Tag Archives: legislation

29 Coal Miners Died in a 2010 Explosion. Congress Still Hasn’t Fixed the Problem.

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

Last week, a federal grand jury indicted former Massey Energy CEO Don Blankenship for allegedly conspiring to violate mine safety standards in the run-up to the 2010 explosion that killed 29 workers at the Upper Big Branch Mine. The four-count indictment describes a culture of negligence under Blankenship’s watch, in which essential safety measures were ignored as the company sought to squeeze every last cent out of the ground. Blankenship, who left Massey in 2010, pleaded not guilty Thursday.

But the indictment also came as a sobering reminder: In the four years since the disaster, little has been done to make the mining industry safer. Legislation designed to rein in the worst offenders and give regulators teeth was beaten back by big business. Meanwhile, tens of millions of dollars in safety fines have gone uncollected.

“We’ve taken some actions after the various accidents that have taken place, but unfortunately, Congress can apparently only legislate in this area after someone dies,” said Rep. George Miller (D-Calif.), who sponsored mine-safety legislation in the wake of the Upper Big Branch explosion.

“I’ve been there after the accidents, I’ve been standing with many of these politicians—they all pledge they’re gonna do something for the families, that they care about the miners. And then everybody goes back to business as usual.”

Continue Reading »

Taken from: 

29 Coal Miners Died in a 2010 Explosion. Congress Still Hasn’t Fixed the Problem.

Posted in alo, Anchor, FF, GE, LG, ONA, Radius, Safer, solar, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on 29 Coal Miners Died in a 2010 Explosion. Congress Still Hasn’t Fixed the Problem.

Mitch McConnell Can Barely Form a Coherent Sentence About Obamacare Now

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

Mitch McConnell came prepared with a soundbite. The Affordable Care Act, the Republican Senate minority leader declared during a debate Monday, is “the worst piece of legislation in the last half-century,” and needed to be pulled out “by the roots.” But when it came to actually getting rid of the law—specifically Kynect, his state’s popular new insurance exchange, and the associated expansion of Kentucky’s Medicaid rolls—McConnell’s tough talk began to fade.

“With regard to Kynect, it’s a state exchange, they can continue it if they’d like to,” he said. He went on: “With regard to the Medicaid expansion, that’s a state decision, the states can decide whether to expand Medicaid or not.” When asked, once more, if he supported the state’s decision to create Kynect and expand Medicaid, McConnell finally conceded, “Well that’s fine, yeah. I think it’s fine to have a website.”

McConnell, one of his party’s loudest voices against Obamacare, could barely put together a sentence when pressed on the specifics of what he’d do about it. And he isn’t alone. At a Senate debate in Arkansas on Monday, GOP Rep. Tom Cotton, who is challenging Democratic Sen. Mark Pryor, talked tough about repealing “Obamacare,” but when asked directly, declined to say whether his state’s version of Medicaid expansion, known as the “private option,” ought to get the boot. (In not answering the question, he did manage to say “Obama” 13 times in two minutes.) This has been Cotton’s approach to the question for months now, and it’s not hard to see why he’s so cautious—the private option was approved by a Republican-controlled state legislature and even has the backing of his party’s gubernatorial nominee, former Rep. Asa Hutchinson.

And in Iowa on Saturday, GOP state Sen. Joni Ernst, who is seeking the Senate seat being vacated by Democrat Tom Harkin, was asked by a man who had received insurance through the Affordable Care Act about how she’d propose to keep him insured after the law is repealed. She ignored the question.

The GOP is still poised to win big in November. McConnell, Cotton, and Ernst all lead in the polls. But four years after the passage of Obamacare, Republicans are finding it harder and harder to say what they really think about it.

Visit site:  

Mitch McConnell Can Barely Form a Coherent Sentence About Obamacare Now

Posted in alo, Anchor, FF, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, Radius, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Mitch McConnell Can Barely Form a Coherent Sentence About Obamacare Now

Scott Brown Promises Women He Has Supported Contraception Since He Was Barely Legal

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

In an effort to defend his record on supporting women’s access to contraceptives, Scott Brown has potentially shared more information than any single voter wants to know.

“To think that I don’t support women’s rights and ability to get contraception is just a false premise,” Brown said during a Monday debate with Sen. Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH). “I have since I was 18 years old.”

