2/3 Of The Public Says NO To Overturning Roe Vs. Wade

The chart above is from the Kaiser Family Foundation Poll done between June 11th and 20th of 1,492 adults nationwide, and has a margin of error of 3 points.

Right-wingers across the country have been celebrating after hearing that Justice Kennedy is retiring at the end of June. They know that means Trump will get to appoint another Supreme Court justice, and bend the court to the right for perhaps decades. But they know it also means they might finally get something they have been wanting for the last 45 years -- the overturning of the Roe vs. Wade Supreme Court decision.

They are positively giddy over Trump's being able to keep a campaign promise -- to nominate anti-choice candidates to the Supreme Court. And these people might get what they want, even though they are just a tiny minority of the American population (about 29%).

The vast majority of Americans (about 67%) say they do NOT want to see Roe vs. Wade overturned. They see that court decision as a rational and reasonable answer to the abortion debate. And that includes 81% of Democrats, 73% of Independents, 65% of men, 68% of women, and 74% women between the ages of 18 and 44.

Only one group wants to see the court decision overturned -- Republicans (53%). And 43% of Republicans also oppose overturning it.

I don't know if the end of Roe vs. Wade can be prevented, but that's what the American public wants. Unfortunately, Trump and the Republicans have shown they don't care what Americans want.

Cable News Coverage Of The Choice Debate

The charts are from Media Matters for America. They did a report on how the cable news networks covered the pro and anti-choice debate (abortion) between January 1st of 2015 and March 6th of 2016. It turns out that the three (CNN, Fox News, and MSNBC) are very different in their coverage.

Fox contained overwhelmingly anti-choice stories in that time period, while MSNBC contained mostly pro-choice stories. Anti-choice stories outnumbered pro-choice stories on CNN, but not by a whole lot. They were somewhere in the middle between Fox and MSNBC.

All three aired at least some misinformation on the topic, but CNN and MSNBC didn't broadcast anywhere near the misinformation aired on Fox. That's because Fox isn't really interested in truth. They were created to be, and remain purely a propaganda arm of the Republican Party (and right-wing politics).

But it's the third chart that bothered me the most -- the chart showing the gender of those the networks have invited on to speak about abortion. It seems to me that the issue of what a woman has the right to do with her own body should be a matter for that woman (or women in general).

Men have always had the right to control their own bodies in a free country, and have assumed they also had the right to control a woman's body. That is wrong, and it is against the precepts of any free country. Women should have every single right that any man has, and in equal portion. Anything less is, in my opinion, unconstitutional.

And it is also wrong to have mostly men discussing a women's issue on the cable news networks. It's time for those networks to do the right thing.

Anti-Choice Advocates Are Still A Minority In This Country

In 1973, the Supreme Court voted 7 to 2 that women have the right to get an abortion (at least in the first trimester of a pregnancy). That landmark case was Roe vs Wade. Since that year, the anti-choice advocates have done their best to change American minds on the issue, and one of their targets in doing this has been Planned Parenthood. They have failed.

A majority (53% to 41%) thinks abortion should be legal in all or most cases. A plurality (49% to 32%) oppose overturning Roe vs. Wade. And a majority (53% to 33%) have a favorable opinion of Planned Parenthood. The anti-choice folks remain a minority in this country.

Only one group of people have majorities wanting to make abortions illegal, supporting the overturning of Roe vs Wade, and having an unfavorable opinion of Planned Parenthood -- the Republicans. Once again (as on many other issues), the Republicans find themselves opposing the wishes of most Americans.

These charts show the results of a recent YouGov Poll -- done between November 30th and December 3rd of a random national sample of 1,000 adults, with a 4.3 point margin of error.

GOP's Anti-Abortion Bill Runs Into Trouble And Is Withdrawn

The Republicans were thrilled when they took control of both houses of Congress in the last election. They thought they finally had the power to force the president (and Democrats) to bow to their wishes. And one of those wishes was to chip away at a woman's right to choose. They know they could not outright overturn that right (which is guaranteed by the Supreme Court decision in Roe vs. Wade), but they thought they could keep putting restrictions on that right until it was worthless.

