Florida state Sens. Evelyn Lynn, R-Daytona Beach, and Stephen Wise, R-Jacksonville (Photo: flsenate.gov/Office of Senate President)

Two state lawmakers — one Democrat, one Republican — have come together to file legislation that would require pregnancy resource centers, or crisis pregnancy centers, to protect the private medical information of women who visit them.

The Pregnancy Confidentiality Act was filed by state Rep. Lori Berman, D-Delray Beach, and Sen. Evelyn Lynn, R-Daytona Beach.

These centers, commonly known as CPCs, are religious-based centers that dissuaded women from having abortions. In Florida, some CPCs receive state funds: Last year the state’s pregnancy resource services received $2 million in taxpayer money — a fixed amount it has received each of the past six years — while other health centers saw deep cuts to their state funding.

As Marcos Restrepo here at The Florida Independent wrote in October of 2010, despite their state funding, the centers have received little oversight and regulation from state agencies in the past. Berman and Lynn’s legislation would reverse the trend by creating a regulation.

The Florida Alliance of Planned Parenthood Affiliates wrote in a press release today that Lynn and Berman’s bills focus on “protecting privacy of Floridian’s who utilize facilities in the ‘pregnancy resource center’ industry often referred to as ‘crisis pregnancy centers.’”

According to the release:

These centers are currently not regulated medical facilities and are not mandated to keep information provided private and confidential.

…

“Crisis pregnancy centers” are non-medical facilities that often provide free pregnancy testing and ultrasounds and counsel pregnant women against abortion and emergency birth control services. Many receive government funding and often advertise themselves in a way that suggests that they offer comprehensive reproductive health services by trained doctors and nurses, even when that is not the case.

This bill will ensure that women and men who are given a medical diagnosis or information at a “crisis pregnancy center” will have their personal and medical information protected, despite the fact that these are not medical facilities.

A state senator recently filed legislation that would commend “the compassionate work of the volunteers and staff at Florida’s pregnancy resource centers.” The bill would celebrate CPCs providing ”important support and resources for women who choose childbirth over abortion.”

Since U.S. Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius announced her decision, reproductive health advocates have expressed disappointment and claim that the decision was based on political calculations, and not on scientific research.

The Center for Reproductive Rights has reopened “its 2005 lawsuit against the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for imposing unnecessary age restrictions on emergency contraceptives, and seek immediate relief to allow broader access to available drugs,” a new press release from the group states.

The group has also sought to add “Sebelius as a defendant in the reopened case for her role in overruling the FDA’s approval of Plan B One-Step last week,” according to the press release.

According to the group:

This fight is far from over. We intend to take every legal step necessary to hold the FDA and this administration accountable for its extraordinary actions to block women from safe, effective emergency contraception,” said Nancy Northup, president and CEP for the Center for Reproductive Rights. “It has been ten years of battling to bring emergency contraception out from behind the pharmacy counter. The FDA cannot simply continue moving the goal posts down the field for women’s reproductive health care.”

While U.S. District Court Judge Edward Korman found the contempt motion moot because late last night, the FDA decided to deny the 2001 Citizen Petition to lift age restrictions on emergency contraceptives— two years after the judge had ordered the agency to fairly reconsider the petition— he proceeded to invite the Center to reopen its 2005 lawsuit and agreed that the Center could add Secretary Sebelius as a defendant.

During the hearing, Judge Korman repeatedly noted the striking similarities between recent events —including last night’s denial of the Citizen Petition and Secretary Sebelius’ unprecedented decision to intervene and block the unrestricted sale of the drug—and the findings in 2009 that the FDA under the Bush Administration had “acted in bad faith and in response to political pressure.”

“The FDA has essentially been holding women’s reproductive health hostage to political calculations,” said Suzanne Novak, the senior staff attorney who argued for the Center for Reproductive Rights.

The Washington Post reports today that “Korman said he was willing to hear arguments over whether the agency should have allowed the sale of the morning-after pill to girls younger than 17 without a prescription, and he instructed advocacy groups to file the appropriate legal motions.”

According to new information, a provision in the Affordable Care Act has helped 2.5 million young adults gain health insurance since the law took effect.

It was previously estimated that about 1 million young adults under the age of 26 were affected by President Obama’s health care reform law, but new reports suggest it was more than twice that number.

The Associated Press reports:

Under the health overhaul, children can remain on their parents’ health insurance plans until they turn 26, and families have flocked to sign up young adults making the transition to work in a challenging economic environment. But the fate of President Barack Obama’s signature domestic accomplishment remains uncertain, with the Supreme Court scheduled to hear a constitutional challenge next year, and Republican presidential candidates vowing to repeal it.

