This is BOR's Video of the Day, or VOTD, our nightly video clip segment that hopefully provides you with a laugh or a chance to think at the end of the day.
There's something about the absurdity of women repeating the horrendous misogynistic claptrap of the contemporary Republican party. From Rick Santorum to various state legislators to professional gasbags Rush Limbaugh and Ann Coulter, this MoveOn video shows real women repeating the really offensive things Republicans have said about women's choice and reproductive freedom.
Of course it's not just what they say, it's what the Republicans do: legislate endless procedural hurdles to getting an abortion, try to deny insurance coverage for birth control, oppose an end to co-pays for birth control, and shut down women's health and family planning programs.
If you haven't read it yet, Frank Rich's in-depth New York Magazine article "Stag Party" details the history of the GOP's war on women, and how the formerly pro-choice, it's-her-own-damn-business country-club type Republicans were replaced with a group of men who want to take away every basic reproductive freedom women have. It's really worth a read, and a bookmark.
In the meantime, here's the video:
Check out all of our BOR videos of the day on the VOTD tag.
As we reported on Monday, this week's strip of Doonesbury comics takes aim at the absurdity of Texas's mandatory sonogram law, which requires a transvaginal ultrasound of women seeking abortions in Texas. Tuesday and Wednesday's cartoons will be appreciated by Burnt Orange Report readers, as they stick it to the three middle-aged male Republicans responsible for this bill: Governor Rick Perry, State Senator Dan Patrick, and State Representative Sid Miller. The cartoons also bring in the ongoing Republican war on birth control, as the GOP wants to come between women and their monthly blister packs of pregnancy-prevention.
Here are Tuesday and Wednesday's strips:
TUESDAY
WEDNESDAY
Tuesday's panel, in which "Sid Patrick" (hmm, sounds like a mash-up of Sid Miller and Dan Patrick to me...) asks the young lady if her parents know she's "a slut," resonates strongly with the remarks made by Radio Blowhard Rush Limbaugh, in which he called Georgetown law student Sandra Fluke a "slut" and a "prostitute" for not only using birth control pills, but also having the audacity to speak up as a woman in favor of access to women's healthcare. More than 30% of American women who use contraception use The Pill. Looks like Rush just insulted one third of the country's ladies. Good work.
Additionally, 14% of pill-takers use them for non-contraceptive purposes including premenstrual dysphoric disorder, endometriosis, and controlling acne. Women also take the pill when they're prescribed other medications that have the risk of birth defects, to make sure they don't get pregnant. Thanks to the ongoing war by Texas Republicans on women's health and family planning programs, there are legions of women lining up to tell their stories about taking the pill for a variety of non-sexy reasons. In short, women take the pill for a whole lot of reasons, and it's none of our legislators' damn business why, nor is it their job to forbid us from receiving them.
Wednesday's panel takes direct aim at Rick Perry, who made sonogram legislation an "emergency item" to speed up the process by which it worked its way through the Republican legislature and into the vaginas of Texas. In his press release, Perry stated that the goal of the legislation was to make sure the "patient understands what's truly at stake" -- because, you know, most women seeking abortions have no idea that they're terminating a pregnancy.
Perry added that he hopes the sonograms compel women to make what he terms "the right choice" -- i.e. not to have the abortion. Of course, sonogram laws don't actually deter many women from having an abortion at all. The real key here is the 24-hour waiting period and procedural delays it causes women. Women need to take an extra day off from work, travel twice, pay for gas twice, pay for other childcare twice, all to exercise their legal right to an abortion. (Meanwhile, all of Perry's efforts to end women's health and family planning in Texas will only increase abortions, as a result of increasing unwanted pregnancies. Bitter irony!)
The St. Louis Post-Dispatch ran a story about the hardships of Texas women who now seek abortions under the sonogram law, and quoted two providers who described their patients' experiences with the law. (Ironically, the Post-Dispatch is one of the papers that refused to run the Doonesbury cartoon, since it wasn't "family friendly" enough.) From their article on the sonogram law, emphasis mine:
"What we have noticed primarily is absolute outrage that they have to come twice," [Amy Hagstrom Miller, CEO of Whole Women's Health] said. "Many of our clients are already mothers; they know what is on a sonogram. They don't see it and say 'Oh, my gosh, I'm pregnant' and change their minds."
