Tag Archives: abortion

And we shall know them by their whiny, poorly written, rhetorically deficient, bullshit press releases

13 Monday Aug 2018

Posted by in meta

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , ,

The Missouri Democratic Party State Committee upset a fringe anti-choice group this past weekend.

To recap, an anti-choice amendment was inserted into the party platform at the committee’s meeting early in July. From a member of the platform committee:

“…I served on the MO Dem platform cmte for several months. We drafted a pretty good platform…”

“…still disgusted with the MO Dem Party’s platform fail. Missouri needs more prolife Dems like we *need* another earthquake. We don’t. Dems who do not support access to abortion and the conservative voters they will allegedly attract are the shiny object that distracts from building a platform that appeals to the thousands of voters who stay home because Republicans are regressive bigoted fiends and Democrats are obsessed with appealing to moderately regressive bigoted anti-women fiends…”

There was also an uproar from the base (majority) of party members who contacted their state committee representatives. This past weekend the Missouri Democratic Party State Committee met to reconsider the motion (uh, that’s a parliamentary procedure – used to fix mistakes), with more members of the committee attending the meeting. They reconsidered the motion to approve the anti-choice amendment, removed it, apparently without dissent, and proceeded to approve the original party platform presented by the platform committee.

The representatives on the Missouri Democratic Party State Committee realized they got played and they fixed it. Democrats do that, they fix things.

Missouri Democratic Party Chair Stephen Webber – at campaign headquarters in Columbia, Missouri – August 7, 2018

And, of course, this upset a hack at “Democrats for Life”?:

Missouri Party Chairman Closes Door on Pro-Life Democrats – Eliminates Inclusive “Big Tent” Language Approved By Platform Committee
on 12 August 2018 Posted in Press Releases.

There is an important election coming up that will determine the balance of the U.S. Senate and the future of the U.S. Supreme Court. The election could also determine whether or not there will be impeachment efforts to rid the White House of Donald Trump. Senator Claire McCaskill (D-MO) is in a very close battle, and all Democrats would like to see her continue her tenure in the U.S. Senate.

Missouri Party Chairman Stephen Webber thinks that the best way to support Senator McCaskill and other Democrats in Missouri is to create an unnecessary battle over abortion.

A few weeks ago, there was a meeting to amend the Missouri Democratic Party platform. A vote took place, and the amendment was accepted. The Missouri Democratic Party then said that they welcome Whole Life Democrats in the party. The “conscience language” to include pro-life Democrats did not dilute the abortion-rights plank in the Democratic Party platform.

Unfortunately, it does not appear that the acceptance, along with the compromise language, lasted. Party Chairman Webber held a meeting this morning to strip the inclusive language from the platform because nothing says “We we want your vote” more than overturning a fair process of debate and approval. It is very unusual to remove language unilaterally after a platform has been ratified. It makes you wonder about the kind of pressure supposedly “progressive” groups exerted and why. They know that this removal will cause chaos.

They doth protest too much.

Now, just read that headline for accuracy.

Oh, it’s all just so rich:

“There is an important election coming up that will determine the balance of the U.S. Senate and the future of the U.S. Supreme Court…”

The writer of the press release at “Democrats for Life” actually wrote that. They also wrote this:

Democratic Senators Use Religion to Discredit Pro-Life Judicial Nominee
September 8, 2017
STATEMENT OF KRISTEN DAY, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR
OF DEMOCRATS FOR LIFE OF AMERICA
Democrats For Life of America (DFLA) expresses its disappointment with Democratic senators and interest groups who are attacking federal court of appeals nominee Amy Barrett for her personal religious views on the dignity of human life at all stages….

Amy Barrett was also one of the right wingnuts who was reportedly on Donald Trump’s (r) short list for the current U.S. Supreme Court vacancy. The press release writer for “Democrats for Life” is definitely not worried about the U.S. Supreme Court the way the vast majority of Democrats are worried about the U.S. Supreme Court.

“…Missouri Party Chairman Stephen Webber thinks that the best way to support Senator McCaskill and other Democrats in Missouri is to create an unnecessary battle over abortion…” It’s called projection. Look it up.

The platform committee did not approve the language. A single anti-choice member of the Missouri Democratic Party State committee pushed an amendment to the party platform prepared by a platform committee using language appropriated from a lunatic fringe anti-choice group. We don’t know if the individual who pushed the amendment disclosed where that language came from when it was presented to the Missouri Democratic Party State Committee. We’re asking now. Was that disclosed at the time of the early July vote?

