Ask the Scholar

Document scope · 1 page
doc
Scholar
Ask about this object, its catalog metadata, its source description, or the page inventory. For page-specific OCR and visual context, open one of the page chats.

Scholar Source Context

Document identity
localId
55031728
label
Family Planning [Folder 2]
core
doc
dtoType
document
pageCount
1
Source metadata
Source extras
naId
55031728
levelOfDescription
fileUnit
otherTitles
2068127-20130534S-093-005-2022
recordType
description
ocrSource
nara-archive
Single page context
seq
1
pageIndex
0
type
document
mediaId
6aa6369d7b86fdd0
ocrText
Withdrawal/Redaction Sheet Clinton Library DOCUMENT NO. SUBJECT/TITLE DATE RESTRICTION AND TYPE 001. letter Adrienne Germain to Melanne Verveer [partial] (1 page) 02/03/1999 b(6) COLLECTION: Clinton Presidential Records First Lady's Office Melanne Verveer OA/Box Number: 20031 FOLDER TITLE: Family Planning [Folder 2] 2013-0534-S rc1503 RESTRICTION CODES Presidential Records Act - [44 U.S.C. 2204(a)] Freedom of Information Act - [5 U.S.C. 552(b)] P1 National Security Classified Information [(a)(1) of the PRA] b(1) National security classified information [(b)(1) of the FOIA] P2 Relating to the appointment to Federal office [(a)(2) of the PRA] b(2) Release would disclose internal personnel rules and practices of P3 Release would violate a Federal statute [(a)(3) of the PRA] an agency [(b)(2) of the FOIA] P4 Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential commercial or b(3) Release would violate a Federal statute [(b)(3) of the FOIA] financial information [(a)(4) of the PRA] b(4) Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential or financial P5 Release would disclose confidential advice between the President information [(b)(4) of the FOIA] and his advisors, or between such advisors [a)(5) of the PRA] b(6) Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of P6 Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy [(b)(6) of the FOIA] personal privacy [(a)(6) of the PRA] b(7) Release would disclose information compiled for law enforcement purposes [(b)(7) of the FOIA] C. Closed in accordance with restrictions contained in donor's deed b(8) Release would disclose information concerning the regulation of of gift. financial institutions [(b)(8) of the FOIA] PRM. Personal record misfile defined in accordance with 44 U.S.C. b(9) Release would disclose geological or geophysical information 2201(3). concerning wells [(b)(9) of the FOIA] RR. Document will be reviewed upon request. 09-30-98 19:13 FROM: POPULATION ACTION ID:2022931795 PAGE 1/6 file family FAX TRANSMISSION planny To: Melanne Verveer Chief of Staff to the First Lady The White House 456-6244 From: Craig Lasher Population Action International Subject: Copy of a Letter to House-Senate Conferees on the Global Gag Rule Date: September 30, 1998 Attached is a copy of a letter mailed today to likely House and Senate conferees on the foreign operations appropriations bill opposing the inclusion of the global gag rule provision in the omnibus spending bill. The letter urges the conferees to reject the global gag rule and to support the Senate position on family planning, free speech, and democracy. The 46 organizational signatories on the letter represent a broad cross-section of groups and have been drawn from the public health, civil liberties, women's rights, religious, population, and environmental communities. Please do not hesitate to call me at (202) 659-1833 if you have any questions. 09-30-98 19:14 FROM: POPULATION ACTION ID:2022931795 PAGE 2/6 September 29, 1998 The Honorable Bob Livingston Chairman House Appropriations Committee Capitol H-218 Washington, D.C. 20515 Dear Chairman Livingston: We, the undersigned, represent millions of Americans who care deeply about the United States' international obligations and responsibilities. Many of our organizations work overseas, in partnership with the U.S. government, as well as with U.N. agencies, to further worldwide hurnanitarian goals and U.S. interests. We strongly support the United States meeting its full financial obligations to the United Nations. Earlier this year, however, we wrote to the president and, regretfully, urged him to veto H.R. 1757, the Foreign Affairs Reform Act-whenever he receives it-because of the global gag rule provision that would severely undermine a core principle of U.S. foreign policy. As you begin deliberations to resolve the differences between the House and Senate- passed versions of the FY 1999 foreign aid appropriations bill, we must point out to you that the House-passed "gag rule" restriction affecting international family planning assistance in this bill is even more onerous than the one contained in H.R. 1757. This new version would, by force of law in the statute itself, define "lobbying" far more broadly than any existing understanding of the term. Under H.R. 1757, the same definition would apply but it is contained in the "statement of managers" rather than the statutory language. The measure's restrictions on freedom of speech are unacceptable as a matter of principle and policy because it is intended to muzzle private, nonprofit, nongovernmental organizations in other countries. As a condition of eligibility for receiving U.S. family planning funds, foreign NGOs-using their own non-U.S. funds-would be barred not only from "overt" lobbying but also from sponsoring "conferences or workshops on the alleged defects of the abortion laws, as well as drafting and distribution of materials or public statements calling attention to such alleged defects." Secretary of State Albright said it best at a Congressional hearing earlier this year: It is a "gag rule. that would punish organizations for engaging in the democratic process in foreign countries and for engaging in legal activities that would be protected by the First Amendment if carried out in the United States." 