Blog For Arizona

We really dodged a bullet there

Crossposted from Democratic Diva 2/26/2014

So Brewer vetoed the very bad no good Center for Arizona Policy bill, with the attention of the world on her, and of course we must all contact her and thank her, for Republicans must be praised effusively like good doggies who haven’t soiled the rug on those rare occasions they do the right thing. Personally, I’d be embarrassed if people’s expectations of me were that low but, then again, I’m just one of those adults in the room.

We really did dodge a bullet and at risk of sounding cynical, I’m glad the focus was on LGBT discrimination from a purely tactical standpoint in addition to the moral and human rights ones. Having it framed as targeting LGBT citizens was what brought the fiercely negative reaction in the media and the organized business community around to kill it. But make no mistake, this was also very much an anti-choice bill. CAP spokesman Aaron Baer cited Hobby Lobby in a TV interview as an example for why SB1062 was needed. Had contraception access been the main public focus – and I bet CAP wishes like hell it had – there’s a good chance the bill would have been quietly signed into law with nary a peep from the Chamber of Commerce crowd because sluts.

The obvious, and only, way to put the brakes on all this dumb shit is to elect more pro-choice Democrats.

 

Action Alert: CAP abortion bill in the House today

Posted by AzBlueMeranie:

Your work is not done now that Governor Jan Brewer has vetoed the Religious Bigotry bill from Cathi Herrod and the Center for Arizona Policy (CAP).

The Committee of the Whole (COW) in the House is debating the CAP bill for surprise inspections of abortion clinics,HB 2284 (.pdf) TODAY. This bill is really about harassing and intimidating abortion services providers and invading the constitutional medical privacy rights of their clients. The bill is sponsored by a CAP water carrier, Rep. Debbie Lesko, R-Peoria.

Democrats and Planned Parenthood oppose the bill. The federal courts have previously ruled that snap inspections of abortion clinics are unlawful because women’s medical privacy rights are at risk.

Once again our Tea-Publican lawless legislature is pursuing the radical exremist agenda of Cathi Herrod and the CAP. Should this bill ever be signed into law, it will result in another losing lawsuit that pisses away taxpayer money in pursuit of the radical extremist agenda of the CAP.

Contact your legislators now to oppose this unlawful bill.

UPDATE: The bill was approved on a voice vote and will be scheduled for a Third Read roll call vote. Will any of the "mythical moderate Republicans" stand up to say no to this unconstitutional and unlawful bill from Cathi Herrod and CAP?

Our Tea-Publican lawless legislature loses in court, again (part the infinity)

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

You may recall that on the opening day of the legislative session this year, lobbyist Cathi Herrod and her Christian Taliban at the Center for Arizona Policy (CAP), and her allies in the anti-choice, anti-constitutional rights for women movement suffered a major defeat when the U.S. Supreme Court denied Arizona's petition to the court requesting review of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals decision striking down the Arizona Tea-Publican legislature's 20-week abortion restrictions, Horne v. Isaacson (13-402).

On Monday, lobbyist Cathi Herrod and the CAP and its legal partner in the Christian Reconstructionist and Dominionist movement, the Arizona-based Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF), suffered another major defeat when the U.S. Supreme Court denied Arizona's petition to the court requesting review of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals decision in Betlach v. Planned Parenthood (13-621) striking down the Arizona Tea-Publican legislature's attempt to defund Planned Parenthood. U.S. Supreme Court won’t revive Arizona abortion law:

The U.S. Supreme Court refused Monday to consider a move to resurrect an Arizona law that would have disqualified abortion providers from receiving public funding for other medical services.

The high court declined to hear Arizona Attorney General Tom Horne’s appeal of a lower court ruling that blocked the 2012 law.

I got yer "goofy hypotheticals" right here.

The AZ Senate debated SB1062, which would allow discrimination so long as it was for “sincerely held” religious reasons. Theocrats have tried, unsuccessfully, to pass similar laws in four other states but there’s a chance Governor Brewer could sign this one if it passes the House. The video isn’t up yet but the floor session was interesting.

Democrats tried valiantly to amend the bill on the floor, including one attempt where Sen. Ableser, hilariously, got the Republicans on record as supporting the rights of Satanists to do their thing. Democrats also cited several possible ways the law could be used to discriminate against LGBT and other groups, which Sen. Yarbrough (R) dismissed as “goofy hypotheticals”.

Abortion access returns to Flagstaff, which displeases LifeSiteNews

Crossposted from DemocraticDiva.com

Planned Parenthood of AZ announced the good news this morning:

Planned Parenthood Arizona – Flagstaff Health Center In 2011, Planned Parenthood Arizona was forced to stop providing abortion care at a number of our health centers due to legislation that made the provision of this care nearly impossible. Our health center in Flagstaff was one of them.

For the past two and a half years, women living outside of Pima and Maricopa County have encountered miles of travel, days of wages lost, and several nights away from loved ones in order to access this safe and legal medical procedure. These barriers, created by politicians who have no business interfering with a woman’s personal medical decisions, were faced and overcome by many women – but not all.

Appalling treatment of rape victims in Missoula, Montana reveals what a big old suckfest conservative "values" are

Crossposted from DemocraticDiva.com

Right wingers are forever going on about how the sexual revolution has brought about the decline of civilization and has been simply terrible for women due to us no longer being able to use pregnancy to force reluctant men to shotgun marry us, among other things. But this Mother Jones report from Missoula, MT clearly illustrates how antediluvian attitudes toward sexuality and women held by the prosecutors there are causing rapists to go free, tormenting female victims, and causing some victims not to even bother trying to get justice.

"Both parties suck! Wah! Why won't you Democrats fix it?!?"

Crossposted from DemocraticDiva.com

Laurie Roberts at the AZ Republic is beside herself that the well-heeled proponents of the dumb Top Two Primary idea are, as she delightedly exclaims, baaaaaack. (Much more after the jump)

Democrat Randall Friese Kicks-off Campaign for LD9 Representative (video)

by Pamela Powers Hannley

Grassroots volunteers mingled with local and statewide Democratic Party glitterati at the official campaign kick-off event for Dr. Randall Friese, who is running for a seat in Arizona House of Representatives.

Friese recently announced his candidacy for one of LD9's two seats in the Arizona House. Currently, LD9, which stretches from Speedway in midtown north into the Foothills, is a competitive district being served by Republican Ethan Orr and Democrat Victoria Steele in the House and Democrat Steve Farley in the Arizona Senate.

Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords and her astronaut husband Mark Kelly hosted an estimated 130 stalwarts of the Pima County Democratic Party, including current County Chair Don Jorgenson, past Chair Jeff Rogers, and several current and former elected Democrats: LD9 Rep. Victoria Steele, LD10 Reps. Stephanie Mach and Bruce Wheeler, LD10 Senator Dave Bradley, Tucson City Councilwoman Karin Uhlich, former Surgeon General Dr. Richard Carmona, former Attorney General and current Secretary of State candidate Terry Goddard, and former Rep. Nancy Young-Wright. (Farley was conspicuously absent, following a social media dust-up on Friday over this article in the Arizona Daily Star.)

Former Giffords' staffer Pam Simon and Kelly gave impassioned speeches about Friese, who was one of the University Medical Center trauma surgeons who cared for Giffords and others who were shot on January 8, 2011. During Giffords' long stay in UMC's intensive care unit (ICU), Kelly and Friese became friends and had many late-night ICU discussions on multiple topics-- including politics. According to Kelly, Friese and Giffords are similar in that they are dedicated to finding solutions, not playing politics. [Friese vs Orr on the issues, after the jump.]

AZ Star Perpetuates ‘Ethan Orr Is a Moderate’ Myth

by Pamela Powers Hannley

In today's Arizona Daily Star, columnist Tim Steller chides the Pima County Democratic Party for trying to take down "moderate" Republican LD9 Legislator Ethan Orr. 

First of all, a quick look at Orr's voting record and political endorsements reveal that the "Ethan Orr is a moderate" meme is a myth. For example:

Orr voted FOR voter suppression on multiple occasions. Most recently, Orr cast the deciding vote in committee and sided Republicans who want to do an "end run" around voters by repealing last year's Omnibus Voter Suppression Bill (HB2305), in order to pass several other voter suppression bills this session. The bill to repeal HB2305-- if passed by the Legislature-- will eliminate the citizens' right to vote for or against voter suppression in the 2014 election. Orr voted for voter suppression last week,  and he was part of the Republican block that originally passed HB2305 in the dead of night in the waning hours of the 2013 Legislative session.