The Missouri Democratic Party State Committee did vote for the amendment in July (it wasn’t unanimous, that’s for sure) and it was very controversial. Everyone heard from everyone else the instant the word got out about the circumstances.

“…It makes you wonder about the kind of pressure supposedly ‘progressive’ groups exerted and why…”

Oh, that’s rich. It’s called holding those who are supposed to represent you accountable. The why is easy. Because their authored amendment, like their press release, is just so much bullshit.

Nothing says “we want your vote” more to the vast majority of Democrats in Missouri than when the Missouri Democratic Party State Committee realized they were played and had the awareness and gumption to quickly fix it. The Missouri Democratic Party State Committee voted on August 11th to restore the original language of the platform committee (overturning the anti-choice amendment) in approving the platform – with 61 of 68 members voting yes, two abstentions. That’s who “closed the door” on anti-choice fanatics.

And, just in case it slips anyone’s mind:

“…And, by the way, there already is an inclusive stance on abortion. It’s called ‘pro choice.'”

Previously:

The elephant in the room (July 3, 2018)

Against abortion? Don’t have one. (July 6, 2018)

Getting played (July 8, 2018)

And they fixed it (August 11, 2018)

And they fixed it

11 Saturday Aug 2018

Posted by in Uncategorized

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

, , , ,

“…If they are willing to accept the fact that they got played they can fix it…”

“…by the way, there already is an inclusive stance on abortion. It’s called ‘pro choice.'”

Over a month ago an anti-choice member of the Missouri Democratic Party State Committee introduced an amendment to the party platform utilizing the anti-choice language of a fringe anti-choice group (unbeknownst to everyone else, probably). The amendment passed. The base of the Missouri Democratic Party was not happy. At all. They let everyone know.

At the Missouri Democratic Party State Committee meeting today:

Alison Dreith @alidreith
As @billy_moffett said, “Now that we saved Labor Rights it’s time to protect a Woman’s Right to Choose in the MDP platform.” @MoDemParty #MDPReproRights
12:01 PM – 11 Aug 2018

Today the state committee met, reconsidered the amendment, removed it, and approved the platform with its original pro-choice language from the platform committee:

Sarah Felts @sarahfelts
61/68 folks voted yes! 2 abstentions.
12:59 PM – 11 Aug 2018

There you have it.

Previously:

The elephant in the room (July 3, 2018)

Against abortion? Don’t have one. (July 6, 2018)

Getting played (July 8, 2018)

Because “anti-choice” has too many characters to fit on a license plate

13 Friday Jul 2018

Posted by in Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, ,

In Missouri:

The frame says it’s all about abortion – not war, or the death penalty, or access to healthcare for all.

As if they’ll ever vote for a Democratic Party candidate.

Previously:

The elephant in the room (July 3, 2018)

Against abortion? Don’t have one. (July 6, 2018)

Getting played (July 8, 2018)

Getting played

08 Sunday Jul 2018

Posted by in Uncategorized

≈ 3 Comments

Tags

, , ,

The Missouri Democratic Party state committee stepped in it on abortion. That’s the most charitable way to put it.

Oh, and it gets worse.

Pre 1973 medical instruments.

Democrats for Life of America Super PAC had one contribution over $200 in 2015:

ROBERT, JANET WAYZAA, MN 55391 SELF 06/04/15 $500

Interestingly, the President of Democrats for Life of America has the same name:

DFLA Board of Directors
on 14 June 2007Posted in DFLA General.
Janet Robert, President [….]

Also interestingly, in 2017 Democrats for Life of America issued a press release defending one of Donald Trump’s (r) radical nominees to a federal court of appeals:

Democratic Senators Use Religion to Discredit Pro-Life Judicial Nominee
September 8, 2017
STATEMENT OF KRISTEN DAY, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR
OF DEMOCRATS FOR LIFE OF AMERICA
Democrats For Life of America (DFLA) expresses its disappointment with Democratic senators and interest groups who are attacking federal court of appeals nominee Amy Barrett for her personal religious views on the dignity of human life at all stages….