"It treats women as if they are stupid and don't know what is in their uterus," [Jenni Beaver, assistant director at Southwestern Women's Surgery Center in Dallas] said. "The law just creates hoops and barriers and drives up the cost for the women. And we have not had anyone decide not to have an abortion because of a sonogram."
Beaver's comments above are accurate with other research on sonogram laws: they don't cause women to change their minds. However, the increased procedural hurdles -- waiting periods, added costs -- do deter some women from accessing abortion, and as always it's the low-income and rural women who will suffer the most.
Wednesday's comic ends as the resigned doctor reads the ideological claptrap required by the state. As far as the Legislature is concerned, doctors "cannot be trusted" to provide their patients with the necessary information about abortion and have to say what the government thinks is correct. It's a move that irked the American Medical Association, and it's a move that should send a clear message to Texas doctors and patients alike: when it comes to women's healthcare, the Republican legislature thinks only they know best.
Congratulations, Republican lawmakers of Texas! Your sonogram law has hit the big-time: week-long ridicule in "Doonesbury." The 40-year daily cartoon strip that frequently takes aim at political and social issues will turn the light on the absurdity that is Texas's mandatory transvaginal ultrasound law, also known as the sonogram law.
Not surprisingly, a few daily papers are refusing to publish the cartoon, claiming that the illustrated rendition of an actual law in Texas is "too much" for the "family-friendly fun" of the cartoon page.
The plot of the series of strips features a woman seeking a sonogram in order to have an abortion. She's asked, "Do your parents know you're a slut?" Before inserting the probe, the doctor says to her, "By the authority invested in me by the GOP base, I thee rape." Later, a receptionist says, "The Republican Party is hoping you get caught in a shame spiral and change your mind."
Is it charged rhetoric? Sure. Does it accurately convey the intent of the Republican sonogram law, passed in Texas and percolating elsewhere across the country? Abso-friggin'-lutely.
Here's Monday's strip:
Quite naturally, a few weak-willed newspaper editors refused to run the strip that is, I note, based on an actual law and actual procedure women in Texas and elsewhere now have to endure to exercise their rights. The St. Paul Pioneer Press, Oregonian, and St. Louis Post-Dispatch have pulled the strips, among others.
The Post-Dispatchcredits aborting the strip to its "graphic language" and "unsuitable language" for a section with "young readers." Hey, editors, how else are we supposed to train young women for the lifetime of slut-shaming that awaits them? How else will your young female and male readers find out that Republicans view women as objects worthy of scorn at best, and beings incapable of making their own decisions without unwanted bodily penetration at worst?
The Oregoniansays comic Garry Trudeau "went over the line of good taste and humor." You know what's actually over the line? Forcing doctors to perform medically unnecessary sonograms and read ideological claptrap to their patients.
In an interview, Trudeau defended his use of the word "rape" to describe the sonogram law:
Texas's HB-15 isn't hard to explain: The bill says that in order for a woman to obtain a perfectly legal medical procedure, she is first compelled by law to endure a vaginal probe with a hard, plastic 10-inch wand. The World Health Organization defines rape as "physically forced or otherwise coerced penetration - even if slight - of the vulva or anus, using a penis, other body parts or an object." You tell me the difference.
The only difference I see is that the WHO hasn't adopted the 17th Century attitudes towards women that pervade the Texas Legislature.
This is BOR's Video of the Day, or VOTD, our nightly video clip segment that hopefully provides you with a laugh at the end of the day.
A recent visitor to our fair city, Bernie Sanders got on his soapbox to talk about how the Blunt Amendment would have undermined most of the progress made by the Affordable Care Act to enable women to access birth control and reproductive health care. Sanders, one of the most if not the most progressive Senator, makes the point that if our Senate had 83 women and 17 men, instead of the other way around, then they wouldn't be voting on an amendment to deny insurance coverage for Birth Control or any other "morally objectionable" healthcare service.