Orr signed an anti-abortion pledge to defend the rights of the unborn. Orr-- along with Governor Jan Brewer, Republican legislators, and three weak-kneed Democrats-- signed the Christian conservative Center for Arizona Policy's pledge to fight for the rights of unborn fetuses, while ignoring the legal rights of adult women to make choices about their bodies, their children, and their lives. Steller soft-sells Orr's pro-fetus stance by saying that Orr "tends toward a pro-life viewpoint on abortion." Orr signed a pledge to fight for fetal personhood; this is an extreme viewpoint that confers rights upon fetuses-- while taking away the rights of American women. This goes far beyond tending "toward pro-life". [Pledge text and more after the jump.]

The quest for the "perfect message" and why it can stifle progressives

Crossposted from DemocraticDiva.com

There was a lot of hand-wringing among progressives/secular types before, during, and after “Science Guy” Bill Nye’s debate with Creation Museum founder Ken Ham on Tuesday night, which was held at the aforementioned “museum” in Kentucky. There is certainly a good argument for avoiding such debates entirely, as Richard Dawkins does. Eschewing them is probably a wise general rule for proponents of evolution since the debate format gives undeserved credibility to evidence-free assertions like Creationism. Also, debates are too often focused on performance over substance and “winners” and “losers”. For example, Mitt Romney “won” his first Presidential debate by boldly lying about his positions and catching President Obama off-guard. But, having watched it, I’m glad that Nye took the risk with this particular debate.

Q: When is it okay for AZ Dem lawmakers to sign an anti-Roe v Wade pledge?

A: Never.

Yet two Democrats in the AZ House did just that.

Text of the proclamation:

GOP's War on Women: Tea-Publican House passes the 'Rape Audit Bill'

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

Just hours before a joint session of Congress for President Obama's State of the Union Address last night, the Tea-Publican House voted on one of its top legislative priorities for this year: HR 7, which they misleadingly label the “No Taxpayer Funding For Abortion Act” (the Hyde Amendment has banned federal funds for abortions since 1976), and that opponents call the "Rape Audit Bill," for justifiable reason.

As I explained in a post earlier this year, House Republicans Are Pushing A Bill That Would Force The IRS To Audit Rape Victims:

In addition to preventing low-income women from using their Medicaid coverage to access abortion, the “No Taxpayer Funding For Abortion Act,” or HR 7, could also have dramatic implications for the tax code and the private insurance market. One of its most controversial provisions could actually require the Internal Revenue Service to conduct audits of rape victims.

Why? Because HR 7 eliminates medical-expense deductions for abortion care, essentially raising taxes on the women who opt to have an abortion. Like many abortion restrictions, this provision includes an exemption for victims of rape and incest, as well as women who encounter life-threatening complications from their pregnancies. But in order to enforce those exceptions, the IRS would have to verify that the women who are claiming a medical-expense deduction for an abortion fall into one of those three categories, to ensure they’re not committing tax fraud.

Essentially, that would empower the government agency to have the final say over what “counts” as a sexual assault or a life-threatening situation. And that, in turn, would force victims to prove their case.

“Imagine having to recount a sexual assault — a horrifyingly painful, personal experience — to a tax collector,” NARAL Pro-Choice America says in an action alert to its members to encourage them to mobilize against HR 7. “An anti-choice bill in Congress would do just that. It could force sexual assault survivors who access abortion care to prove the assault occurred.”

The House vote was 227 to 188, mainly along party lines. Final Vote. Six Democrats voted yes, only one Republican voted no, and another voted present. There were 15 members of Congress not voting.

As usual, wingnuts don't realize everyone else has the internet too

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Gaslighting is a form of mental abuse in which false information is presented with the intent of making a victim doubt his or her own memory, perception and sanity.^[1] Instances may range simply from the denial by an abuser that previous abusive incidents ever occurred, up to the staging of bizarre events by the abuser with the intention of disorienting the victim.

The term "gaslighting" comes from the play Gas Light and its film adaptations. The term is now also used in clinical and research literature.

Israel exposes anti-abortion zealot hypocrisy

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

So how do Christian Zionists square their support for Israel with their no exceptions anti-abortion stance?

After all, these same zealots seek to defund Planned Parenthood on the theory that any financial support to Planned Parenthood "indirectly" funds abortions. This is the same convoluted argument they make against the contraception coverage mandate in "ObamaCare" for which they seek a "conscience clause" exception for religious objectors -- including corporations and businesses.

Israel has adopted one of the most liberal abortion laws in the world, and will now provide government funding for non-medical abortions for Israeli women aged 20 to 33. So where is the hue and cry to defund Israel for its liberal abortion policies? Buzzfeed reports, Anti-Abortion Republicans Are Largely Quiet As Israel Adopts Liberal Abortion Law:

Washington’s most anti-abortion lawmakers are largely silent on the new policy. These same members of Congress are also some of Israel’s loudest defenders, highlighting a peculiar aspect of the relationship between many of Israel’s ardent U.S. supporters and Israel’s domestic political landscape.

Last month, a health ministry panel in Israel recommended the state pay for the abortions of women aged 20 to 33, including non-medical abortions. The measure was adopted this week, and will cost the state annually about $4.6 million. Unlike in the United States, abortion is relatively non-controversial in the country.

* * *

“I don’t really feel qualified to talk about what Israel should be doing on abortion,” said Sen. John McCain.

CAP's latest assault on the constitutional right of privacy in health care decisions of Arizona women

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

On the opening day of the Arizona Legislature this year, the U.S. Supreme Court rejected Arizona's appeal from the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals striking down the legislature's 20-week abortion ban as unconstitutional. The source of this anti-choice bill, Mullah Cathi Herrod and her Christian Taliban at the Center for Arizona Policy (CAP), vowed to retaliate against Arizona women. Arizona cannot enforce abortion ban, Supreme Court rules:

Herrod signaled that her organization, which has been at the forefront of pushing lawmakers here to enact more restrictions on abortion, is not done yet.

"We are already taking the next steps to protect women and their pre-born children from the dangerous and deadly practices of the abortion industry," she said, promising details in the coming days.

One of CAP's foot soldiers in the Arizona Legislature, Rep. Debbie Lesko (R-Peoria), is the sponsor of HB 2284 (.pdf) which would, among other provisions, allow for the Christian Taliban to make unannounced "inspections" of abortion clinics to harass and intimidate abortion service providers and their patients. The Arizona Capitol Times (subscription required) reports, Anti-abortion bill would permit unannounced inspections of clinics:

A Peoria lawmaker has introduced an anti-abortion bill that would allow health inspectors to examine clinics unannounced. The bill also would make it a crime to circumvent the state’s parental consent law.

The bill, HB 2284, introduced Thursday by Rep. Debbie Lesko, also requires abortion clinics to report whether an infant survived a procedure and what steps doctors took to save it.

The legislature's attempt to defund Planned Parenthood before the U.S. Supreme Court

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

Last November the state of Arizona petitioned the U.S. Supreme Court for review of a 9th Circuit Court of Appeals decision striking down the Arizona legislature's attempt to defund Planned Parenthood of Arizona as a family planning service under Medicaid (AHCCCS) on the specious argument that it also separately provides for abortion services. Providing funding to the family planning services side of Planned Parenthood allegedly "indirectly" subsidizes the separately maintained and accounted for abortion services of Planned Parenthood.

State and federal law have long prohibited public funding of abortions, hence the separation of services and separate accounting by Planned Parenthood. Should the state of Arizona succeed on its specious claim, many areas of the state would lose family planning services because Planned Parenthood is the only provider in those areas. Planned Parenthood also provides wellness services for such things as cancer screening for cervical and breast cancers, and a host of other services. In effect, the Arizona legislature, at the behest of Mullah Cathi Herrod and her Christian Taliban at the Center for Arizona Policy (CAP), would deny low income Arizona women access to basic health care and family planning services.

The case is Tom Betlach, Director, Arizona Health Care Cost Containment System, et al., v. Planned Parenthood Arizona, Inc., et al. (Docket 13-621). A responsive brief was due on January 21, 2014.