Amy Barrett, Amy Barrett, Amy Barrett…that name seems familiar. Oh, yeah:

Battle lines drawn over abortion ahead of Trump’s supreme court pick
In the increasingly acrimonious dispute the two political sides took to talk shows at the start of what promises to be an epic tussle over seat
[….]
…Of those, Barrett is considered to have the most hardline record opposing abortion rights…
[….]

Okay, where does this all lead? Democrats for Life of America have a post on their site from 2013:

Proposed Platform Language to Unites Democrats Around Historic Democratic Principles

“We respect the conscience of each American and recognize that members of our party have deeply held and sometimes differing positions on issues of personal conscience, such as abortion and the death penalty. We recognize the diversity of views as a source of strength, and we welcome into our ranks all Americans who may hold differing positions on these and other issues…”

Sound familiar?:

Missouri Democrats Vote to Welcome Pro-Life Members, Angering Others
Posted By Sarah Fenske on Tue, Jul 3, 2018 at 7:29 AM

“…We respect the conscience of each Missourian and recognize that members of our party have deeply held and sometimes differing positions on issues of personal conscience, such as abortion,” the amendment read. “We recognize the diversity of views as a source of strength, and welcome into our ranks all Missourians who may hold differing positions on this issue…”

The Missouri Democratic Party State Committee voted to amend its platform using the exact language of a lunatic fringe anti-abortion group. The same anti-abortion group has gone on the record to defend the nomination of a radical anti-abortion judge to a federal appeals court by Donald Trump (r). The same individual who also happens to be under consideration by Trump for the current opening in the U.S. Supreme Court.

It took us less than thirty minutes to do the research to make the connections. You’d think the leadership and membership of the Missouri Democratic Party state committee could attempt to do a little bit of the same when they vote to amend the party platform.

That “…differing opinions…” language in the template was and is just so much bullshit. The anti-abortion right wants to and is going to ban abortion in the United States. So much for respecting differing opinions, eh?

The Missouri Democratic Party got played. If they are willing to accept the fact that they got played they can fix it. If.

Previously:

The elephant in the room (July 3, 2018)

Against abortion? Don’t have one. (July 6, 2018)

Against abortion? Don’t have one.

06 Friday Jul 2018

Posted by in social media, Uncategorized

≈ 4 Comments

Tags

, , , ,

“…by the way, there already is an inclusive stance on abortion. It’s called ‘pro choice.'”

Coathanger.

Old media caught the dissension caused by the change in the Missouri Democratic Party platform at last weekend’s state committee meeting – wrought by the approval of an amendment which was brought forward by an anti-choice member.

That individual was quoted as stating: “…We are tired of being second class citizens in our party…”

Pamela Merritt, as always, gets it right:

Pamela Merritt @SharkFu
Okay, so I keep thinking about Joan Barry saying abortion opponents are tired of being treated like 2nd class citizens in the MO Dem party. This, a rant.
[….]
11:41 AM – 5 Jul 2018

The thread:

Being treated like a 2nd class citizen in the Dem Party is being forced to vote in a church w/ a giant“God is Prolife” sign out front while living in a city where Black babies are 4x more likely to die in their first year.

Being treated like a 2nd class citizen in the MO Dem Party is being the base, being 90+ % reliable election after election but seeing a platform that appeals to voters who will just find another oppressed group to blame their GOP vote on.

Being a 2nd class citizen is having to debate adding language saying women have the right to make decisions about their own bodies & being told that’s too radical for Joan Barry and the voters who don’t vote for Democrats she claims will flood in.

And being a 2nd class citizen in the MO Dem Party is showing that there can’t be economic justice w/ out reproductive justice and watching the party ignore and continue a losing formula.

So, yeah. I’m pretty damned pissed off at Joan Barry for treating Missouri’s pro-choice voters like 2nd class crap and then having th audacity to whine when we protest that. Fin.

Yeah, that’s definitely gonna leave a mark.

Let’s make this clear. It’s not about anyone’s personal belief against abortion, it’s about imposing that belief through the power of the state on others. Got it?

Previously:

The elephant in the room (July 3, 2018)

The elephant in the room

03 Tuesday Jul 2018

Posted by in Uncategorized

≈ 7 Comments

Tags

, , ,

Pre 1973 medical instruments.

We received word via social media from Pamela Merritt, from Reproaction, on doings at the Missouri Democratic Party state committee meeting this past weekend:

I served on the MO Dem platform cmte for several months. We drafted a pretty good platform. It could have had more teeth, but it was way better than the Republican lite mess they had been working with.

