Real Time Blog
North Carolina Considers 24 Hour Wait and Ultrasounds Before Abortions
by Robin Marty, RH Reality Check
May 4, 2011 - 8:44pm (Print)
The state of North Carolina is beginning its own mission to whittle down access to abortion for women in the state.
Via the Daily Comet:
State legislators waded into the social divide over abortion on Wednesday, taking up legislation that would add new requirements like a 24-hour waiting period and an ultrasound of the fetus.North Carolina is one of 16 states that don't require counseling before an abortion, and half require women to wait between counseling and the abortion procedure, according to the Guttmacher Institute, a reproductive-health research organization that supports abortion rights. Ten states require a pre-abortion ultrasound that provides a visual image of the developing child's features.
Supporters told a House judiciary committee that the additional requirements would give women a fuller picture of what's at stake, including the approximate age of the developing child and the medical risks of an abortion technique. Opponents said the bill aims to make abortions more difficult and expensive.
Frankly, the only thing that surprises me anymore at this point is that there are still states that don't have either of these restrictions in place already. Then again, 86 percent of the counties in North Carolina have no providers, so perhaps they just didn't see restrictions as that necessary to begin with.
Rep. Chris Smith: "Re-enfranchise" the Unborn Child
by Robin Marty, RH Reality Check
May 4, 2011 - 8:33pm (Print)
H.R. 3, the misnamed "No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion" bill, passed the House today in a 251-175 vote, with all House Republicans and 16 Democrats voting for it. The bill's sponsor, New Jersey Republican Chris Smith, promoted his bill on the floor, declaring it necessary to protect the "most persecuted minority" out there...the fetus.
Now, in a bizarre "thank you" to the Susan B. Anthony List, Rep. Smith declares that anti-choice politicians have taken the first steps to "re-enfranchise" the unborn.
I didn't know there were franchising opportunities...
FACE Act Charges Increased Dramatically Under the Obama Administration
by Robin Marty, RH Reality Check
May 4, 2011 - 8:14pm (Print)
Since Obama entered the White House in 2008, six people have been sued for violating the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances (FACE) Act, a sign that unlike the prior administration threats to access to clinics are being taken more seriously.
The Associated Press reports:
Since Obama's inauguration, federal lawsuits have been filed against a woman who blocked a car from entering a clinic in West Palm Beach, Fla.; a Texas man who threw his body across the door of a patient waiting area in San Antonio; and a Pennsylvania man who posted on the Internet the names and addresses of abortion providers and extolled his readers to kill them.
Government records obtained by The Associated Press show that in slightly over two years, the Obama Justice Department has filed six lawsuits under the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act, mostly to seek injunctions and fines. That compares with just one such lawsuit during the entire eight years of George W. Bush.
Tiller's slaying "brought home to many of us the terrible potential for violence and the need to use every legal means at our disposal to prevent it," said Barry Grissom, U.S. attorney for Kansas.
Despite the added attention to threats against abortion providers by the administration, however, cases are still being dismissed as "freedom of speech" issues, such as the threats against a Kansas doctor that the judge ruled "not a true threat," because the letter writer wasn't necessarily planning to hurt the doctor herself.
Nebraska Telemed Bill Makes It Out of Committee
by Robin Marty, RH Reality Check
May 4, 2011 - 7:58am (Print)
Nebraska has passed a bill out of committee that would ban the use of telemedicine in early medical abortions, a procedure that would have allowed rural women to have more access to less invasive, less expensive abortions. LB 521 mandates that a doctor must be physically present during an abortion, restricting the use of webcams as a stand in.
Lifenews reports:
Two weeks ago, the Nebraska Legislature’s Judiciary Committee failed to move the bill to the Senate floor but, today, lawmakers approved LB 521 after one senator changed from “not voting” to a “yes” vote. Senator Steve Lathrop of Omaha, Senator Scott Lautenbaugh of Omaha, Senator Colby Coash of Lincoln and Senator Tyson Larson of O’Neill voted to support the legislation.
The bill will move to legislature for a vote. Nebraska has a predominately anti-choice unicameral legislature and governor, so the bill is expected to pass easily.
Texas Legislature: If Planned Parenthood Sues We'll Take Everyone's Family Planning Money
by Robin Marty, RH Reality Check
May 3, 2011 - 8:43pm (Print)
The Texas legislature is quite literally holding poor women hostage in order to defund Planned Parenthood. The have now introduced a bill that will shut down the entirety of the state's low income women's health care and family planning program if Planned Parenthood or any other group that provides abortions sues and wins a ruling saying they should be a part of it.