09-30-98 19:14 FROM: POPULATION ACTION ID:2022931795 PAGE 3/6 This policy violates democratic principles and would be firmly rejected as unconstitutional if applied in the United States. It is not a policy that should be foisted on other nations. Many of our organizations have direct experiences with the implementation of public health programs in the United States and overseas. The facts are: USAID resources do not fund abortions; Levels of funding approved by Congress for family planning have been cut drastically since 1995; and The practical impact of the global gag rule is enormous. Proponents claim the gag rule will have little effect. This is simply not true. If a family planning organization in Bolivia is receiving U.S. support for its programs and, for example, published a paper noting that Bolivia has the highest maternal mortality rate in all of Latin America, largely as the result of illegal, unsafe, botched abortions, it would amount to drafting a paper "calling attention" to "defects" in Bolivia's abortion law. If the head of a group receiving U.S. aid that offers only natural-method family planning gave a radio interview urging opposition to her country's plan to liberalize its abortion law, she would be violating the ban on a "public statement." In South Africa, where safe, legal abortions were available to white women but beyond the reach of most black women under apartheid, President Nelson Mandela in 1996 asked Dr. Helen Randera-Rees, director of the Planned Parenthood Association of South Africa (PPASA), for her help. He wanted to draft a law easing such administrative hurdles as a requirement for approval by two doctors, one of whom must have been in practice for at least four years. She helped to draft that law, and it was enacted. Under the pending U.S. measure, PPASA would have lost its U.S. support because Dr. Randera-Rees responded to Mandela's request. And most recently, in Mexico, a national debate on reforming the law on abortion is occurring. NGOs in Mexico-where 1500 maternal deaths are attributed to illegal abortion annually-would be disqualified from U.S. family planning aid if they dare to participate in the national debate. Even Guadalajara's Cardinal Juan Sandoval commented that, while he does not wish to see the law changed, "it's good to raise the discussion. We are in a democratic society..." (Boston Globe, July 29, 1998). The debate is going on in Mexico, among Mexicans with non-U.S. funds. We believe that the bill as enacted would lead to more, not fewer, abortions worldwide, because it would cut $44 million in funding for family planning, which has proved repeatedly to be the single most effective means of reducing the number of abortions. 09-30-98 19:14 FROM: POPULATION ACTION ID:2022931795 PAGE 4/6 The measure imposes a minority American political position on other nations' private organizations, rather than letting them decide what is best for their own country. It tramples upon those countries' medical standards, their political practices and their right to decide their own futures, and it drastically narrows the reproductive health options available to hundreds of millions of women. Some of us who have signed this letter are pro-choice while others take no position on the question of abortion, but we all stand firmly behind family planning, safe motherhood, free speech, and maternal and child health programs. Equally important, we are Americans who take very seriously our country's deeply held democratic values. The pending measure directly contradicts the most basic of those values: free speech, access to the political process and the right to petition the government for a redress of grievances. The global gag rule turns its back on 222 years of U.S. history and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. For these reasons, we urge you to reject the gag rule and support the Senate position on family planning, free speech and democracy. Sincerely yours, James Wagoner Nan Aron President President Advocates for Youth Alliance For Justice Sandy Bernard Laura W. Murphy President Director, Washington National Office American Association of University American Civil Liberties Union Women Richard A. Levinson, M.D. Amy E. Pollack, M.D., M.P.H. Associate Executive Director for President Programs and Policy AVSC International American Public Health Association Peter D. Bell Frances Kissling President President CARE Catholics For a Free Choice Janet Benshoof Peggy Curlin President President Center for Reproductive Law and Centre for Development and Policy Population Activities 09-30-98 19:15 FROM: POPULATION ACTION ID:2022931795 PAGE 5/6 Jill Sheffield Eleanor Smeal President President Family Care International Feminist Majority Nils Daulaire, M.D. Jill Merrick President & CEO Director of Communications & Public Global Health Council-NCIH Policy International Center for Research on Women Marcia Townsend Adrienne Germain Deputy Regional Director President International Planned Parenthood International Women's Health Federation-Western Hemisphere Coalition Region Phyllis T. Piotrow Joel Lamstein Professor and Director President Center for Communication Programs John Snow, Inc. Johns Hopkins School of Public Health Catherine Crone Cobum Kate Michelman President President Management Sciences for Health National Abortion and Reproductive Rights Action League Joan E. Bertin The Reverend Joan Brown Campbell Executive Director General Secretary National Coalition Against Censorship National Council of Churches Nan Rich Judith M. DeSamo National President