Today, the party amended and voted on the platform.

I’m going to need someone from the Missouri Democratic Party to explain to me how a diversity of opinion on abortion rights is a strength, and how that positioning doesn’t make the party look like incoherent moderates in an age that demands articulate leadership.

Is diversity of opinion on voting rights a strength? Is diversity of opinion on immigrant rights a strength? Is diversity of opinion on civil rights a strength? Is diversity of opinion on LGBTQ non-discrimination laws a strength?

This is the very definition of bullshit.

But hey, message received.

I’ll have more to say about this in the next few days.

For now, I’ll just say that agreeing to disagree on core values is how we ended up with a battle to save Roe, families separated and children in cages, Muslim bans, a former Dem Governor and labor leadership organizing a fundraiser for racist police union spokesbigot Jeff Roorda, and a country where guns have more rights than women.

That’s not strength. Those are the predictable consequences of weakness and appeasement toward a core group who will never support you the way Black women did.

Past tense on purpose.

*spits*

Great. Someone(s) in the Missouri Democratic Party found a way to alienate the most loyal part of its base.

And, again, from Pamela Merritt:

…still disgusted with the MO Dem Party’s platform fail. Missouri needs more prolife Dems like we *need* another earthquake. We don’t. Dems who do not support access to abortion and the conservative voters they will allegedly attract are the shiny object that distracts from building a platform that appeals to the thousands of voters who stay home because Republicans are regressive bigoted fiends and Democrats are obsessed with appealing to moderately regressive bigoted anti-women fiends.

And I’ll ask again, how is diversity of opinion on abortion a strength but diversity of opinion on right to work an abomination. I’ll add that I am firmly opposed to right to work, I’d never ask any political party to welcome members or politicians who support it because it is horrible policy that will harm workers and damage communities.

See how easy that is? Didn’t hurt a bit.

*spits again*

I’ve always used the term “anti-choice” to describe those single issue voters and politicians.

I was born before Roe v Wade. I was a teenager when the then U.S. Supreme Court made the ruling. And before you ask me or criticize me, as a male, about anything in my past experience that would prompt me to or give me the right to comment on reproductive health and choice for women, know that my first response would be, “It’s none of your god damned business.”

It’s a personal medical decision. Period.

Against access to adequate health care for all? No way you’re “pro life”. Against Medicaid expansion in Missouri? No way you’re “pro life”. I can go on and on. There’s decades of this kind of right wingnut policy and behavior. I’ve always asked the anti-choicers (and believe me, I have), “Are you against the death penalty and war?” One memorable response, “Oh, no, it’s about the babies.” I have nothing but contempt for that kind of moral emptiness. It’s about nothing other than forcing their power over others. That’s it.

So, this past weekend, of all days, the Missouri Democratic Party state committee voted to alter the party platform on women’s reproductive health – which might allow for so called “pro life” candidates to feel better about themselves.

No.

Does that state party believe that there may be anti-choice voters and politicians who may feel like it’s finally time to abandon the republicans over putting little children in concentration camps because it’s just a tiny bridge too far for them and who also really reflect the values of the Democratic Party and the people that we’ve all been working on behalf of for decades? I’ve got news for you, you don’t abandon your base because you want to attract a few voters or politicians in the opposition party who suddenly become queasy over behavior that’s been going on in their party for decades.

You dance with them what brung you.

Against access to adequate health care for all? No way you’re “pro life”. Against Medicaid expansion in Missouri? No way you’re “pro life”. If you’re that kind of “pro life” you and everyone else like you can go to hell, you already have an oppressive party you can join.

And, if the state party is going down that road I’ve got the new state party logo for you right here.

And, by the way, there already is an inclusive stance on abortion. It’s called “pro choice.”

But, her emails…

27 Wednesday Jun 2018

Posted by in Claire McCaskill, Resist

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , , , , ,

Now what?

Pre 1973 medical instruments.

She told us:

Hillary Clinton @HillaryClinton
A Republican president could nominate as many as 4 Supreme Court justices. Why that should terrify you: [….]
11:11 AM – 22 Dec 2015

January 20, 2017:

Coathanger.

Think again.