Rep. Goodlatte's weird "abortion ban as jobs plan" comment was not made in a vacuum

As AZBlueMeanie reported yesterday:

Apparenlty the NRCC forgot to school their male members of Congress that they should also not say stupid things in open committee hearings with C-Span cameras rolling.

You can't make this shit up. Congressman’s New Jobs Plan: Deny Women Access To Abortion So They Can Make More Babies:

During a debate over an anti-abortion bill currently advancing in Congress, Rep. Bob Goodlatte (R-VA) suggested that Republicans support restricting access to abortion because it will ultimately benefit the economy if women have more children. Goodlatte noted that carrying pregnancies to term “very much promotes job creation.”

Goodlatte made the comments while presiding over a committee mark-up of the “No Taxpayer Funding For Abortion Act,” or HR 7, on Wednesday afternoon. That legislation would dramatically restrict women’s access to affordable abortion care by imposing restrictions on insurance coverage and tax credits for the procedure. Goodlatte, who chairs the House Judiciary Committee, advanced HR 7 by scheduling it for a full committee mark-up on Wednesday.

Explaining his support for the measure, Goodlatte [said]:

“I would suggest that it is very much the case that those of us in the majority support this legislation because it is the morally right thing to do but it is also very very true that having a growing population and having new children brought into the world is not harmful to job creation,” he said. “It very much promotes job creation for all the care and services and so on that need to be provided by a lot of people to raise children.”

This is nothing new with anti-choicers, who have been obsessed with "low birth rates" for decades and are furiously peddling the panic in an obvious attempt to get the economic elites to support their policies. Given how much money right wing bigwigs like the Koch Bros. have pumped into the campaigns of anti-choice politicians and legislation, the strategy appears to be working at least somewhat. 

Now, if you have the reasoning and arithmetic skills of a five year old, it would seem absurd to think the human population, having gone from 1.5 billion worldwide in 1900 to over 7 billion now, is in the throes of precipitous demographic doom but that is exactly what anti-choicers would have you believe.

A sampling of the evidence:

The GOP has a jobs bill: keep the womenfolk barefoot and pregnant!

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

Back in early December, POLITICO Tiger Beat on The Potomac reported that "The National Republican Congressional Committee wants to make sure there are no Todd Akin-style gaffes next year, so it’s meeting with top aides of sitting Republicans to teach them what to say — or not to say — on the trail, especially when their boss is running against a woman." GOP men tutored in running against women.

The idea was so comical that Gary Trudeau featured it in his Doonesbury comic strip in December.

Apparenlty the NRCC forgot to school their male members of Congress that they should also not say stupid things in open committee hearings with C-Span cameras rolling.

You can't make this shit up. Congressman’s New Jobs Plan: Deny Women Access To Abortion So They Can Make More Babies:

During a debate over an anti-abortion bill currently advancing in Congress, Rep. Bob Goodlatte (R-VA) suggested that Republicans support restricting access to abortion because it will ultimately benefit the economy if women have more children. Goodlatte noted that carrying pregnancies to term “very much promotes job creation.”

Gov. Brewer doesn't 'get' the concept of federalism

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

Governor Jan Brewer clearly doesn't "get" the concept of federalism, co-equal branches of government, and judicial review. In response to the U.S. Supreme Court's denial of Arizona's abortion law appeal in Horne v. Isaacson on Monday, Brewer's PR guy Howie Fischer wants us all to know that:

The high-court decision drew derision from Gov. Jan Brewer, who signed the measure into law. In a prepared statement, she called it “a clear infringement on the authority of states to implement critical life-affirming laws.”

That whole federal supremacy clause in the U.S. Constitution and the 14th Amendment prohibiting states from interfering with the constitutional rights, liberties and immunities of U.S. citizens is just so damn inconvenient. And whoever heard of Marbury v. Madison? (judicial review, Supreme Court is the final arbiter of constitutionality).

States' rights! I am the governor! I get my way! Waaah!

BREAKING: U.S. Supreme Court rejects Arizona's abortion law appeal

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

For those of you heading up to the Capitol this morning for the Stand With Arizona Women rally, there is breaking news from the U.S. Supreme Court. Arizona's petition to the court requesting review of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals decision striking down the Arizona Tea-Publican legislature's 20-week abortion restrictions, Horne v. Isaacson (13-402), has been DENIED. The Order list is Here.

Lyle Denniston at SCOTUSblog.com reports, Court bypasses abortion test case:

The Supreme Court on Monday chose to bypass the first case to reach it testing a new round of state laws restricting abortion rights.  Without comment and without any noted dissents, the Court refused to hear an Arizona case involving a ban on abortions at 20 weeks of pregnancy.  The case was Horne v. Isaacson (13-402).

Arizona's legislative session opens today with a major defeat for Mullah Cathi Herrod and her Christian Taliban at the Center for Arizona Policy (CAP), and her allies in the anti-choice, anti-constitutional rights for women movement. It is a major victory for women's rights.

Let's make this the first in a series of victories for women's rights this year.

In the U.S. Supreme Court this week

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

The U.S. Supreme Court at its Conference on Friday considered the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals decision striking down the Arizona Tea-Publican legislature's 20-week abortion restrictions, Horne v. Isaacson (13-402).This case was not among the eight cases granted immediately after the Conference on Friday. Additional orders from the January 10 Conference are due on Monday morning at 9:30 a.m. EST.

Monday is also the first day of the January sitting.On Monday the Court will hear oral arguments in National Labor Relations Board v. Noel Canning, the challenge to the constitutionality of the president’s recess appointments to the NLRB. The patrician prevaricator for the plutocracy, George Will, clutches his pearls and whines mightily about the president's recess appointments, while ignoring the unprecedented partisan obstruction of the president's appointments by the Tea Party tyranny of the minority in A defining moment for the Court, while the New York Times editorializes today, correctly, Protect the President’s Appointments. That's a big "screw you George Will."

On both Tuesday and Wednesday one or more opinions in argued cases are expected to be announced. The campaign finance case of McCutcheon v. FEC heard in October? It's possible.

Scott Smith is for sure not running as a moderate

I got the following email from Mesa Mayor and (now) GOP candidate for AZ Governor Scott Smith:

Friend,

Today, I was honored to file paperwork to begin my campaign for Governor of Arizona.

For the past six years as Mayor of Mesa, I have shown how governing using conservative principles of efficient, effective and limited government can create opportunity and help individuals and businesses succeed. I am confident the experience and successes I have gained as mayor can be a model for success for all of Arizona.

As Governor, my number one priority for Arizona will be to build a healthy economy, get Arizonans great jobs and brighten the future for our children.

As Mayor of Mesa, I dealt with a $62 million shortfall caused by the economy by reducing spending, reforming government operations, and eliminating burdensome regulations. Mesa residents are paying less in taxes than they were before I became Mayor.

I also brought economic opportunity by keeping the Chicago Cubs spring training in town, recruiting 5 private universities to our downtown, and led the effort to bring Apple to Arizona.

As a business owner, I turned around a troubled company into a $200 million company and looked at opportunities to create jobs and work in areas other builders had long ignored. I am proud of the success we achieved and the Arizonans we employed. I also know how hard it is when Washington bureaucrats force ill-conceived policies like Obamacare on the American people. As Governor I will stand up to Barack Obama and work with our Congressional delegation to replace it.

I am pro-life, support traditional marriage, am a strong proponent of Second Amendment rights, and believe Governor Brewer was right to demand the Federal Government secure our border.

I am a man of faith and it is at the core of who I am.

In addition, I am the only candidate in this race who as an executive in government has actually put true conservative principles into action to bring economic opportunity to Arizona while also shrinking the size of government.

Our state has amazing potential to lead the nation in job growth and economic prosperity. With continued conservative leadership, we can bring more companies like Apple to Arizona.

We can create additional high paying jobs for Arizonans while keeping fiscal discipline with government spending.

We can create a world-class education system for our children while also giving parents control over where their child attends school.

We can hold true to our conservative principles while also being leaders who bring people together to solve the challenges we face.

We can do this together and I ask that you please take a moment to join our campaign. Together, we can make Arizona the greatest state in America to live, work, and raise our families.