President & CEO National Council of Jewish Women National Family Planning and Reproductive Health Association Patricia Ireland Kathryn Rodgers President Executive Director National Organization for Women NOW Legal Defense & Education Fund Judith L. Lichtman Marcia Greenberger President Co-President National Partnership for Women National Women's Law Center and Families 09-30-98 19:15 FROM:POPULATION ACTION ID:2022931795 PAGE 6/6 Helen Rodriguez-Trias, M.D. Daniel E. Pellegrom Co-Director President Pacific Institute for Women's Health Pathfinder International Carole Shields Gloria Feldt President President People For The American Way Planned Parenthood Federation of America Amy Coen Margaret Catley Carlson President President Population Action International Population Council David J. Andrews Richard Frank President President Population Communications Population Services International International The Reverend Elenora Giddings Ivory Gordon W. Perkin, M.D. Director President Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.), Program for Appropriate Technology Washington Office in Health The Reverend Carlton W. Veazey Carl Pope President and CEO Executive Director Religious Coalition for Reproductive Sierra Club Choice Jeannie I. Rosoff Warren Leon President Deputy Director for Programs The Alan Guttmacher Institute Union of Concerned Scientists Dr. Thom White Wolf Fassett Mim Kelber General Secretary Interim President General Board of Church & Society Women's Environment and United Methodist Church Development Organization Prema Mathai-Davis Peter Kostmayer CEO President YWCA of the U.S.A. Zero Population Growth VILLAGE 2/3 TALKING IT OVER BY HILLARY RODHAM CLINTON FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE The pregnant woman wore an alpaca shawl over her blouse and full skirt, the traditional Indian dress in Bolivia. She looked about 35 and was attending a prenatal class at a health clinic I visited this week in the Bolivian capital, La Paz. She was nursing a 3-month-old baby and expecting her eighth child, who she hoped would be her last. I was in Bolivia to attend the Sixth Conference of Wives of Heads of State and Government of the Americas. Women from countries throughout the Western Hemisphere got together to talk about strategies to eliminate measles, promote education reform and improve maternal health in our region. Bolivia, a country of majestic beauty in the heart of South America, was an auspicious location for such a discussion. More women die in Bolivia during pregnancy and childbirth than in any other country in South America. But in the face of this human tragedy, Bolivia has become a model of how one nation can respond to the crisis of maternal mortality by galvanizing the government, non-governmental organizations and the medical establishment to launch a nationwide family-planning campaign. In a country where half of all expecting mothers go through pregnancy and childbirth alone -- without medical attention of any kind -- Bolivia's aggressive effort to educate women about their own health and their options for childbearing is resulting in safer pregnancies, stronger families and fewer abortions. Without access to family planning, women in Bolivia - and in many developing nations - often turn in desperation to illegal, unsafe abortions that can end in death or serious injury. Deaths from abortion complications account for half of all maternal deaths in Bolivia. As Bolivia has ably demonstrated, voluntary family planning teaches women about the benefits of spacing children several years apart, breast-feeding, good nutrition, prenatal and postpartum visits and safe deliveries. It also decreases the number of abortions. Bolivia's success at preventing mothers from dying and lowering abortion rates has been possible, in part, because of help from the United States and other countries. The U.S. Agency for International Development has provided financial and technical assistance to help Bolivia establish a network of primary health care clinics. VILVORM TALKING IT OVER 12/3/96 Page 2 The clinic I visited in La Paz is one that the United States helped start. Called PROSALUD (which, loosely translated, means "for the good of health" in Spanish), the clinic has doctors and nurses who offer round-the-clock prenatal, obstetric and pediatric services, as well as counseling about family planning in a poor neighborhood of 15,000 people. In the first six months of this year, the clinic staff provided 2,200 medical consultations, delivered 200 babies, registered 700 new family-planning users and immunized 2,500 children. There are obvious benefits of such a program to Bolivian women, children and families, but health and family-planning services also help alleviate poverty and contribute to the economic stability of a democratic ally in our hemisphere. Yet opponents of foreign assistance and particularly of family planning in Congress are trying to eviscerate U.S. funding for programs like the one I saw at PROSALUD. Some argue that the United States has no national interest in the health and well-being of other countries' citizens. Others mistakenly suggest that family planning is being used to encourage - rather than decrease - abortions. In fact, our government has prohibited funding of any overseas project that promotes abortion since 1973. Ignoring this, Congress last year approved draconian cuts in family-planning assistance amounting to a 35 percent reduction in funds. To add insult to injury, the cuts were accompanied by new restrictions that delayed delivery of ald for the first nine months of the fiscal year. Similar harsh cuts and delays are included in the current budget, meaning that many organizations could again be