The value of this piece is twofold: it alerts readers to potential legislation that may result in changing the legal definition of "abortion" in such a way that women's rights to contraception are abridged, and 2) it provides the link to a better source of information in the New York Times. There are a number of components to this story-- the legislation itself, which is ostensibly to prevent "discrimination" in hiring, is one issue; the definitions of "contraception," "pregnancy," and "abortion" are another, and possibly of far-reaching significance. It certainly is possible that the legislation is a back-door approach to further a pro-life agenda, but readers need more information than is provided here to be able to assess that. In fact, I think the New York Times article falls short in detail and context. This is an extremely important topic; we need better coverage than I've seen so far. NOTE: The NY Times article is available for review on NewsTrust at: http://www.newstrust.net/webx?14@@.1059974e