Tag Archives: abortion

HB 1203: on a roll

01 Friday Mar 2019

Posted by in Missouri General Assembly, Missouri House

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , ,

….Since 1976, the Hyde Amendment has blocked federal Medicaid funding for abortion services (since 1994, there have been three extremely narrow exceptions: when continuing the pregnancy will endanger the woman’s life, or when the pregnancy results from rape or incest). This means Medicaid cannot cover abortion even when a woman’s health is at risk and her doctor recommends she get an abortion.

[….]

Since Congress first passed the Hyde Amendment 40 years ago, anti-women’s health politicians extended similar policies to other federal health insurance programs, including coverage for federal employees and their families, military personnel and their families, Native Americans, Alaskan Natives, and inmates in federal prisons….

Representative Mike Moon (r) [2019 file photo].

Just another abortion bill, filed yesterday by Representative Mike Moon (r):

HB 1203
Prohibits the state of Missouri from remitting taxes to the federal government until the federal government prohibits the use of any federal funds for abortion
Sponsor: Moon, Mike (157)
Proposed Effective Date: 8/28/2019
LR Number: 2451H.01I
Last Action: 02/28/2019 – Introduced and Read First Time (H)
Bill String: HB 1203
Next House Hearing: Hearing not scheduled
Calendar: HOUSE BILLS FOR SECOND READING

Any other reasons? Just asking.

Pre 1973 medical instruments.

Previously:

HB 126 and HB 127: catering to their single issue base (December 3, 2018)

HB 964 and HB 971: the “Gish Gallop” of legislation (February 20, 2019)

HB 1017: Anything else? (February 21, 2019)

HB 1017: Anything else?

21 Thursday Feb 2019

Posted by in Missouri General Assembly, Missouri House

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

, , , ,

Pre 1973 medical instruments.

A bill, criminalizing abortion in Missouri, introduced yesterday by Representative Adam Schnelting (r):

HB 1017
Makes the performance or inducement of an abortion, except in a medical emergency, a criminal offense
Sponsor: Schnelting, Adam (104)
Proposed Effective Date: Varies
LR Number: 2157H.01I
Last Action: 02/21/2019 – Read Second Time (H)
Bill String: HB 1017
Next House Hearing: Hearing not scheduled
Calendar: Bill currently not on a House calendar

The bill summary [pdf]:

HB 1017 — ABORTION
SPONSOR: Schnelting

This bill declares its intention that the state and its political subdivisions shall be a “sanctuary of life” to protect pregnant women and their unborn children. Additionally, this bill establishes the “Right to Life of the Unborn Child Act.” This bill specifies that an abortion performed or induced on a woman, unless a medical emergency, shall be a class B felony and shall subject the person performing or inducing the abortion to suspension or revocation of his or her professional license.

This bill has a contingent effective date.

This bill is similar to SB 345 (2019).

Previously:

HB 126 and HB 127: catering to their single issue base (December 3, 2018)

HB 964 and HB 971: the “Gish Gallop” of legislation (February 20, 2019)

HB 964 and HB 971: the “Gish Gallop” of legislation

20 Wednesday Feb 2019

Posted by in Missouri General Assembly, Missouri House

≈ 2 Comments

Tags

, , , , , ,

Pre 1973 medical instruments.

They keep throwing bills against the wall to see if anything sticks. Rinse. Repeat.

Representative Mary Elizabeth Coleman (r) [2019 file photo].

A bill, introduced by Representative Mary Alice Coleman (r) on Monday:

HB 964
Requires the use of a fetal heartbeat detection test prior to an abortion and prohibits an abortion if a fetal heartbeat is detected
Sponsor: Coleman, Mary Elizabeth (097)
Proposed Effective Date: 8/28/2019
LR Number: 2116H.01I
Last Action: 02/19/2019 – Read Second Time (H)
Bill String: HB 964
Next House Hearing: Hearing not scheduled
Calendar: Bill currently not on a House calendar

The bill summary [pdf]:

HB 964 — FETAL HEARTBEAT DETECTION
SPONSOR: Coleman (97)

This bill specifies that a physician shall not perform or induce an abortion on a pregnant woman without first performing a fetal heartbeat detection test. Except in cases of medical emergency, a physician shall not perform or induce an abortion if a fetal heartbeat is detected and shall inform the woman, in writing, that such abortion cannot be performed or induced. If a fetal heartbeat is not detected, an abortion may be performed or induced, in accordance with applicable law, so long as the abortion is performed or induced within 96 hours of the fetal heartbeat detection test. If more than 96 hours have passed since the fetal heartbeat detection test, the physician shall perform a new test prior to an abortion.