“The increase in coverage among 19- to 25-year-olds can be directly attributed to the Affordable Care Act’s new dependent coverage provision,” said a draft report from the Health and Human Services Department. “Initial gains from this policy have continued to grow as … students graduate from high school and college.” A copy of the report was obtained by The Associated Press.

…

Using unpublished quarterly statistics from the government’s ongoing National Health Interview Survey, analysts in Sebelius’ policy office determined that nearly 36 percent of those age 19-25 were uninsured in the third calendar quarter of 2010, before the law’s provision took effect.

That translates to more than 10.5 million people.

By the second calendar quarter of 2011, the proportion of uninsured young adults had dropped to a little over 27 percent, or about 8 million people.

The difference — nearly 2.5 million getting coverage — can only be the result of the health care law, administration officials said, because the number covered by public programs like Medicaid went down slightly.

While most of the health care reform law does not go into effect until 2014, the provision in question went into effect last fall and most employer health insurance plans started following through with this change on Jan. 1, the AP reports.

From The Santa Fe New Mexican:

While the 21 percent increase last year affected more than 40,000 individual customers, this one potentially will affect 27,000 policyholders, Franchini said. Policyholders may have switched plans, moved to Medicare or simply dropped health insurance, he said.

Blue Cross Blue Shield of New Mexico did not answer questions about how many people would be affected by the most recent rate-increase proposal, whether customers had been alerted about the erroneous letters or why the increase was needed.

[…]

According to the state Insurance Division, health care costs in New Mexico are going up an average of 12 percent per year. Those costs include doctor visits, nursing care, hospital stays, laboratory tests and diagnostic tests such as X-rays.

Weiss Ratings, a company that rates the financial health of insurance companies, released a report earlier this year saying that nationally, medical expenses declined by 1.3 percent to 3 percent — the first decline in a decade.

A 2009 report by The Henry J. Kaiser Foundation, which analyzes health care policies and costs, says new medical technology, prescription drug use and the rise in chronic diseases have contributed the most to rising health care costs. Another Kaiser report found the increase in health-insurance premiums, out-of-pocket health spending and taxes for health care far outpaced both inflation and people’s average gross income increases.

In 2009, the market penetration of Blue Cross Blue Shield was 35 percent, according to information compiled (PDF) by the Center for American Progress. Presbyterian Health, a non-profit health group, comes in second, covering 30 percent of the state.

The latter came under even more scrutiny two years ago after raising rates by 24 percent and providing even less justification than Blue Cross Blue Shield (BCBS), submitting just over 30 pages in information to the state’s Insurance Division of the New Mexico Public Regulation Commission, compared to BCBS’s 100 pages.

Between 2004 and 2010, Presbyterian Health rate hikes totaled 88 percent, while BCBS pushed its premiums up by 150 percent.

Through the The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA), states are obligated to monitor trends in the rise of service costs to patients towards including or excluding inequitable policies by 2014, when health benefit exchanges are scheduled to go live. The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services has outlined to state authorities what an acceptable rate hike justification document should look like — the department has signed off on New Mexico’s rate review program.

The federal government encourages Individuals in search of affordable health care options to view this website for policy recommendations. The site will also monitor pending rate increases of ten percent or more.

Last week, Sen. Jeff Bingaman (D-N.M.) wrote in a public statement the state has the second highest rate of uninsured residents in the country — 24.7 percent.

The study confirmed a determination by the Swiss High Court several years ago. The court there ruled that a person on HIV medications that have achieved an undetectable viral load for six months or more and were not infected with any other sexually transmitted infections were not legally contagious.

In this new study, researchers follow 1,763 couples in 13 study locations in the Americas, Africa and Asia. The couples were sero-discordant — or magnetic couples — which means one partner was HIV-positive and the other was HIV-negative. Couples were randomly assigned into two study groups. In the first group, the HIV-positive partner received HIV medications only when their blood work showed the virus was beginning to do damage to the immune system. In the second group, the HIV-positive partner was started on medications immediately, regardless of what blood tests show.

The second group was found to reduce infections by 96 percent, reports the BBC. The group where the medications were started immediately saw only one seroconversion, while the other group saw 27 seroconversions. The study findings were so dramatic, NIH researchers pulled the plug on the program four years early in order to extend the medication intervention to all of the couples and prevent new infections. The study started in 2005 was supposed to last until 2015.