Check out all of our BOR videos of the day on the VOTD tag.
This is BOR's Video of the Day, or VOTD, our nightly video clip segment that hopefully provides you with a laugh at the end of the day.
Hey ladies, stop worrying your pretty little heads about your women's health issues, because a bunch of men that won't ever be pregnant, get an abortion, or have a pap smear are here to tell you what to do with your bodies. From Funny or Die, here's a video that could actually be played at the Republican National Convention without a hint of irony and actually receive a standing ovation.
It's actually kind of great to see a bunch of dudes mocking the Republican Party's attack on women -- it helps drive home the absurdity of the situation to folks who might not otherwise understand the sheer ridiculousness and scale of the war on women.
Check out all of our BOR videos of the day on the VOTD tag.
Not to be outdone by the troglodytes in the Texas legislature, Republicans in the Virginia and Iowa statehouses are pushing for women to be forced to receive a mandatory trans-vaginal sonogram before getting an abortion. It's no surprise to see the law being repeated in other states, given Republicans' national war on women. Furthermore, since efforts by the Center for Reproductive Rights to beat back the sonogram lawsuit in the courts have recently failed, anti-choice activists likely are trying to strike while the unwanted-mandatory-probing of women is hot.
Over at RH Reality Check, writer Andy Kopsa accurately terms the bills "state-sanctioned rape," since they force an unwanted object into the body of a woman even if she won't consent to the procedure. Kopsa asked the Virginia AG if the bill overturns the state's anti-rape statute, but has yet to receive a response. Arguably it's the State who fills the role of the rapist, since many doctors themselves do not want to perform the unnecessary procedure. The Virginia law has already passed the lower chamber and is headed for the Republican-controlled Senate, where it is also likely to pass. Kopsa reports that thankfully the Iowa State Senate is Democratic, and will likely kill the Iowa version of the bill, along with other anti-choice and anti-woman legislation up for consideration.
Meanwhile, as we previously reported here at BOR, Federal Judge Sam Sparks dismissed the lawsuit against the State's sonogram law, primarily due to a pending reversal from the 5th Circuit Court, where the rabidly anti-abortion Chief Judge Edith Jones already overturned Sparks' temporary restraining order blocking enforcement of the sonogram law. Sparks essentially said that while he could still side against the sonogram law on constitutional grounds, there was little hope of the plaintiffs prevailing when the State appealed. It goes without saying that conservative, anti-choice judges on our Circuit Courts appointed by Republican presidents are just waiting to uphold these mandatory sonogram laws.
The irony is that sonogram laws have not been proven to actually reduce the rate of abortion. The main challenges they present are economic and procedural. The 24-hour waiting period associated with the sonogram can cause logistical hurdles for women that must travel long distances or take days off from work in order to get to an abortion provider. In Texas, if women travel over 100 miles to get an abortion they can waive the 24 hour waiting period, but must still wait 2 hours, I suppose to "think it over." Most infuriatingly, women also must pony up the extra money for a sonogram they don't want and don't even have to look at once it's done. Abortions are already expensive, especially for low-income women. This just makes the financial hurdle even bigger.
At its core, the sonogram law is about embarrassing and shaming women for exercising their right to choose. It's about humiliating women and forcing them to submit to an unwanted vaginal probing before going through with a medical procedure that they've already thought about a great deal. These laws are fixated on making women feel bad about their choice, and allowing the state to literally and physically violate them for exercising their rights.
Republicans will never stop their insane intrusions into women's personal lives or women's bodies. Now they're trying to allow employers to restrict their employees' access to birth control on "moral grounds." Where does it end? The Republicans have literally forced their way into the vaginas of women in Texas via their mandatory sonograms, and soon those of women in Virginia as well. Even as their efforts to block birth control coverage, mandate sonograms, and chip away at every reproductive freedom women enjoy cause them to nose-dive in the polls, it seems that they just won't stop. Women literally have no business voting for candidates from the Republican party -- their sole priority seems to be taking away our reproductive rights and basic access to birth control.