Brown, who is the GOP senate candidate in New Hampshire, was responding to a question regarding his past co-sponsorship of legislation opposing Obamacare because of its requirement mandating employers provide healthcare coverage (birth control being the most controversial) to workers.

He did not elaborate on the exact fundamental shift that occurred when he turned 18. Perhaps, Brown was overwhelmed by his newfound civic duty to vote in a presidential election?

But hey! In the case, you are reveling in Brown’s likely personal detail, here are some photos of the former senator working out and loving it.

See the article here:

Scott Brown Promises Women He Has Supported Contraception Since He Was Barely Legal

Posted in Anchor, FF, GE, LG, ONA, Radius, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Scott Brown Promises Women He Has Supported Contraception Since He Was Barely Legal

Dem Candidate for Pennsylvania Governor Vows to Block Texas-Style Abortion Bill

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

Tom Wolf, the Democratic candidate for Pennsylvania governor, promises that if he’s elected he won’t support a controversial bill that could force some abortion clinics in the state to close. Wolf’s opponent, Republican Gov. Tom Corbett, has trailed in recent polls and is expected to back the bill in the slim chance it clears a vote.

“Tom Wolf would not sign this bill. This is just an attempt to make it more difficult for women to access reproductive health care,” says Beth Melena, a spokeswoman for Wolf’s campaign. Corbett’s campaign did not respond to comment, but the bill’s sponsor, Republican Rep. Bryan Cutler, says that he expects that Corbett would support it. The governor has backed other abortion restrictions in the past, defending a bill that would require women seeking abortions to first obtain ultrasounds by noting, “You just have to close your eyes.”

The newer bill, introduced in February, would require doctors who perform abortions to get admitting privileges from a hospital which offers obstetrical or gynecological care less than 30 miles away from their clinic. Abortion rights supporters say the legislation is unnecessary because only 0.3 percent of abortions lead to major complications and abortion providers don’t need admitting privileges to transfer sick patients to hospitals. They believe the bill will limit Pennsylvania women’s access to safe and legal abortions, because not all doctors may work within 30 miles of a hospital and some religiously affiliated hospitals will not grant admitting privileges to doctors who perform abortions. The Pennsylvania bill has nearly identical language to the admitting-privileges requirement that passed last year in Texas. Since the passage of that requirement (and other abortion restrictions), many of the Lone Star State’s 41 abortion clinics have closed.

Some Pennsylvania women say they already have trouble accessing clinics. This week, a woman was sentenced to prison for ordering abortion pills online for her 16-year-old daughter, who did not want to have the baby. The Bloomsburg Press Enterprise reported that she ordered the pills because the daughter did not have insurance to pay for a hospital abortion and there were no clinics nearby.

Fortunately for abortion rights advocates, people familiar with Pennsylvania’s political scene say that the bill is doomed. “They did this before with one of those ultrasound bills and that died an ugly death too. As conservative as this Legislature can be, it seems to me to be seized by fits of common sense,” says John Micek, editorial and opinions editor for PennLive and the Patriot-News.

The legislation hasn’t gone to a vote yet and Cutler, who sponsored the bill, says that he doesn’t expect it to before the Senate session ends on November 12. He says he will consider reintroducing it next year.

Link to original:

Dem Candidate for Pennsylvania Governor Vows to Block Texas-Style Abortion Bill

Posted in Anchor, FF, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, Radius, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Dem Candidate for Pennsylvania Governor Vows to Block Texas-Style Abortion Bill

This Is the Democratic Plan to Reverse the Hobby Lobby Decision

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

On Monday, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid promised “to do something” about the Supreme Court’s recent Hobby Lobby decision. Now two members of his caucus say they are preparing a bill that would reverse some of the controversial aspects of last week’s decision.

Take it away, TPM:

The legislation will be sponsored by Sens. Patty Murray (D-WA) and Mark Udall (D-CO). According to a summary reviewed by TPM, it prohibits employers from refusing to provide health services, including contraception, to their employees if required by federal law. It clarifies that the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, the basis for the Supreme Court’s ruling against the mandate, and all other federal laws don’t permit businesses to opt out of the Obamacare requirement.

This bill will restore the original legal guarantee that women have access to contraceptive coverage through their employment-based insurance plans and will protect coverage of other health services from employer objections as well, according to the summary.

