancy is always done for the woman's health, always," she said. "There are no exceptions. No one aborts a fetus to get into a prom dress."
A survey conducted by the Alan Guttmacher Institute, a nonprofit that focuses on sexual and reproductive health research and analysis, found that 2,200 "partial-birth" abortions were performed in the United States in 2000. More than 1.3 million abortions were performed in the country that year.
Abortion-rights advocates argue the bill's language is "misleading" and "inexact," and could outlaw commonly used second-term abortion procedures that occur as early as 12 weeks into a pregnancy.
"It's a vague term that's used by anti-abortion activists, but it's not recognized in any medical dictionary," Frizzell said. "And it's a political definition, not a medical definition."
New Hampshire health care facilities and Planned Parenthood centers generally perform abortions only during the first trimester of pregnancy, according to Frizzell. Private- practice doctors usually handle second-trimester abortions and any potential emergencies late in pregnancy, she added.
Ebel said the ban could threaten women's lives.
"It is absolutely unacceptable at any time to give lawmakers the right to tell a doctor what she or he may or may not do in the operating room," Ebel said.
"At some point even the most rabid anti-choice legislators have to get it," she said. "What they need to get is that the women in America -- Republican, Democrat, independent, teenagers, middle-aged and all the women in between -- will never go back. We will never again surrender our rights to autonomy over our own bodies."
Stenson, of New Hampshire Citizens for Life, said there is a distinction between the procedure defined in the bill and more-common abortion practices.
"This doesn't ban abortions," he said. "This bans a specific technique, which is so brutal that it just chills the hearts of everybody in the United States that this kind of thing can be done."
The Center for Reproductive Rights, which has filed suits against a number of anti-abortion measures, has promised to challenge the law as soon as the president signs it.
"The Supreme Court has already said that a law like this would have 'tragic health consequences,' " Nancy Northup, president of the Washington-based center, said in a statement. "We will do everything in our power to prevent this dangerous ban from taking effect."
Abortion opponents speak of the bill in benevolent terms.
"Banning this practice will have a á compassion-inducing effect on our culture," Stenson said. "We've been so desensitized by violence in the United States, including the violence of abortion á, that saying no to this particular technique is a step in the right direction of making a more compassionate culture."
Sununu Announces Safe Act
WASHINGTON - New Hampshire Sen. John Sununu Wednesday unveiled two bills that would rewrite controversial parts of the USA Patriot Act of 2001. Civil liberty advocates called the bipartisan legislation a "wonderful start."
Sununu and several co-sponsors said at a press conference they wanted to repair parts of the Patriot Act that have the most potential for abuse by the government. Sen. Russell Feingold (D-Wisc.) said the Patriot Act, which Congress passed shortly after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, eliminated too many checks on the executive branch.
Keeping the county's security tight could be accomplished without forsaking the rights of the public, Sununu said. "We can do it while protecting civil liberties," he said.
The White House has stood behind the Patriot Act, and Attorney General John Ashcroft has embarked on a nationwide campaign to defend it.
One of the bills, the Patriot Oversight Restoration Act of 2003, would establish expiration dates for a number of provisions, including some government surveillance methods and so-called sneak and peak search warrants, which allow federal agents to search terrorism suspects' property without obtaining warrants.
The other bill, the Security and Freedom Ensured Act of 2003, or the SAFE Act, would re-establish rules eliminated by the Patriot Act that prescribed steps the government must take to gain access to business records. The SAFE Act would also limit "John Doe" roving wiretaps by requiring that targets be identified and "sneak and peak" search warrants by requiring notification of a search within seven days.
Sununu, who supported the Patriot Act as a House member in 2001, called the reforms "common sense."
"What we tried to do was sit down, put aside all the rhetoric and take a look at what the law really does," he said.
Civil liberties advocates such as Claire Ebel, executive director of the New Hampshire chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union, said there is more to be done.
"This is a recognition by some very powerful, conservative Republican members of Congress that this law is a problem," Ebel said, "that it is a threat to personal liberty, that it is a violation of constitutional protections, that it imperils the very society that Mr. Ashcroft purports to defend with this bill."