The only way to keep Republicans out of our lady-business is to keep them out of office.
More on the Texas Sonogram Law on Burnt Orange Report:
This marks the first week that the infamous Texas sonogram law was enforced. (It's been in effect at many clinics since the law was passed in October, but now there are some teeth behind it.) And not surprisingly, it a) hasn't changed any women's minds, b) is a major hassle for women already making a difficult decision, and c) is a hassle for doctors and clinics.
The law doesn't just require that women get a sonogram before getting an abortion. They also have to listen to the doctor describe the fetus' features and listen to its heartbeat. From a logistical perspective, this means women have to schedule two appointments - one for the sonogram, followed by one at least 24 hours later to actually terminate the pregnancy. So it's twice the sick leave, twice the child care, twice the transportation. You can read more about what exactly is involved, as well as the long and torrid legal history, here.
The director of Texas Right to Life claims in a very Orwellian twist that the sonogram law actually empowers women, and that we need to stop "underestimating the capability of women to make a decision with more information, not less." Indeed, she says, keeping this information from them is paternalistic. Except even these newly "empowered" women are making the same decisions that they had made before they were forced to endure the sonograms. According to the New York Times:
"Clinic directors said they have not had a single woman change her mind in the 24-hour period between her sonogram and her abortion. Abortion opponents and advocates for crisis pregnancy centers say that anecdotally, they have not heard of any either."
So it turns out that women tend to know what they're doing when they make major decisions about their health and families. Harassment doesn't really change it. Even the anti-choice groups haven't been able to rustle up any cases that indicate otherwise.
But unfortunately, the legal battle has been put to rest for now. Today the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals denied a request to reconsider the suit, so it looks like it's not going anywhere.
Maybe we should take a page from the book of a State Senator in Virginia who, in response to their own proposed sonogram law, introduced an amendment that "would require men to have a rectal exam and a cardiac stress test before obtaining a prescription for erectile dysfunction medication."
More on the Texas Sonogram Law on Burnt Orange Report:
Thanks to a ruling from the 5th Circuit and a request from Greg Abbot to expedite enforcement, Texas' wildly invasive sonogram law is going into effect. Women seeking abortions will be subject to a mandatory ultrasound and forced to look at the sonogram image, and their doctor will be required to read a bunch of medically unnecessary information about fetal development or risk losing their medical license. For women who are less than 10 weeks pregnant, that sonogram will be conducted with a trans-vaginal probe, seen at right.
The law took effect sooner than anticipated, since Attorney General Greg Abbott got permission for immediate enforcement after 5th Circuit Judge Edith Jones struck down Federal Judge Sam Sparks' temporary restraining order on the law. Usually there's a three-week waiting period before laws are enforced. Now the Department of Health Services is writing rules for enforcement of the new law.
Here's a run-down of what happened in the litigation and where anti-probers can go from here.
June 13, 2011: The initial lawsuit against the sonogram bill is filed in federal court, with plaintiffs seeking to prevent the law from going into effect on September 1, 2011. The lawsuit seeks a judgment that the mandatory sonogram law is unconstitutional and unenforceable in whole and/or in part.
August 30, 2011: Judge Sam Sparks issues a temporary restraining order, or TRO, blocking enforcement. Specifically, Sparks' ruling prohibits any enforcement of the provisions requiring the display of the ultrasound, the detailed description of the fetal image, and the audible heart auscultation of the fetus.
January 5, 2012: AG Greg Abbott appeals Sparks' injunction at the 5th Circuit court. The anti-sonogram side continued to argue that the sonograms and compelled speech by the doctors are not medically necessary, and that the State of Texas was trying to insert ideological speech into the doctor-patient relationship.
January 10, 2012: Chief Judge Edith Jones, noted anti-abortion zealot, reversed Spark's TRO and stated that there's precedent for the new Texas law. That gave pause to opponents of the law, since any appeal of Sparks' final decision would have to go back through the 5th Circuit.
