Bush, in his 2006 State of the Union address, tried to take credit for the steep decline in abortion rates. Fact-checkers quickly pointed out that he was boasting about the outcomes of policies started by his predecessor, Bill Clinton. Noticeably, Bush avoided taking credit this year even though a recent study revealed that the decline in abortion rates continue through the Bush years too. His speech-writers must have done their homework this time and realized they would have been making the same mistake if they had assigned the downward trend to Bush.

The recent study I refer to is by the Guttmacher Institute and, as I mentioned, it discovered the nation continues to experience steep declines in the abortion rate. It would have been easy for the Bush camp to hang a big Mission Accomplished banner over that fact. Certainly, the so-called "anti-abortion" movement was quick to take credit. "A number of states over the last five or six years have enhanced their pro-life laws, such as requirements for informed consent and parental notice," said one spokesman, "When those laws take effect, the rate of abortion drops. I think the data they're getting is reflecting that change." But a closer examination of the study findings show that the areas experiencing the greatest declines, representing 2/3 of the decrease of abortions, were actually the strongest pro-choice regions in the US, where abortion clinics are numerous and prevention a priority. The New York Times wrote a terrific editorial about it this weekend, here it is in its entirety below.

New York Times

January 26, 2008

Editorial
Behind the Abortion Decline

Coinciding with this month’s 35th anniversary of the Supreme Court’s ruling that legalized abortion, a new study shows that the United States continues to make progress on reducing the abortion rate. The progress would be greater if more was done to avoid unintended pregnancies.

Between 2000 and 2005, the last year in the study by the Guttmacher Institute, the number of abortions performed yearly dropped from 1.3 million to 1.2 million, the fewest since 1974. The proportion of pregnancies ending in abortion also declined significantly.

Abortion opponents like the National Right to Life Committee seized upon the numbers as vindication for their strategy of demonizing abortion and making it harder for women to obtain one. Many states now mandate counseling sessions beforehand. But a harder look at the data suggests another explanation.

Almost two-thirds of the decline in the total number of abortions can be traced to eight jurisdictions with few or no abortion restrictions — New York, New Jersey, Massachusetts, Illinois, California, Oregon, Washington State and the District of Columbia. These are places, notes the Guttmacher Institute’s president, Sharon Camp, that have shown a commitment to real sex education, largely departing from the Bush administration’s abstinence-only approach. These jurisdictions also help women avoid unintended pregnancies by making contraception widely available.

The lesson: prevention works. Restrictions on abortion serve mainly to hurt poor women by postponing abortions until later in pregnancy. While shifting social mores may change some people’s behavior, the best practical strategy for reducing abortions is to focus on helping women avoid unwanted pregnancies.

One of the most intriguing findings of the abortion study has to do with RU-486, which allows women to safely terminate a pregnancy in its first weeks without surgery. Guttmacher Institute researchers found that a significant decline in the number of abortion providers over the past decade is being offset by an increase in providers that offer the drug.

This growing access, along with refinements in ultrasound imaging help explain the positive trend toward earlier abortions. It has long been true that nearly 90 percent of abortions in this country occur in the first trimester, but the number that occur within the first eight weeks of pregnancy has increased sharply.

Still, in 2005 about one in five pregnancies ended in abortion, emphasizing the need for a national emphasis on better sex education and access to contraception.

Realizing how awkward it is for many women to carry around (let alone purchase) condoms, Proper Attire has come to the rescue. Using design to make their product discreet, Proper Attire has adorned condom packages in stylish looks such as the sweet, and poetic, fig-leafed motif pattern (above). According to the company's press release:

"PROPER ATTIRE(TM) is making a lifestyle statement with the premiere of the new and stylish condom that is being called the "must-have" fashion accessory. Featuring a chic package with a unique fig leaf print, PROPER ATTIRE(TM) was designed to encourage women to feel more comfortable about carrying and buying condoms. That's why it's "Required for entry(TM)."

All proceeds from Proper Attire condoms will benefit Planned Parenthood Federation of America. Now you won't have to feel embarrassed when the condom package spills from your purse, just fashionable.

Seventeen magazine has challenged its readers to dream big with their campaign What's Your Plan A. teaming up with the Candies Foundation (check out their great "Pause Before You Play" campaign), Seventeen magazine asks readers to "show us what life dream is keeping you from getting pregnant." Readers are asked to submit a video detailing what their dreams are to the What's Your Plan A? You Tube page and, by doing so, enter to win a trip to New York, including airfare, hotel stay, and an invitation to The Candie's Foundation Event to Prevent -- plus $1,000 to get that special dream off the ground. Prevention never sounded so inspiring.