Sincerely,

Scott Smith

 

That's standard right wing boilerplate there: anti-choice, anti-gay, pro-gun, "school choice", drown the government. God, Obama-bashing. Yet I'm still being told what a nice, pragmatic, and moderate man he is. Of course I anticipate the inevitable protest: "Oh but you know he's just doing that for the primary!". Unless Scott Smith has given you his personal assurance that the uber-conservative stances he's taken are simply a ruse to fool Republican primary voters, you have no way of knowing that. If he hasn't told you that then you should realize that you are pinning your hopes on Smith being someone different from who he tells you he fundamentally is. I can tell you from my dating days that that is not a good idea.

The incubators have to be carefully taught

So this was on Phoenix ABC15's website this morning.

TEMPE, AZ - A sexual education presentation is causing lots of controversy in Tempe and has even sparked threats of a lawsuit.

Planned Parenthood will be making their presentation Tuesday in front of officials from  the Tempe Union High School District's Sexual Education Curriculum Committee.

It's not clear yet exactly what will be said during the presentation, but a group calling themselves the Alliance Defending Freedom wrote a letter to Tempe officials saying Planned Parenthood's presentation could be illegal under Arizona law.

Read more: http://www.abc15.com/dpp/news/region_southeast_valley/tempe/sexual-education-causing-controversy-in-tempe#ixzz2pkAU2Z9N

Single mothers ruining everything again!

Alia Rau of the Arizona Republic is someone I've thought of as a straightforward news reporter so I was surprised to see such a biased article under her byline. The piece is a woman-blaming mess from the title on down.

More moms in Arizona skip marriage

Debate over reversing the trend, providing a secure environment for children

What?! Okay, there's a good chance that Rau didn't pick that title but someone did. Someone who has been living in what culture their entire life? Because the rest of us live in the one where it's still customary for the man to propose marriage. It worth noting that in the two times that fathers are even mentioned in the article it's to describe a successful co-parenting situation and a longterm cohabitation where the couple, who were already parents of two children, recently married.

Beyond that, it's a story of wicked, wicked women who apparently steal sperm from unwitting men. And it's the unwillingness of these wicked, wicked single mothers to force the fathers of their children to marry them that is the cause of most modern social ills. Not widening inequality, not lack of opportunity and economic mobility. Certainly nothing to look at in the fathers. We are just to assume that the flaw lies entirely in the mothers. 

Conservatives love this story and have ready-made solutions for the "problem".

Former Mesa Republican state lawmaker Mark Anderson was the force behind several successful bills to promote marriage, including using federal funds to create a state marriage education program and establishing so-called covenant marriages.

He said he doesn’t believe anybody, regardless of political affiliation, thinks the rising cost of unmarried mothers is OK.

“But if you ask them what to do about it, that’s another issue,” Anderson said. “It’s not simple.”

I'm not sure why Mark Anderson thinks I must share his anxiety over unmarried mothers. There's also no basis to conclude that what he implemented changed anything. So-called covenant marriage was clearly designed for middle class to affluent people who already intended to marry and who shared a certain religious sensibility. It was not a prescription to encourage marriage in general. 

Cultural shift

Conservatives say the solution is a cultural shift to reinstate the value of marriage.

“Increasingly, and most especially with this youngest generation, they don’t see marriage as something that has to come before children,” Hymowitz said. “It’s been very, very hard to get any consensus that this is a societal and economic problem.”

But more than a decade ago, the federal government did acknowledge the problem. And the resulting efforts to solve it have been unsuccessful.

One of the goals of the federal Temporary Assistance for Needy Families program, authorized in 1996, was to encourage two-parent families. States, which receive the TANF funds to distribute, responded in a variety of ways.

Arizona established the option of covenant marriage contracts, which require the couple to get premarital counseling and can only be dissolved in limited situations such as adultery, abuse or abandonment. The state passed laws to require more education on the impacts of divorce as part of the divorce process. It created a commission that appropriated more than $1 million in TANF funds for a program to support marriage and published a marriage handbook.

Oklahoma in 1999 started the nation’s largest and longest-running state program supporting marriage, investing $10 million into the effort. But like Arizona, Oklahoma’s marriage rate continues to decline and its rate of unmarried mothers continues to rise.

Hymowitz said local and national leaders may need to be more blunt about the benefits of marrying before having children.

Really? The millions they've already spent on, uh, bluntly promoting the benefits of marriage haven't panned out already? You don't say! 

UCLA researchers probed this mystery recently. They found that low income people valued marriage as much as their higher income counterparts. Perhaps lack of willingness to marry isn't the problem after all. Looks like marriage follows financial stability, not the other way around. 

And not for nothing but, hey, didn't the single mothers "choose life"? Do conservatives even have grounds to criticize them? Would they be happier if the women had chosen abortion? I think not. Conservatives are also not exactly at the forefront of promoting sex ed and widespread contraception access either. Why, then, would any reporter take conservatives at their word on the subject of single mothers? They clearly know nothing about them. 

 

 

 

 

A counter-movement to anti-choice extremism

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

A new study shows more abortion restrictions went into effect in the last three years than in the previous decade. States pass record number of abortion laws:

State legislatures have passed more laws restricting access to abortions in the last three years than they did in the decade beforehand, according to a new study.

The Washington Post's Sarah Kliff explains:

What made 2010 such a boom year for abortion restrictions? It’s hard to pinpoint a particular reason, but a few factors do stand out. First, Republicans took control of lots of state legislatures in the 2010 midterm elections, allowing them to pass more restrictions than was politically feasible in the past. The Affordable Care Act also ignited a fight over abortion policy, particularly whether federal funds would help pay for abortions (when Americans used their tax subsidies to purchase health insurance coverage). That fight spilled over to state legislatures – the ones that Republicans had recently come to control – and many passed laws restricting insurance coverage of abortion.

Lastly, the focus on late-term abortion, with the 20-week abortion bans, likely played a role, too. As the Guttmacher Institute reports, those bans proliferated quickly, after Nebraska passed the first such law back in 2010. While the majority of Americans do support legal abortions in the first trimester of pregnancy, support for abortion rights falls significantly when you get into second and third trimester terminations. That drop-off in public support could have laid the groundwork for the success of the late-term restrictions.

"Religious freedom" prudes win a small victory.

Late in the afternoon on New Year's Eve, the US Supreme Court quietly dropped a small bombshell regarding the Affordable Care Act's contraception mandate. 

Just before presiding over the Times Square countdown on New Year’s Eve, Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor granted a temporary injunction to a handful of Catholic nonprofit groups, including the Little Sisters of the Poor Home for the Aged. They say that the Obama administration’s accommodation on birth control coverage still violates their religious liberty. Sotomayor asked the government to respond by Friday. After that, the Justice, who oversees the circuit where the case was first filed, will either issue a further ruling herself or refer it to the full court. 

The decision applies only to the organizations in question and doesn’t affect the broader contraceptive coverage regulations in the Affordable Care Act, which have already gone into effect for millions of American women. But it may signal that the broader court is receptive to arguments that filling out a form for an employee to get birth control directly from an insurer is a substantial burden on religion. 

Mark Rienzi, senior counsel at the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty and the lead attorney on the case, told msnbc of his clients, “They’re saying, ‘I can’t fill out permission slips for abortion, sterilization or contraception under any circumstances.’” (The mandate does not cover abortion, but some Catholic and evangelical groups have contended that the scientifically undocumented possibility the IUD and emergency contraception will disrupt the implantation of a fertilized egg is the same as abortion.) 

Advanced directive? Maybe not, if you're a lady with a Holy Fetus inside her

I had not planned to do any blogging over the holidays but then there was this whitehot-rage-inducing item in the news today:

Marlise Munoz, 33, is in serious condition in the intensive care unit at John Peter Smith Hospital in Fort Worth, Texas, hospital officials said. She is unconscious and on a ventilator, her husband told CNN affiliate WFAA, but she wouldn't have wanted her life sustained by a machine.

"We talked about it. We're both paramedics," he told WFAA. "We've seen things out in the field. We both knew that we both didn't want to be on life support."

Complicating an already difficult situation is that Munoz is also pregnant, about 18 weeks along, WFAA reported. Texas state law prohibits withdrawing or withholding life-sustaining treatment from a pregnant patient, regardless of her wishes.

Court cases to watch in the coming weeks

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

Our lawless legislature has several cases in court to keep an eye out for a decision in the coming weeks.

