Tagged: abortion

Posted: February 26, 2013 at 9:26 pm

More Junk Science from the GOP

by Cowgirl

Today’s TEA Party Republican idiocy comes from David Halvorson (R-Sidney). Speaking on the floor of the Montana House of Representatives, this former director of Montana Right-to-Life offered fake “scientific information” he’d found on the Internet shows “the evil, the absolute evil” that results from allowing women to decide whether and when they will have children.

Halvorson held forth on the classic crank argument that “abortion causes cancer,” and that women who get abortions are “six times more likely to commit suicide.”

As for his scientific evidence, Halvorson, a former voice over performer, argued that his claims are “substantiated by published literature” from a “prestigious” organization. By this he means The Elliot Institute–they’re behind the document Halvorson theatrically brandishes in the video.

This institute is little more than one imbecile who writes papers based on junk science, a man named David Reardon. Reardon received his “doctorate in biomedical ethics” from an on-line, unaccredited institution, and it shows. The Elliot Institute doesn’t follow the peer review process in scientific publishing that is designed to maintain standards and further the discovery of scientific truth. And in its ”studies” the institute cites nothing other than it’s own previous articles or letters-to-the-editor, as evidence.

So either Halvorson is incapable of discerning the difference between junk science and otherwise, or he is deliberately using junk science to deceive his colleagues into passing a bill that the legislature’s own attorneys say is unconstitutional, HB 391.

In fact, there is NO association between abortion and cancer, nor any scientific evidence that abortion is hazardous to mental health.

There is an entire body of actual science to back this up. Consider the National Cancer Institute, the American College of Obstetrics and Gynecology, California Teacher’s study of 10,000 women, the Nurse’s Health Study II, which included over 100,000 women, and the EPIC Study (over 250,000 women.) And just a few more: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17.

Posted: February 12, 2013 at 7:32 am

A New Low

TEA Partier has new theory of the Constitution

by Cowgirl

Most TEA Partiers claim to hold the Constitution sacred. But a Montana TEA Party legislator is now arguing that constitutionality is not relevant. Popular sentiment, he says, is all that matters.

Rep. Gerald Bennett (R-Libby) has introduced a bill which he acknowledges is unconstitutional. The bill would strip young women of their privacy rights and force them to seek parental consent before terminating a pregnancy. But Bennett believes that popular will is with him, and that

“The will of the people should never be held subservient to their own constitution.”

Continue reading →

Posted: January 22, 2013 at 7:32 am

Roe v. Wade 40th: Will the Montana GOP retreat?

Today is the 40th anniversary of the historic Roe v. Wade decision. The Republican Party continues its 40 year war to overturn the decision. The battle rages on.

But there are indications that the GOP is coming to understand the political cost of advocating for forced rape births, compulsory vaginal ultrasounds, a prohibition on birth control, and other ant-abortion and anti-female nuttiness.

Continue reading →

Posted: October 17, 2012 at 6:58 am

The Foul 57

Republican candidates across the county have tried to distance themselves from Rep. Todd Akin, R-Mo., who believes that rape victims should be forced to give birth and said that victims of “legitimate rape” rarely get pregnant because “the female body has ways to try to shut that whole thing down.”

That’s been much more difficult for GOPers in Montana.

A whopping 57 candidates for the Montana legislature actually voted for an amendment to the Montana Constitution to ban abortion, under all circumstances, with no exception for rape or incest. Sen. Debby Barrett (R-Dillon) was one of them, as democratic challenger Richard Turner of Dillan smartly points out in a mail piece (pictured).

The forced birth for rape victims amendment cleared the house and the senate with 96 votes. All Republicans voted for it except Lila Evans. However, because it takes a 2/3 vote of 150 legislators to amend the constitution, the amendment failed by only four votes.

Below the fold is the list of current legislative candidates who voted in favor of forced births for victims of rape and incest. Check it out to see if your legislator is on it–I’ve alphabetized the list by town.

Shamefully, Jonathan Windy Boy and Gene Vuckovich also made the list. To be sure, there are many more GOP candidates for legislature who share these beliefs but weren’t in the 2011 session–like Scott Sales. There are also many more Republican legislators who voted for this but aren’t up for re-election this year.

Rick Hill, Steve Daines, and Tim Fox all support Akin’s position. Rehberg was an early major donor to Akin.

Continue reading →

Posted: October 3, 2012 at 7:41 am

Rick Hill Measuring Drapes?

From whispers I’ve heard, it sounds likely that Rick Hill has already enlisted Scott Mendenhall to run his transition operation, in the event Hill wins the election.