Wagner and Hartzler insult those who died in Las Vegas

05 Thursday Oct 2017

Posted by in Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , , ,

Okay. This is good. We have a gun massacre – more than fifty dead and nearly 500 wounded. A clean, white, gun “enthusiast” (authorities found more than 40 guns in his hotel room, car, etc.) goes bonkers and gears up multiple automatic weapons in his hotel room to shoot concert-goers from on-high like they’re fish in a barrel. Additionally, as far as mass shootings go, we have a twofer – three killed, two wounded in another shooting spree in Lawrence, Kansas on the same day. Of the two, only the first massacre elicits big news coverage – mass shootings have become so run-of-the-mill nowadays that there has to be a big body count before anyone notices.

Do these events possibly suggest that we’ve got a problem with guns in the U.S.? That maybe we shouldn’t be quite so permissive when it comes to what are, when all is said and done, potential instruments of death? And maybe our elected representatives should take some time to address this issue?

Well, if you said “yes” to these questions, you’d be all on your lonesome, at least if you were a member of the GOP Caucus of the U.S. House of Representatives. Not that these folks don’t care about life. Nosiree. They care so much about life that the use of guns to deprive so many of that state of being just shored up their resolve to enact even more restrictions on, wait for it, abortion:

As we mourn the lives lost in Las Vegas this week, and welcome Whip Scalise back to Capitol Hill, we are reminded just how precious life is. This message weighed heavily on the hearts of House Republicans as we spoke of the potential of life — especially lives cut short through abortion.

The House passed a so-called fetal-pain bill, Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act (H.R. 36), that, adhering to the best junk science ideology can compel, declares that a fetus can feel pain at 20 weeks – even though all major U.S. and international medical societies, such as the American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, have gone on the record that, although a fetus can respond reflexively to stimulation much earlier, the essential components of the cerebral cortex have not developed sufficiently to permit the experience of pain until at least 26 weeks.

No surprise to Missourians, our local GOPers were among those so overcome by antics of a shooter in Las Vegas that they just had to put in jeopardy the lives of women who have potentially life-threatening, problematic, late term pregnancies – because the largest number of late term abortions, a procedure that is exceedingly rare to start with, is a due to just such complications. Among those Missourians who offered especially emotive support for the bill were Reps. Ann Wagner (R-2) and Vicky Hartzler (R-4).

Hartzler goes all the way with junk science declaring, in opposition to all reputable evidence, that “babies at this age are hypersensitive, feeling pain more acutely than you and me.” But, hey, this is the lady who thinks that our toasters are rigged by the Chinese to spy on us. Of course, this begs the question of why we allow someone incapable of evaluating evidence to make laws that depend on competent evaluation of evidence.

Wagner also embraced the dishonest crazy, but did so with real sophistic flair, detailing the developmental progress of her incipient grandchild, and slipping into the catalog the assumption that the stages of development she listed somehow entailed the capacity to feel pain at 20 weeks:

… Today, we know so much more. We know that, after 3 weeks, my granddaughter had a heartbeat. After 7 weeks, she began kicking her mother, like any good Wagner child would. By week 12, she could suck her thumb, and at week 20, my granddaughter knew the sound of her mother’s voice and could feel pain.

Somebody tell these ladies that guns cause pain and death too. And it’s real pain, the kind that hurts, as opposed to fantasy pain hypothesized by junk science quacks (or hacks who are in it for the money), who’ll pretend that reflexive stimulation equal pain and lie about the fact that the anesthesia used during fetal surgery prior to 26 weeks is strictly used to insure the comfort of the fully developed mother who can actually feel pain.

If these nice Republicans ladies are so concerned about pain and death, real pain, that is, there’s lots they can do about it. But somehow, I don’t think I’ll see either Wagner or Hartzler make a stand even for something as minor as an assault weapon ban. Indeed, I believe that both opposed renewing such a ban when the chance came up again in 2013. Both lawmakers also opposed legislation that would have blocked those on the terrorist watch-list or individuals certified mentally ill from buying guns.

They tell us that they are so concerned about, and so venerate life that murder by means of assault weapons – modified to perform like fully automatic guns – moved them to do nothing more than to restrict the right of women and their doctors to address their own, private reproductive health. And at the same time they can’t even manage to talk about the realities of gun violence. On top of that insult to both the dead and the survivors of the Las Vegas massacre, they insult the rest of us with lies, repeated over and over again in the face of contrary evidence, to justify banning so-called late-term abortions. And yet, both congresswomen have served multiple terms. What gives?

 

Did Rep. Mike Moon just make a modest proposal?