The physician shall record the estimated gestational age of the unborn child as well as the time, date, method, and results of the fetal heartbeat detection test in the woman’s medical record and in the abortion report submitted to the Department of Health and Senior Services.

Any physician who fails to perform a fetal heartbeat detection test prior to the performance or inducement of an abortion shall be subject to having his or her medical license rejected, revoked, or suspended for six months and shall pay a $1,000 fine. Any physician who performs or induces an abortion following the detection of a fetal heartbeat shall have his or her license revoked and any future license application denied. Any woman upon whom an abortion is performed or induced in violation of these provisions shall not be prosecuted for a conspiracy to violate these provisions.

This bill is the same as HB 126 (2019).

“…This bill is the same as HB 126 (2019).” Then what’s the point?

In Iowa:

Iowa ‘fetal heartbeat’ abortion restriction declared unconstitutional, struck down by Polk County judge
Tony Leys, Des Moines Register Published 4:23 p.m. CT Jan. 22, 2019 | Updated 7:13 p.m. CT Jan. 22, 2019

Iowa’s “fetal heartbeat” law — the most restrictive abortion limit in the country — violates Iowa Constitution and may not be enforced, a state judge ruled Tuesday.

In his decision striking down the abortion law, Polk County District Judge Michael Huppert cited the Iowa Supreme Court’s ruling last year in a challenge to a different abortion-restriction law. The high court held that “a woman’s right to decide whether to terminate a pregnancy is a fundamental right under the Iowa Constitution” in that ruling.

[….]

The law would ban nearly all abortions after a fetal heartbeat is detected. Critics of the law said that can occur about six weeks into a pregnancy and often before a woman realizes she’s pregnant.

[….]

And, a bill, introduced by Representative Doug Richey (r) on Monday:

HB 971
Establishes the “Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act”
Sponsor: Richey, Doug (038)
Proposed Effective Date: 8/28/2019
LR Number: 2103H.01I
Last Action: 02/19/2019 – Read Second Time (H)
Bill String: HB 971
Next House Hearing: Hearing not scheduled
Calendar: Bill currently not on a House calendar

From the bill text [pdf]:

[….]
2. Whoever knowingly causes the death of a child who was born alive during or immediately after an attempted abortion shall be guilty of murder in the second degree under section 565.021.
3. Whoever recklessly causes the death of a child who was born alive during or immediately after an attempted abortion shall be guilty of involuntary manslaughter in the first degree under section 565.024.
4. Whoever, with criminal negligence, causes the death of a child who was born alive during or immediately after an attempted abortion shall be guilty of involuntary manslaughter in the second degree under section 565.027.
[….]

Before 1973.

Previously:

HB 126 and HB 127: catering to their single issue base (December 3, 2018)

SCR 16: If at first you don’t secede…

13 Wednesday Feb 2019

Posted by in Missouri General Assembly, Missouri Senate

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , ,

A concurrent resolution, introduced yesterday by Senator Paul Wieland (r):

SENATE CONCURRENT RESOLUTION NO. 16

Whereas, in January 1973, the Supreme Court of the United States ruled in Roe v. Wade that abortion is protected by the Constitution of the United States, and in doing so effectively removed legal protection from human beings prior to birth; and

Whereas, the ramifications of the court’s decision created a moral morass and was a step in the wrong direction for our nation; and

Whereas, each and every innocent human life is unique and precious and that human life begins at the moment of conception and continues, uninterrupted, until the moment of natural death; and

Whereas, each innocent human life must always be protected and preserved, and in all possible ways our country should promote a culture of life; and

Whereas, each state should enact laws that protect unborn human life; and

Whereas, the Missouri General Assembly on behalf of Missourians has spoken out in defense of the sanctity of life, and has done so in connection with contemporary threats to the life of the unborn; and