The study is likely to fuel the continued push by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in Atlanta for a prevention strategy called “test and treat.” In that strategy, health workers work to identify all people infected with the virus in high prevalence areas. As soon as someone tests positive for HIV, they are started on anti-retrovirals. The CDC is currently piloting the idea in Washington D.C. and Brooklyn NY, two areas with significant HIV prevalence.

Targeting viral loads, which is a measure of free virus in the blood, in order to reduce it has long been a goal in treating HIV. However, it has also begun to show promise as a prevention intervention as well. However, it is not without detractors.

Some people argue that the medications are being foisted on HIV-positive individuals who may not fully understand the implications of taking the toxic meds for the rest of their lives. They may also not feel empowered to challenge health care providers and become full partners in their own care. The final concern that is expressed about test and treat is the issue of medical necessity. There are no long term studies showing what, if any, benefit taking the medications early in the infection course may have over the long term effects of the medications themselves.

Regardless of those concerns, prevention advocates hailed the discovery, reports the Chicago Tribune.

“This is amazing news,” said Michael Sidibe, executive director of the Joint United Nations Programme on HIV/AIDS. “Prevention can be a reality. The science is strong — so strong that we must use it.”

Using those medications right away may be an issue, since the medication can run $15,000 or more per year. Developing countries continue to struggle to afford the anti-HIV medications, even when they have access to cheaper generics. And here in the U.S. the federally funded AIDS Drug Assistance Program has been under strain across the country. The strain has resulted from more people starting treatment sooner as the result of a 2009 change in treatment protocols as well as the economic pressures of increased unemployment and stagnant wages.

Shortly after 8 p.m. Thursday night, State Rep. Dave Agema (R-Greenville) posted the following status update to his Facebook page announcing the amendment:

I had an amendment put into the education budget that takes 5% away from colleges that give same sex/unmarried benefits and places up to $60 million of that into the MPSRS K-12 budget if colleges do not stop skirting the law and the will of the people. Colleges can’t say they are short of money when they skirt the law and give such benefits. The Dems didn’t like this – it passed.

The approved budget cuts millions of dollars in state funds from the state’s K-12 system while shifting some of the funding from the school aid fund into community college funding. State universities and community college were cut 15 percent in the Senate version of the funding, but in the House funding proposal, those entities are cut by 22 percent unless they hold tuition increases to no higher than 7.1 percent.

Both bills now head into a conference committee where they will be combined into a final bill, which will then face up and down votes in both chambers. If approved, it would head to Gov. Rick Snyder’s desk.

Agema has introduced the same amendment measure for years without much success. But with the public battle between the state civil service commission and Republican lawmakers over that MCSC January decision to extend partner benefits to unrelated adults living in the same home as state employees, the amendment is likely a head nod to anti-gay activists.

The GOP majority in the House fell short of the needed 2/3 majority to over ride the benefits allowing the proposal to become law. That happened over the protests of Gov. Rick Snyder and the GOP dominated Senate, which easily mustered the 2/3 majority to approve the resolution rescinding the MCSC decision.

The move by the House to put the penalty in the education budget raised the ire of advocates for the Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender community which has fought hard to attain and protect partner benefits are colleges and universities in the state.

“Representative Agema has used creative accounting to force Michigan’s colleges and universities to deny their employees’ families access to good health. Our institutions of higher learning could now suffer a five percent penalty for operating in a responsible and forward thinking way toward the very individuals that work hard to make our students successful and prepared for the world economy,” said Emily Dievendorf, director of policy for Equality Michigan. “Budgeting taxpayer dollars is not a game for our our elected leaders to play but an opportunity for each legislator to demonstrate their values and commitment to the well being of their constituency. Rep. Agema’s amendment is a thinly veiled expression of personal ideology and not a reflection of what is best for the families he represents. This is exactly why no Michigander should lose interest when their legislator starts talking dollars. We are reminded today that budget negotiations can result in less food on the table and basic and essential rights being stripped away.”

Speaking at Legend’s Bar & Grill before a dozen students from Iowa State University, largely members of the College Republicans, told them he supported Democrat Hillary Clinton during the 2008 primaries. Karger said he would support a Democrat if they fell in line with his beliefs, and he supported Barack Obama when he became the eventual nominee. But he also said Obama has been a disappointment to him and the gay community, and that’s what pushed him into the race.

Karger has always been a Republican and worked on the campaigns of former presidents Gerald Ford, Ronald Reagan and George H. W. Bush. Over the past 10 years, Karger — who is openly gay — spent most of his time as an activist for gay rights, especially fighting the Mormon church over Proposition 8.

