Until recently there were a lot of things I didn’t know about the role of the state Attorney General (AG).  In particular I had no idea how much control that office has over my uterus. 

For example, the AG plays a key part in framing and enforcing laws concerning reproductive rights, including responsibility for enforcing the F.A.C.E (Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances) Act, for privacy protection and for bringing or not bringing lawsuits against those involved with reproductive rights. 

 Think Phil Kline, past AG of Kansas, who obtained 90 client records from abortion provider Dr. Tiller-the doctor who was later gunned down and killed in his church by an anti-abortionist-before charging Dr. Tiller with 30 misdemeanor counts.  Several of these patient files were later leaked to Bill O’Reilly. 

 Or the Oklahoma law, defended by Attorney General Drew Edmonson, forcing women to have ultrasounds (an exam not normally done that early in a pregnancy) explained to them in great detail before they are allowed to have an abortion.  

  In short, the Attorney General has the power to harass (or protect) abortion providers, enact laws forcing us to have procedures we may not want and to invade (or protect) our privacy.  

  Amy Everitt, State  Director of NARAL Pro-Choice California was kind enough to explain to me  that, “The AG is the single most important office for women’s privacy  and reproductive health.”

 I also learned from Everitt that the  Attorney General is responsible for hospital mergers, a critical issue  for hospital based reproductive rights.  If religion-based hospitals  like the ever-growing Catholic Healthcare West (CHW) are allowed to  merge or take over local hospitals, they can refuse to provide  reproductive health care services-including emergency contraception.

 Imagine being raped and then being denied emergency contraception in the hospital.  

 Or imagine you, or if you are a  man-your wife-, your sister or your daughter is rushed to the nearest  hospital for a life threatening pregnancy complication and refused  options based on religious doctrine.  

 These seemingly outrageous scenarios  could easily become the norm if we don’t have an AG who is pro-choice or  even if we have an AG who just doesn’t care about women’s issues.

 The fact that religious based  hospitals (or even religious doctors) can remove hospital based  reproductive health from women’s lives is a real threat, one that that  the AG’s office is directly responsible for.  

 Right now in California 41% of  counties have no abortion provider, while 91% have deceptively named,  non-medical, pro-life Crisis Pregnancy Centers.

 In learning all this shocking  information I became very curious about the upcoming race for California  Attorney General and I emailed both candidates – Democrat Kamala Harris  and Republican Steve Cooley some questions about their stance on these  key issues.  (Feel free to use my letter and email your AG if you live  outside of CA)

 I posted Kamala Harris’ responses in bold below.  Steve Cooley however, was less responsive. 

 I emailed his office the letter, then  I called his campaign office twice to make sure they received it. Both  times no one answered and both times I left voicemails.  I emailed again  several days later. 

 Finally, after 4 days of no response I  left yet another message, this time casually mentioning that I’m  married to Phil Bronstein, Editor-at-large for Hearst newspapers,  including the San Francisco Chronicle. 

 Within a half hour I had a missed  call from Steve Cooley’s office.  When I called back a Cooley  representative picked up immediately and told me Cooley’s office would  “get back to me by tonight.” And that they were a small office and the  email must have, “slipped through.”

  That was Friday morning.  Still no word.  Does Cooley just not care or is his office just that disorganized? 

 Given his silence, it’s hard for me to believe these issues are important to him.

 When NARAL called and wrote to him  about his stance on abortion they also could not get a response from  Cooley, according to a recent NARAL press release that announced the  group’s endorsement of Harris. 

 Considering that it’s Harris – not  Cooley — who has steadfastly supported a woman’s right to choose, and  women’s rights in general, as do most Californians, why is she the  underdog in the latest poll in a state where 31 percent of registered  voters are Republicans and 45 percent are Democrats?

 Especially since you can’t even find Cooley’s stance on these issues (or many others including the environment) on his website.

I was able to find out that Cooley opposes  the federal health care reform, and that the individual states’ AGs will  have the power to either protect or limit women’s rights with the  handling of these reforms.

 On Kamala Harris’ website you can  easily find her position and historical record on these key issues and  others like environmental preservation, violent crime, financial fraud,  and sex offenses.   If you think Kamala is not tough on crime than you  need to read her statistics on violent crime.   She has increased the felony conviction rate, secured an 85%  conviction rate for homicides, took more gun cases to trial and doubled  the conviction rate in felony gun trials, from 43% in 2003 to 90% in  2006 to name a few.

 We need to get it together come  November or we’ll only have ourselves to blame when a new Attorney  General turns his back on us, or worse, takes away our freedom, privacy  and choices.  

 This means not only getting out to  vote for Kamala, but also spreading the word. Facebook and twitter this  info and please pass this link to 10 people and urge them to pass it to  10 more.  

http://christinebronstein.com/

Letter to Kamala Harris’ office:

 I’m Christine Bronstein, the founder of A Band of Wives (www.abandofwives.com),  a non-partisan social network for women with nearly 1200 members, many  of whom are influential businesswomen and highly successful  entrepreneurs. The vast majority of members are California voters. 

 We’re working to highlight  candidates in the upcoming election who are pursuing offices with a  significant influence on issues important to women.  

I was hopeful that I could get your position  on a few of the issues that you’d be responsible for if you were  elected Attorney General of California.  

  Your responses will be  published on our site for all our members to read and may be picked up  by our members and others who have extensive social networking web  presences.  

 The AG plays a key part in  framing and enforcing laws concerning abortion, including enforcing the  F.A.C.E (Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances) Act and for bringing or  not bringing lawsuits against those involved with abortion and other  reproductive services. As Attorney General, would you work towards  increasing women’s access to those services, limiting it, or continuing  the status quo? 