denied assistance for months and then receive it only in monthly installments. According to a recent analysis by five population organizations, the funding cuts alone will result in an increase of 1.6 million abortions, more than 8,000 maternal deaths, and 134,000 infant deaths in developing countries. Family-planning campaigns at work in Bolivia and elsewhere represent sensible, cost-effective and long-term strategies for improving women's health, strengthening families and lowering the rate of abortion. My husband's administration remains committed to the continuation of these Investments. And I will do everything I can to ensure that U.S. support for these initiatives continues. If you share my concern, I hope you will add your voice to mine and give all women everywhere the same opportunities for their lives we take for granted in ours. COPYRIGHT 1996 CREATORS SYNDICATE, INC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED December 3, 1996 SEP-11-98 18:05 FROM:POPULATION ACTION ID:2028870313 PAGE 1/3 file family FAX TRANSMISSION plan To: Melanne Verveer Chief of Staff to the First Lady The White House From: Craig Lasher Population Action International Subject: Forthcoming Newspaper Ad Campaign on the Global Gag Rule Date: September 11, 1998 Early next week, an ad will appear in newspapers in 18 targeted states and congressional districts around the country opposing efforts by conservative forces in Congress to impose additional restrictions on overseas family planning programs. In addition, it will be published in two Washington papers with wide readership inside the beltway. A copy of the ad and a list of the newspapers in which it will run are attached. The ad highlights the aspects of the global gag rule amendment that are among the most offensive to American values, namely its inconsistency with democratic principles and its interference with the freedom of speech. Twenty-six major national organizations have endorsed this effort and are listed on the ad. Several more have either generously provided financial support or have agreed to activate their grassroots members during this critical stage in the legislative process. The ad will run on Tuesday, September 15 in most outlets. The ad will appear on Monday, September 14, on the Federal Page of the Washington POSI and in Roll Call. We are hopeful that this targeted media campaign will have a favorable impact on upcoming debates. Please do not hesitate to contact me at (202) 659-1833 if you have any questions. SEP-11-98 18:05 FROM: POPULATION ACTION ID:2028870313 PAGE 2/3 Y Restricting free speech is un-American. That's why U.S. politicians do it in other countries. When the topic of women's health care In our country, 0 Gag Rule like this would be arises, some members of Congress would throw unconstitutional. In developing countries, where free speech out the window. family planning clinics are often o woman's only Right now, a bill in Congress would CUE off source of health care, it, is unconscionable. U.S. family planning funds to any organization If you believe people the world over should overseas that dares to speak out either for or have the freedom to discuss and debate issues, against abortion. do the American thing: Call your Senators and This bill seeks to punish those who talk Representative today. Tell them you support about it publicly, even to speak to their own U.S. funding for international family governments about the deaths and injuries to planning programs-no restrictions on free women from unsafe abortions. [It is not about speech attached. the use of U.S. funds for abortion services-that Because silence is not the answer. In our has been illegal since 1973.] country-or any other. To reach your Senators and Representative, call the U.S. Capitol switchboard at I-202-224-3121. Sponsored by: Advocates for Youth American Association of University Woman,American CMl Literes Unran.AVSi international Catholics for a Free Choice, Congr for Reproductive low and Policy. NARAL International Worners Health Constion National Codidor Against Consership, National Counal for International Health Notived Canci of Hwish Women, National Formily Planning and Reproductive Health Association National Ponnership for Women & Families, National Women's Low Care, Pocific institute for Warmen's Health incomdonal Planned Parenthood Federation of America Pobulation Action International Population Communications Informational, Population Council PATH, Religious Consition (or Reproductive Choice Sien Club Unica of Concerned Scientises Women of Reform judget and Zero Population Growth For mare information call follows 1-877-PAI-PLAN. SEP-11-98 18:05 FROM:POPULATION ACTION ID:2028870313 PAGE 3/3 Planned Advertisement Placements Newspaper Congressional District 1. Anchorage Daily News (Alaska) Sen. Ted Stevens (R) 2. Riverside Press-Enterprise (California) Rep. Mary Bono (R-44) 3. San Bernardino Sun (California) Rep. Jerry Lewis (R-40) 4. Denver Post (Colorado) Sen. Ben Nighthorse-Campbell (R) 5. West Palm Beach Post (Florida) Rep. Mark Foley (R-16) Rep. Clay Shaw (R-22) 6. Sarasota Herald Tribune (Florida) Rep. Dan Miller (R-13) 7. Florida Times Union (Jacksonville, FL) Rep. Tillie Fowler (R-4) 8. Kansas City Star (Missouri) Rep. Pat Danner (D-6) 9. Omaha World Herald (Nebraska)) Rep. Doug Bereuter (R-1) 10. Albuquerque Journal (New Mexico) Rep. Heather Wilson (R-1) 11. Dayton Daily News (Ohio) Rep. Tony Hall (D-3) 12. Toledo Blade (Ohio) Rep. Marcy Kaptur (D-9) 13. Canton Repository (Ohio) Rep. Ralph Regula (R-16) 14. Phil. Inquirer & Daily News (Pennsylvania) Rep. Bob Borski (D-3) Rep. Robert Brady (D-1) Rep. Jon Fox (R-13) 15. Pittsburgh Post-Gazette (Pennsylvania) Rep. Ron Klink (D-4) Rep. John