He said part of the reason he’s running is to try to influence the debate among the Republican party, to get them away from an ideological divide over social issues and become a “big tent party” once again. That’s why he’s trying to visit with college students.

“Reince Priebus is making that a big part of his initiative is to bring in younger people into the Republican party,” Karger said of the new head of the Republican National Committee. “And I’ve heard him say that — and I’ve talked to him about that — and I’m clearly the only Republican running who is actively trying to bring new and younger members into the party.”

Karger won a straw poll at a college campus recently in New Hampshire, beating former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney. He attributed that to spending a week at a time in the Granite State repeatedly, meeting with voters. He said college students are typically more accepting of his sexuality and are able to get around it to talk about policy and other larger concerns.

Karger admits he’s taking a page out of Obama’s playbook by targeting youth voters, but believes Obama is “vulnerable” in 2012 despite a “bleak field” of GOP candidates emerging.

When students asked him about the size of government, Karger said some social programs will have to stay because some people just can’t take care of themselves. But he said the size of entitlements needs to be on the table.

Photo by Tyler Kingkade/The Iowa Independent

“I’m not making any finite recommendations but … I’m not running from it,” Karger later told The Iowa Independent. “Because of health care [improvements], people are living far longer than they were when Medicare was passed, when Social Security was passed.”

Along with him, Karger brought frisbees that read “Fred Who?” to pass out. He said the frisbees are intentional because it’s part of his initiative to get people healthy. “It may not be throwing frisbess,” he admitted, but he wants to encourage people to take small steps like walking up stairs, going for short runs and making an effort to live healthy. That’s part of why health care costs are so high, he claimed.

Karger said part of his campaign will be focused on listening to ideas from potential voters rather than simply throwing out his policy ideas right away. But he will focus on fiscal issues over social issues, such as gay rights or a woman’s right to choose.

“I want to bring back that entrepreneurial spirit and get people to stop relying on government,” Karger said.

He also declared he would not accept any matching dollars from the federal government for his campaign. He said there has been too much money being raised.

Raising nearly hundreds of millions of dollars just before entering the White House, as Obama did, makes health care reform packages and stimulus programs with price tags near $1 billion seem like no big deal, Karger asserted.

Recently proposed federal and state family-planning spending cuts would disproportionately hinder low-income Latinas’ access to reproductive care, said several women’s reproductive care providers and advocates during a teleconference organized this week by Planned Parenthood Federation of America.

Clinic directors from local Planned Parenthood affiliates near predominately Hispanic communities illustrated how federal and state legislation might impact low-income Hispanic women, many of whom are uninsured and rely on grant-funded services offered by Planned Parenthood or other community health clinics to obtain low-cost contraception, gynecological exams, testing for sexually transmitted diseases and family-planning education.

“Threats to Planned Parenthood at the federal level mean threats to our ability to provide vital primary and prenatal care to Latinas and their families via Medicaid,” said Guadalupe Rodriguez, director of public affairs at Planned Parenthood Mar Monte, whose health centers serve 29 counties in California.

Despite threats from the Republican-led U.S. House, the approved 2011 budget maintained Planned Parenthood funding for family planning services; however, in the final spending plan, programs that provide low-cost reproductive health care access and pregnancy prevention received significant cuts. The appropriation to Title X of the Public Health Service Act was reduced from $317 million to $300 million, and the budget cut approximately $500 million from the Women, Infants, and Children program, which provides federal grants to states for supplemental food, health care referrals and nutrition education for low-income pregnant, breastfeeding and non-breast feeding postpartum women, as well as infants and children up to age 5 who are found to be “at a nutritional risk.”

According to the U.S. Census Bureau, the U.S. Hispanic population grew by 43 percent during the past decade, to 50.5 million people, making up 16 percent of the total U.S. population. In 2009, 23 percent of Planned Parenthood patients nationwide, approximately 620,000 people, were Hispanic, said Destiny Lopez, director of Latino engagement at Planned Parenthood Federation of America. She noted that the number of male Hispanic patients increased by 191 percent in the last decade.

Lopez said that in the nine states where the Hispanic population more than doubled between 2000 and 2010, in all but one have several measures — such as family planning cuts, abortion restrictions and abstinence-only education programs — been introduced that could potentially restrict access to reproductive health care.

“With the attacks on women’s health care in Congress and in the states, even more Latinas could be cut off from basic reproductive health care like birth control, cancer screenings, and other essential services,” said Elizabeth Barajas-Román, director of policy at the National Latina Institute for Reproductive Health.