Whereas, other states in the union have not shared this mission to preserve life and have demonstrated contempt towards the most vulnerable in our society; and

Whereas, New York Governor Andrew Cuomo signed legislation permitting abortion on demand; and

Whereas, the State of New York removed abortion from their criminal code; and

Whereas, the State of New York put women’s health at risk by allowing non-physicians to perform or induce abortions; and

Whereas, the State of New York has failed to live up to ethical standards that Missourians demand of us and the State of New York, by their actions, have added to the moral chaos that is plaguing this country:

Now Therefore Be It Resolved that the members of the Missouri Senate, One-hundredth General Assembly, First Regular Session, the House of Representatives concurring therein, declare that Missouri tax dollars should not be spent in any state, like New York, that demonstrates such disregard and contempt for the unborn; and

Be It Further Resolved that the members of the Missouri General Assembly ask the Governor to order all departments to cease from taking part in any non-emergency activity or event in the State of New York; and

Be It Further Resolved that the Missouri General Assembly demands higher moral standards of its fellow states and will continue to boycott events hosted by these states until they repeal legislation that fails to preserve and protect the life of the unborn; and

Be It Further Resolved that the Secretary of the Missouri Senate be instructed to prepare properly inscribed copies of this resolution for the Governor and the State Treasurer.

Where to begin?

And yet, Donald Trump is currently President of the United States. Go figure.

Citizens of the State of New York have access to affordable health insurance. You know, their state participated in Medicaid expansion. That’s what I’d define as a “culture of life”.

Uh, if the U.S. Supreme Court says it’s so, it’s so [see Marbury v Madison (1803)].

We take it that the so-called “culture of life” as mentioned in this resolution does include exemptions for the death penalty and war.

The citizens of the State of New York must be quaking in their collective boots.

HB 680: yet another forced birth bill

27 Sunday Jan 2019

Posted by in Missouri General Assembly, Missouri House

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , ,

A grand legislative strategy – keep throwing stuff against the wall to see if something sticks.

Representative Mary Elizabeth Coleman (r) [2019 file photo].

Last week Representative Mary Elizabeth Coleman (r) introduced yet another anti choice bill:

HB 680
Establishes the “Pain Capable Unborn Child Protection Act”
Sponsor: Coleman, Mary Elizabeth (097)
Proposed Effective Date: 8/28/2019
LR Number: 1651H.01I
Last Action: 01/24/2019 – Introduced and Read First Time (H)
Bill String: HB 680
Next House Hearing: Hearing not scheduled
Calendar: HOUSE BILLS FOR SECOND READING

The bill summary:

HB 680 — PAIN CAPABLE UNBORN CHILD ACT [pdf]
SPONSOR: Coleman (97)

This bill establishes the “Pain Capable Unborn Child Protection Act,” which specifies that no abortion may be performed or induced, or attempted to be performed or induced if the probable gestational age of the fetus has been determined by a physician to have reached the pain capable gestational age, unless 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 such 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, 2019, 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.

This bill is the same as HB 339 and HB 1266 (2018).

“…This bill is the same as HB 339 and HB 1266 (2018).”

Ah, the right wingnut caucus is passing out leftovers for the freshmen.

HJR 28: forced birth

23 Wednesday Jan 2019

Posted by in Uncategorized

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

, , , , ,

Nothing, not a word, about the death penalty or war.

Representative Mike Moon (2019 file photo).

Filed today by Representative Mike Moon (r):

FIRST REGULAR SESSION
HOUSE JOINT RESOLUTION NO. 28 [pdf]
100TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY

INTRODUCED BY REPRESENTATIVE MOON. 0654H.02I DANA RADEMAN MILLER, Chief Clerk

JOINT RESOLUTION

Submitting to the qualified voters of Missouri an amendment repealing Section 2 of Article I of the Constitution of Missouri, and adopting one new section in lieu thereof relating to affirming life.

