Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

cali

(114,904 posts)
Sun Jan 19, 2014, 08:17 AM Jan 2014

Great Rolling Stone Article: The Stealth War on Abortion

On the morning of December 11th, Gretchen Whitmer, the charismatic 42-year-old minority leader of the Michigan Senate, stood before her colleagues in the Statehouse in Lansing, and told them something she'd told almost no one before. "Over 20 years ago, I was a victim of rape," she said. "And thank God it didn't result in a pregnancy, because I can't imagine going through what I went through and then having to consider what to do about an unwanted pregnancy from an attacker."

No one in the gallery said a word. Instead, with just hours to go before it broke for Christmas recess, Michigan's overwhelmingly male, Republican-dominated Legislature, having held no hearings nor even a substantive debate, voted to pass one of the most punishing pieces of anti-abortion legislation anywhere in the country: the Abortion Insurance Opt-Out Act, which would ban abortion coverage, even in cases of rape or incest, from virtually every health-insurance policy issued in the state. Women and their employers wanting this coverage will instead have to purchase a separate rider – often described as "rape insurance." Whitmer, a Democrat known as a fierce advocate for women's issues, described the new law as "by far one of the most misogynistic proposals I've seen in the Michigan Legislature."

And it's not just Michigan. Eight other states now have laws preventing abortion coverage under comprehensive private insurance plans – only one of them, Utah, makes an exception for rape. And 24 states, including such traditionally blue states as Wisconsin and Pennsylvania, ban some forms of abortion coverage from policies purchased through the new health exchanges. While cutting insurance coverage of abortion in disparate states might seem to be a separate issue from the larger assault on reproductive rights, it is in fact part of a highly coordinated and so far chillingly successful nationwide campaign, often funded by the same people who fund the Tea Party, to make it harder and harder for women to terminate unwanted pregnancies, and also to limit their access to many forms of contraception.

<snip>


Since 2010, when the Tea Party-fueled GOP seized control of 11 state legislatures – bringing the total number of Republican-controlled states to 26 – conservative lawmakers in 30 states have passed 205 anti-abortion restrictions, more than in the previous decade. "What you're seeing is an underhanded strategy to essentially do by the back door what they can't do through the front," says Nancy Northup, president and CEO of the Center for Reproductive Rights, which is currently litigating against some of the new anti-choice laws. "The politicians and organizations advancing these policies know they can't come right out and say they're trying to effectively outlaw abortion, so instead, they come up with laws that are unnecessary, technical and hard to follow, which too often force clinics to close. Things have reached a very dangerous place."

Read more: http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/the-stealth-war-on-abortion-20140115#ixzz2qqVtI3Fs
Follow us: @rollingstone on Twitter | RollingStone on Facebook





16 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Great Rolling Stone Article: The Stealth War on Abortion (Original Post) cali Jan 2014 OP
K&R Solly Mack Jan 2014 #1
It's very good. cinnabonbon Jan 2014 #2
K & R mountain grammy Jan 2014 #3
K&R ReRe Jan 2014 #4
They've gotten around that, too. Look what they were doing in the nation's capital... theHandpuppet Jan 2014 #8
Boy, are we going backwards or what? ReRe Jan 2014 #9
Why couldn't liberal organizations sidestep this stealth shit by Nay Jan 2014 #5
Even if you could, try finding doctors who will work in them theHandpuppet Jan 2014 #7
Because the Hyde amendment. LeftyMom Jan 2014 #10
Ah. I've heard about the Hyde Amendment, but did not know it prohibited Nay Jan 2014 #11
Why doesn't libertarian Leftwing Democrats recognize the danger of their insistence on bluestate10 Jan 2014 #15
I want to see additional (batshit crazy) laws passed... Moostache Jan 2014 #6
Kicking theHandpuppet Jan 2014 #12
K&R nt redqueen Jan 2014 #13
Ladies, ladies, ladies... all the important feminist issues are solved! redqueen Jan 2014 #14
K&R! countryjake Jan 2014 #16

cinnabonbon

(860 posts)
2. It's very good.
Sun Jan 19, 2014, 09:50 AM
Jan 2014
"The politicians and organizations advancing these policies know they can't come right out and say they're trying to effectively outlaw abortion, so instead, they come up with laws that are unnecessary, technical and hard to follow, which too often force clinics to close. Things have reached a very dangerous place."


This hits the nail on the head.

ReRe

(10,597 posts)
4. K&R
Sun Jan 19, 2014, 10:43 AM
Jan 2014

I have never understood how they can get away with any of the state laws against abortion that they have been passing. It's a Federal Law that a woman has the right to a safe legal abortion.
I thought Federal Law trumps State Law.

theHandpuppet

(19,964 posts)
8. They've gotten around that, too. Look what they were doing in the nation's capital...
Sun Jan 19, 2014, 11:41 AM
Jan 2014
http://rhrealitycheck.org/article/2014/01/09/catholic-bishops-allies-dominate-hearing-on-sweeping-anti-choice-bill/
Catholic Bishops’ Allies Dominate Hearing on Sweeping Anti-Choice Bill by Adele M. Stan, RH Reality Check
January 9, 2014 - 5:50 pm

For the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB), it was a good day in the U.S. House of Representatives, when the all-male Subcommittee on the Constitution gave the bishops’ current top lobbyist and former anti-choice spokesperson the chance to express their support on Thursday for a sweeping anti-abortion bill that would, among other obstructionist measures, single out for tax penalties women who exercised their Constitutional right to end a pregnancy.