January 13, 2012: Abbott gets permission to enforce the sonogram law immediately, rather than wait the usual 3 weeks for the provision to take effect. The 5th Circuit granted his request, thus denying the anti-sonogram side the opportunity to appeal Jones' decision to reverse Sparks' injunction. The Texas Department of State Health Services was instructed to issue rules for compliance with the law, as well as prosecute doctors who do not obey it.
January 20, 2012: At a hearing on the initial lawsuit, Judge Sparks says his "hands are tied" by the 5th Circuit's reversal of his original TRO. Essentially, if Sparks rules for the plaintiffs, Jones is likely to reverse him when the State appeals his decision.
Now What? The best chance for opponents of the invasive sonogram law is for Sparks to rule against the law on constitutional grounds, and then have the ensuing appeal by the state take place en banc, or to the entire 5th Circuit, not just a three-judge panel including the dreaded anti-choice Judge Jones. A majority of the 17 judges on the 5th Circuit would have to agree to rehear it, and then could potentially reverse Judge Jones. Not all 17 would have to hear the case. Or at least that's my understanding. Other Circuit courts have ruled against similar laws, so there's a solid chance that a wider group of judges ruling on our sonogram law at the 5th Circuit might produce a different outcome.
Conceivably if Sparks does rule, and then the losing side appeals to the 5th Circuit, the losing side there can appeal to the Supreme Court. It's not clear however if the SCOTUS would take up the case, and given the current ideological swing of the court to the right thanks to George W. Bush's appointments, how the anti-sonogram side would fare.
So that's where we are. We'll keep you updated on this issue as it continues.
So this is an unfortunate way to end Cervical Awareness Month: the Dallas-based Susan G. Komen Foundation, which raises money to fight breast cancer, announced today it will stop its funding to Planned Parenthood for breast exams.
That's really smart, Komen Foundation! Denying low-income women breast exams through defunding Planned Parenthood will totally help win the fight against breast cancer. OMG why didn't someone think of this sooner!
Last year, the Susan G. Komen Foundation, which is the largest and most well-known breast cancer advocacy group, funded 170,000 breast exams and 6,400 mammogram referrals provided by Planned Parenthood. As we noted earlier today, Planned Parenthood performed almost 750,000 breast cancer screenings in 2010.
Apparently the Komen foundation has adopted a new rule that prevents it from providing grants to organizations that are under investigation by state, local, or federal authorities. A conservative Republican Congressman, Cliff Stearns of Florida, recently launched a probe to determine if money was improperly used for abortions. It's a b.s. accusation designed to prevent Planned Parenthood from receiving funding, one which will in turn imperil the health of thousands of women.
Planned Parenthood claims that the Komen foundation is caving in to pressure from anti-abortion activists.Clearly these anti-abortion activists would rather see more women die of breast cancer than if that's what it takes to stop women from exercising their right to choose.
Cecile Richards, president of Planned Parenthood Federation of America, told the Associated Press, "It's hard to understand how an organization with whom we share a mission of saving women's lives could have bowed to this kind of bullying. It's really hurtful."
It sounds like the Komen foundation was fairly rude in how they dealt with Richards and Planned Parenthood. From the Statesman:
Richards said she was informed via a phone call from Komen's president, Elizabeth Thompson, in December.
"It was incredibly surprising," Richards said. "It wasn't even a conversation - it was an announcement."
Richards subsequently sent a letter to Komen's top leaders - CEO Nancy Brinker and board chairman Dr. LaSalle D. Leffall, Jr. - requesting a meeting with the board and asserting that Komen had misrepresented Planned Parenthood's funding-eligibility status in some states.
According to Planned Parenthood, the Komen leaders replied to Richards with a brief letter ignoring the request for a meeting, defending the new grant criteria, and adding, "We understand the disappointment of any organization that is affected by these policy and strategy updates."
This was a bad move on the Komen foundation's part. Planned Parenthood primarily provides women's health care -- annual physicals and exams, pap smears, birth control prescriptions, and yes, breast exams and mammogram referrals. With this move, the Komen foundation isn't just denying support to Planned Parenthood -- they're denying support to women. It's very shameful.
