The following summarizes selected women's health-related blog entries.

~ "Obama Supreme Court Pick: Sonia Sotomayor," Lynn Sweet, Chicago Sun-Times' "The Scoop From Washington": "President Obama was looking for someone with empathy and a 'real life' storyline" when making his Supreme Court nomination, and he "probably got both with his historic pick" of federal appellate court Judge Sonia Sotomayor, Sweet writes. She adds, "If confirmed, Sotomayor will be only the third woman justice in the history of the United States" and the first Hispanic to serve on the court. Sweet writes that although the Democrats have 60 votes in the Senate, "that does not mean there will not be a confirmation battle," adding, "Already on Tuesday morning, a videotape of comments Sotomayor made while on a panel discussion -- about how judges make policy -- is being replayed along with the story of her appointment." According to Sweet, the video will "become a rallying cry for groups already organizing to block her confirmation." She notes that Wendy Long, counsel to the conservative Judicial Confirmation Network, said that Sotomayor is a "liberal judicial activist of the first order who thinks her own personal political agenda is more important [than] the law as written. She thinks that judges should dictate policy, and that one's sex, race and ethnicity ought to affect the decisions one renders from the bench" (Sweet, "The Scoop From Washington," Chicago Sun Times, 5/26).

~ "Nelson Open To Filibustering Obama Court Nominee," Sam Stein, Huffington Post blogs: Senate Republicans -- who have "spent weeks working to frame the type of judicial resume that would be acceptable" for a Supreme Court nominee -- "got what could be a bit of a boost" when Sen. Ben Nelson (D-Neb.), a "key moderate Democrat," said he would be open to filibustering Obama's pick to replace retiring Justice David Souter, Stein writes. During an interview on Fox News Sunday, Nelson cautioned Obama against choosing an "activist judge," adding that he "would hope that there wouldn't be any circumstances that would be so extreme with any of the president's nominees that the other side would feel the need to filibuster or that I might feel the need to filibuster in the case of extraordinary circumstances." Earlier in the interview, Nelson said that he "understand[s] that there could be certain circumstances where you might vote against somebody on the filibuster" (Stein, Huffington Post blogs, 5/24).

~ "Patients' Choice Act: Nice Rhetoric, Swiss Cheese Policy," Julia Kaye, Womenstake: It is "heartening to know that members of Congress from both sides of the aisle have come to recognize the severe failures of the current health care system -- nowhere more obvious than in the individual market -- and more importantly, are introducing legislation to reform it," Kaye writes. However, she adds that the Patients' Choice Act of 2009 -- introduced last week by Sens. Tom Coburn (R-Okla.) and Richard Burr (R-N.C.), and Reps. Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) and Devin Nunes (R-Calif.) -- proposes a state-based marketplace for individuals seeking insurance. It also includes "nice" rhetoric but has holes in terms of some policy issues, Kaye writes, adding, "To start with, the summary does not actually state that insurers participating in the exchanges would have to provide coverage on a guaranteed issue basis -- which means that no one can be denied coverage for any reason. It says only: 'Guaranteed access to care.'" In addition, the proposal does not include incentives for insurance companies to join the state exchanges, which puts the idea that state-based exchanges will "provide a regulated environment" on "shaky ground," she writes. Lastly, Kaye writes that although the plan relies on tax credits to help cover the cost of premiums, they are capped tax credits that fail to "account for differences in premiums that unfairly penalize women and older people -- differences that are allowed under the new proposal." She concludes that the "Patients' Choice Act is not the yellow brick road to comprehensive, affordable, quality health care that meets women's needs" (Kaye, Womenstake, 5/22).

Antiabortion-rights blog

~ "Going Public About White House Abortion Meeting," David Brody, The Brody File: Wendy Wright, president of Concerned Women for America, is "going public with details from a private White House meeting about abortion reduction," Brody writes. According to an article recently Wright, White House Director of Domestic Policy Melody Barnes said that the goal of the meeting was to discuss how to "reduce the need for abortions," rather than "reduce the number of abortions." Brody writes that Wright and other antiabortion-rights advocates "are wary and skeptical of the Obama administration in this area," but it is "hard to argue that the Obama administration is not making a good faith effort." He continues, "If this is not a good faith effort, then the answer will lie in the final product because the real question is what will the final abortion reduction initiative look like" (Brody, The Brody File, 5/22).

Reprinted with kind permission from nationalpartnership. You can view the entire Daily Women's Health Policy Report, search the archives, or sign up for email delivery here. The Daily Women's Health Policy Report is a free service of the National Partnership for Women & Families, published by The Advisory Board Company.

© 2009 The Advisory Board Company. All rights reserved.