Leave it up to the smart folks at Princeton University to realize that the promising futures of women students shouldn't be jeopardized by an unintended pregnancy. The ivy league college, to remedy what Congress shamefully has not, decided to subsidize the cost of contraception for students after changes wrought by the Federal Deficit Reduction Act sent college birth control skyrocketing, in some cases, by 900%.

Using a discretionary fund of about $69,000, the university was able to lower the price of a month's supply of generic birth control pills to $6, from the $15 it cost a few months earlier. Mary Hoban, an official with the American College Health Association told Women in Higher Education, "It's new and it's going to be pretty unusual." They don't call them geniuses for nothing.

Today is the 35th anniversary of Roe v Wade, the Supreme Court decision that legalized abortion. For most Americans, the protracted battle appears never-ending, and for that matter, never-changing. The abortion debate has become political white noise, something you hear and tune out simultaneously. But while we've been half listening, the conflict has changed; it has broadened. Roe v. Wade is no longer just about abortion rights. Those set on overturning Roe have their eyes on a larger prize: banning contraception. And they've got the support of at least one leading presidential contender.

Today, Governor Mike Huckabee is scheduled to travel to Georgia to commemorate the anniversary of Roe v. Wade. There he plans to join Georgia Right to Life to lend his support, as well as the focus of the national media, to HR 536. This legislation, also called the Human Life Amendment, is a state constitutional amendment that reclassifies the most effective and popular forms of contraception as abortion. The goal of the amendment is to create a direct challenge to Roe v. Wade while also defining life as beginning at fertilization. The anti-abortion movement believes that hormonal contraception (the pill, the patch, the depo shot, the nuva ring, the IUD) can destroy a fertilized egg. By setting in law the assertion - the unproveable assertion - that life begins at the moment of fertilization, the most common forms of contraception become abortion.

James Bopp, a leading anti-abortion attorney, in a memo to pro-life activists, explained what the practical applications of HR 536 would be. Establishing in law that life begins at the moment of fertilization could lead to, he writes, "enforcement of homicide laws against pregnant women, restricting the activities of pregnant women, outlawing contraception and so on." He continues, "The big picture is that the Human Life Amendment creates
uncertainty in the law leaving it up to future legislatures to establish implementing laws and up to enforcement officials and courts to sort out what the law might mean in various applications." In other words, let's leave your right to use contraception up to your local assemblymember, district attorney and sheriff.

Huckabee appears comfortable with the implications of defining the most commonly used forms of contraception as abortion. In an April 2007 interview with the Des Moines Register editorial board, Huckabee explained his position this way, "There are some forms of birth control that really are the destruction of a fertilized egg." One of the editors offered a follow-up question, "Should the government ban that sort of birth control?" Huckabee replied, "Yeah, I personally think there are better ways to deal with contraception than destroying a human life. So, again I'm going to say that I'm always going to make my position on the side of protecting human life."

That's why, for many pro-life leaders, Huckabee's support of their anti-contraception campaigns makes him the real deal. Randy Alcorn, author of Does the Birth Control Pill Cause Abortions? (Alcorn's answer: yes) earned a spot on Huckabee's Faith and Family Values
Coalition beside others who are deeply opposed to contraception.

Huckabee is not the only candidate wooing the anti-contraception base. Mitt Romney, as Governor of Massachussetts, vetoed a contraception bill claiming the emergency contraception was an "abortive" drug. The McCain campaign boasts he has always opposed funding of family planning programs. Neither of these two frontrunners have embraced the anti-contraception rhethoric and strategy as fully as Huckabee, however. When Huckabee describes himself as "consistently pro-life" this is what he means. If only the majority of pro-life voters who overwhelmingly support contraception understood that.

The Atlanta Journal Constitution ran a fantastic op-ed by Dr. Robert Hatcher today. Dr. Hatcher draws attention to presidential candidate Mike Huckabee's planned visit to the Georgia on January 22, the anniversary of Roe. Huckabee chose to visit Georgia on the symbolic day with the goal of drawing public to HR 536, a bill that would define personhood at the moment of fertilization. What Dr. Hatcher reveals is what most Georgians, and Americans, don't know: Mike Huckabee is in lock-step with the right to life establishment and its war on contracpetion. HR 536, if passed, will redefine the most commonly used forms of birth control, (like the pill, the patch, the depo-shot, the ring, the IUD) as abortion. HR536 lays the groundwork for banning the most effective forms of birth control in Georgia.

