Michigan Lawmakers Are Trying To Sneak Through Extreme Abortion Restrictions In Lame Duck Session

By Tara Culp-Ressler/Think Progress

Women’s health advocates confirm that Michigan lawmakers are likely to revive on Thursday an omnibus anti-abortion bill thatsparked widespread protests after it passed the House this summer, in addition to a host of other restrictive abortion legislation they hope to force through the current lame duck session.

As Michigan’s current attempt to pass anti-union legislation dominates the coverage surrounding the state legislature, lawmakers are using the opportunity to revisit anti-abortion measures they hope to slip through before this session ends. Since five anti-choice state legislators lost their seats in last month’s election, this may be the best time for the legislature to advance their far-right agenda — despite the fact that the majority of Michigan residents support legal access to abortion. On Thursday afternoon, the state senate may consider multiple anti-abortion bills that aim to:

1) Regulate abortion clinics out of existence. HB 5711, the massive 45-page legislation that sparked a massive outcry when the House considered it in June, contains additional and unnecessary regulations for abortion providers. HB 5711 would subject any facilities that perform 6 or more abortions per month to burdensome regulations that could be so costly that they force clinics to close their doors, an indirect method of targeting abortion providers.

2) Limit abortion access for women in rural areas. HB 5711 would also place restrictions on telemedical abortions, which provide essential health servicesto women in rural areas who often lack any access to nearby abortion doctors. Even though telemedical procedures have been proven to be safe and effective, Michigan lawmakers seek to require doctors to be physically present to administer abortion services.

3) Impose further guidelines for the disposal of fetal remains. Michigan already has regulations in place to instruct medical professions about how they must dispose of fetal remains, but HB 5711 wants to go a step further, requiring fetal remains to be treated in the exact same manner as dead bodies. Doctors would be forced to fill out death forms and make arrangements for the fetal remains’ cremation or burial, imposing an emotional burden on the women whose pregnancies end through a medical miscarriage. No other state handles fetal remains at 10 weeks in the same way as it handles dead bodies.

4) Prevent private insurance companies from covering any abortion services. A trio of companion bills — SBs 612, 613, and 614 — would work together to ban the health insurance exchange that Michigan will set up under Obamacare from covering abortion, as well as ban private insurers from covering any abortion services under their general insurance plans. Currently, 87 percent of Michigan’s insurance plans include abortion care in their benefits packages. If private insurers elect to cover abortions, they have to do it as a separate rider, which often ends up being more costly for women.

5) Allow doctors to refuse to perform abortion services because of their personal beliefs. SB 975, which passed the Michigan Senate’s Health Policy committee earlier this week and is now up for a full vote, is a sweeping “license to discriminate” bill that would allow medical professionals to deny health services based on their personal beliefs. It would allow doctors to refuse to provide HIV treatment, vaccinations, or abortions to any of their patients simply based on their “conscience.”

Preliminary reports from women’s health advocates on the ground in Michigan suggest that the Senate has already passed SB 975, and is likely to pass SBs 612, 613, and 614 this afternoon. But Thursday’s push doesn’t represent the only step that Michigan lawmakers have taken during this year’s lame duck session to push through anti-choice legislation. Just a few weeks ago, state legislators also considered establishing a tax credit for fetuses past 12 weeks’ gestation, a dangerous step toward endowing fetuses with the same rights as U.S. citizens.

UPDATE

The Huffington Post confirms that the Michigan Senate passed SBs 975, 612, 613, and 614 on Thursday afternoon. Only one Republican state senator broke from his party to oppose SB 975, while the rest of the legislators voted along party lines. The Senate is expected to schedule a vote on HB 5711 sometime during the remainder of this legislative session.

Fluke tells Soledad O’Brien GOP policies make women feel ‘under attack’

By Arturo Garcia/Raw Story

Womens’ rights activist Sandra Fluke, who became a lightning rod in the debate over contraception rights this year, said Wednesday that the phrase “War on Women” isn’t just a disagreement regarding policy on reproductive issues or a way to frame the discussion over them.

“To me, the frame is less important than what policies we’re seeing,” Fluke told CNN’s Soledad O’Brien. “I do feel like women feel they’re under attack.”