And they wasted no time in starting. In the first month of the 114th Congress, the GOP members of the House proposed a bill that would outlaw abortions after 20 weeks (Pain Capable Unborn Child Protection Act). But the bill ran into trouble before even reaching the House floor for a vote. The few moderate Republicans left in the House rebelled, because they didn't want to bring up an issue that could hurt them in the next election, and they were joined by the House's GOP women, who were appalled at the rape language in the bill.

This posed a situation that could be embarrassing for the party, and for House GOP leaders. If those rebellious elements joined House Democrats in voting against the bill, there was a real possibility that the bill could suffer defeat in that strongly Republican body -- and that would make the Republicans look weak to their base (and other Americans). What were the House GOP leaders to do?

They blinked -- and withdrew the bill from consideration. The bill will not be brought to the House floor for a vote (at least not now, and not in its present form). Instead, they are bringing up a bill they know they can pass (because they passed it in the 113th Congress) -- the No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion Act. That would be largely a symbolic vote (since no federal funds are currently used to pay for abortions), and aimed at trying to show their base (many of them evangelicals) that they are doing something that will please them.

The Republicans are beginning to learn that trying to govern is a lot harder than just trying to obstruct what others are trying to accomplish. I expect this will not be the only time that lesson is rather harshly brought to their attention.

Why Aren't Davis And Abbott Talking About Abortion ?

The Democratic Party in the United States supports a woman's right to choose whether she will get an abortion or not (with no interference from the state). The Republican Party believes just the opposite. They would like to overturn Roe vs Wade and once again outlaw abortion in this country.

But there's a strange thing happening in the Texas gubernatorial race. Neither candidate seems to want to discuss this issue at all. While Texas Republicans have done their best to stop abortions in the state (most recently passing a law that shuts down nearly all clinics in the state that perform abortions), Greg Abbott has been very vague about just where he stands on the issue (and would prefer not to talk about it at all). And while Wendy Davis made her name by filibustering that Republican bill, she has also been silent on the issue (not even listing it as an issue on her website).

Why are these candidates trying to avoid this issue? It's certainly not because it is no longer a divisive issue in this country. Even in Texas, evangelicals are still trying hard to make getting an abortion more difficult for women, while liberals are fighting hard against any new restrictions. Both the pro-choice and anti-choice forces are just as passionate about their beliefs as ever.

A recent poll taken of Texans could provide the answer. It is the University of Texas / Texas Tribune Poll -- done between May 30th and June 8th of 1,200 registered Texas voters (with a margin of error of about 2.83 points).

One thing the survey showed is that there is little difference between Texans of different races on the issue. Whites, Hispanics, and Blacks all agree (with significant majorities) that abortion should be allowed in four cases -- when the health of the mother is in danger, when the fetus is the result of a rape, when the fetus is the result of incest, and when there is a possible serious defect in the fetus. They also agree (with just as significant majorities) that abortions are not justified for three other reasons -- that the parents can't afford the baby, that the woman is unmarried and doesn't want a child, or that the woman is married and doesn't want another child.

There is a significant difference among the political preferences. Democrats would give women the right to choose an abortion in all seven cases, while Republicans would do so only in the first three cases. Independents agree with adults in general that it should be permitted in the first four cases, but not in the last three.

So what does this tell us about Texas voters? It tells us that they do not agree with the position of either party. They are somewhere in the middle -- wanting abortion to remain legal for some reasons, but not wanting it available for all reasons.

This is why both Republican Greg Abbott (who supports the evangelical position) and Democrat Wendy Davis (who has filibustered in favor of the liberal position) are treating this issue like it was radioactive. Both of them know that campaigning on their beliefs would probably lose them more votes that they would gain -- because the majority of Texas voters don't agree with either candidate.

Choice - It's The South Vs. Rest Of The U.S.

I found this information from the Pew Research Center to be very interesting. They combined the results from their own recent survey with surveys from others, and verify that Americans still support a woman's right to control her own body (top chart). But the most interesting part was the regional divide on the issue.