The first case of importance is Biggs, et al. vs. Brewer, et al. (CV2013-011699), the Tea-Publican legislature's challenge to Governor Jan Brewer's Medicaid (AHCCCS) expansion plan heard in Maricopa County Superior Court by Judge Kathleen Cooper on December 13, 2013. A Minute Entry dated December 18 says the matter is "under advisement." Judge Cooper did not indicate at the December 13 hearing when she would rule on pending motions, but there is a deadline of sorts -- the "ObamaCare" Medicaid expansion provisions become effective on January 1, 2014.

Harris, et al. v. Arizona Independent Redistricting Commission (CV-12-0894-PHX-ROS-NVW-RRC), the Tea-Publican legislature's challenge to the Arizona Independent Redistricting Commission's (AIRC) state legislative districts map, was heard by a three judge panel of federal judges on March 22 and concluded on March 30, 2013. Supplemental briefs addressing the effect, if any, of the U.S. Supreme Court decision in Shelby County v. Holder on this case wrapped up by August 9. A decision has been pending for more than 120 days.

We are already well into the 2014 election cycle with the primary filing deadline in May. I would argue that time has already expired on the game clock -- there needs to be certainty in legislative district lines, and the 2012 legislative district lines should remain in place for 2014. I anticipate a decision in this case shortly.

Tea-Publican Tyranny in Michigan: Women need to buy separate 'rape insurance' from their healthcare plan

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

The beta testing lab for Tea-Publican tyranny in America is Michigan. Tea-Publicans have used a financial emergency manager law to dissolve democratically elected city governments and school districts, and impose a dictator financial manager appointed by and answerable only to the governor. Democracy exists in name only in Michigan.

Tea-Publicans have starved the city of Detroit of state revenue sharing and forced into a Chapter 9 bankruptcy liquidation as a means of "legally" breaching a constitutionally mandated guarantee to public employee pensioners and looting their retirement security.

And this actually happened last week: the Michigan state legislature passed a bill that requires women to buy separate coverage for abortion if they want to have coverage for it at all, dubbed "rape insurance" by opponents. In Michigan, the meaning of 'rape insurance':

Michigan, State. Sen. Gretchen Whitmer, a Democrat, was not backing down.

For those you who want to act aghast that I’d use a term like “rape insurance” to describe the proposal here in front of us, you should be even more offended that it’s an absolutely accurate description of what this proposal requires. This tells women that were raped and became pregnant that they should have bought special insurance for it. By moving forward on this initiative, Senate Republicans want to essentially require Michigan women to plan ahead and financially invest in healthcare coverage for potentially having their bodies violated and assaulted. Even worse, it would force parents to have similar and unthinkably terrible discussions about planning the same for their daughters. I’ve said it before and I will say it again: This is by far one of the most misogynistic proposals I’ve ever seen in the Michigan legislature.

U.S. Supreme Court to decide whether the legal fiction of 'corporate personhood' gives corporations religious liberty rights

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

The U.S. Supreme Court on Tuesday agreed to hear religious challenges to the requirement that employers provide health insurance for their workers that includes birth control and related medical services.  The Court said it would decide constitutional issues, as well as claims under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act. Lyle Denniston at SCOTUSblog.com reports, Court to rule on birth-control mandate (UPDATED):

The Court granted review of a government case (Sebelius v. Hobby Lobby Stores) and a private business case (Conestoga Wood Specialties Corp. v. Sebelius).  Taking the Conestoga plea brought before the Court the claim that both religious owners of a business and the business itself have religious freedom rights, based on both the First Amendment and RFRA.  The Hobby Lobby case was keyed to rights under RFRA.

* * *

The Court did not expedite the briefing schedules for the new cases, so presumably they will be heard in March.  Moreover, the Court has already released its argument schedule for all sittings through the February session.

Under the orders the Court issued in the health care cases, the Justices are not being asked to strike down the requirement that employers provide a full range of pregnancy-related health care under their employees’ health insurance plans. In that sense, these cases are different from the Court’s first rulings on the ACA two years ago, when it upheld a penalty for an individual who refused to obtain health insurance at all and nullified a requirement that states must broadly expand their Medicare program of health care coverage for the poor.

This time, the Court will be focusing only on whether the pregnancy-related care coverage can be enforced against profit-making companies — or their individual owners, when that is a very small group — when the coverage contradicts privately held religious beliefs.

Abortion politics in the U.S. Supreme Court

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

A couple of weeks ago, the U.S. Supreme Court dismissed as “improvidently granted” the case of Cline  v. Oklahoma Coalition for Reproductive Justice (docket 12-1094), an appeal from the state of Oklahoma to  revive a law that restricts doctors’ use of drugs rather than surgery to perform an abortion with the medication RU-486 and others, struck down by the federal courts.

Around the same time, Planned Parenthood of Texas applied for an order setting aside the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals order permitting the Texas law requiring abortion practitioners to have admitting privilieges at a nearby hospital before they may perform abortions at a clinic or in a doctor’s office. Planned Parenthood of Greater Texas Surgical Health Services v. Abbott (13A452).

In a 5-4 decision along ideological lines, the Court declined on Tuesday to set aside the Fifth Circuit Court order. Lyle Denniston at Scotusblog.com reports, Texas abortion law left in effect:

Splitting five to four, the Supreme Court late Tuesday afternoon refused to block a Texas abortion law that critics say is forcing the closing of one-third of all clinics in the state.  The Court had been studying the issue for the past week.  The majority said that the challengers had not met the requirement for setting aside a federal appeals court’s order permitting the law to take effect on October 31.

The majority specifically included Justices Antonin Scalia, who wrote separately in a concurring opinion joined by Justices Samuel A. Alito, Jr., and Clarence Thomas.  But Chief Justice John G. Roberts, Jr., and Justice Anthony M. Kennedy presumably voted with those three, because it would have taken five votes to act definitively on the plea by doctors and clinics when there were four Justices who wanted to block the law.

The specific order denying the application (13A452) was unsigned.  Both Justice Scalia’s opinion and that of the dissenters referred to the result as the action of “the Court.”

U.S. Supreme Court rejects Oklahoma abortion case, wants response from Texas

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

The Supreme Court took off of its docket, and thus will not decide, a plea by the state of Oklahoma to revive a law that restricts doctors’ use of drugs rather than surgery to perform an abortion with the medication RU-486 and others. Lyle Denniston at SCOTUSblog reports, Court won’t rule on RU-486 abortions:

In a one-sentence order, the Court dismissed as “improvidently granted” the case of Cline  v. Oklahoma Coalition for Reproductive Justice (docket 12-1094).   In issuing other orders, the Court granted no new cases for review.

Meanwhile, a group of women’s health clinics and doctors in Texas asked that the Court at least temporarily a new Texas law that forbids doctors to perform abortions at a clinic unless those physicians have professional privileges at a hospital within thirty miles of that site.  The Fifth Circuit Court on Thursday allowed that requirement to go into effect, resulting in closing a number of abortion clinics across the state. The application to set aside that order was filed initially with Justice Antonin Scalia, who is the Circuit Justice for the geographic area that includes Texas. He has the authority to decide the issue himself, or share it with his colleagues.

The application is Planned Parenthood of Greater Texas Surgical Health Services v. Abbott (13A452). Justice Scalia immediately asked for the state to respond by 4 p.m. on Tuesday, November 12. The new Texas law also involved a broad restriction on doctors’ option of performing medical abortions with the drug RU-486 and other medications, and that, too, has been allowed to take effect at least in part. The abortion providers’ request to the Supreme Court on Monday, however, did not ask the Justices to take any action on that provision.

The GOP war on women: gradually eroding the constitutional right to abortion

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

The injunction issued by a Texas federal court earlier this week was overturned by a panel of the conservative activist Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals yesterday. Texas court reinstates abortion limits:

Texas abortion providers’ Monday victory was short-lived. The U.S. 5th Circuit Court of Appeals on Thursday reversed a federal district court ruling that found part of the state’s new abortion regulations unconstitutional, meaning the provisions of House Bill 2 could take effect immediately if state officials choose to enforce them.

* * *

A three-judge panel in the 5th Circuit appellate court lifted a permanent injunction placed on the abortion regulations by a lower court, arguing in a written opinion that the state was likely to succeed in its legal arguments.

The judges, Priscilla R. Owen, Jennifer Walker Elrod and Catharina Haynes, wrote that “there is a substantial likelihood that the state will prevail in its argument that Planned Parenthood failed to establish an undue burden on women seeking abortions or that the hospital-admitting-privileges requirement creates a substantial obstacle in the path of a woman seeking an abortion.” Furthermore, they wrote,”we also conclude that the state has made a strong showing of likelihood of success on the merits, at least in part, as to its appeal of the injunction pertaining to medication abortions.”

