The XX Factor: What women really think.

Kicking Off the XX Gabfest

This week, Hanna, Meghan, and I inaugurated the Double X weekly podcast, called the "XX Gabfest" in tribute to some of our Slate offerings, the "Political Gabfest" and the "Culture Gabfest." We hashed out our thoughts about Obama's speech on abortion at Notre Dame, Nancy Pelosi's troubles, and... (To read the rest of this post, visit our new website DoubleX.com!)

Newt Gingrich to Jon Stewart: "Why Don’t You Talk Pelosi and I’ll Smile?"

As Slate columnist John Dickerson pointed out late last week, by saying that the CIA "misleads us all the time," Nancy Pelosi "put the spotlight on herself and has given weakened Republicans a fight they can enjoy, engage in, and possibly win." Newt Gingrich took to the Daily Show last night to promote his new book, 5 Principles for a Successful Life, but before getting into the heart of his shill, he called for... (To read the rest of this post, visit our new website DoubleX.com!)

Is Birth Control, Um, Stimulating?

When I read this morning that President Obama was going to ask House Democrats to pull family-planning funds from the stimulus package, I breathed a sigh of relief. Not because I'm opposed to birth control (quite the contrary, actually), but because I was opposed to the stimulus package being used for such a purpose. (And yes, feel free to insert your jokes about the, har har, stimulating effects of birth control at any point.) Alas, and perhaps obviously, not everyone shares my sentiments. At Talking Points Memo, Ruth Rosen chides Obama for courting Republicans and calls his request "misguided."

This doesn't have to be an issue that divides women and brings Democrats and Republicans to blows so early in the new administration. I feel like there's a liberal argument for excluding the funds from the stimulus package, and a conservative argument for providing birth control for family planning.

First, not including the funds in the stimulus package: Despite Obama's pledge that there would be no pork in the legislation, Las Vegas' mayor has been trying to get stimulus bucks for a planned "Mob Museum" for his city, and conservatives are already having fun with such proposals as an extra $50 million for the National Endowment for the Arts. If family planning is so important, do we really want it to be reduced to comparisons to the Mob Museum?  Can't it stand on its own merits?

As for the (fiscally) conservative argument for funding family planning, well, as much as I rarely agree with Nancy Pelosi on anything, her comments to George Stephanopolous make a point. It's cheaper to provide birth control to poor families than it is to pay for unintended and sometimes unwanted children. And I'd rather fund birth control than abortion, a million times over. If we can give these parents the means to limit their family size, they will have an easier time taking care of themselves, meaning they will be less likely to need government assistance. And the parents will have more time and resources to devote to the children they already have, helping them with school and getting them involved in extracurricular activities, with the effect of helping them to break the cycle of poverty once they become adults themselves. (To me, that's a pretty important "family value.")

But both arguments lead me to the same conclusion: Make funding for family planning its OWN legislation. Get the debate out into the open. Obama promised hope and change. Congress shouldn't let him down with business as usual.