Murtha (D-12) 16. Wilkes-Barre Times-Leader (Pennsylvania) Rep. Paul Kanjorski (D-11) 17. Richmond Times Dispatch (Virginia) Sen. John Warner (R) 18. Seattle Times & Post Intelligencer (WA) Rep. Jennifer Dunn (R-8) Rep. Rick White (R-1) 19. Roll Call (Washington, DC) 20. Washington Post (Washington, DC) All placements for Tuesday, September 15, 1998. except Roll Call and The Washington Post (Federal Page) for Monday, September 14, 1998. In Seattle and Philadelphia the ads will appear in both the morning and evening papers. file family planning House funds family planning agency at U.N. Won't pay for abortion in China anti-AIDS work in Haiti, Hurri- By Tom Carter cane Mitch assistance in Central THE WASHINGTON TIMES America, and efforts to end female The House voted yesterday to circumcision. resume funding of U.N. family The main thrust of yesterday's planning programs after a one- bill, which will likely come to a year hiatus during debate on a bill vote this week, is to finance the providing $1.4 billion to enhance first year of a 10-year, $14 billion security at U.S. embassies abroad. program to fortify existing embas- An amendment to authorize $25 sies and build new, more secure million for the U.N. Population structures. Fund (UNFPA) was approved on a It provides $1.4 billion for im- 221-198 vote. That will be reduced proving security at embassies and by an amount equal to any money another $1 billion for other State the agency spends in China, which Department programs. is accused of performing forced The Senate approved only $300 abortions to enforce its policy re- million for embassy security in the stricting couples to one child. first year in a major foreign affairs In effect, the United States will authorization bill in June. That give UNFPA about $20 million next matches the request of the Clinton year. Last year, Congress refused administration, which wants to to approve any money for the spend $11.4 billion over 10 years. The Senate bill also authorized agency. Approval of the amendment was payment of nearly $1 billion in U.S. a setback for anti-abortion Rep. arrears to the United Nations, Christopher H. Smith, New Jersey which was not mentioned in the Republican, who has consistently House bill. Mr. Clinton vetoed a linked foreign affairs funding with similar measure to pay the U.N. ar- anti-abortion legislation. rears last year after Mr. Smith was Mr. Smith had proposed tougher successful in attaching anti- language that would have cut off abortion language. all money to UNFPA as long as it The differences will have to be runs programs in China, or until worked out in conference between the president can certify that representatives of the two cham- China is no longer performing bers. forced abortions. Mr. Smith said yesterday that "It was a defeat, but the real los- the House leadership continues to ers are the poor women of China," back his strategy of linking the Mr. Smith said after the vote. U.N. arrears payment to anti- "They beat us by claiming to be abortion language that would pre- anti-abortion. It was deceptive." vent U.S. money from being used Family planning organizations to lobby to end anti-abortion laws celebrated the restoration of overseas. money for family planning pro- The bills come amid increased grams in undeveloped nations. fear of a terrorist attack around the "Members of the House made anniversary of the bombings that the right decision today by refus- killed 224 persons at U.S. embas- ing to hold family planning and sies in Kenya and Tanzania on Aug. UNFPA hostage to otherwise le- 7, 1998. gitimate concerns about the hu- If diplomats are going to be man rights record of the Chinese asked "to put themselves in harm's government," said Amy Coen, way, we need to do everything we president of Population Action In- can to protect them from terror- ternational. ism," Mr. Gilman said. China claims its abortion policy Several U.S. embassies have is voluntary. been closed for short periods since Mr. Smith said UNFPA did not the Africa bombings. And the State deserve U.S. support because it Department on Monday an- was "complicit" in China's nounced a temporary closure of its "crimes." embassy in Mozambique for secu- That view was challenged by rity reasons. Rep. Benjamin A. Gilman, New The bill would fund several York Republican and chairman of other programs but leaves levels the International Relations Com- for foreign aid and other interna- mittee, who co-sponsored the tional spending to congressional amendment that passed. appropriators, who have to work He said UNFPA is the "only out a balanced budget for the start channel" the United States has to of fiscal year 2000 on Oct. 1. help mitigate Mexico's exploding population. He said the agency This article is based in part on also serves U.S. interests though its wire service reports. FEB-03-99 WED 03:36 PM IWHC FAX NO. 212 979 9009 P. 02 file family IWHC INTERNATIONAL WOMEN'S HEALTH COALITION planning 24 First 21 Street, New York, New York 10010 Telephone (212)979-8500 Fax (212)979-9009 [email protected] http://www.iwhc.org February 3, 1999 Ms. Melame Verveer Chief of Staff for the First Lady Office of the First Lady O.E.O.B., Room 100 Washington, D.C. 20500 Dear Melanne, I upologize for the delay in sending these suggestions for Hillary's specches in the Hague. I did send some of them to Margaret Pollack last week just before her conversation with the speech writer. Hillary's NARAL speech was fabulous, certainly her strongest on the subject. Much of that specch could be used verbatim in the Hague simply by changing "American values" to "ICPD commitments"! T make some specific suggestions below. A. General Points: 1. While it is important for Hillary to endorse the entire ICPD agenda, this is a critical moment to emphasize actions needed specifically on reproductive rights and health. Both proponents and opponents of the ICPD Programme of Action will listen closely to what the First Lady says, and even more closely to what she does not say, While I understand the need to consider Congressional views, I believe it is essential for her to address directly even the most sensitive issues (adolescents, abortion, gender, families), as she did in her NARAL speech. 