They divided the country into eight geographical regions (bottom chart), and six of those regions clearly support a woman's right to choose. One region, the Midwest, is split right down the middle on the issue -- with 47% on each side. There is only one region that opposes choice significantly -- the South-Central region (Texas, Tennessee, Oklahoma, Mississippi, Louisiana, Kentucky, Alabama, and Arkansas). These states have a 12 point margin opposing choice.

I guess this shouldn't surprise anyone. These are also the states with the largest number of people without a high school education, and the largest number of poor people. They do a bad job of taking care of their own, but still want to tell the rest of America what it should be doing. And of course, they are all controlled by Republicans.

The Texas GOP Passes Anti-Woman Bill

(The cartoon above is by John Branch at branchtoon.com.)

Well, the Texas GOP finally got it done. They have passed a bill that would close 37 out of 42 Texas clinics that offer women abortion services -- forcing many women to have to travel 300 to 400 miles to exercise control over their own bodies. Those who cannot will be forced to once again resort to unsafe back-alley procedures. The bill also bans abortions after 20 weeks -- even though those were rare and usually performed only to protect the health of a woman.

The Republicans will claim this was a measure to protect women's health. That is a LIE. By forcing women back to using unsafe (and unqualified) abortion providers, and not allowing the procedure to protect the health of a woman, the bill actually puts women in more danger. The bill is nothing more than a sneaky attempt to get around Roe v. Wade and outlaw abortions. And it shows that the GOP has no interest in giving women rights equal to those of men (who do have control over their own bodies).

Legislative Democrats fought valiantly to prevent this awful bill. To get it passed, the GOP had to go through two special sessions (at a cost of a million dollars each), cut off testimony on the bill (leaving hundreds of citizens wanting to testify), and change the rules of the state senate (which requires two-thirds support to bring a bill up for a vote). Now the bill goes to the governor.

The Republicans (and their teabagger base) think they have won a great victory, but it is only the end of the first chapter of this saga. Chapter two starts as soon as the governor signs the bill into law, because there will be a court challenge -- alleging this bill violates a woman's constitutional right to choice. That fight will likely go all the way to the Supreme Court eventually (and cost the state a few million more dollars).

And chapter three will be played out over the next year and a half -- as newly energized Democrats and Independent women fight for women's rights by working to unseat the Republicans controlling state government. At a minimum, I expect the GOP to lose seats in the state legislature in 2014 -- and with a popular candidate (Wendy Davis), the Democrats could possibly win back the governor's office. This won't be easy, but I haven't seen Texas Democrats this energized and ready to fight for twenty years.

Anti-Choice Crowd Still Making No Inroads

The chart above is from a recent Gallup Poll (conducted May 2nd through 7th of a nationwide sample of 1,535 adults -- with a margin of error of 4 points). The chart makes it look like the anti-choice crowd might be making some progress in this country, since 48% of the population identified themselves as "pro-life" and only 45% as "pro-choice".

But that is just an illusion, and is more indicative of the fact that a whole lot of people like to think of themselves as being in favor of life (even though many of them actually support Roe vs Wade). I think if you substituted "anti-choice" for "pro-life", those figures would drop dramatically. And that is born out by this next chart from that same poll.

Note that the number of people who oppose abortion has remained very constant since 1975 (about 38 years). Only 20% of the population opposes abortion in all cases (the position the anti-abortion crowd wants America to support). Meanwhile, 26% would support abortion in all cases -- and a majority of the population (52%) likes things as they are, with abortion being permitted with restrictions (as Roe vs Wade does).

The anti-abortion people have been loud and vociferous in their opposition for over 40 years now, but they haven't accomplished much (if anything) at all. Most Americans support the right of women to control their own bodies, and believe the Supreme Court decision of Roe vs Wade is a reasonable way to accomplish that.

Pro-Life? Really?

Republicans, especially the teabaggers, love to call themselves "pro-life". I'm not sure they really understand what it means to be pro (in favor of) life, because they are in favor of killing nearly anyone (except fetuses). Isn't this sort of like someone saying they're pro-chicken while eating fried chicken, because they don't eat eggs?

