All-male House subcommittee votes to restrict abortion nationwide

By Eric W. Dolan/Raw Story
An all-male House Judiciary subcommittee on Tuesday approved legislation that would impose a new nationwide restriction on abortion.

By a party line vote of 6-4, the House Subcommittee on the Constitution and Civil Justice approved a bill that would ban abortions nationwide after 20 weeks of pregnancy. The Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act is based on the belief that fetuses are capable of experiencing pain after 20 weeks gestation.

When Rep. Trent Franks (R-AZ) first proposed the legislation, it only would have covered the District of Columbia. But Franks successfully pushed for the bill to apply nationwide following the conviction of abortion provider Kermit Gosnell.

“The trial of Kermit Gosnell exposed late abortions for what they really are: relocated infanticide,” Frank said Tuesday in a statement. “I pray we use this as a ‘teachable moment,’ in the words of President Obama, and can agree that, at the very least, we are better than dismembering babies who can feel every excruciating moment.”

Opponents of the legislation argue that it is unconstitutional because of the Supreme Court’s ruling in Roe v. Wade, which prohibits states from banning abortion until the fetus is viable outside the womb. The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals struck down a similar law in Arizona’s last month.

“It is astonishing that the Subcommittee on the Constitution would support such a clear affront to the U.S. Constitution — especially when everywhere similar laws have been challenged in the courts, they have been immediately blocked,” said Nancy Northup, president and CEO of the Center for Reproductive Rights.

Michigan Republicans Push ‘Fetal Remains’ Bill That Traumatizes Women Who Miscarry

By Marie Diamond/Think Progress/thanks to @wavingcrosser on Twitter for the link

Michigan Republicans have seized on a bogus story about abandoned fetal remains to push through a bill that callously disregards the feelings of women who have to abort wanted pregnancies for medical reasons.

RH Reality Check explains that here was never any proof to support an anti-abortion activist’s claim of finding fetal remains in an abortion clinic’s dumpster, but the anti-abortion lobby has nevertheless used the story as an excuse to propose an unprecedented bill about the disposal of fetuses.

Laura Berman of the Detroit News reports that as a result of the bill, one of the first questions hospitals may ask women who have just miscarried or had still births is “what do you want to do with the fetus?”:

In the wake of an Eaton County abortion clinic’s Dumpster scandal, the state Senate passed a package of bills Oct. 20 to ensure the “dignified disposition of fetal remains.” But if the bills would treat fetuses with newfound dignity, they don’t extend the same compassion to those especially vulnerable women who have lost pregnancies in clinics and hospitals. [...]

“I think some women will be devastated,” says Joanne Mulhere, who counsels women undergoing loss of pregnancies at Beaumont Hospital in Royal Oak, where about 175 women lose pregnancies through miscarriage or stillbirth annually. Patients would be handed Kleenex, as well as a form to sign, requesting the remains be cremated, buried or interred. [...]

It’s a “choice” that effectively reframes the way women are supposed to think about early pregnancy, imposing new opportunities for grief where none might have existed.

State Sen. Rebekah Warren (D) of Ann Arbor notes that “This would be the first time in Michigan law that a fetus, or fetal remains, would be classified as a dead body at 10 weeks. That’s the most stunning piece of it.”

The bill is likely to pass, either this year or next. Anti-choicers may relish the idea of tormenting women who have had abortions with graphic reminders of their “crime,” but they have no problem traumatizing couples who have just lost pregnancies in the process.

Berman sums it up: “Unfortunately, Michigan legislators have crafted a bill that’s more sensitive to the needs of tissue that fits in a tablespoon than to grown women who, at vulnerable moments, will face a new form to sign, an unsought, disturbing decision to make.”

MISSISSIPPI GOVERNOR-ELECT: PERSONHOOD AMENDMENT COULD RESURFACE IN 2012

By Tanya Somanader/Think Progress

Women’s rights activists took heart after Mississippi voters resoundingly rejected the state’s personhood amendment that would effectively ban all abortions, certain forms of birth control, and even in vitro fertilization for couples struggling to have a child. However, Mississippi’s Governor-Elect Phil Bryant (R) is now saying that the personhood proposal or something similar may “resurface in the 2012 legislature.” Bryant — who told a rape victim that “satan wins” if the personhood amendment fails — said the loss illustrates that “a better effort could have been shown to present information on the Constitutional Amendment.”