The Houston Chronicle reports:
Texas lawmakers inserted a poison bill into a women's health program Tuesday in a move designed to ensure that groups like Planned Parenthood do not receive state funding.Legislation that would renew a program to help poor women now has a provision that would shut it down immediately if a group that provides abortions files and wins a lawsuit to participate in the program. The Senate Health and Human Services approved the measure 5-1.
Sen. Bob Deuell, R-Greenville, said the move was necessary to make sure that no organization that provides abortions will receive any state money to provide any kind of health service.
"The legislature has clearly tried to cut off funding for these entities, only to have it restored by lawsuit," Deuell said. "We do not want this to happen again ... if abortion providers are able to sue and win — they have to win the suit — the program will cease to operate."
Even better, almost all of the funding for the program that would be eliminated comes from the federal government, not the state. But they would rather toss it all out, and leave poor women without any health care, and especially birth control, if not doing so means Planned Parenthood might get a dollar of it.
It's the ultimate in gag rules.
Minnesota Senate Committee Approves 20 Week Ban, Subsidized Abortion Elimination
by Robin Marty, RH Reality Check
May 3, 2011 - 8:28pm (Print)
A Minnesota senate committee voted through a bill to restrict poor women's ability to use state subsidized health care for abortions, as well as a ban on all abortions after 20 weeks.
The West Central Tribune reports:
The Judiciary and Public Safety Committee voted 8-5 Tuesday for a bill that would bar subsidized coverage of abortions for women on state health care programs.
A ban on abortions shortly after the midway point in pregnancy also cleared the panel on an 8-4 vote.
The ban on allowing poor women to use state based Medicaid funds is a direct violation of the Minnesota state constitution's Doe V. Gomez ruling, and is an attempt to reverse the decision now that the court has become more conservative.
Both bills, should they pass the Senate and House, are expected to be vetoed by the governor. It is unclear if there are enough votes in both chambers to override a veto.
Ohio "Heartbeat" Bill Gets GOP Star Support
by Robin Marty, RH Reality Check
May 3, 2011 - 8:06am (Print)
The Ohio "heartbeat" abortion ban, a blatantly unconstitutional bill that would make abortion illegal at a point when many women don't even know they are pregnant yet, has caused a large divide among the anti-choice politicians in the state. But now some high powered Republicans are coming out in favor of the bill: GOP presidential hopefuls.
Three potential Republican presidential candidates are backing passage of Ohio's “Heartbeat Bill,” the Dayton Daily News reports.
The legislation, which would ban abortions once a heartbeat is detected, now has the blessing of former U.S. House Speaker Newt Gingrich, Minnesota U.S. Rep. Michele Bachmann and former Alabama Supreme Court Justice Roy Moore.
Of course, it's easy for the candidates to say they are for it -- it proves their anti-choice credentials without them likely having to face any actual repercussions of it passing. The bill has yet to have a senate vote scheduled as legislators continue to debate the enevitable court challenge it will invoke.
Senior Advisors Counsel President To Veto H.R. 3
by Robin Marty, RH Reality Check
May 3, 2011 - 5:36am (Print)
The House is scheduled to vote tomorrow on H.R. 3, a bill that will provide additional bans on abortion funding, including removing tax credits for any insurance plan that provides abortion coverage.
According to Frank Knapp in The Hill, the bill is not just an affront to women, but also is little more than a tax increase on small businesses.
Now H.R. 3, up for a vote this week, threatens to erase this benefit for small businesses because it would eliminate the health insurance tax credits under the Affordable Care Act for any existing or new plans that provide coverage for abortion.
The problems H.R. 3 would cause for small businesses that are trying to do the right thing and offer health insurance have nothing to do with the ideological intent of this bill. Even if a small business owner agrees with the intent, the cost of passage of H.R. 3 in terms of time, money and continuity of policy is very significant.
Should H.R. 3 pass the House and the Senate, it will still have a hard time making it to law, however. The Office of Management and Budget released the following statement.
The Administration strongly opposes H.R. 3 because it: intrudes on women's reproductive freedom and access to health care; increases the tax burden on many Americans; unnecessarily restricts the private insurance choices that consumers have today; and restricts the District of Columbia’s use of local funds, which undermines home rule. Longstanding Federal policy prohibits Federal funds from being used for abortions, except in cases of rape or incest, or when the life of the woman would be endangered. This prohibition is maintained in the Affordable Care Act and reinforced through the President’s Executive Order 13535. H.R. 3 goes well beyond these safeguards by interfering with consumers’ private health care choices. The Administration also strongly supports existing provider conscience laws that have protected the rights of health care providers and entities for over 30 years, and it recognizes and supports the rights of patients. The Administration will strongly oppose legislation that unnecessarily restricts women’s reproductive freedoms and consumers’ private insurance options.