Barajas-Román said that women with* legal status have to wait five years to qualify for public health care, including access to reproductive services such as birth control. These cuts will make it even harder for these women to get care, she said.

In Texas — where Latinos make up 37 percent of the state’s population, according to 2009 census figures — the state House voted this month to cut $60 million from family planning programs in their version of the state budget.

Last year, the federal government designated $155 million in new funding for the Personal Responsibility Education Program, a state grant program that funds sex education that includes information on abstinence, contraception and pregnancy- and STD-prevention. But state lawmakers only have until the end of the month to decide whether to apply for approximately $9 million of this grant money — meaning they might not put in a request.

“The [Texas] House budget looks terrible,” said Patricio Gonzalez, president and CEO of Planned Parenthood Association of Hidalgo County, the seventh-largest county in Texas, located on the Texas-Mexican border.

Gonzalez said the funding cut proposal translates into nearly 70 percent in cuts to family planning services, which he predicted would lead to the shutdown of eight to 10 of his clinics, affecting approximately 18,000 women.

Lillian Tamayo, president and CEO of Planned Parenthood of South Florida and the Treasure Coast, which covers Key West to Indian River, said that Hispanic women make up 20 percent of the population in her area and have disproportionately higher pregnancy, birth and cancer rates.

“The Florida Legislature, rather than being concerned on the creation of jobs, what they’ve done is dismantle women’s rights and attack women’s health,” Tamayo said, noting the 18 bills the state has introduced related to reproductive rights restrictions. ”It’s a wholesale attack on women.”

*Correction: Previously TAI reported that Barajas-Román said that women without legal status have to wait five years to qualify for health care, when in fact she was referring to women with legal status. We regret the error.

The ADA provides federal civil rights protections to persons with disabilities in public accommodations, employment and state and local government services. The DOJ learned that public and private trade schools for barbering, cosmetology, massage therapy, home health care work and other occupations, as well as state licensing agencies, may be illegally denying individuals with HIV/AIDS admission to trade schools or occupational licenses because of their HIV status. Because HIV cannot be transmitted by casual contact or by circumstances present in these occupations, according to the DOJ, the status of such individuals is irrelevant.

In the letter, Assistant Attorney General for the Civil Rights Division Thomas E. Perez asked state officials to review their respective jurisdictions’ admission and licensing criteria for trade schools and licensing agencies to identify the existence of any criteria that unlawfully exclude or discriminate against persons with HIV/AIDS, and to make necessary adjustments to bring those programs into compliance with ADA.

“It is critical that we continue to work o eradicate discriminatory and stigmatizing treatment towards individuals with HIV based on unfounded fears and stereotypes,” Perez said. “The ADA clearly protects individuals with HIV and other disabilities from this kind of exclusion or marginalization.”

The letter follows a December 2010 settlement agreement with Modern Hairstyling Institute Inc., a private cosmetology school in Puerto Rico, for delaying the admission of an HIV-positive person. The agreement requires the school to remove questions about applicants’ HIV/AIDS status and to promptly enroll the aggrieved individual in its program.

DOJ officials have also developed a white paper regarding HIV/AIDS and the Americans with Disabilities Act.

The National HIV/AIDS Strategy has called for a significant reduction of the stigma and discrimination experienced by people living with HIV. It is believed such practices undermines ongoing efforts to encourage all people to learn their HIV status, and to disclose their status to others who can provide understanding and support.

In an email sent out to supporters Tuesday, Life Always board member Rev. Derek McCoy touted the importance of the ad, which he said is already being run on MSNBC and Fox News. #

Calling her a “courageous woman,” McCoy wrote that Johnson left Planned Parenthood in order to expose the truth about the organization’s “reliance on abortion income.” #

The ad is not likely to see the controversy that has come as a result of other Life Always ads, but this one is still directed at Planned Parenthood, enemy No. 1 for the group and its sister organization, Heroic Media: #

As you can imagine, the pro-abortion crowd is doing all they can to silence her. Planned Parenthood filed a restraining order to keep her from talking. Activists are launching character attacks. But she will not be silenced. Her message is too important. #

A blurb on the Life Always website (ThatsAbortion.com) says that Planned Parenthood’s claims that 83 percent of its clients receive services to prevent unintended pregnancy are mere attempts at minimizing its role in the abortion industry: “If we kill a pet, it’s a crime, yet if Planned Parenthood ends the life of a baby, it’s defended as ‘a woman’s right to choose.’ Where’s the outrage?” #

Johnson is slated to speak at Care Net’s National Pregnancy Center Conference in Orlando in September. #