Despite the amendment’s defeat in a staunchly pro-life state, several other states are jumping on the personhood bandwagon including Arkansas, Ohio, Montana, Florida, Nevada, California, and Alabama.

New Right-Wing Billboard Campaign: ‘The Most Dangerous Place For A Latino Is In The Womb’

By Tanya Somanader

The tidal wave of right-wing politicians elected in 2010 sparked an unbridled anti-choice campaign that has unleashed nearly 1,000 increasingly radical anti-abortion bills across the country. Following a “conceived in rape” tour that aims end a sexual assault victim’s right to choose, a burgeoning billboard campaign seeks to blame minority women for high abortion rates. Across the country, groups like Lifehave have set up billboards in minority neighborhoods claiming, “Every 21 minutes, our next possible leader is aborted.”

Now the movement is branching out. The right-wing advocacy group Latino Partnership for Conservative Principles launched a new billboard campaign this week in Los Angeles directed at abortion providers in Latino communities. Insisting that “Latinos are being targeted by organizations that promote abortion like Planned Parenthood,” Latino Partnership for Conservative Principles is putting up billboards stating, “El lugar mas peligroso para un Latino es el vientre de su madre,” or, “The most dangerous place for a Latino is in the womb”:

 

The billboard campaign was launched this week in part to “kick off” the “Unidos por la Vida” (United for Life) event being held at the Los Angeles Sports Arena this Sunday, which will feature anti-Planned Parenthood activist Lila Rose and Texas Gov. Rick Perry (R). Unidos por la Vida benefits the anti-choice Latino group Manto de Guadalupe, which was founded by actor Eduardo Verastegui in December 2005 with the mission of “promoting adoption.” Verastegui — who starred in the anti-choice movie Bella — announced plans in January “to build the largest pro-life clinic in the U.S. to be located in Los Angeles.” According to anti-choice activists Jill Stanek, proceeds from Unidos por la Vida will go to build that clinic.

The irony here is that by targeting organizations like Planned Parenthood, these right-wing groups are exacerbating the root causes behind the higher abortion rates in minority communities. Inadequate health insurance, substandard health care, ineffective use of contraceptives, and poor sex education often leave abortion as the only resort choice for women, particularly those in low-income areas. Planned Parenthood, however, provides these very health services needed that help prevent abortion as a last resort.

And so many minority organizations are joining together to condemn the campaign. The National Latina Institution for Reproductive Health slammed it as “nothing more than political ploys designed to stigmatize Latina women and communities of color” and urged the swift removal of the billboards. Decrying “the anti-woman, anti-immigrant, anti-worker reality” Americans face today, California Latinas for Reproductive Justice (CLRJ) said, “These ads create a place for hate mongers to hide behind.”

Anti-Abortion Group Uses Google Ads To Misdirect Women Seeking Abortions

By Marie Diamond

An anti-abortion group called Online for Life is buying up Google ad space as part of a campaign to deliberately mislead and misdirect women seeking information about abortions on the internet, the Washington Independent reportedFriday. In order to “intercept” “abortion-determined” women who try to find service providers online, the Texas-based group has made their deceptive ads some of the first hits women see when they use Google to search for “abortion” in certain cities. Several of the ads trick women by appearing to offer full-service medical counseling, but instead re-route them to “crisis pregnancy centers” that perform ultrasounds and try to scare women out of having abortions by telling them false or misleadinginformation about the risks of the procedure.

Online for Life explains the strategy on its website under the heading “Rescuing pre-born babies from abortion using the Internet”:

The pro-life search result connects the frightened, uncertain Mom with a website that Online for Life maintains for a pro-life pregnancy resource center in her hometown…that connection leads to a phone call, then a visit, then a sonogram, and…
…when an abortion-minded woman sees her baby’s ten tiny fingers…ten tiny toes…and a beating heart…it is almost certain she will change her mind and choose life!

Anti-choice groups and news outlets are already crowing about Online for Life’s success confusing women and making finding abortion providers more difficult. Christian Newswire praises the site’s innovation, writing “The outreach literally breaks the stranglehold the lavishly financed abortion industry has on Internet search results.”