Most of these same people have no problem with the death penalty -- in fact, they'll even demand it. They do this in spite of the fact that numerous innocent people have been executed by various states (at least two innocent people are known to have been executed here in Texas).

These same people are in favor of unnecessary and brutal wars (like those in Vietnam, Iraq, and Afghanistan). They support this is spite of the fact that many thousands of innocent men, women, and children have been killed in these conflicts (conflicts that had nothing to do with defending the United States or its citizens).

These same people support the government assassination of people they designate as "terrorists" -- people that have neither been charged nor convicted of any crime. They do this in spite of the fact that this nation is supposed to be driven by the "rule of law".

These same people are in favor of repealing the Affordable Care Act (Obamacare) -- guaranteeing that at least 50 million of their fellow citizens will be unable to get health insurance, and millions more will lose their insurance because they contracted a serious illness. They do this in spite of the fact that many thousands of these people will die every year because they can't get preventive care or because they can't afford the expensive treatment needed to save their lives.

These same people oppose the imposition of reasonable gun laws. They do this in spite of the fact that lack of these laws allows violent people to get guns and cost the lives of many people.

These people could claim to be "anti-choice", because they are against any woman having the right to control what happens with her own body (even if it results in the deaths of many women by trying to get back-alley abortions). They could also  claim to be "pro-fetus", because they value the existence of that bit of protoplasm over the lives of real people. But they have no right to call themselves "pro-life", because frankly, they just don't value the lives of far too many people.

(Picture was found at Under The Mountain Bunker.)

Public Not Buying Into The "Culture War"

(Cartoon above is by Clay Bennett in the Chattanooga Times Free Press.)

The Republican economic policies ("trickle-down"economics) has been exposed as an utter failure. Their theory that lowering taxes for the rich and the corporations (but not ordinary Americans) is the cure for what ails the U.S. economy is laughable, and the people no longer accept it. The people want job creation, and they want the rich and the corporations to stop their tax avoidance and pair their fair share -- and they want the outsourcing of American jobs to stop.

But while the Republicans may be mistaken in their economic approach, they are not complete idiots. They know they are losing the economic argument. So they have now switched gears. They have gone back to an old standard of theirs -- the culture war. They have been making thinly-veiled comments appealing to the lingering racism in this country, and they are again attacking women's rights (abortion, contraception, etc.). And of course, they are again using their current favorite -- homophobia.

Although they cloak this in religious terminology, it is nothing more than bigotry. They want to scare enough white people into voting to keep them in office by inferring that the minorities, feminists, and homosexuals are trying to steal "their" country, while the liberals and atheists want to outlaw "their" religion. Republicans are trying to sell the bigoted lie that the country can be returned to a time when rights and power were reserved for white males.

Fortunately, the public is not buying it. At least they are not buying it as an issue for this coming election. A new Gallup Poll surveyed a nationwide sample of voters between February 16th and 19th to see what issues would be important to them in the coming election. The top two issues were the economy and unemployment. About 92% of all respondents said the economy was either extremely or very important, while 82% said the same about unemployment.

How did the culture war issues fare in the survey? Not too well. Only 38% said they were either extremely or very important -- and only 15% said they were extremely important. If this is really what the Republicans want to base their campaign on, then they are waging a losing campaign. The American people are not interested in spreading bigotry and hate -- they want solutions for the failing economy and high unemployment.

This effectively puts the Republicans between a rock and a hard place. Their economic plan (give rich people more money) is no longer acceptable to the residents of Main Street, and neither is their culture war campaign to reinstate bigotry. Sadly, they have nothing else to offer.  

Sonogram Bill To Be Toned Down

The state of Texas has some serious problems to address in this session of the legislature, like a $27 billion shortfall in the next biennium and a redistricting fight that is sure to be devisive (even among the majority Republicans, as each legislator fights to retain his own district intact as much as possible). But the governor has decided there are some "emergency" measures that must be taken care of before those serious matters can be dealt with.