  Kamala  Harris has always supported and will always support a woman’s right to  choose.    As San Francisco District Attorney she has campaigned against  the repeated attempts to restrict access to abortion here in  California.  She served as the No on Prop 73 campaign chair in San  Francisco, and also campaigned aggressively against Props 85 and 4, all  of which would have limited a woman’s right to choose. 

As AG, Kamala will make choice a priority in her administration.    

 A campaign of violence, intimidation, and harassment continues to be waged against reproductive health care providers, their patients, and their families.  The California Freedom of Access to Clinic and Church Entrances (FACE) Act, protects reproductive health care staff, volunteers, and our clients from physical threats and intimidation and prohibits anyone from damaging or destroying property.   Kamala support s the FACE Act, and believes that the law is only effective when it is fully enforced. She would also believes law enforcement should be trained in the law to ensure that the FACE Act is enforced, regardless of one’s views on abortion.  Kamala would also ensure that socioeconomic status or geographic location should not preclude women from equal access to abortion services.  And would oppose any bills that would restrict a woman’s access to a safe, legal abortion.

 

  

The AG also  plays a key role in assuring women have confidential health services.  What is your stance on maintaining confidentiality for adult women who  seek abortions or other reproductive services? What about minors? 

 

As a career prosecutor, Kamala has  seen firsthand horrific cases involving child sexual assault and she  believes that confidential access is a matter of safety.  Teenagers, as  well as adults, should have confidential access to reproductive health  services, including family planning, disease prevention and abortion.   

  

What is your  stance on the federal health care reform plan passed by Congress?  What health care reform you would support, if any? 

Through the historic health care  reform law passed this year, our nation made major progress in reducing  the number of uninsured Americans.  This is an accomplished to be lauded  and as California’s AG, Kamala Harris would support the implementation  of the federal health care reform law to ensure more Californians had  access to healthcare. 

 

As the individual states’ AGs will have the  power to either protect or limit women’s access to abortion and other  reproductive services with the handling of these reforms (should they  take place), what are your intentions — increasing women’s access to  those services, limiting it, or continuing the status quo?

 As California’s AG,  Kamala would ensure women in our state had access to safe reproductive  healthcare services.   She would protect the reforms provided to women  under the Federal healthcare law for increased access to reproductive  healthcare services.  

 

 The AG is also responsible  for hospital mergers. With the growing numbers of faith-affiliated  hospitals like Catholic Healthcare West (CHW), it appears there is an  opportunity for these groups to merge or take over local hospitals,  therefore changing the access women or minors might have to abortion or  other reproductive services. In fact, some of these faith-affiliated  hospitals have stated that limiting access to these services is a  specific part of their business agenda.  Is that aspect of their agenda  something you would support?  

 

 As community  hospitals merge with religiously affiliated hospitals, many women are  faced with reduced access to reproductive health care services because  the religiously affiliated hospitals refuse to provide those services  saying they go against church doctrine.  In many areas, lack of access  to reproductive health services is acute in areas where the only  hospital has a religious affiliation.    Kamala would support requiring  all health facilities that accept public funds to provide and/or refer  for comprehensive reproductive health care services.  Furthermore, the  Attorney General can use the antitrust powers of her office to ensure  that when hospital mergers are proposed, access to reproductive care is  not eliminated.

 

 

Would you make a concerted effort to ensure  that hospital mergers would not limit women’s access to hospital  based reproductive rights, including emergency contraception?  If so,  how?

 All women should have  emergency contraception available to them, especially rape survivors  being treated at hospital emergency rooms.  California lawmakers  approved legislation, which would ensure timely access all prescriptions  including Emergency Contraception.  But sadly, pharmacists have refused  women who have sought access to EC and ER staff based on the health  professional’s personal beliefs despite state law that protects access  to EC.  As Attorney General, Kamala would uphold and enforce  California’s laws ensuring timely access to EC.  As California’s  Attorney General, Kamala would work with Planned Parenthood,  NARALPro-Choice California and other providers of contraceptive services  to use both the statutory and bully pulpit powers of the AG’s office to  ensure that women seeking EC access are not denied based on a  provider’s personal beliefs. 

 

 

What are some of your past accomplishments in the areas of women’s rights, protections and privacy?

  As District Attorney, Kamala has sponsored and spearheaded the following significant reforms in California:

 

·      California’s landmark law against human trafficking and comprehensive protections for its victims (AB 22, 2005).

 

·      Wrote  San Francisco ’s law banning discriminatory evictions of domestic  violence victims, which is now statewide legislation (SB 782, 2009).

 

·      New state services and support for immigrant women who report their abusers to law enforcement (SB 1569, 2006).

 

·      State funding for California children who witness violent crime to receive mental health services (AB 2809, 2008).

 

·      Stricter criminal penalties for adults who pay children to engage in commercial sex (AB 3042, 2004).

 

·      First  major reform of California ’s Witness Relocation and Assistance Program  to assist crime victims who have been threatened for testifying against  gang members (SB 594, 2007)

 

·      Doubled state funding for witness relocation and protection by working with Governor and states’ district attorneys.

 

·      New  protections for victims of elder abuse who are too sick or injured to  make it to court, by allowing them testify by video and help convict  their abusers (AB 1158, 2007).

 

This is cross-posted from ChristineBronstein.com.  Christine Bronstein is the founder of www.abandofwives.com a social  network and information website for women.  She was CEO of one of the  few women run, venture backed health and fitness companies in the nation  for 8 years and president of a child-welfare foundation for 3 years.   She is a graduate of Columbia/UC-Berkeley executive MBA program and a  member of the honor society Beta Gamma Sigma. 

Chris is married to Hearst/San Francisco Chronicle's Editor-at-Large Phil Bronstein and mother of three.