Be it resolved by the House of Representatives, the Senate concurring therein:

That at the next general election to be held in the state of Missouri, on Tuesday next following the first Monday in November, 2020, or at a special election to be called by the governor for that purpose, there is hereby submitted to the qualified voters of this state, for adoption or rejection, the following amendment to Article I of the Constitution of the state of Missouri:

Section A. Section 2, Article I, Constitution of Missouri, is repealed and one new section adopted in lieu thereof, to be known as Section 2, to read as follows:
Section 2. That all constitutional government is intended to promote the general welfare of the people; that all persons have a natural right to life, liberty, the pursuit of happiness and the enjoyment of the gains of their own industry; that all persons are created equal and are entitled to equal rights and opportunity under the law; that to give security to these things is the principal office of government, and that when government does not confer this security, it fails in its chief design.
(1) That the term “person” under this constitution includes every human being, including every in utero human child at every stage of biological development from the moment of conception until birth.
(2) Nothing in this constitution secures or protects a right to abortion or requires the funding of an abortion.

Section B. Under section 116.155 and other applicable constitutional provisions and laws of this state authorizing the general assembly to adopt ballot language for the submission of a joint resolution to the voters of this state, the official ballot title of the amendment proposed in section A shall be as follows:
“Should the Missouri Constitution be amended to protect pregnant women and children in the womb by recognizing that a child in the womb of a woman is a person with a right to life which cannot be deprived by state or private action without due process and equal protection of law?”.
Section C. Under section 116.155 and other applicable constitutional provisions and laws of this state authorizing the general assembly to adopt a fiscal note summary for the submission of a joint resolution to the voters of this state, the official fiscal note summary of the amendment proposed by section A shall be as follows:
“This change is expected to have no fiscal impact.”

Yep, it’s only about forced birth.

HB 126 and HB 127: catering to their single issue base

03 Monday Dec 2018

Posted by in Missouri General Assembly, Missouri House

≈ 3 Comments

Tags

, , , , , ,

Pre 1973 medical instruments.

Abortion and republicans.

It’s that time again. Bills are being prefiled for the coming session of the Missouri General Assembly.

HB 126
Requires the use of a fetal heartbeat detection test prior to an abortion and prohibits an abortion if a fetal heartbeat is detected
Sponsor: Schroer, Nick (107)
Proposed Effective Date: 8/28/2019
LR Number: 0461H.01I
Last Action: 12/03/2018 – Prefiled (H)
Bill String: HB 126
Next House Hearing: Hearing not scheduled
Calendar: Bill currently not on a House calendar

RepStaceyNewman @staceynewman
Pre-filing of anti-women MO abortion bills has begun – complete with unconstitutional heartbeat bill.
#StateMandatedPregnancy #NoMedicalInput
[….]
3:07 PM – 3 Dec 2018

And:

HB 127
Changes the laws regarding the parental notification required for a minor to obtain an abortion
Sponsor: Miller, Rocky (124)
Proposed Effective Date: 8/28/2019
LR Number: 0510H.01I
Last Action: 12/03/2018 – Prefiled (H)
Bill String: HB 127
Next House Hearing: Hearing not scheduled
Calendar: Bill currently not on a House calendar

Like clockwork.

Really, it’s not about abortion

13 Tuesday Nov 2018

Posted by in Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, ,

“Of all the Democratic candidates who flipped House seats and gubernatorial offices last week, not a single one ran on a pro-life [anti-choice] platform…” – Fixed it for them.

Really, it’s not about abortion. It’s about controlling others.

That little dustup about the anti-choice boilerplate language inserted into and then removed from the Missouri Democratic Party platform this past Summer? As if that made any difference in the 2018 election here in Missouri?

Show Me.

Pre 1973 medical instruments.

The impact nationally of the anti-choice movement on the Democratic Party wave in Tuesday’s election was exactly…

The Pro-Life Democratic Politician Is Going Extinct
By Sarah Jones

…Of all the Democratic candidates who flipped House seats and gubernatorial offices last week, not a single one ran on a pro-life platform.

As Shellnutt notes in her piece, it’s true that one in five people who support the repeal of Roe v. Wade identify as Democrats. But that’s a small fraction of an already-small demographic, and it doesn’t necessarily follow that the sort of pro-life voter who favors Democrats prioritizes abortion above, say, health care or the economy. There’s still widespread support for Roe. A July Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll found that 71 percent of Americans want to keep Roe; in fact, most Republicans say they oppose repeal. There just doesn’t appear to be a constituency for pro-life Democrats, an observation borne out by electoral results in addition to issue-specific polls. America’s abortion debate isn’t over, and the pro-life Democrat isn’t extinct. Intraparty debates over the exact place pro-life Democrats should or should not occupy will likely continue, but the evidence increasingly favors one conclusion: The party doesn’t need pro-life candidates to win. Democrats achieved a blue wave mostly without them. There’s no reason to think this will change in 2020, or afterward, as the party plots its post-Trump future.