The appellate court’s decision overrules U.S. District Judge Lee Yeakel’s ruling on Monday that a provision in HB 2 that requires abortion doctors to have admitting privileges at a nearby hospital imposed an undue burden on women seeking the procedure. Additionally, Yeakel ruled that it would be unconstitutional for the state to require physicians to follow federal standards for drug-induced abortions if a physician determined it would be safer for the woman to use a common evidence-based protocol.

D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals rules against contraceptive coverage in 'ObamaCare' in a deeply disturbing decision

Posted  by AzBlueMeanie:

"Corporations are people, my friend." - Willard "Mittens" Romney

Apparently the legal fiction of a corporate entity also enjoys rights far superior to the individual rights and liberties guaranteed to citizens by the U.S. Constitution and Bill of Rights. This is a brave new world of corporatocracy, my friends.

The D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals today upheld a legal challenge to the provision of the Affordable Care Act (ObamaCare) that mandates employer coverage of birth control, arguing that it “trammels” the expression of religious freedom.

Wait, the legal fiction of a corporate entity has a "religion" (other than profits and shareholder dividends)? And it is free to impose its religious beliefs on its employees under some perverse notion of "religious liberty"?

This is the exact opposite meaning of religious liberty: it is a "get out of jail free card" for an employer to discriminate against its employees of other religious beliefs, or no religious beliefs, who do not share the corporate entity's "religious beliefs" -- under the sanction of federal law, which would violate the "free exercise" clause of First Amendment religious liberty.

Steve Benen reports, Court rules against ACA contraception policy:

Birth-control opponents wonan especially significant round this morning.

The D.C. Circuit Court has upheld a legal challenge to the provision of the Affordable Care Act (Obamacare) that mandates employer coverage of birth control, arguing that it “trammels” the expression of religious freedom. While the legal process over the issue isn’t final, the decision hands a huge political victory to conservative activists that have long made this argument.

The ruling is online here (pdf).

Abortion-inducing drug case may be headed to the U.S. Supreme Court

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

The Oklahoma Supreme Court set the stage Tuesday for the U.S. Supreme Court to rule this term on an abortion dispute over whether states may restrict doctors from prescribing the two drugs that are commonly used by women who seek an abortion in the first weeks of their pregnancy. Stage set for Supreme Court to rule on abortion<-inducing drugs:

The Oklahoma case could be the first test of whether the court’s conservative majority will uphold the new state laws that seek to strictly regulate legal abortions.

The legislatures in Oklahoma, Texas and several other states have adopted laws that require doctors to follow the Food and Drug Administration’s protocols for the use of “any abortion-inducing drug.” The laws forbid doctors to prescribe medications for “off-label use.”

Sponsors of the laws said they wanted to protect the health of women. But medical experts and supporters of abortion rights said the law would effectively ban medication abortions because the FDA protocol is outdated and conflicts with current medical practice.

Only one drug — mifepristone or RU-486 — was approved by the FDA in 2000 for inducing early abortions. In the last decade, however, physicians have regularly prescribed a second drug — misoprostol — to complete such abortions through nine weeks of a pregnancy. They also have prescribed RU-486 in much lower dosages.

Federal Court blocks Texas abortion law that Wendy Davis tried to stop

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

The United States District Court for the Western District of Texas today issued an opinion striking down two key parts of an abortion restriction that Texas passed earlier this year. Sarah Kliff writes at Wonkblog, Wendy Davis couldn’t stop a Texas abortion law. But a federal court just did.

The decision halts two key provisions of House Bill 2: A requirement that abortion providers have admitting privileges at a local hospital and another barring medical abortions.

"The admitting privileges provision of House Bill 2 does not bear a rational relationship to the legitimate right of the State in preserving and promoting fetal life or a woman's health and, in any event, places a substantial obstacle in the path of a woman seeking an abortion of a nonviable fetus and is thus an undue burden to her," U.S. District Judge Lee Yeakel wrote in the opinion.

On the medical abortion ban, he wrote, "Although the medication abortion provisions do not generally place an undue burden on a woman seeking an abortion, they do if they ban a medication abortion where a physician determines, in appropriate medical judgment, such a procedure is necessary for the preservation of the life or health of the mother."

This is a big deal for the 12 Texas abortion providers that filed suit against the restrictions, which were set to take effect on Oct. 29.

In Light of Local Poverty, Tucson Needs Creative Direction & Progressive Economic Ideas

by Pamlea Powers Hannley

Business friendly? Tucson’s been there, done that, … and got the t-shirt at Goodwill. As former City Councilwoman Molly McKasson said, we put all of our eggs in the development basket and look where it got us.

Twenty percent of Tucsonans are living in poverty.

Thirty percent of Tucson children are living in poverty.

Fifty-two percent of Tucson children live in a one-parent household.

Seventy-one percent of Tucson Unified School District students qualify for free or reduced-price lunch. (Statistics from the Arizona Daily Star.)

How did we get here?

The Back Story on Tucson’s Poverty Rate

In a November 2011 “What If?” article published just a few days before the last mayoral election, former Arizona Daily Star reporter Josh Brodesky interviewed activist, writer, and artist McKasson and mused about how Tucson would be different today if she had beaten former Mayor Bob Walkup back in their 1999 match-up.

I remember that election well. Walkup– a former Hughes Aircraft executive and former head of the Greater Tucson Economic Council– was the quintessential business candidate. Bankrolled by Tucson’s business community, Walkup’s campaign successfully painted McKasson as a flighty hippie artist whose no-growth, tree-hugging, water-conserving policies would be bad for Tucson (ie, bad for business and bad for growth). Meanwhile, Walkup was championed as a business savvy savior who successfully ran a business, and, therefore, (of course!) could successfully run a city.

As mayor, the glad-handing, ribbon-cutting Walkup promoted business development, Rio Nuevo, and ill-conceived, taxpayer-funded private projects like the downtown hotel (which went down in flames, thank goodness). Except for his pro-business, pro-growth cheerleading, Walkup was a do-nothing mayor who depended upon defense funding, the occasional TREO call center moving to Tucson, and housing boom construction jobs to bolster Tucson’s chronically low-wage tourist economy. The Tucson Weekly’s endorsement of McKasson (here) eerily  predicts what happened to Tucson under three terms of Walkup. Read it and more background and new ideas after the jump.

From DC to Texas: Men Behaving Badly (video)

by Pamela Powers Hannley

From the failure of the Farm Bill to the ups and downs of Immigration Reform to last-minute,late night anti-abortion bills– it’s been a wild ride lately. And, the craziness is not likely to stop any time soon.

After the jump, check out several news stories and two videos which highlight [Republican] men behaving badly in the Congress and multiple state legislatures. Heavy sigh. Will this strategy of "subtraction" work for them in 2014 or 2016? I personally don't see how it can.

The GOP war on women: 'This is Texas, baby. Remember the Alamo'

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

While the Christian Taliban is still working on its anti-abortion bill in the North Carolina Legislature, the Christian Taliban in the Republic of Texas Gilead wrapped up its work today, just in time for Sunday services!

The Texas Senate voted 19-11 early Saturday to pass sweeping restrictions on abortions, the conclusion of a weeks-long standoff over reproductive rights in the state.

Although the bill’s passage was all but assured, opponents still turned out in droves. One T-shirt favored by protesters invoked another lost cause: “This is Texas, baby. Remember the Alamo.” Fearing a disruption, Department of Public Safety officials confiscated anything that could be thrown from the gallery — leading some protesters to lose tampons, condoms, glitter and other potential projectiles.

Tampons of mass destruction -- who knew? You can carry a gun in the Texas Lege, but security will confiscate tampons? Wow.

“The fight for the future of Texas is just beginning,” said Sen. Wendy Davis (D) as the vote on the legislation she successfully filibustered last month neared.

Questions for Martha McSally: What is your position on women's access to health care, contraception, and safe and legal abortions?

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

In this new series, "Questions for Martha McSally," we pose questions to the McSally campaign about her positions on current hot topics -- I am not going to give her a free pass until after the GOP primary like our local media did in 2012.