14 Wednesday Jun 2017

Posted by in Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , ,

Rep. Mike Moon is over the moon about Governor Greitens’ special anti-abortion show boat session. Moon is the sponsor of a bill to ban abortion in the state so he is in tune with Greitens aspirations though he wants to go even further and ban abortion entirely, to hell with the legalities suggested by Roe v. Wade.

Moon, though, seems to have confused abortion with meat processing. After killing and eviscerating a chicken on camera, he had this to say:

… “God gave man dominion over life. He allows us to raise animals properly, and care for them, and then process them for food so we can sustain life,” he said. “And that’s what I’m doing here.”

He then switched gears and seemed to compare abortion to the chicken heart, “the heart of the matter,” he had extracted. He later tweeted disdainfully “some people seem to be freaking out about the chicken video. I wonder if they know what an abortion is?” Which dodges the question of whether or not Moon knows what an abortion is.

I think that, if I can follow the logic, Moon thinks that abortion has something to do with chicken processing and food production.

In which case, I’m put in mind of the the late 17th and early 18th century satirist, Jonathan Swift. In “A Modest Proposal,” Swift parodied the indifference and cruelty of the Mike Moons of his time by suggesting that the problems of poverty and widespread starvation in Ireland cold be solved by breeding and selling the children of the poor for food. Especially relevant to Moon’s performance is the fact that Swift writes that breeding babies for food might resolve the situation wherein women too poor to feed their children resorted to abortion:

There is likewise another great advantage in my scheme, that it will prevent those voluntary abortions and that horrid practice of women murdering their bastard children, alas! too frequent among us! sacrificing the poor innocent babes I doubt more to avoid the expense than the shame, which would move tears and pit in the most savage and inhuman breast.

Alas, though such irony may be lost on Moon, he is no stranger to bizarre and mean-minded rhetoric. He has recently distinguished himself by calling on Congress to repeal Obamacare with “manly firmness” . A couple of years ago, he called for a special session of the state legislature to stop the “Islamification” of Missouri by keeping out Syrian refugees, whom he also seems to regard as potential – but undesirable – food items, claiming that in his experience “a practicing Muslim comes in all flavors (black, white, brown, yellow American, African, European, etc. etc.).”

Is Moon maybe trying to out-Swift Swift?

*Slightly revised for clarity (11:34 am 6/14/2017),

99th General Assembly, 2nd Extraordinary Session – HB 1, HB 2, HB 3, HB 6, HB 7, HB 9, HB 14 – interfering in reproductive choice

13 Tuesday Jun 2017

Posted by in Missouri General Assembly, Missouri House

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

, , , , , , , , , , ,

The General Assembly is in its second extraordinary session called by the governor, by news accounts costing the taxpayers of Missouri $20,000.00 a day. The subject is abortion.

Bills introduced by the anti-choice republican majority:

HB 1 — PAIN CAPABLE UNBORN CHILD PROTECTION [pdf]
SPONSOR: Lichtenegger
This bill creates the “Pain Capable Unborn Child Protection Act” which specifies that no abortion may be performed or induced, or attempted to be performed or induced, unless the probable gestational age of the fetus has been determined by a physician to have reached the pain capable gestational age and it is necessary to avert the patient’s death or serious risk of substantial and irreversible physical impairment of a major bodily function. The physician must terminate the pregnancy in a manner which provides the best opportunity for the fetus to survive unless doing so would pose a greater risk of death or substantial and irreversible physical impairment of a major bodily function to the patient. Any physician who performs or induces an abortion shall report certain information, as specified in the bill, to the Department of Health and Senior Services. Beginning June 30, 2018, the department must issue a statistical report of reported information during the previous calendar year. Any physician or other licensed medical practitioner who intentionally or recklessly performs or induces an abortion in violation of this bill is subject to discipline from the appropriate licensure board.

HB 2 — ABORTION [pdf]
SPONSOR: Miller
Currently, a person is not permitted to knowingly perform an abortion on a minor unless the attending physician has secured the informed written consent of the minor and one parent or guardian of the minor. This bill requires, except in the case of an emergency, the consenting parent or guardian of the minor to notify any other custodial parent or guardian in writing prior to the securing of the informed written consent of the minor and consenting parent or guardian. A parent or guardian is not required to be given notice under certain circumstances as specified in the bill.