Much of the Online for Life website is devoted to soliciting donations, telling visitors their “life-saving impact is limited only by funding.” The group bases its pitch on effectiveness, claiming to be able to quantify its success. Though it never specifies how it obtains these numbers, the group says it has already “saved” 42 babies. Thewebsite boasts, “Through the use of innovative Internet technology, we can verifiably save the lives of unborn babies.”

They even claim to be able to put a dollar amount on how much its costs to prevent an abortion — $676. Donors can “save three babies from abortion” by giving the group$2,028. Life News editorializes, “It costs less than a Bowflex to save a life.” According to the group’s website, they are affiliated with the socially conservative Focus on the Family.

This subterfuge ad campaign is simply the anti-choice lobby’s latest maneuver to bully, frighten, misinform and otherwise prevent pregnant women from making their own choices. Unfortunately, they are getting considerable help from their friends in Congress and state legislatures across the country, who are putting up their own barriers to make it more difficult for women to access safe abortions. Texas recentlypassed a bill requiring women to have sonograms 24 hours before an abortion, Indiana has cut off funding for Planned Parenthood, and two weeks ago the House GOP unanimously passed a bill that raises taxes on abortions and bans D.C. from using its own money to fund abortions.

House GOP Unanimously Passes Anti-Abortion Bill That Redefines Rape, Raises Taxes, And Creates Rape Audits

By Tanya Somanader

In a 251 to 175 vote this evening, 16 anti-choice Democrats joined every House Republican present in passing H.R. 3, the No Taxpayer Funding For Abortion Act. A chief weapon in the House GOP’s “comprehensive assault” on women this bill proposes some of the most radical and draconian restrictions on women’s rights. They include:

– Redefinition Of Rape: The bill sponsor Rep. Chris Smith (R-NJ) faced serious backlash after he tried to narrow the definition rape to “forcible rape.” By narrowing the rape and incest exception in the Hyde Amendment, Smith sought to prevent the following situations from consideration: Women who say no but do not physically fight off the perpetrator, women who are drugged or verbally threatened and raped, and minors impregnated by adults.
Smith promised to remove the language and while it is not technically in the bill, Mother Jones reports that House Republicans used “a sly legislative maneuver” to insert a “backdoor reintroduction” of redefinition language. Essentially, if the bill is challenged in court, judges will look at the congressional committee report to determine intent. The committee report for H.R. 3 says the bill will “not allow the Federal Government to subsidize abortions in cases of statutory rape” — thus excluding statutory rape-related abortions from Medicaid coverage.
– Tax Increase On Women And Small Businesses: H.R. 3 prevents women from using “itemized medical deductions, certain tax-advantaged health care accounts or tax credits included in last year’s health care law to pay for abortions or for health insurance plans that cover abortion.” In doing so, the bill forces women and small businesses that provide health insurance that covers abortion to pay more in taxes than they would otherwise. Both economic conservative Grover Norquist and the South Carolina Chamber of Commerce noted that the bill is basically a tax increase.
– Rape Audits: Because H.R. 3 bans using tax credits or deductions to pay for abortions or insurance, a woman who used such a benefit would have to prove, if audited, that her abortion “fell under the rape/incest/life-of-the-mother exception, or that the health insurance she had purchased did not cover abortions.” Essentially, the bill turns Internal Revenue Service agents into “abortion cops” who would force women to give “contemporaneous written documentation” that it was “incest, or rape, or [her] life was in danger” that compelled an abortion.
– Bans D.C.-Funded Abortions: The most recent spending resolution contained a ban on abortions in the District of Columbia by redefining the D.C. local government as the federal government. Thus, health clinics in D.C. are banned from using public funds from D.C. taxpayers to provide abortion services. H.R. 3 “would enshrine the District ban into federal law.” According to the Office of Management and Budget office, such a restriction violates “home rule.”

Despite receiving nearly 135,000 signatures in opposition to the bill, Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) and the House Republicans leveled a serious blow on American women and their right to choose. Some Republicans even suggested holding the debt ceiling increase hostage over the passage of H.R. 3. The bill, however, is unlikely to pass as a standalone in the Democratic-led Senate. President Obama has alsothreatened to veto the bill.

M.C.L Comment: This creates jobs how??After a year of the orange bastard screaming "where are the jobs" on every news show  that stuck on a camera in his face, the House GOP hasn't brought up a single jobs bill since taking power in January. All they done since taking power is talk shit and passed wingnut bills that have no chance of going anywhere.