One example of this marginalization is how pro-choice organizations narrow their advocacy to legislation that affects the right to choose to have an abortion – without addressing the conditions that put women in the position of having to make the decision in the first place. Consequently, politicians, such as former president Bill Clinton are heralded as “pro-choice” as long as they do not support legislative restrictions on abortion regardless of their stance on other issues that may equally affect the reproductive choices women make. Clinton’s approval of federal welfare reforms that place poor women in the position of possibly being forced to have an abortion because of cuts in social services, for instance, while often criticized, was not criticized as an “anti-choice” position. On the Web sites for Planned Parenthood and NARAL, there is little mention of welfare policies in their pro-choice legislation alerts.