Preface: The GOP war on women continues unabated. Halfway Through 2013, States Have Already Enacted More Than 100 Provisions Related To Reproduction, according to a new report from the Guttmacher Institute. On Thursday, the North Carolina House Passed New Restrictions on Abortion. The Texas Senate takes up abortion this afternoon.

In 2012, the Arizona legislature enacted a 20-week ban on abortions, and attempted to defund Planned Parenthood clinics. Both measures have been enjoined by the federal court as violative of federal law, and the constitutional right to a abortion recognized in Roe. v. Wade.

The Arizona legislature also enacted a law granting an exemption to religious organizations to provide contraception coverage in health care insurance, and a Targeted Regulation of Abortion Providers (TRAP) law creating arbitrary standards that apply only to abortion clinics and providers aimed at closing down abortion clinics. A bill for unannounced surprise inspections of abortion clinics died late in the legislative session this year, because it would have been in violation of a court decision.

Rep. Trent Franks (R-AZ) last month introduced a similar 20-week ban on abortions in Congress to extend the ban to all states, which the GOP controlled House recently approved.

Martha McSally frequently refers to herself as a "woman warrior" (because she was a pilot in the U.S. Air Force). But will she be a "warrior for women"?

What is Martha McSally's position on women's access to health care, contraception, and safe and legal abortions?

Speaking truth to power at the Texas Lege

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

Yet another hero emerges from the resistance to the Christian Taliban's war on women in the Republic of Texas Gilead. We need more people like Sarah Slamen who are fearless and willing to speak truth to power. Ann Richards and Molly Ivins would be proud of this fearless Texan woman. Texas woman pulled off Senate floor after fiery testimony against abortion bill:

Sarah Slamen left her home in central Texas at 5:30 a.m. Monday to testify at the Austin Senate against the state’s controversial abortion bill. She didn’t get to speak until 11:00 pm that night, after listening to hours of what she described as a “parade of anti-choice zealots and misogynists.” By the time she was called, Slamen had scrapped her prepared speech about Gov. Rick Perry’s sister’s ties to surgical centers and doctor-owned hospitals that would benefit from the bill’s passage, and went for the senators themselves.

“Thank you for being you, Texas legislature,” Slamen said. “You have radicalized hundreds of thousands of us, and no matter what you do for the next 22 days, women and their allies are coming for you. Let’s start down the line. Senator Campbell, you’re an ophthalmologist. So I won’t be making you the expert on reproductive health. We can give you all the children with chlamydia and herpes in their eyes, since we don’t have Sex Ed in this state.”

Video below the fold.

Pro-Choice Advocates Fight Back in Wis, NC, & Texas

by Pamela Powers Hannley

Pro-choice advocates are fighting the Republican Party's anti-woman laws in Wisconsin, North Carolina, and Texas.

In Wisconsin, a federal judge has issued a temporary restraining order to block enforcement of the anti-abortion legislation signed in secret by Governor Scott Walker on July 5. From the Huffington Post...

U.S. District Judge William Conley granted the order following a hearing in a lawsuit filed Friday by Planned Parenthood of Wisconsin and Affiliated Medical Services. It alleged the requirement would unconstitutionally restrict the availability of abortions in the state, violates the U.S. Constitution's due process guarantee and unconstitutionally treats doctors who perform abortions differently from those who perform other procedures.

The restraining order will remain in place pending a fuller hearing July 17. In his ruling, Conley said "there is a troubling lack of justification for the hospital admitting privileges requirement." He said the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that states must prove that restrictions on abortion rights must be reasonably aimed at preserving the mother's health.

"Moreover, the record to date strongly supports a finding that no medical purpose is served by this requirement," he said.

The bill was introduced in the Legislature on June 4, passed nine days later and signed into law Friday by Gov. Scott Walker. It took effect Monday. The law also requires women to obtain an ultrasound before getting an abortion, but that provision is not being challenged. [Emphasis added.]

In North Carolina, State Legislators tacked abortion restrictions onto an unrelated bill outlawing  "Sharia Law" in North Carolina. "Moral Monday" protesters have been demonstrating against NC's Republican agenda every Monday for the past 10 weeks. This Monday, more than 60 pro-choice protesters-- including the head of North Carolina's Planned Parenthood-- were arrested during the Moral Monday protest. From the Huffington Post...

North Carolinians of all stripes have been fighting back with everything we've got. For months, hundreds of us have rallied and protested against more restrictions on women's health in our state. In a matter of hours last week, more than 500 women's health activists descended on the General Assembly to protest the Senate's actions last week. Hundreds more are protesting today to #standwithNCwomen. We are already home to one of the nation's most intrusive and demeaning mandatory ultrasound laws. We were also among the first to try to block preventive health care funds from Planned Parenthood's nonprofit health centers. Taxpayers here have been on the hook for the costly legal battles these unconstitutional attacks on women's health and well-being have triggered.

In Texas, 1000s of protesters descended on the capitol to protest the Texas Legislature's reconsideration of a highly restrictive anti-abortion law that was stopped by filibuster (and noisy protesters) recently. The Texas Legislature is expected to debate and vote on this legislation today (July 9, 2013). From Democracy Now...

In Texas, thousands of people descended on the Capitol Monday as Republicans revived a bill that would shut down nearly all of the state’s abortion clinics and ban abortion after 20 weeks post-fertilization. Hundreds of people on both sides gave testimony during a state Senate committee hearing that lasted into the early hours of Tuesday morning. Among them was Austin resident Katie Heim, who delivered a poem.

Katie Heim: "If my vagina was a gun, you would stand for its rights. You would ride on a bus and fight all the fights. If my vagina was a gun, you would treat it with care. You wouldn’t spill all its secrets, because, well, why go there? If my vagina was a gun, you’d say what it holds is private. From cold dead hands we could pry; you surely would riot. If my vagina was a gun, its rights would all be protected. No matter the body count or the children affected. If my vagina was a gun, I could bypass security. Concealed carry laws would ensure I had purity."

Related articles

• Size Matters: Pro-Choice Rally More Than Twice As Large As Anti-Choice Event Featuring Non-Texans (burntorangereport.com)
• Judge Blocks New Wisconsin Abortion Law (abcnews.go.com)

Awesome remix video: Texas Special Session Blues

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

I am a devoted fan of School House Rock, and "I'm just a bill on Capitol Hill" has always been one of my favorites. This remix by Bad Bill at YouTube, "Texas Special Session Blues," is awesome! Texas Special Session Blues (I'm Just a Bill Remix) - YouTube.

Video and transcript below the fold.

Anti-Choice ‘Onslaught’: GOP-Led State Legislatures Debate 300 Bills to Restrict Abortion Access (video)

by Pamela Powers Hannley

Words like “onslaught,” “unprecedented,” “extremist,” “dangerous,” “unconstitutional,” “medically unnecessary,” “unscientific,” and “draconian” have been used to describe the Republican Party’s nationwide push to limit women’s healthcare, stop women from choosing to have safe, legal abortions, and close abortion clinics through over-regulation. In the first six months of this year, states have passed 106 provisions related to reproductive health, including 43 that specifically restrict abortion access.

In recent weeks, high-profile, anti-choice legislation in Texas, Ohio, North Carolina,  Wisconsin, and North Dakota has made the news.  Thanks to a one-woman filibuster by Texas State Senator Wendy Davis and hundreds of pro-choice protesters watching in the Legislative chambers, Texas is the only Republican-controlled state government in that list that didn’t pass and sign into law anti-choice legislation this spring. (Of course, Texas Governor Rick Perry– vowing to end abortion in Texas altogether– has called for another special session of the Republican-dominated State Legislature to fix that, and Democrats have little hope they will be able to stop the legislation a second time.)

These Republican-led states join others like Arizona and Virginia who passed anti-choice legislation in recent years. Nationwide, 13 states now have highly restrictive laws limiting women’s reproductive healthcare and access to legal abortions, resulting in half of American women of reproductive age living in states that are outwardly hostile to their health. Nationwide, 300 anti-choice bills are being debated. In addition, US Senator Marco Rubio and Arizona Congressman Trent Franks have introduced anti-choice bills in the Senate and House of Representatives; a ban on abortions after 20 weeks has already passed the Republican-controlled House. More details about the extent of this battle after the jump.

Perry & Kasich: War on Women Heats Up in Texas & Ohio

by Pamela Powers Hanley

Teapublican Legislatures in Texas and Ohio have been working diligently in recent weeks on sexist laws aimed at the suppression of women.

