Sourse: natural sleep aids
I once heard historian John D’Emilio speak about the “leaping and creeping” of social change. Women certainly understand this concept — trying to change the world for the better, periodically celebrating small victories, when all of a sudden a convergence of events creates huge and significant change.On Tuesday, Dec. 8, a convergence of events resulted in tremendous victories for women. Massachusetts Attorney General Martha Coakley won the Senate primary and is likely to be the 16th pro-choice Democratic woman elected to the Senate. And Democratic women in the Senate led the fight to defeat the Nelson-Hatch amendment (aka the Stupak amendment), which would eliminate insurance coverage for abortion for millions of women. Every pro-choice Democratic woman in the House and Senate voted against this anti-choice effort.
One victory shows women know how to win. One victory shows why women need to win.
Massachusetts has been an extraordinarily difficult state for women in politics. Like Rodney Dangerfield, they get no respect in the political world. Several women have run unsuccessfully for governor — and, of course, the state has never elected a woman to the Senate. But change is in the air.In 2007, Niki Tsongas became the first woman elected to the House from Massachusetts in a generation. In the 2008 presidential primaries, many women, led by Attorney General Martha Coakley, worked hard for Hillary Clinton. Male political leaders, for the most part, fell in line with Sen. Ted Kennedy and supported Barack Obama. But ultimately Hillary won the state decisively. Yes, the winds of change are blowing.
Women in Massachusetts — like so many others where men control the political machine — are fed up with being left out and disrespected. As a result, women came out strong for Martha, and two-thirds of her donors were women — energized by their determination that this time the woman would win.
Here’s my take-away image of change in Massachusetts: seven out of eight men in Massachusetts’ congressional delegation endorsed their friend, Rep. Mike Capuano. Tsongas — the state’s only congresswoman — was the only member of the delegation to endorse Coakley. And there was Tsongas, up on that stage with the winner on election night! There’s a new political force to be reckoned with in Massachusetts, and it is demanding respect from the old establishment.
Tuesday also showed us, once again, why we need more women in office. Under the guise of protecting the status quo, the Stupak-Nelson effort was a back-door attempt to restrict women’s access to abortion. And it was the women in the House and Senate who fought back hard against this effort.
In a New York Times op-ed, Rep. Bart Stupak claimed that his proposal simply protected the status quo that prohibits federal funds in health care from being used for abortions. But the “status quo” he wants to protect is wrong and terribly harmful to millions of women. And Stupak’s measure goes much further.
In describing existing law, Stupak notes that more than 8 million Americans covered by federal health care plans do not have access to abortion coverage. That is the “status quo” — and it includes not just federal employees, but women in the armed forces, Peace Corps volunteers, women who depend on the federal Indian Health Services plan, and many others.
The Washington Post recently highlighted the story of federal attorney D.J. Feldman. After struggling with infertility, she and her husband were delighted to learn she was pregnant. But sadly, she learned at 11 weeks that the child she was carrying had serious brain abnormalities and would not survive outside the womb. Her doctor cautioned that continuing the pregnancy could have serious health consequences and advocated terminating the pregnancy. But Feldman is a federal employee and, despite the health risks, her health plan would not cover the $9,000 procedure. And so, at an incredibly difficult time, Feldman found a way to pay for a procedure she did not want, but needed. Many women less financially secure would simply not have that option.
That is the status quo.
This issue is not an esoteric philosophical point to be discussed over brandy and cigars. This is an issue of life or death, of protecting women’s health and ability to have children in the future. And no one understands this better than the pro-choice Democratic women in the House and Senate. As Martha Coakley succinctly put it, this issue is “personal with me.”
The leap forward that happened Tuesday makes it clear that women see the world differently than men. Our perspectives need to be represented in our representative democracy. And when the establishment won’t include us, we will mobilize to claim our share of political power. When we succeed in electing more women like Martha Coakley, the Bart Stupaks and Ben Nelsons of the world won’t have the power to define, create, or expand the “status quo” for women.
Ellen Malcolm is the president of EMILY’s List, an organization that works to elect pro-choice Democratic women to office.

http://www.politicsdaily.com/2009/12/11/coakley-wins-nelson-loses-a-victory-for-women/