Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

Layoffs Hit NARAL, ACLU

By Garance Franke-Ruta
The combination of a nationwide recession and the election of a president who supports abortion rights and used to work as a civil rights lawyer has delivered a one-two punch to two of the nation's best-known liberal nonprofit groups: NARAL Pro-Choice America and the American Civil Liberties Union.

The ACLU has had to cut staff by 10 percent nationwide, thanks to the tough economic climate and reduced donations and grants, "including those from two foundations that were wiped out by the Bernard Madoff scandal," ACLU executive director Anthony D. Romero said in a statement Friday.

The steps taken by the group included: "instituting a hiring freeze, limiting travel, canceling conferences, and reducing nonpersonnel costs, resulting in savings of more than $9 million." But that wasn't enough, Romero continued. "Unfortunately, additional measures were needed and as a result, the ACLU National Office was forced to eliminate 36 staff positions." Romero also voluntarily took a 15 percent reduction in pay.

Today, NARAL Pro-Choice America also confirmed staff cuts. "NARAL Pro-Choice America is not immune to the most severe economic challenges facing Americans in more than 50 years," explained Ted Miller, the abortion rights group's communications director, in an e-mail. "Like many nonprofit organizations that rely on individual contributions, we have made adjustments. We have reduced staff and cut expenses to both preserve the organization's fiscal health and continue our work as a leader in advancing policies that protect women's freedom and privacy."

Miller declined to specify the size of the staff reduction, citing the privacy of "personnel actions."

By Web Politics Editor  |  January 28, 2009; 3:35 PM ET
Categories:  The Green Zone  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Obama Plans Canadian Visit for February
Next: Obama Invites Congressional Leaders for Cocktails at the White House



Posted by: reshas1 | January 29, 2009 3:11 PM | Report abuse

NARAL made it clear in the last election that they have no concern for advancing the status of women in America. NARAL came out for Obama over Clinton although both were Pro-Choice.

I have beena long time supporter of NARAL, but their action was an epiphany to me. Clearly their organization profits when women are held down and back.

NARAL could care less about American women and is beholden to the liberal male establishment. No Pro-Choice American woman should contribute to their cause. Time to end the oppression, let's start by ending NARAL.

Posted by: mgd1 | January 29, 2009 2:38 PM | Report abuse

doctorfixit - wow, yes, you're clearly very pro-life, as you think people who disagree with your views should starve/freeze to death/take cyanide capsules. Or did you forget that life means those who are actually living? PS: Al Gore is now personally responsible for creating global warming? who knew?

Posted by: larn33 | January 29, 2009 11:15 AM | Report abuse

Wonderful news, I hope the baby butchers at NARAL and the wonderful Anti-American Commie Lawyers Union all starve and/or freeze to death in the Al-Gore induced heat wave that is occurring right now as he lies his head of at the Senate. I can't think of a more deserving anti-American, anti-life group that should receive pink slips along with cyanide capsules.

Posted by: doctorfixit | January 28, 2009 6:34 PM | Report abuse

Awwww! :-D

Posted by: SAINT---The | January 28, 2009 3:58 PM | Report abuse


Why can't the ACLU take a percentage of a monetary award as the result of a class action suit against, say, pervasive government spying against citizens and the "targeted" class of virtually all journalists?

This journalist would gladly donate a third of any monetary award to the ACLU to defray the cost of mounting such a legal effort -- the only practical way to deter such abuses in the future.

Taxpayers would end up footing the bill if agents of government were found culpable -- but perhaps that would force Congress to do some real oversight of the intel "community."

Or maybe officials who betrayed their sworn oaths to uphold the Constitution could be held individually and personally liable.

Here is some source material that could provide the basis for such a suit:

Posted by: scrivener50 | January 28, 2009 3:54 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company