Of course, what the governor considers to be an emergency and what a normal person would consider an emergency turns out to be vastly different. For instance, the governor thinks it is an emergency to pass a Voter ID bill -- which would make all voters show a picture ID in addition to their voter registration card before they would be allowed to vote. The measure is supposedly to prevent voter fraud -- even though there is no evidence that voter fraud is a problem in Texas. Everyone knows the real reason is to try and prevent many of the elderly and poor from voting (people more likely to vote for Democrats).

Another emergency the governor has demanded the legislature deal with is the "problem" of sanctuary cities (emergency bills declared by the governor must be dealt with in the first 60 days of the legislative session). Of course, nobody really knows if Texas even has any so-called "sanctuary cities" (or even what comprises a sanctuary city). This is just the governor playing to his xenophobic right-wing base.

But perhaps the most heartless bill declared to be an emergency by the governor is the sonogram bill. The U.S. Supreme Court has guaranteed women the right to choice regarding their own bodies, but the governor wants to put up as many roadblocks to that choice as possible. Acting on the governor's emergency declaration, State Senator Dan Patrick (R-Houston) introduced a bill that would make doctors perform a sonogram on any woman wanting a legal abortion (which you can bet the state will not pay for even though they mandate it).

Patrick (pictured above) made the bill a very intrusive one, demanding the doctor display the sonogram to the woman, describe what is on the screen to her, and play an audible version of a fetal heartbeat. It goes without saying that this is nothing more than an effort to punish and torture any woman who has the temerity to make her own decision about abortion. It is also insulting, as it assumes the woman hasn't thought long and hard about the decision she has made. It's just a bad and very mean-spirited bill.

Evidently someone finally told Patrick that Oklahoma tried the same kind of law and had it declared unconstitutional, because he has announced he is making changes to the bill. His new bill would give the woman the right to avoid seeing the sonogram, hearing the description and hearing the heartbeat. That is an improvement. It's still a bad and stupid bill (and a prime example of men wanting to deny women the right to control over their own bodies), but it's not quite as bad as the original.

I expect the bill will pass the legislature (which is controlled by Republicans). If there's one thing that white Republican men like even more than freedom, it's their own right to control the lives of other people.

Nebraska Further Restricts A Woman's Choice

It looks like the male legislators in Nebraska are determined to keep women in a second-class status. They evidently think women are not capable of making their own decisions regarding their own bodies, so they have passed a new law to "protect" those women. Actually, the new law has nothing to do with protecting women, and everything to do with denying women the control over their own bodies.

The new bill, introduced by Senator Cap Dierks (a male who would never have to deal with the new restrictions imposed by the law), would impose new requirements on any woman seeking an abortion. It would require the woman to be screened for any risks the procedure could cause, including "physical, psychological, emotional, demographic or situational" risks.

The legislators have intentionally made the law as vague as possible in an effort to scare doctors away from performing legal abortions. What the hell is the difference between a psychological and emotional risk? And what the hell is a demographic or situational risk? Does anyone know? And if a doctor doesn't know that, how can they be sure of complying with this silly law?

The law doesn't provide for any criminal penalties, but it would allow a patient to sue any doctor who doesn't comply fully with the law (and a jury of closet fundamentalists could wreck a doctors career for performing a legal procedure). Kyle Carlson, a Planned Parenthood attorney, said, "It's very difficult to know for certain if you're complying with this bill. There's an undetermined amount of documentation you have to go through to know all the different. . .risk factors."

These legislators tried to make it sound like they were worried about women's health. They aren't. This is nothing more than a backdoor attempt to take away a woman's rights over her own body. Women are already screened for any medical problems the procedure might cause, and frankly, denying an abortion for a spurious reason (such as a demographic or situational risk) could easily be just as risky for a women not prepared to deal with a baby (or another baby).

There are already far too many instances of child abuse and child murders by women under stress or with psychotic problems. Forcing women to have unwanted babies will just make the problem worse. This must be a woman's own decision, as she is the only person who truly knows the situation she is in.

Hopefully, this new law will be quickly challenged in court. I believe it can be challenged on grounds of vagueness and discrimination. The law is so vague as to be almost impossible to obey. Also, it will substantially increase the cost of the legal procedure -- making it even more difficult for poor women, if not impossible.

This is just a bad law, and the courts need to toss it out as quickly as possible.