Mendenhall is a right-winger from Clancy, and served several terms in the legislature before being termed out a few years ago. If the rumor is true, then Hill has chosen, as his chief advisor to begin a potential Hill administration, a man who believes that a woman who is raped and impregnated should be required by law to give birth to the rapist’s child.

And Hill shares this belief, by the way, even if the anti-choice Helena IR hasn’t given it much coverage (and don’t hold your breath). So it shouldn’t surprise anyone that he would enlist an anti-abortion zealot to begin assembling a gubernatorial administration, moot though that assignment may be.

Mendenhall has long been the darling of the religious right and is a fiery speaker at anti-choice events. He says that conservative Christians must fight against “the extreme liberal left,” which he claims seeks to “undermine traditional family values.” He also claims that women’s constitutional right to medical privacy is a “direct violation” of why America was founded. Mendenhall was an early endorser of the constitutional amendment banning gay marriage in Montana.

Mendenhall and his wife own an ultrasound business in Helena and Butte. During the last session, Mendenhall sent his wife to testify in favor of a bill which would force women to undergo vaginal probe ultrasounds before they were allowed to terminate the pregnancy.

The last time, by the way, that Rick Hill was involved in a transition was in 2001, when he led Judy Martz’s transition policy team for economic development.

Posted: September 26, 2012 at 12:11 pm

Jent Miffed

Montana state Senator Larry Jent is miffed at me because I drew attention to his anti-birth control vote in the legislature last week. On Jent’s Facebook page he claims that the GOP bill he’s supporting

“did not even mention contraception…It seems that cowgirls lie as well as Karl Rove”

Here’s the screenshot:

In fact, the bill gives the legislature specific authority over what’s covered or not in state worker health plans. The entire discussion in committee made this clear. In this video, you can hear the committee staffer specifically assuring the legislators that yes, this would give them the authority to remove:

“contraception other things that could be very controversial..like..I don’t know, health and wellness for women.”

We will give Mr. Jent the benefit of the doubt and assume that he simply misunderstood the bill, and did not know what he was truly voting for. A general rule of thumb for Democrats in the upcoming legislature should be: when wing-nuts propose something, it is most likely a bill that is designed to advance right-wing ideology, not make things better for Montana citizens. The bill in this case was proposed by Dave Lewis. While not a wing-nut in every sense, on abortion and birth control he is way out there (right, Dave?).

Posted: September 16, 2012 at 2:25 pm

Rick Hill’s Woman Problem

While Judy Martz crisscrosses the state saying assuring voters that “there is no war on women,” Rick Hill’s record and positions prove otherwise.

He has, shall we say, a Woman Problem. No, I’m not talking about Hill’s affair with a cocktail waitress. Hill has a problem with women voters because of his backward beliefs and miltant anti-woman voting record. And if he becomes governor, there will absolutely be a war waged against women from the second floor of the State Capitol Building.

One wonders if Hill, had he knocked up his waitress, would have asked her to have the baby.

When the rest of the GOP was throwing Todd Akin off the boat (because of his nutty views about rape victims), Hill backed Akin up. Hill is an absolutist on abortion. No abortion, in any circumstance including rape and incest, reported the top Montana women’s advocacy group this week.

When he’s in office, therefore, Hill will do what all Republicans do on abortion. They can’t make abortion illegal outright, so they do it by death by a thousand cuts. Limit funding for poor women who can’t afford to feed the children they already have; pass laws requiring ultra sounds and vaginal probes; allow sham clinics, run by religious zealots rather than doctors, to fraudulently operate in a way that draws unsuspecting women in, leaving them confused and misinformed. Forbid any state institution from performing abortions. Publicly support anti-Roe ballot initiatives. With a solidly GOP legislature, a Governor Rick Hill would be an anti-choicer’s dreamboat. And yet on this crucial issue, such a Governor would maintain a position that 90% of Montana voters oppose.

The new report by NARAL Pro-Choice Montana also shows that during his short time in the House, Congressman Hill cast 50 votes to restrict women’s reproductive rights. And, when the right-wing Montana Family Foundation released its voter guide recently, only two candidates in the entire state of Montana even bothered to fill out the survey. Hill was one of them (the other is Liz Bangerter– more on that later).

When asked whether he was opposed to abortion in all circumstances (e.g. even when a woman has been raped.) Hill refused to answer. He also refused to answer the question about whether abortion should be prohibited except in cases of rape, incest, or to save the life of the mother. If there’s one thing I’ve learned, it’s this: beware when GOP candidates don’t respond to questions during campaigns. They will screw you once they are elected. Here is the screenshot of the questions and here are Hill’s answers.