Below is Dr. Hatcher's op-ed:

Huckstering points up bill's dangers
by Robert Hatcher, for the Journal-Constitution

I have been a physician at Grady Memorial Hospital for 44 years, in family planning for 41 years and a professor of gynecology and obstetrics at Emory for 39 years. I have seen the importance of family planning, including birth control, for the women of Georgia. I am concerned about the impending visit of former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee on Jan. 22, the 35th anniversary of Roe v. Wade, the Supreme Court ruling legalizing abortion.

He is here to encourage the passage of House Resolution 536, supported by Georgia Right to Life. Most Georgians are unaware of the full implications of HR 536, which designates personhood in the state of Georgia beginning at fertilization and continuing to natural death. The intention is to ban legal abortion in Georgia. Additionally, defining personhood as starting at fertilization is contrary to the medical definition of pregnancy by the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, which is at implantation --- when the embryo adheres to the wall of the uterus.HR 536 would impact all hormonal methods of birth control, including birth control pills, the patch, the Nuva-Ring, injections like Depo-Provera and both currently available IUDs. It could even prevent the use of some forms of assisted reproductive technology and cast a shadow on the reporting of miscarriages.

Huckabee is coming to Georgia to highlight his support of legislation that could prevent public health facilities in Georgia from providing the contraceptives that 95 percent of women use at some time in their lives. Is this what anyone in the United States would want to see happen?Family planning was designated one of the top 100 health breakthroughs of the 20th century by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. We know, scientifically, that family planning, spacing the amount of time between the birth of children, access to prenatal care and safe, legal abortion contribute to the health of women and families. I have never understood the lack of support and in some cases overt opposition to funding for family planning by those who oppose abortion. Currently fewer than 50 percent of Georgia's poorest women have access to subsidized family planning services. Many health departments run out of birth control supplies and have to write prescriptions for clients. There are only eight states with higher teen birth rates and seven states with higher infant mortality rates than Georgia. How sad. I have loved my years of providing individual women with completely voluntary contraceptives, in large part because I have seen the benefits family planning has brought to women and families. If people of conscience on the other side of this issue would join forces with those of us who want to see less teen and unintended pregnancy and reduce the number of abortions, we could make it happen.

There are many countries that are far more successful than we are on these issues. Canada has half as many teen pregnancies and Western Europe one fourth as many, largely because of access to sexual health information and contraceptive services. I do not believe that private and personal issues should be decided by legislators, the state or the federal government, or frankly, by the president. We do not need a Huckabee, on his whistlestop trip through Georgia, to come and make recommendations about changing our state's constitution. We need practical and realistic policies and practices that will help our state climb out of the cellar in health status for women and children. Programs that promote prevention and wellness should be at the top of the list. An ounce of prevention is always worth a pound of cure.

Robert Hatcher, M.D., is a professor of gynecology and obstetrics at Emory University School of Medicine.

Billionaire investment-wizard Warren Buffett is getting behind a sure-to-profit strategy: family planning. Buffett, recognizing the best investment in the future of our country is ensuring our families are stable and healthy is turning his philanthropic ambitions to helping people take power of life's most important decisions--name, when to start a family. His first stop: Iowa

Buffett, through the foundation named for his deceased wife, Susie, is funding the "Iowa Initiative to Reduce Unintended Pregnancy" which is headed up by Iowa's former first lady Christie Vilsack. Why Iowa, well it seemed rife with the most potential. According to the Iowa Initiative:

Iowa ranks 48th in the nation in making family planning services available and 39th in its public funding for those efforts. These policies cost taxpayers some $82 million dollars per year, far more than prevention efforts would cost. More than half of Iowa’s counties do not have family planning centers and 170,000 Iowa women are in need of services they cannot easily obtain.

"As a woman and a mother, I believe we have a responsibility to give all women in our state the knowledge and means to prevent unintended pregnancies. " Vilsack explained, "Access to family planning results in better lives for women, children and families and the greater Iowa community. When half of all pregnancies in Iowa are unintended, we are not doing enough for women. We find high levels of unintended pregnancies in every corner of the state, across all age ranges and all income levels. The Iowa Initiative is committed to help bringing these levels down through public education outreach."

The Initiative will educate people about contraception and make it easier to obtain family planning counseling and services that are safe, accessible and affordable. Buffett's investment will no doubt improve the lives of women and families of Iowa for generations to come.