…next to nothing, if at all.

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 we shall know them by their whiny, poorly written, rhetorically deficient, bullshit press releases (August 13, 2018)

Is Josh Hawley a theocrat or an intolerant fanatic. Or are they the same thing?

06 Thursday Sep 2018

Posted by in Uncategorized

≈ 2 Comments

Tags

, , , , , , , ,

The English Oxford Living Dictionaries defines a fanatic as one who exhibits “excessive and single-minded zeal, especially for an extreme religious or political cause.”

So what’s a theocrat? According to Mirriam-Webster, it’s “one who rules in or lives under a theocratic form of government,” which is defined as “government of a state by immediate divine guidance or by officials who are regarded as divinely guided.” In other words, a theocrat is a religious fanatic who wants to make sure we all defer to his God and jump to order when he legislates what he believes to be his God’s preferences.

An example of a wannabe theocrat here in Missouri is our current Attorney General and Republican Senatorial candidate, Josh Hawley.

Many have noticed that Hawley is just a bit uninspired when it comes to his regular duties as AG – such as fulfilling promises that he would fight against Jefferson City’s culture of corruption. But Hawley doesn’t always run on empty; what gets the the boy’s blood primed is any perceived slight to the power of the state to insist that we we all defer to his brand of Christianity.

Hawley calls it defending religious liberty. Others have pointed out his religious liberty amounts to repression and a license for bigotry. But judge for yourself; here’s a few examples of our AG’s religious crusades:

  • Hawley’s current bête noire is the Johnson Amendment which he wants to eliminate. so that churches can make official political endorsements and still retain tax-free status. He seems to believe that it violates his and like-minded folks religious liberty and freedom of speech if I, a nonbeliever, don’t have to subsidize their political views via a tax exemption for their politicized churches – a point of view, by the way, with which most Americans and numerous religious bodies disagree. And, of course, GOP candidates like Hawley are salivating over all the dark money that will be funneled into campaigns via donations to churches once the Johnson Amendment is history and the total politicization of religious life – along lines they favor – has been achieved.
  • Hawley, while running for AG, advocated for state legislation to “ensure that churches and businesses will not be compelled to “participate” in same-sex marriages” – a bit bizarre since the Fist Amendment clearly protects churches from such coercion already, and, since Missouri does not provide anti-discrimination protection for LGBT people, there could be no possible legal grounds to try to force the issue. He may have finally figured this out since, so far as I know, we’ve not heard about it since he won the AG race.
  • Hawley also claims credit for his somewhat nominal participation in the famous Hobby-Lobby case which gave “closely-held” businesses permission to refuse to provide their female employees with insurance that paid for birth-control if doing so clashed with the owners religious or “moral” beliefs.
    • He attributes his support for this decision to his belief that “abortion is not a right,”[… .] It is a violent act against the defenseless. It violates every principle of morality and should be barred by American law.” Immoral? Yes. Because Hawley’s believes his God says so.To hell with my God.

What are the implications for regular people if their AG – or, God forbid, their senator – is a religious zealot? Consider the following:

A 34-year-old painter is suing Dahled Up Construction, a company based south of Portland, Ore., for allegedly firing him after he refused to join a Christian Bible group for employees. [… .]

Coleman told The Washington Post that when he explained to the company’s owner, Joel Dahl, that he had different beliefs, Dahl said: “If you want to keep your job, everybody needs to attend. If not, I’m going to be forced to replace you.”

Where do you think AG Hawley would come down? Do you trust him to understand what we’re supposed to be in America?  Theocrats want the power of a specific religion to be pervasive and all-encompassing – and bear in mind that the desire of persecuted religions – those not endorsed by the ruling theocrats – to escape theocratic rule is one of the reasons that our country exists.

 

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

13 Monday Aug 2018

Posted by in meta

≈ 1 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)