Republican policy on issues ranging from the Violence Against Women Act, the Lily Ledbetter Fair Pay Act – both at the national level and in Wisconsin – and reproductive health care, Fluke said, have not gone unnoticed over the past two years.

“Women feel that,” she said. “They really do feel like this is a shift, and not in their favor.”

O’Brien cited recent polls showing Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney had slightly improved his standing among women voters after his party’s national convention last week, but Fluke was quick to point out that the former Massachusetts governor still trails President Barack Obama in those polls, 54 percent to 42.

And recent attempts by Romney and his running-mate, Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI), todistance themselves from Rep. Todd Akin’s (R-MO) infamous “legitimate rape” remarks, Fluke said, are “disturbing.”

“He’s taken so many different ones on the issue of access to abortion,” said Fluke of Romney, who recently said he supported an exception allowing rape victims to get abortions. “And I don’t expect to see a leader moving and quivering with the political times.”

Watch Fluke’s interview with O’Brien, aired Wednesday on Starting Point, below.

Hannity Tries To Whitewash GOP Bill's "Forcible Rape" Language

by Zachary Pleat/Media Matters

Sean Hannity continued his attempts to downplay the GOP's record of promoting legislation that hurts women by accusing Democrats of "playing word games" when bringing up an abandoned Republican effort to blur the definition of rape in federal anti-abortion legislation.

In January 2011, Rep. Chris Smith (R-NJ) introduced a bill to permanently ban federal funding of abortion, designated H.R. 3. Under the Hyde Amendment, which has been renewed periodically since 1976, federal funding for abortions is prohibited with exceptions for rape, incest, and saving the life of a pregnant woman. But in the original language of H.R. 3, the exception for rape was changed to "forcible" rape. Mother Jones reported that the change "would rule out federal assistance for abortions in many rape cases, including instances of statutory rape, many of which are non-forcible."

The "forcible rape" language in the bill drew condemnation from women's rights groups. Steph Sterling of the National Women's Law Center said that the bill "takes us back to a time when just saying 'no' wasn't enough to qualify for rape." NARAL Pro-Choice America policy director Donna Crane said that the change is "unbelievably cruel and heartless," and National Organization for Women president Terry O'Neill said that the bill "takes us right back to the 1950s, when women had to prove they were physically assaulted." EMILY's List stated:

"The GOP is pushing their anti-woman agenda yet again, and this time they've sunk to new lows: they actually want to redefine rape, incest, and the health of a mother. In an outrageous and dangerous new bill supported by John Boehner, the GOP is going after some of the most vulnerable women at the worst time of their lives -- after they've been raped.

"Can you imagine telling a victim of date rape -- or another form of sexual assault -- that they don't just count as rape survivors because it wasn't so-called "forcible rape"? Well, with this HR3 bill, that's exactly what John Boehner and the GOP wants to do: tell these women that they're not victims of a crime or deserve the resources they need to deal with their trauma.

Amid the widespread condemnation, House Republicans announced in February 2011 that they would drop the term "forcible" from the bill, and it does not appear in the most recent version of the bill.

But according to Hannity, highlighting this is somehow another distortion of the Republican record. After Fox News contributor Christopher Hahn brought up the original language of H.R. 3, Hannity defended the language, first demanding that Hahn "explain what non-forcible rape is," and repeatedly questioning whether statutory rape is "forced." Watch:

Hannity ultimately dismissed the concerns over the GOP's attempt to redefine rape as "playing word games." But language matters, especially in our nation's laws. In its reporting on H.R. 3, Mother Jonesnoted the problems with using such a term:

Laurie Levenson, a former assistant US attorney and expert on criminal law at Loyola Law School in Los Angeles, notes that the new bill's authors are "using language that's not particularly clear, and some people are going to lose protection." Other types of rapes that would no longer be covered by the exemption include rapes in which the woman was drugged or given excessive amounts of alcohol, rapes of women with limited mental capacity, and many date rapes. "There are a lot of aspects of rape that are not included," Levenson says. 

[...]

The bill hasn't been carefully constructed, Levenson notes. The term "forcible rape" is not defined in the federal criminal code, and the bill's authors don't offer their own definition. In some states, there is no legal definition of "forcible rape," making it unclear whetherany abortions would be covered by the rape exemption in those jurisdictions.