Now It's Pro Choice Violence

 These people. 

Over the past couple of years we've heard so much inflammatory rhetoric about Black Lives Matter protesters "burning cities to the ground" in America. It's nonsense, of course, but in some cases right wing extremists went so far as to incite violence while posing as #BLM protesters. 

In the wake of the startling Supreme Court leak, we see that same language in use, just re-purposed for a new cause. Swap in "pro abortion" for "BLM" and again the rhetoric is tilting toward describing pro choice crowds as violent while touting the Zen-like calm of the anti choicers. I think it's important to review the recent history of the anti choice people, many of whom are perfectly willing to murder in order to disrupt the reproductive care supply chain. 

Yes, I'm talking about Scott Roeder, the man who drove to Witchita, Kansas in 2009, ready to commit felonies against local OBGYN doctor George Tiller. 

Tiller was one of the few surgeons in America willing to provide "late term" abortions for women in dire need. His clinic had been attacked numerous times, bombed, and he himself had been shot 5 times by anti choice activists. 

But one Sunday morning, as Dr. Tiller was ushering people into his Lutheran church for Sunday services, Scott Roeder entered the church, waited for Tiller to approach him, and then shot the doctor in the head, killing him instantly. Roeder then fled.

It's the willingness of anti choice people to decide the value of a given life that makes them terrifying. 

When Roe Goes

 

I Thought We Weren't Going To Talk About Social Issues

Republicans, from GOProud to Scott Walker, have urged their party's candidates to avoid social issues on the campaign trail. Still smarting from the "war on women" theme that put a polish on the GOP's image of Old White Men trying to run the country, Republicans were advised to avoid certain topics - marriage equality and abortion, for example - that would energize their aging voter base at the cost of, as Rudy Giuliani phrased it, "we lose the suburbs." 

But it isn't easy to follow that advice with presidential candidates like Mike Huckabee raising those issues. Indeed, it's likely to get a whole lot more difficult in the heat of the 2016 campaign for the White House. The Supreme Court is expected to issue a major decision on the single most volatile social issue of them all - abortion.

In Whole Women's Health v Cole, the Court will address abortion rights for the first time in a generation. At issue are Texas laws that impose strict standards on clinics that provide abortions and the doctors who staff them. The new rules may cause up to 75% of existing clinics to close, imposing what the plaintiffs call an "undue burden" on women seeking abortions while the state of Texas insists the law will promote women's health. A decision is expected by next June.

The Court's decision will absolutely impact women's healthcare in Texas and undoubtedly influence lawmaking in many other states in the years to follow. Pro choice and anti-abortion advocates will, I'm sure, energetically respond to the decision no matter which way the Court rules.  

But the more immediate concern for Republicans will be how to respond to the decision without appearing to take unpopular sides on this fundamental "social issue."

Conservative Republicans Want to Shut Down Government

Because it worked so well in 2013, the ironically named "Freedom Caucus" of far right House members is committed to opposing any budget deal that funds Planned Parenthood, and they're willing to close everything down if that's what it takes.

“Given the appalling revelations surrounding Planned Parenthood, we cannot in good moral conscience vote to send taxpayer money to this organization while still fulfilling our duty to represent our constituents. We must therefore oppose any spending measure that contains funding for Planned Parenthood.”

The irony of staking a "moral conscience" stand on demonstrably deceitful videos seems lost on these guys. And, to be sure, they also seem unaware that it is only "guys" on the bandwagon - the letter they circulated contains not a single female Representative's name.

But more to the point, the "Freedom Caucus" seems bent on depriving a significant segment of their constituency, poor people, of access to valuable preventative health services, like long acting reversible contraceptives (LARCs), that have been shown to dramatically reduce demand for abortion, which is the goal of this muddle-headed effort in the first place.

Maybe a better name for this tribe of tyrants is "Freedom From Thought Caucus."

A Refreshing Concession to the Rule of Law

And in Iowa, of all places.

So the Iowa Board of Medicine made a rule that any woman seeking an abortion in the Hawkeye State must have a personal visit with a physician before the physician may prescribe an abortifacient such as mifepristone. The Iowa Supreme Court disagreed, and ruled the Board of Medicine rule unconstitutional.

After reluctantly concluding an appeal to higher courts would be useless, Iowa Governor Terry Branstad signed a bill that instructs Medicaid to consider "interactions with doctors via telemedicine as "equivalent" to an in-person doctor's visit."

Every so often, conservative zealots meet their Waterloo. Good for the Governor, in this instance, to concede defeat gracefully.