2. TL is very important that Hillary speak as an American, and refer to both progress and shortfalls domestically. While she should acknowledge the importance of U.S. foreign assistance, and express the Administration's commitment to increase it, I believe that her audiences will be most receptive if she recognizes the work and 11 accomplishments of local groups and projects based on their own commitment, skills and initiative. U.S. foreign assistance aids and abcts good ideas, but the accomplishments are those of the local groups, many of which she has visited. BOARD OF DIRECTORS: Ellen Chester, Ph.D., Chair; Jacqueline de Chollet, Vice Chair: Gica Sen, Ph.D., Vice Chair; Adrienne Germain, President: Nicoham H. Burgman, Ph.D.; In Ivey Boufford, M.D.; Ani O. Dumois, Ph.D.; Joan B. Dunlop: Mahmoud Fathalla, M.D.; Susane M. Ihre; Natsinh Mhoi, M.D.; Passion) Manuel M.D.; American Ph.D.; Signd Rausing, Ph.D.: Sandra Silverman. FEB-03-99 WED 03:37 PM IWHC FAX NO. 212 979 9009 P. 03 Letter to Ms. Verveer February 3, 1999 Page 2 3. This is an important moment to express support for UNFPA and the Administration's intentions on funding. B. Kcy points to include in both specches: 1. The context: ICPD implementation requires poverty alleviation; action to reduce the terrible burden of debt faced by southern countries and countries with economics in transition; increased foreign assistance; partnerships bctween the private sector and donors/international agencies; reduction of corruption and waste; and prioritization of social sector investment by governments. 2. Elimination of deaths and illness related to pregnancy: Despite more than a decade of the "Safe Motherhood Initiative," in the last 12 years some seven million or more women have died, and millions upon millions of women's lives and health have been ruined - unnecessarily. It is not acceptable that, even under the politically comfortable banner, "Safe Motherhood," women's death and illness have attracted SO little funding and that political will for change does not yet exist. As you'll see from more detailed points below, emphasizing this issue would allow Hillary to address quite a number of additional topics, while, at the same time, highlighting what has possibly been the most neglected dimension of reproductive health worldwide (including in the U.S. where women of color and low income women have higher rates of maternal mortality than others). 3. Investment in civil society groups: The points made below may secm esoteric but they are critically important. Too many governments stifle the energy of NGOs The U.S. experience demonstrates not only what the nongovernment actors can do but also the importance of basic capacity building and freedom from unnecessary government restrictions. This topic would allow Hillary to pick up the great lines from her NARAL speech on common ground, democracy, values, etc. 4. Key words and phrases from the NARAL speech: Certain phrases from the NARAL speech on unwanted pregnancy and abortion, would be particularly meaningful in the Hague, because they would reinforce the leadership of the U.S. in the original ICPD negotiations, and because neither governments nor international agencies have taken the action needed. I hope Hillary will assert that abortion should be "safe, legal and nne." Para. 8.25 (copy attached) of the ICPD Programme of Action exists because of U.S. recognition, in both Cairo and Beijing, that unwanted pregnancies will occur no matter how strong preventive efforts are, because contraceptives fail, circumstances FEB-03-99 WED 03:37 PM IWHC FAX NO. 212 979 9009 P. 04 Letter to Ms. Verveer February 3, 1999 Page 3 change, SCX may be forced, etc. The most contentious sentence of the paragraph - "In circumstances where abortion is not against the law, such abortion should be safe" - has been ignored by most governments even though it is so narrowly construed. It would be particularly valuable if Hillary's speech recognizes the known health consequences of restricting access to safe abortion, asscrts the need to ensure that each woman can decide for herself what to do, and that analyses the very negative consequences of both pro- and anti-natalist government action. In this regard, the first full paragraph on page 4 of the NARAL speech ("I hope...") is brilliantly crafted. Other wonderful phrases are the personal decisions women make; stories of dangerous and illegal abortions; women who have suffered in silence. C. Detailed points: 1. Death, injury and ill health due to pregnancy: The widest health disparity between rich and poor countries is in maternal mortality An estimated 600,000 women die every year due to pregnancy-related causes, most in poor countries; millions are severely injured, and left to face infertility or chronic illness. In the last 15 years, we have made almost no progress in reducing these numbers. We know how to prevent them. Most occur because of gross inequities of resource distribution between and within countries. They are due as well to failure of political will both by national governments and by donors to build and sustain the basic public health systems needed to cope with obstetric emergencies and provide safe abortion. We