HB 3 — ABORTION [pdf]
SPONSOR: Swan
This bill changes provisions relating to abortion.
SAFE AND RELIABLE CARE The bill allows the Department of Health and Senior Services to adopt rules governing complication plans to ensure patients undergoing abortions induced by drugs or chemicals have access to safe and reliable care (Section 188.021, RSMo).
DEFINITIONS This bill defines a “qualified professional” as the physician who referred the woman to the physician who is to perform the abortion or to the advanced practice registered nurse in a collaborative practice arrangement with the physician performing the abortion (Sections 188.027 and 188.039). This bill defines an “abortion facility” as any establishment operated for the purpose of performing or inducing any second- or third-trimester abortions or five or more first-trimester abortions and which does not provide accommodations for patients to stay more than 23 hours within the establishment (Section 197.200).
ABORTION FACILITIES The bill amends these sections to include abortion facilities (Sections 188.030, 192.665, 192.667, 197.150, 197.152, 197.158, 197.160, 197.162, 197.165, 197.205, 197.215, 197.220, 197.235, 197.240, 197.285, 197.287, 197.289, 197.293, 197.295, and 595.027). LICENSED PHYSICIANS In order to receive a license from the department, the bill requires an abortion facility to provide affirmative evidence that each person authorized to perform abortions is a physician currently licensed to practice in Missouri (Section 197.215). RULES FOR AMBULATORY SURGICAL CENTERS AND ABORTION FACILITIES This bill allows the department to adopt separate rules to apply to ambulatory surgical centers and to apply to abortion facilities. Any rule that applies to an abortion facility shall, at minimum, be equal to any physical requirement of an ambulatory surgical center (Section 197.225).
ABORTION FACILITY INSPECTIONS The department shall make an unannounced on-site inspection of any abortion facility at least annually. The inspection shall include: compliance with statutory and regulatory requirements, including requirements that the facility maintain adequate staffing and equipment to respond to medical emergencies; compliance that all organs or tissue removed at the time of the abortion be submitted to a board certified pathologist; review of patient records to ensure that no documentation authorizes improper utilization or organs or tissue; compliance with prohibition on the use of public funds to perform or assist a prohibited abortion or to encourage a woman to have a prohibited abortion (Section 197.230).
INTERFERENCE WITH MEDICAL ASSISTANCE A person commits the offense of interference with medical assistance if he or she, while working as an employee of an abortion facility: knowingly orders or requests medical personnel to deviate from any applicable standard of care or ordinary practice while providing medical assistance to a patient for reasons unrelated to the patient’s health or welfare; or knowingly attempts to prevent medical personnel from providing medical assistance to a patience in accordance with all applicable standards of care or ordinary practice for reasons unrelated to the patient’s health or welfare. This offense is a class A misdemeanor (Section 574.200). This bill contains an emergency clause. This bill is similar to HB 5 (2017, Second Extraordinary Session).

An emergency clause from right wingnut republicans in the Missouri General Assembly. Go figure.