Because Republicans have a majority in the House, Subcommittee Chairman Trent Franks (R-AZ), was able to use his prerogative to choose two witnesses while the Democrats were left with one. Presenting testimony in favor of HR 7, dubbed the No Taxpayer Funding of Abortion Act, were Richard Doerflinger, associate director of the USCCB’S Secretariat of Pro-Life Activities, and Helen M. Alvaré, professor of law at George Mason University, and former spokesperson for the same USCCB secretariat.

Susan Wood, associate professor of health policy at George Washington University, testified in opposition to the bill. Wood is a former official of the Federal Drug Administration who resigned in protest in 2005 over what she saw as political interference in the approval process for the emergency contraception drug Plan B One-Step.

Forbidden to testify, despite the request of ranking member Jerrold Nadler (D-NY), was Del. Eleanor Holmes Norton, who represents the District of Columbia in the House. Because HR 7 would permanently bar the district from using revenue collected through local, not federal, taxes to fund abortions for poor women (an option that remains open to the states), Norton had asked to address the committee for five minutes. Instead, she was left to sit in the audience while the men on the committee argued over whether House rules permit her testimony....

ReRe

(10,597 posts)
9. Boy, are we going backwards or what?
Sun Jan 19, 2014, 12:21 PM
Jan 2014

... Remember when all they talked about was "Progress, Progress, Progress?" This is NOT progress. This is regression. Sounds like Russia. And "Subcommittee on the Constitution?" That's a new one on me. Did they create that subcommittee just for this issue at this time? They are the party that hates the Constitution. I guess it's like the Bible. They pick and choose and misinterpret what they read in the Bible and they do the same with the US Constitution. They just don't recognize the separation of church and state and that everyone can choose to believe in a religion or not. The only thing Congress should be discussing about religion is whether to tax it ot not. Since most of them proselytize politics now, they should be taxed!

I have heard everything now... "singling out women for tax penalties because they get an abortion." That has got to be the craziest thing I have ever heard in my life out of Congress. I swear, that sounds like it came out straight out of "The Onion!"

When are we going to start taxing men who impregnate women who don't want to be pregnant?????????

I haven't been around much in the last few weeks, so I had not seen this news. Thanks for bringing it to my attention.

Nay

(12,051 posts)
5. Why couldn't liberal organizations sidestep this stealth shit by
Sun Jan 19, 2014, 11:10 AM
Jan 2014

funding, building, and staffing a FEDERAL medical clinic in each state? A clinic that would be exempt from all the state stealth rule-making?

Why do we always have to fight back by getting caught up in all the RWers' machinations? Just short-circuit all that shit somehow by making it federal. Clinics would be federal property. Surely there are lawyers who can determine how to do this. Why isn't something like this happening?

theHandpuppet

(19,964 posts)
7. Even if you could, try finding doctors who will work in them
Sun Jan 19, 2014, 11:33 AM
Jan 2014

Last edited Sun Jan 19, 2014, 02:35 PM - Edit history (1)

They might as well walk around with a bull's eye on their backs.... if the clinics didn't get bombed first.

Nay

(12,051 posts)
11. Ah. I've heard about the Hyde Amendment, but did not know it prohibited
Sun Jan 19, 2014, 01:20 PM
Jan 2014

so much. Well, I guess the assholes have all the fucking bases covered. Now what??? Voting? Don't make me laugh. They're well on their way to making sure that all possible candidates of both parties are bought and paid for -- so voting is pretty much worthless.

I'm glad I'm old.



bluestate10

(10,942 posts)
15. Why doesn't libertarian Leftwing Democrats recognize the danger of their insistence on
Sun Jan 19, 2014, 05:14 PM
Jan 2014

"voting their principles" during close state and national elections? When republicans win office, states and the nation faces rollbacks of women's rights, minority rights, gay rights, abortion right. There IS a greater fucking evil.

Moostache

(9,895 posts)
6. I want to see additional (batshit crazy) laws passed...
Sun Jan 19, 2014, 11:18 AM
Jan 2014

Laws like:

1) Making it illegal for anti-abortion protesters to be without adopted children (if male) or without mandatory, state-supervised uterus rentals - whereby a zygote from a pregnant woman seeking to end her pregnancy would be surgically implanted into the uterus of a female anti-abortion protester. The cost of the surgery would be billed to their respective churches as part of the cost of being tax-exempt when actually operating for profit.

2) Mandatory, simulated labor for all male law-makers who wish to vote to pass laws regarding the female reproductive process. Included in this would be 18-hours of electrode-stimulated abdominal cramping and the rectal passing of a cantaloupe, followed by suckling a pig for 3 days.

I'm sure there are better ideas for laws, but hey, we have been shown time and again that we do not have to be rational any longer...it is working just fine for the GOP crazies...

redqueen

(115,103 posts)
14. Ladies, ladies, ladies... all the important feminist issues are solved!
Sun Jan 19, 2014, 04:36 PM
Jan 2014


I guess a lot of women in the US must actually believe that line of bullshit, for this attack on women's rights to have come as far as it has.
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Great Rolling Stone Artic...