Hill is even on the record opposing no-fault divorce–a law all 50 states have passed. Hill would have us return to centuries past, when couples were required to assign blame or fault before they could end a marriage. The situation was especially horrendous for victims of domestic violence trapped in abusive marriages who were left no way out without the consent of the abuser. Hill touts his opposition to no-fault divorce in this campaign fundraising letter (PDF).

For those that are interested, here’s a screenshot of Liz Bangerter’s answers to the Montana Family Foundation questionnaire. Here are the questions.

Posted: August 21, 2012 at 11:03 pm

Standing by their Man

While the rest of the Republican party was busy putting as much distance as possible between themselves Todd Akin, the Missouri GOP candidate that said if women were not making up the rape their bodies would “shut down” the pregnancy, Montana Republicans lined up to express their support for his views.

Former Congressman Rick Hill was the first to stand with Todd Akin. Hill, who clearly has a woman problem, came out yesterday in support of Akin’s position on forcing rape victims to carry their rapists’ pregnancies to term. Hill supports it.

As Julianna Crowley, the political leader of the pro-choice movement in Montana, pointed out, Congressman Rick Hill has a frightening record.

“Former Congressman Rick Hill’s extreme anti-choice record shows just how serious a threat it would be for the women of Montana if he was elected Governor,” Crowley said.

“He has cast 57 votes on reproductive rights while in Congress receiving a zero percent voting record from NARAL Pro-Choice America in1998, 1999 and 2000 and a 3% in 1997. Hill co-sponsored the “Right to Life Act” of 1997 and 1999, both of which gave personhood status to a fetus, defining life at the moment of fertilization and, if passed and enacted into law, would have ended legal abortion and ban several of the most common forms of birth control.

Montanans have rejected to qualify a similar personhood measure for our ballot three years in a row. The Hill ticket is too dangerous for Montana women’s health and too extreme to represent this state.”

In a press release, the NARAL Pro-Choice Montana Director points out that Hill’s anti-choice record also includes these gems:

Repeatedly voting to deny women in the military – who defend our freedom overseas – and dependents the right to use their own, private funds for abortion care at military hospitals.

Repeatedly voting against international family-planning programs.

Publicly stating that he opposes abortion even in cases of rape or incest.

Hill’s anti-woman views don’t end with his shocking NARAL voting record. Hill has publicly stated that he supports repealing Montana’s law prohibiting insurance company discrimination against women. In Montana, insurance plans must cover women’s health care needs like birth control, mammograms, and maternity care–just like they cover men’s. If Hill had his way, insurance rates for women will dramatically increase. (Hill has made no objection to the fact that insurance companies routinely cover Viagra and male pattern baldness drugs.)

Even Congressman Dennis Rehberg who totally missed the point of why Rep. Akin’s comments about “legitimate rape,” were repulsive, at least made a futile attempt to address the controversy.

Republican Attorney General Candidate Tim Fox on the other hand has spent his political career dodging the issue altogether.

In a Yellowstone Public Radio interview from 2008, Fox was asked by a caller whether he opposes abortion even in cases of rape and incest. In one of the most remarkable acts of dodging a question ever, Fox said that it was important for candidate to be clear on their stances on issues such as this, right before avoiding the question.

Here’s a transcript of the exchange:

Host: Carl’s on the line and I understand he wants to talk about abortion. Hello, Carl?

CALLER: Hello, Mr. Fox, I heard you say that you are 100% pro-life. Does that mean that you are opposed to abortion even in cases of rape and incest?

Tim Fox: You know I have made it clear on the campaign trail that I am…ah…pro-life and I believe that life begins at conception and I think it’s important for candidates to be clear on their stances on those kind of issues of the day. But I also think it’s important to know and understand that the Attorney General doesn’t make law, the Attorney General enforces law. And certainly whenever the legislature for instance enacts a new law whether it leans one way or the other on, say, the abortion issue the Attorney General is charged with the responsibility of enforcing that law and defending that law and I would do that as Attorney General, irrespective of my values or political philosophies.

So, I, think this is an important issue to Montanans, and that’s why I’ve made sure that people know where I stand ad certainly we need to make sure that the dialogue continues in Montana on this issue and I would certainly be a part of that.

The GOP’s cowardly lion, Steve Daines, is taking the extreme position but seems to be hoping to hide it. His spokesman told Montanans that Daines ”disagreed” with the remarks. At the same time Daines reinforced his agreement with the policy, saying he “opposed to abortion in all cases except when the life of the mother is at risk.” In other words, he is in support of making rape victims keep the rape-induced pregnancy. Daines is still accepting cash from groups that are standing with Akin.

Also of note, today the Republican National Committee’s platform committee firmly stated their support of Rep. Akin when they tentatively put in their platform language against abortion, even in the case of rape or incest.