If the President is presented with H.R. 3, his senior advisors would recommend that he veto the bill.
Hopefully, the President will listen to his advisors.
Texas Senate Passes Mandatory Ultrasound Bill
by Robin Marty, RH Reality Check
May 3, 2011 - 5:26am (Print)
Texas senate has finally passed their much debated mandatory ultrasound law, which will also have the added effect of pushing a longer waiting period for many women seeking abortions in the state.
Via Dallas News:
The bill mandates sonograms for women seeking abortions, and makes clear they can view the image and hear the fetal heart beat. If she o not to see the sonogram, a doctor must give her a detailed description of the fetus from what can be seen on a sonogram.
Also, in the vast majority of cases - unless the woman lives 100 miles away from an abortion clinic - she must have the sonogram and hear the description one day and return to have the abortion on the next day.
Republican Governor Rick Perry, an anti-abortion politician, is expected to sign the bill into law.
Defund It All, Let God Sort It Out
by Robin Marty, RH Reality Check
May 2, 2011 - 7:52am (Print)
As the tale is told, during the crusades, a monk was asked how soldiers could separate the Catholics from their enemy. The monk infamously replied, "Kill them all. For the Lord knows them that are His,” the anecdotal origins of the phrase “Kill them all, let God sort it out.”
We’re in the midst of a new crusade, just as religious, and growing to be just as dangerous – the crusade against sexuality, fertility and human rights. Sex, our newly empowered conservative leaders seem to believe, is something that should only happen for procreation, should never involve people who aren’t either married or willing to be married should they get pregnant, and should definitely never occur for the sake of pleasure and intimacy.
To push their agenda, they’ve replaced their swords with the newest and sharpest weapons they own – their tax dollars. Their new rallying cry is to defund: Defund Planned Parenthood! Defund Sex Ed! Defund Websites! Defund Prenatal Care! Defund WIC! Anything that in any way is associated with the sex or procreation with which they disagree should be defunded, disbanned and eliminated.
Even when these projects actually support their goals.
They state they want to eliminate abortions, then demand defunding Planned Parenthood, which provides the very services and supplies most needed to prevent unintended pregnancies. In Indiana, they are willing to give up over one million dollars in family planning and reproductive health care funding for low-income residents, simply to ensure Planned Parenthood does not receive the other three million. Thousands of women will lose the ability to obtain affordable birth control so that money that never went to abortions will now disappear entirely in order to “guarantee” it doesn’t go to abortions.
In Oklahoma, they will literally take the food out of babies’ mouths to ensure “their” tax dollars don’t go to the health care provider. They would rather cut off a supplier of formula for low income babies, endangering the health of the infants about which they care so greatly, on a crusade to stop other “babies” from being “murdered” by birth control pills and IUDs.
In Nebraska, the concern for the unborn stopped the moment it became an issue of citizenship. Rather than potentially provide health care to women who might be in the country illegally, the state stripped prenatal care from the lowest-income women, affecting not just potential illegal immigrants, and not just their children, who would be citizens of the United States, but a group of the absolute poorest women in the state – women who were in fact citizens and caught in the anti-immigration backlash. No tax dollars that could potentially go to illegal immigrants, they argued. Defund it all. When the state had their first rash of stillborns in decades, they shook their heads and refused to change their minds. Not with my tax dollars.
Now, in Massachusetts, they are demanding the removal of a website that provides teens with information on sex, preventing pregnancy and STI’s, and options if a girl gets pregnant. They call it disgusting, crude, and obscene because it uses actual terms a teenager would use when having sex, like “cum.” They call it pornographic for showing how to put on male and female condoms properly. They claim it advocates for secret abortions, despite the fact that it encourages young girls to first try to talk to their parents, tells them to consider adoption, and explains resources for raising a baby on her own. They ignore that it encourages abstinence, that it promotes personal responsibility.
“Defund it!” they demand. “Not with my tax dollars.”
Defund it all. It doesn’t matter if it will hurt teens, women, men. It doesn’t matter if it provides information that could protect future fertility, that groups help prevent unintended pregnancy that will bring down abortion rates. It doesn’t matter if they provide food to babies, health care to mothers, help healthy infants be born into stable lives, or help teens simply be teens and not parents.
It doesn’t matter if innocent victims are affected in their zeal to end sex for any reason but procreation.
Defund it all. Let God sort it out.