Last week Texas State Senator Wendy Davisbecame a nationwide feminist hero when she single-handedly filibustered and stopped anti-choice, anti-woman legislation that would have banned abortions after 20 weeks and effectively close all but 5 abortion clinics in the state of Texas.

In response to Davis and the thousands of pro-choice protesters who flooded Austin yesterday, Governor Rick Perry vowed to ban abortions in the state of Texas and called another special session. The sole purpose of this new 30-day session is to pass the same anti-choice bill that failed last week, thanks to Davis and cheering pro-choice protesters inside the Legislative chamber.

Meanwhile in Ohio, another Teapublican Governor, John Kasich– surrounded by other old white men– quietly signed  one of the most draconian, anti-choice, anti-woman bills in the country this week. The Ohio legislation requires women seeking abortions to have a vaginal ultrasound (even if the woman doesn’t want one), defunds Planned Parenthood, requires stricter controls on abortion clinics which will cause some of them to close, and redefines pregnancy to begin at fertilization. (If some of this anti-woman nonsense sounds familiar, it’s because Arizona and other Teapubican states passed similar legislation in recent years.)

Perry and other anti-abortion zealots paint this fight as a religious war to protect the unborn. This is hogwash. The War on Women’s reproductive rights is a war of suppression. More on this and proposed laws to regulate sperm donors after the jump.

Ohio Tea-Publicans restrict women's reproductive health care

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

While all eyes were on Texas last week and the people's filibuster led by state Sen. Wendy Davis, Tea-Publicans in Ohio demonstrated how to get things done in the dark while no one is paying much attention. Like cockroaches.

Former FAUX News host and Governor of Ohio, John Kasich, signed into law an appropriations bill this week that contains some of the most onerous and restrictive anti-women's reproductive health measures in the country. I fail to see how these substantive legislative measures are germain to an appropriations bill -- perhaps this is grounds for a legal challenge -- but that is how Tea-Publicans roll in Ohio. Surrounded By Men, Ohio Governor Signs Stringent Abortion Restrictions Into Law:

Flanked by a group of other male officials, Ohio Gov. John Kasich (R) signed a contentious two-year budget bill into law on Sunday evening. The governor vetoed 22 amendments to HB 59 before approving it, but he left intact several provisions that will severely limit women’s reproductive access.

The new budget, which takes effect on Monday, includes at least five new anti-abortion provisions. HB 59 will defund Planned Parenthood clinics, reallocate family planning funding to right-wing “crisis pregnancy centers,” strip funding from rape crisis centers that give their clients any information about abortion services, impose harsh restrictions on abortion clinics that will force many of them to shut down, and require doctors to give women seeking abortion information about the presence of a “fetal heartbeat.”

Taken together, the budget amendments ensure that Ohio now has some of the most stringent abortion laws in the nation.

So how exactly does this help GOP rebranding after its War on Women?

Governor Goodhair 'mansplains' to Wendy Davis

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

Governor Goodhair, Rick Perry of the theocratic Republic of Texas Gilead (literary reference to The Handmaid's Tale), was none too happy about state Sen. Wendy Davis leading a people's filibuster to defeat his anti-abortion measure. Doesn't this little lady know that women are supposed to be subservient to their men folk and to be seen and not heard? How dare she violate the law of God (according to these religious extremists).

Read this disturbing report by Forrest Wilder in the August 2011 issue of Texas Observer, Rick Perry's Army of God. The movement is called the New Apostolic Reformation. Believers fashion themselves modern-day prophets and apostles:

[T]wo Texas pastors, Tom Schlueter of Arlington and Bob Long of San Marcos, who called on Perry in the governor’s office inside the state Capitol. Schlueter and Long both oversee small congregations, but they are more than just pastors. They consider themselves modern-day apostles and prophets, blessed with the same gifts as Old Testament prophets or New Testament apostles.

The pastors told Perry of God’s grand plan for Texas. A chain of powerful prophecies had proclaimed that Texas was “The Prophet State,” anointed by God to lead the United States into revival and Godly government. And the governor would have a special role.

* * *

If they simply professed unusual beliefs, movement leaders wouldn’t be remarkable. But what makes the New Apostolic Reformation movement so potent is its growing fascination with infiltrating politics and government. The new prophets and apostles believe Christians—certain Christians—are destined to not just take “dominion” over government, but stealthily climb to the commanding heights of what they term the “Seven Mountains” of society, including the media and the arts and entertainment world. They believe they’re intended to lord over it all. As a first step, they’re leading an “army of God” to commandeer civilian government.

In Rick Perry, they may have found their vessel. And the interest appears to be mutual.

Texas: The People's Filibuster derails The Great Texas Screwjob...for now, anyway...

By Craig McDermott, cross-posted from Random Musings

 

By now, most people who care about this sort of thing are aware that in Texas, State Sen. Wendy Davis filibustered their SB5 yesterday.  SB5 would have all but completely banned abortion services in Texas.

The Republicans in the Texas lege tried and failed to pass the provisions of the bill during the regular session of the legislature.  Upset by that failure, they called a special session to railroad through all of the provisions in one measure.

However, under the rules governing specials sessions in Texas, they have a limited amount of time to pass bills and once that time is gone, any unpassed bills die.

Davis was attempting to hold the floor until the time for the special session expired.

The Republicans in the Texas state senate pulled out all the stops in their attempts to break the filibuster.  They used hyper-technical interpretations of the rules of the Senate, openly ignoring those rules, and just plain cheating.

They forced her off of the floor but the other Democrats in her caucus took up the fight, mostly using points of parliamentary inquiry to run out the clock.  Call it "legislative stall ball".

And when it looked like that the Rs we just going to ride roughshod over democracy and women in TX, hundreds of citizens in the Senate gallery just started cheering.

Loudly enough to drown out the Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst, the conductor of the railroad chair of the Texas State Senate.

And long enough to finish running out the clock on the special session.

From the Dallas Morning News, written by Christy Hoppe and Claire Z. Cardona -

The filibuster against tyranny in the Texas Lege succeeds!

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

Texas state senator Wendy Davis achieved what many people thought was the impossible: she filibustered tyranny in the Texas Lege. The tyrants threw in the towel and gave up around 3:00 a.m. this morning. Dewhurst declares abortion bill dead, blames 'unruly mob: (paragraphs reordered):

Davis’ filibuster had passed the 10-hour mark, and the Fort Worth Democrat was still going strong, when Republicans were able to stop her from speaking with a ruling that she had violated the Senate’s filibuster rules for a third time. Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst’s ruling shortly after 10 p.m. cleared the way for a simple majority of the Republican-led body to vote to halt a filibuster that had gained national attention, including recognition from President Barack Obama.

Dewhurst’s ruling prompted many in the spectators’ gallery erupted in anger, with shouts of “Shame!” giving way to sustained chants of “Let her speak!” All business in the Senate was halted for several minutes until order could be restored and a large group of spectators ordered to leave the gallery.

That was nothing compared to the ruling that cut off all debate, leading to a final vote on Senate Bill 5.

State Sen. Kirk Watson, D-Austin, had appealed the ruling, and upset Democratic senators rose to make a series of parliamentary inquiries, working to draw out the debate until the special session ended at midnight.

Republicans moved to cut off debate, with Sen. Robert Duncan, D-Lubbock, who was leading the Senate, declined to recognize several Democrats’ calls to be recognized to speak. Pandemonium followed.

A filibuster against tyranny in the Texas Lege

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

Oh, good golly Miss Molly [Ivins], we sorely miss your wit and wisdom on the Texas Lege today.

Before a packed chamber and gallery, Texas state Sen. Wendy Davis began a dramatic filibuster Tuesday morning designed to block passage of a controversial and politically charged anti-abortion bill. Davis' filibuster to stop abortion bill continues:

Because the special legislative session will end at midnight, the Fort Worth Democrat could succeed if she continues talking on Senate Bill 5 without interruption.

Leaders in the GOP-controlled Senate who want the bill to pass said at mid-afternoon they were considering invoking a little-used rule to end the filibuster with a vote, a move that other Republicans had earlier vowed not to use. They planned to let Davis talk the day out — as long as she stays within the rules for such speeches, with no leaning on her desk or no pausing or straying off the subject.

[And no potty breaks.]

There was no immediate indication when the move might take place.

Davis said she intended to talk until midnight.