One aspect of the Patriot Act that gave the government access to library records concerned New Hampshire library workers, who objected to having to comply with the regulations, Ebel said. The SAFE Act would return to pre-Patriot Act standards and limit access to information such as library records by requiring the FBI to seek subpoenas by providing evidence that the person under investigation was a suspected terrorist or spy.
"I think is it an enormous credit to Sen. Sununu that he recognizes the danger in this bill, not just to Islamic Americans or Arab Americans, but to all Americans," Ebel said, "because there are no limits to the breadth and the depth of the investigatory tools that have been put in the hands of law enforcement á to investigate innocent American citizens."
The Patriot Act was handled too quickly and with too much secrecy, she said, and Congress should completely re-evaluate it.
"People are frightened," Ebel said. "They are angry.á They are up in arms that their individual constitutional rights could be abrogated á by a piece of legislation that they did not know was coming and they have no opportunity to react to."
NH Sen’s Wife Safe After Knife-Point Abduction, Robbery
by Bethany Stone and Jordan Carleo-Evangelist
WASHINGTON - Kathleen Gregg, the wife of New Hampshire Sen. Judd Gregg, was abducted at knifepoint Tuesday from her suburban Washington home and forced to withdraw money from a bank, authorities said. She was released unharmed after providing cash to her kidnappers.
Ms. Gregg, 52, found two men in her home in the posh suburb of McLean, Va., when she arrived at about 9:30 a.m., according to police in Fairfax County, Va. The two men - one white, one black - demanded money and one drew a knife, police spokeswoman Shelley Broderick said.
One of the men used Ms. Gregg's car to drive her to a nearby branch of Wachovia bank, while his partner followed in another car, police said. The men forced Ms. Gregg to enter the bank and withdraw an undisclosed amount of money, then grabbed the cash and sped away in a silver Cheverolet Monte Carlo with Virginia license plates.
The suspects were last seen headed toward Washington.
It is not known if the abductors knew that Ms. Gregg is married to a U.S. senator.
"This morning Kathy Gregg was a victim of a violent robbery," Sen. Gregg's spokesman, Jeff Turcotte, said in a statement. "Her life was threatened, and it was a terrifying experience. Thanks to quick decisions made by Mrs. Gregg, she is doing fine and out of harm's way."
Gregg's office declined to comment further because of the police investigation, but neighbors in the quiet suburb were shocked by the assault.
"Nothing ever happens here," said a neighbor, who asked that her name not be used. "I'll be a little more careful, I think, make sure the locks are locked in my car."
She added that the assault on Ms. Gregg was especially disturbing because "she's pretty sharp, she'd be paying attention."
"It's a nice, safe neighborhood," said a longtime neighborhood resident, who also spoke on condition of anonymity. "I wouldn't expect this to be something that's going to be happening a lot." He said the neighborhood is far from a main road and rarely sees any commotion.
But Fairfax police said they're looking into a possible connection between yesterday's assault and an abduction that took place in a 7-Eleven parking lot about a mile away little more than a week ago.
In that case, a 29-year-old woman and her two small children were kidnapped at gunpoint by an unidentified white male and forced to drive to a nearby bank and withdraw money. The kidnapper directed the woman to drop him off on the same block as Ms. Gregg's bank. The mother and children were not hurt.
"It's definitely on the top of our minds that they be related," said Officer Courtney Young, a spokeswoman for the Fairfax County Police Department.
New Hampshire legislators expressed relief over Ms. Gregg's safe return.
"This was obviously a very traumatic event for Kathy," Rep. Charles Bass (R-N.H.) said in a statement Tuesday afternoon. "My thoughts are with her and the entire Gregg family as they deal with the aftermath of this terrible ordeal. I am hopeful that the perpetrators of this crime will soon be caught and punished to the fullest extent of the law."
"We're extremely, extremely happy that Mrs. Gregg is safe," said T.J. Crawford, spokesman for Rep. Jeb Bradley (R-N.H.).
Sen. John Sununu (R-N.H.) also issued a message of support for the Gregg family.
"This was an outrageous and horrific crime," he said. "It's an incredible relief to know that Kathy Gregg is safe, and we can only hope that her assailants will be caught quickly and brought to justice."