must recognize the underlying social causes of women's death and suffering: gender discrimination in access to food and health care, education, employment and political participation; traditional taboos and harmful practices imposed on girls and women; endomic gender-based violence, including forced and unsafe sexual relations; laws and policies that restrict women's access to contraccption and to safe services to end unwanted pregnancies. We will not achieve the goal sct in the ICPD - to reduce by half the 1990 level of maternal mortality by the year 2000. But, let us promise our daughters, our wives, and all women, that the necessary actions will be a top priority for the next five years. What are these actions? FEB-03-99 WED 03:37 PM IWHC FAX NO. 212 979 9009 P. 05 Letter to Ms. Verveer February 3, 1999 Page 4 As countries adopt health sector reforms, build effective basic health systems and adopt sector-wide investment strategies, we must: ... prioritize sexual and reproductive health services of the best possible technical quality, that provide full information and choices and treat women with respect. address pregnancy care in its broader health context, that is, build the skills and make the investments needed to prevent and treat STDs, prevent HIV, and control malaria, TB and other major communicable diseases that increase the risks associated with pregnancy; we must invest in clean water and sanitation systems, and in basic education for all. We must bring services - especially emergency obstetric care and safe abortion - as close as possible to women, which often will require us to: - invest in training and equipping mid-level paramedical providers especially midwives; build partnerships with communities to ensure that everyone knows the danger signs of pregnancy, to maintain maternity waiting homes, and to provide emergency transport; and we must persuade men that pregnancy is their responsibility too - men have an obligation to ensure women's access to services, to share the demands of childcare, and to refrain from violence, intimidation, and forced sex. We must face even the most taboo and sensitive aspects of reproductive and sexual health squarely: -- To curb the STD/HIV epidemic, we must ensure that all sexually active people, whatever their age and marital status, have access to condoms (both male and female) and are persuaded to use them; we must develop additional methods that women control, such as microbicides (NTH funds this work); and we must work with men to be more responsible in their own sexual behavior. --- "Emergency contraception" (higher-than-usual doses of birth control pills within 72 hours of unprotected sex) is a simple, inexpensive, safe method to prevent unintended or unwanted pregnancy. But it is not yet accessible in most places. Let us ensure that emergency contraception is available for all women. . FEB-03-99 WED 03:38 PM IWHC FAX NO. 212 979 9009 P. 06 Letter to Ms. Verveer February 3, 1999 Page 5 - When unwanted pregnancies occur, we must ensure that women have all possible choices to continue or to end the pregnancy; preventing unwanted pregnancies is essential but not sufficient; we must make safe abortion services accessible and affordable. We must inform young people about sexuality, help them build self-csteem, develop mutually respectful relationships, encourage gender equality and equity and delay pregnancy until they are socially, emotionally and biologically prepared for safe child bearing. 2. Investment in civil society groups: One of the most important commitments of the ICPD was to build partnerships with civil society groups, especially women's groups, to make the hard choices about allocation of scarce resources, to monitor and hold governments accountable for meeting the promises made in Cairo, and to build the momentum and political will for the major social, policy and program changes that are needed. If these partnerships are to take root, flourish, and be effective, governments need to: remove unnecessary restrictions on civil society groups' access to local and external funds; provide access to information; include civil society groups in policy processes; and respect the autonomy of civil society groups. Donors and international agencies similarly need to foster partnerships based on equity, and provide the resources needed for civil society groups to build their basic organizational strength, not just implement projects or deliver services. Withdrawal/Redaction Marker Clinton Library DOCUMENT NO. SUBJECT/TITLE DATE RESTRICTION AND TYPE 001. letter Adrienne Germain to Melanne Verveer [partial] (1 page) 02/03/1999 b(6) COLLECTION: Clinton Presidential Records First Lady's Office Melanne Verveer OA/Box Number: 20031 FOLDER TITLE: Family Planning [Folder 2] 2013-0534-S rc1503 RESTRICTION CODES Presidential Records Act - [44 U.S.C. 2204(a)] Freedom of Information Act - [5 U.S.C. 552(b)] P1 National Security Classified Information [(a)(1) of the PRA] b(1) National security classified information [(b)(1) of the FOIA] P2 Relating to the appointment to Federal office [(a)(2) of the PRA] b(2) Release would disclose internal personnel rules and practices of P3 Release would violate a Federal statute [(a)(3) of the PRA] an agency [(b)(2) of the FOIA] P4 Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential commercial or b(3) Release would violate a Federal statute [(b)(3) of the FOIA] financial information [(a)(4) of the PRA] b(4) Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential or financial P5 Release would disclose confidential advice between the President information [(b)(4) of the FOIA] and his advisors, or between such advisors [a)(5) of the PRA] b(6) Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of