Do Democrats Care More About Women's Health?

As I wrote here, the general election campaign has taken a vicious turn.  It has now entered the phase where each side is trying to stake claim on certain influential demographics.  The most recent battle is over the so-called war on women.

Image from sky dancing.com

Although both sides are guilty of this pandering, for weeks, I have been trying to make the case that Democrats have engaged in careful planning, strategy and outright manipulation for the loyalty of the female vote.

But everything changed last week with Hillary Rosen's disastrous attack on Ann Romney's role of being a stay-at-home mom who has apparently, "never worked a day in her life."

It proved the be an extremely effective rallying cry for conservative women to unite behind Mitt Romney.

(Thank you Ms. Rosen).

***

The manipulation and pandering to women started a few months ago on January 7th at the New Hampshire Republican debate.  Moderator George Stephanopoulos posed the bizarre question about whether the candidates thought that states could ban contraception.

It felt disjointed and odd to be asking the candidates to comment on such a non-political issue.

Well 13 days later, on January 20th, we found out that contraception IS indeed a relevant 2012 political issue and the controversy surrounding its availability rapidly became the most talked about political issue of this election cycle.

How?

The Health and Human services released a mandate (see HHS mandate) requiring all non-profit employers--including Catholic church-owned hospitals and charities--to provide and pay for insurance coverage to include all forms of birth control--including contraceptives, morning after pills and abortions.

It was extremely controversial for the Obama administration to impose mandates on non-profits especially when it opposes the doctrines of their faith.  Many still question whether it was even constitutional.  The backlash was relentless.  The White House adjusted the ruling.

The White House masterfully began to gradually shift attention away from an "imposition of religious freedoms" to questioning whether women should fear that Republicans will take away the availability of contraception.

Foolish comments by Rick Santorum and political commentator Rush Limbaugh played right into the game plan.

Boom.

One can't help but ask, did Mr. Stephanopoulos have a little insight from White House?

It would be hard to argue otherwise.

Over and over, Democratic Strategists like Donna Brazille and Debra Wasserman Shultz tried to make the case that Republicans are not concerned about equal pay, respect for women's lives, the workplace or a woman's access to health care.

Their message resonated.  In the court of public opinion, many women believed that Democrats were actually more concerned about Women's Health issues than Republicans.

Are they?  Are Democrats more concerned about Women's Health?

Let me start by saying that I would never argue that women's health issues are irrelevant to the political arena.  They aren't.  But this fight over contraception and women's health issues feels manipulative and orchestrated.

Republicans care just as much about Women's health as the Democrats.  To argue otherwise is foolish.

***

I stand by my claim that women are being targeted and blatantly used in a political war--an artificial war that is nicely blanketed under "a concern for women's health."

If this Administration were truly concerned about the "health of women," then the focus of the HHS ruling would not have been simply about contraception.  It would have required free heart screenings, cholesterol screenings and other preventative heart care measures to prevent heart disease--the number one killer of women.

Instead, this Administration is laser focused on contraception.  Why? Because contraception is a hot-button issue that gets people out protesting.

A manipulation of women's issues for political gain?

I would argue absolutely.  And I am still not falling for it.