Want to do something? There's a range of Internet actions you can take.
DailyKos has a quick letter you can fire off to the Susan G. Komen foundation: click here.
There's an Act.ly petition calling on Komen to reverse their decision: click here.
Boo, Komen foundation! Boo!! Pro-choice women get breast cancer, too! Shame on you.
The Texas Tribune ran an interesting interview with the doctors who head the American Medical Association and Texas Medical Association today. Topics included Medicaid and Medicare reimbursement rates, the American Care Act and its individual mandate, and the general politicization of healthcare.
The doctors interviewed were American Medical Association President Peter Carmel, a New Jersey-based pediatric neurosurgeon, and Texas Medical Association President Bruce Malone, an Austin orthopedic surgeon. There was an interesting -- and very insightful nugget in there about the Republican Party's war on women's health. Carmel directly called out the sonogram law as a "needless, dangerous interference" in medicine, and both decried cuts to family planning and attacks on Planned Parenthood. Malone went so far as to call it "stupid."
Read for yourself, formatting/emphasis mine:
TT: Where do you come down on Texas' abortion sonogram law, which requires a sonogram at least 24 hours ahead of an abortion and mandates that a doctor play the fetal heartbeat aloud and show the woman the image of the fetus?
Carmel: It is a needless, dangerous interference with the practice of medicine by politicians. And as physicians, we have to oppose all interference that we possibly can by politicians in the practice of medicine. There are all sorts of rules all over the country, with state legislatures trying to dictate what doctors do. In the state of Florida, it is illegal for a doctor to ask the family of a child whether there are guns in the home. You can ask about storage of chemicals, about fire alarms, fire escapes, open windows, how the windows are sealed. You're allowed to ask all those questions, but you cannot ask whether there are firearms in the home. Firearms are a major cause of childhood mortality and injury. It's so extreme as to be ludicrous. The important principle is, the government shouldn't interfere with the doctor-patient relationship. The government shouldn't practice medicine.
TT: And what about Texas lawmakers' efforts to slash spending on family planning? Now they're threatening not to participate in the Medicaid Women's Health Program if they can't exclude Planned Parenthood.
Malone: That would be a really stupid thing to do. Planned Parenthood does not do abortions in the state of Texas with state funds. So this is a very stupid political thing. It's not like the state of Texas has another safety net for these women for medical care. The Texas Medical Association doesn't want to get into the issue of whether a patient wants an elective abortion. That's not what we're dealing with. We're talking about well woman services, pap smears and breast exams, things that make public health sense. And we don't want to see those women who are vulnerable denied essential medical services because someone wants to debate an ethics issue. That's their right to debate that. That's fine, but these are essential medical services.
Carmel: What it sets up is two classes of patients. If you've got rocks, you've got the ability, you've got access to contraception, to women's health, to all of these things. If you're poor, we're going to deny you access to that kind of health. That's first of all not tolerable for medicine, and it can't be tolerable for Americans. No American would say, "Yes, the poor should get inferior treatment."
Aww, Dr. Carmel's clearly spent too long in a Blue State. Actually, down here the Republicans do want to deny poor people treatment. We've seen it session after session after session.
It's important to note that these leaders in the field of medicine disagree with what the Republican legislature is doing -- making women's health an ideological issue, rather than a medical one. Slashing funds to women's health and family planning services hurts all of us.
I'm glad that these distinguished doctors realize this. It's too bad our Republican legislators don't.
Not to be outdone by the troglodytes in the Texas legislature, Republicans in the Virginia and Iowa statehouses are pushing for women to be forced to receive a mandatory trans-vaginal sonogram before getting an abortion. It's no surprise to see the law being repeated in other states, given Republicans' national war on women. Furthermore, since efforts by the Center for Reproductive Rights to beat back the sonogram lawsuit in the courts have recently failed, anti-choice activists likely are trying to strike while the unwanted-mandatory-probing of women is hot.