HB 6 — ABORTION [pdf]
SPONSOR: Barnes (60) This bill changes provisions relating to abortion.
SAFE AND RELIABLE CARE The bill allows the Department of Health and Senior Services to adopt rules governing complication plans to ensure patients undergoing abortions induced by drugs or chemicals have access to safe and reliable care (Section 188.021, RSMo).
DEFINITIONS This bill defines a “qualified professional” as the physician who referred the woman to the physician who is to perform the abortion or to the advanced practice registered nurse in a collaborative practice arrangement with the physician performing the abortion (Sections 188.027 and 188.039). This bill defines an “abortion facility” as any establishment operated for the purpose of performing or inducing any second- or third-trimester abortions or five or more first-trimester abortions and which does not provide accommodations for patients to stay more than 23 hours within the establishment (Section 197.200).
ABORTION FACILITIES The bill amends these sections to include abortion facilities (Sections 188.030, 192.665, 192.667, 197.150, 197.152, 197.158, 197.160, 197.162, 197.165, 197.205, 197.215, 197.220, 197.235, 197.240, 197.285, 197.287, 197.289, 197.293, 197.295, and 595.027).
ATTORNEY GENERAL JURISDICTION The Attorney General shall have concurrent original jurisdiction throughout the state for actions for a violation of any: provision of Chapter 188 (Regulation of Abortions); state law regarding the use of public funds for an abortion; or state law which regulates an abortion facility or a person who performs an abortion (Section 188.075). LICENSED PHYSICIANS In order to receive a license from the department, the bill requires an abortion facility to provide affirmative evidence that each person authorized to perform abortions is a physician currently licensed to practice in Missouri (Section 197.215).
RULES FOR AMBULATORY SURGICAL CENTERS AND ABORTION FACILITIES The bill allows the department to adopt separate rules to apply to ambulatory surgical centers and to apply to abortion facilities. Any rule that applies to an abortion facility shall, at minimum, be equal to any physical requirement of an ambulatory surgical center (Section 197.225).
ABORTION FACILITY INSPECTIONS The department shall make an unannounced on-site inspection of any abortion facility at least annually. The inspection shall include: compliance with statutory and regulatory requirements, including requirements that the facility maintain adequate staffing and equipment to respond to medical emergencies; compliance that all organs or tissue removed at the time of the abortion be submitted to a board certified pathologist; review of patient records to ensure that no documentation authorizes improper utilization or organs or tissue; compliance with prohibition on the use of public funds to perform or assist a prohibited abortion or to encourage a woman to have a prohibited abortion (Section 197.230).
INTERFERENCE WITH MEDICAL ASSISTANCE A person commits the offense of interference with medical assistance if he or she, while working as an employee of an abortion facility: knowingly orders or requests medical personnel to deviate from any applicable standard of care or ordinary practice while providing medical assistance to a patient for reasons unrelated to the patient’s health or welfare; or knowingly attempts to prevent medical personnel from providing medical assistance to a patient in accordance with all applicable standards of care or ordinary practice for reasons unrelated to the patient’s health or welfare. This offense is a class A misdemeanor (Section 574.200).
This bill contains an emergency clause. This bill is similar to HB 3 (2017, Second Extraordinary Session).

Gee, another bill with an emergency clause. And similar to HB3.

HB 7 — FETAL TISSUE [pdf]
SPONSOR: Franklin This bill requires that all organs and tissue removed at the time of an abortion be submitted to a pathologist for examination. The pathologist shall file a copy of a report on the sample with the Department of Health and Senior Services and each sample shall be given a unique identification number for tracking. The bill requires that a report shall be created and submitted to the department for each sample at each facility that handles the sample, including the abortion facility, the pathology lab, and the location of final disposition. If the department does not receive a report, it could lead to the suspension of the abortion facility or General Assembly. This bill contains an emergency clause.

Emergency clause.

HB 9 — POLITICAL SUBDIVISIONS [pdf]
SPONSOR: Kelly (141)
This bill states that the General Assembly acknowledges the right of an “alternatives to abortion” agency to operate freely and engage in speech without governmental interference and the right of a person not to be compelled by the government to participate in abortion contrary to his or her religious beliefs or moral convictions. The bill specifies that a political subdivision may not enact an order that:
(1) Prohibits, limits, interferes with, or otherwise adversely affects an “alternatives to abortion” agency’s operations or speech. This shall not prevent a political subdivision from exercising its lawful authority to regulate zoning or land use or to enforce a building or fire code regulation, as long as that political; subdivision treats an “alternatives to abortion” agency in the same manner as another similarly situated agency
(2) Requires a person to directly or indirectly participate in abortion if such participation is contrary to the religious beliefs or moral convictions of such person;
(3) Requires any person to conduct real estate transactions for or with an abortion facility or for or with a person for the purpose of performing an abortion not necessary to save the life of the mother; or
(4) Requires a person to provide coverage for or participate in a health plan that includes benefits that are not otherwise required by state law.
In any action to enforce these provisions, a court may order injunctive or other equitable relief, recovery of damages, legal remedies, and payment of reasonable attorney’s fees, costs, and expenses. In addition to a private cause of action, the Attorney General is also authorized to bring a cause of action under these provisions. Nothing in the bill prohibits a political subdivision from enforcing any order to assist pregnant women to carry their unborn child to term or assist women in caring for their children or placing their children for adoption. This bill has an emergency clause.

Allows entities to discriminate based on an individual’s reproductive choices. With an emergency clause. Go figure.

And, finally:

HB 14 — MISSOURI RIGHT TO LIFE ACT [pdf]
SPONSOR: Moon This bill creates the “Missouri Right to Life Act.” The bill states that it is the intent of the General Assembly to protect the life of all humans and require due process of law before the life of any human is ended prior to natural death.

What did you expect?