P6 Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy [(b)(6) of the FOIA] personal privacy [(a)(6) of the PRA] b(7) Release would disclose information compiled for law enforcement purposes [(b)(7) of the FOIA] C. Closed in accordance with restrictions contained in donor's deed b(8) Release would disclose information concerning the regulation of of gift. financial institutions [(b)(8) of the FOIA] PRM. Personal record misfile defined in accordance with 44 U.S.C. b(9) Release would disclose geological or geophysical information 2201(3). concerning wells [(b)(9) of the FOIA] RR. Document will be reviewed upon request. FEB-03-99 WED 03:38 PM IWHC FAX NO. 212 979 9009 P. 07 Letter to Ms. Verveer February 3, 1999 Page 6 Melanne, there's a lot here- I'd be happy to comment on drafts and will be in New York. ( (b)(6) [00 1 J Please note, some of the language in this letter I have used in writing others so you may HS Ag not want to use the language, just the ideas. With kind regards, Chone Sincerely yours, Adricane Germain President Enclosure FEB-03-99 WED 03:38 PM IWHC FAX NO. 212 979 9009 P. 08 International Conference on Population and Development Programme of Action 8.25. In no case should abortion be promoted as a method of family planning. All Governments and relevant intergovernmental and non-governmental organizations are urged to strengthen their commitment to women's health, to deal with the health impact of unsafe abortion* as a major public health concern and to reduce the recourse to abortion through expanded and improved family-planning services. Prevention of unwanted prognancies must always be given the highest priority and every attempt should be made to eliminate the need for abortion. Women who have unwanted pregnancies should have ready access to reliable information and compassionate counselling. Any measures or changes related to abortion within the health system can only be determined at the national or local level according to the national legislative process. In circumstances where abortion is not against the law, such abortion should be safc. In all cases, women should have access to quality services for the management of complications arising from abortion. Post-abortion counselling, education and family- planning services should be offered promptly, which will also help to avoid repeat abortions. **Unsafe abortion is defined as a procedure for terminating an unwanted pregnancy either by persons lacking the necessary skills or in an environment lacking the minimal medical standards, or both (based on World Health Organization), The Prevention and Management of Unsafe Abortion, Report of a Technical Working Group, Geneva, April 1992 (WHO/MSM/92.5))." JESSE HELMS, NORTH CAROLINA. CHAIRMAN RICHARD G. LUGAR. INDIANA. JOSEPH R. BIDEN, - DELAWARE CHUCK HAGEL NEBRABKA PAUL 5. SARBANES. MARYLAND file Inc'l Family Planning GORDON H. SMITH. OREGON CHRISTOPHER + DOOD, CONNECTICUT noo GRAMS, MINNESOTA JOHN F. KENRY, MASSACHUSETTS SAM BROWNBACK. KANSAS RUSSELL D. FEINGOLD. WISCONSIN CRAIG THOMAS. WYOMING PAUL D. WELLSTONE, MINNESOTA JOHN ASHCROFT, MISSOURI BARBARA BOXER, CALIFORNIA Hnited States Senate BILL FRIST, TENNESSEE ROBERT G. TORRICELL NEW JERSEY LINCOLN n. CHAFEE RMODE ISLAND COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN RELATIONS STEPHEN 6. BIEGUN. STAFF DIRECTOR EDWIN K HALL MINORITY STAFF DIRECTOR WASHINGTON, DC 20510-6225 September 27, 2000 *430542* The President The White House Washington, D.C. 20500 Dear Mr. President: I have been reliably informed that (pursuant to section 599D of the Foreign Operations, Export Financing, and Related Programs Appropriations Act 2000) at least ten foreign, privately run so-called population control advocacy groups and international organizations have, so far, refused to certify to the Agency for International Development that they did not perform or promote abortions with their own funds. Two of these groups (the International Planned Parenthood Federation in London and the World Health Organization) have made their position public. We received the findings of the General Accounting Office report called "USAID Compliance With Family Planning Restrictions" which we find disturbing, to say the least. The Committee then sought the names of the eight other organizations that are refusing to comply with U.S. law. We were arrogantly informed that the information would not be provided unless unprecedented and illegitimate restrictions were implemented. Mr. President, it may be subject to legitimate question whether your administration is using taxpayers' dollars in violation of U.S. law to finance covert abortion clinics in foreign countries, although the behavior of your staff not to mention their highly creative excuses to deny Congressional request for information- does make one wonder: The number of frivolous excuses employed by your staff in efforts to keep Congress and the American people in the dark on this matter is breathtaking and would ordinarily defy imagination. I certainly shall not dignify a response to any of them #430531 908426 I am sure you agree that U.S. taxpayers have every right to know which groups (domestic or foreign) use taxpayer funds to carry out foreign aid projects. There has never been any question about this. A.I.D. does not now, nor has it ever, operated covert foreign aid programs. For your people to suggest otherwise could permanently damage A.I.D.'s credibility in the field as well as to cause friend and foe alike to question the U.S. Government's stated intentions to help poor people. Mr. President, providing this information without further delay will put an end to this charade. Sincerely, Jesse Helms JESSE HELMS: ggg