This is all well and good, but unfortunately this bill will never survive a cloture vote in the Senate; even if it did, it would be dead on arrival in the House of Representatives. The only way that Hobby Lobby stands even a chance of being overturned legislatively is if John Boehner is forced to hand over the Speaker’s gavel to a Democrat. That’s probably something someone at the DCCC should remind people of as we head into the midterms.

Link: 

This Is the Democratic Plan to Reverse the Hobby Lobby Decision

Posted in Anchor, FF, GE, LG, ONA, Radius, Uncategorized, Venta, Vintage | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on This Is the Democratic Plan to Reverse the Hobby Lobby Decision

Ohio lawmakers: All right, folks, we guess it’s OK for you to buy Teslas

Ohio lawmakers: All right, folks, we guess it’s OK for you to buy Teslas

Tesla

If you live in Ohio, your lawmakers are poised to allow you to purchase a Tesla from a sales center — without forcing you to drive outside the borders of the Buckeye State to do your eco-friendly spending.

But legislative efforts to placate the Ohio Automobile Dealers Association will nonetheless cap the number of sales offices Tesla is allowed to operate inside the state at three – and other auto manufacturers will be barred outright from hawking their wheel-spinning wares direct to buyers. Here’s the news, courtesy of NJTV:

An Ohio Senate committee approved a bill formally barring automakers from selling directly to consumers except for a maximum of three outlets for electric-car builder Tesla Motors Inc.

The measure was a compromise between the company and the Ohio Automobile Dealers Association, which had sought to block Tesla from selling without a middleman, according to state Sen. Scott Oelslager, the committee chairman.

Tesla, based in Palo Alto, Calif., operates Ohio stores in Columbus and Cincinnati and will be permitted to add a third as long as the company isn’t sold or acquired and doesn’t produce anything other than all-electric vehicles, under the legislation worked out yesterday.

Why are states getting into the strange business of banning a wildly hyped, pretty cool, awfully expensive electric car manufacturer? Tesla’s direct sales model has drawn opposition from car salesmen — middlemen who fear becoming superfluous as Tesla champions a direct-to-consumer auto-marketing model. That opposition has led to sales bans in five states and restrictions in two others.

In New Jersey, for example, Grist’s Ben Adler explains that Gov. Chris Christie’s administration is forcing the electric automaker to shut down its two sales offices. The promising news there is that a Democratic assemblymember recently introduced a bill that would unshackle Tesla from Christie’s new ban on its sales model.


Source
Tesla may be nearer to a compromise in Ohio, NJTV

John Upton is a science fan and green news boffin who tweets, posts articles to Facebook, and blogs about ecology. He welcomes reader questions, tips, and incoherent rants: johnupton@gmail.com.

Find this article interesting? Donate now to support our work.Read more: Business & Technology

,

Climate & Energy

,

Living

Original article:

Ohio lawmakers: All right, folks, we guess it’s OK for you to buy Teslas

Posted in alo, Anchor, aquaculture, eco-friendly, FF, Free Press, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, PUR, Uncategorized, wind energy | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Ohio lawmakers: All right, folks, we guess it’s OK for you to buy Teslas

Ohio lawmakers: All right, folks, we guess it’s okay for you to buy Teslas

Ohio lawmakers: All right, folks, we guess it’s OK for you to buy Teslas

Tesla

If you live in Ohio, your lawmakers are poised to allow you to purchase a Tesla from a sales center — without forcing you to drive outside the borders of the Buckeye State to do your eco-friendly spending.

But legislative efforts to placate the Ohio Automobile Dealers Association will nonetheless cap the number of sales offices Tesla is allowed to operate inside the state at three – and other auto manufacturers will be barred outright from hawking their wheel-spinning wares direct to buyers. Here’s the news, courtesy of NJTV:

An Ohio Senate committee approved a bill formally barring automakers from selling directly to consumers except for a maximum of three outlets for electric-car builder Tesla Motors Inc.

The measure was a compromise between the company and the Ohio Automobile Dealers Association, which had sought to block Tesla from selling without a middleman, according to state Sen. Scott Oelslager, the committee chairman.

Tesla, based in Palo Alto, Calif., operates Ohio stores in Columbus and Cincinnati and will be permitted to add a third as long as the company isn’t sold or acquired and doesn’t produce anything other than all-electric vehicles, under the legislation worked out yesterday.

Why are states getting into the strange business of banning a wildly hyped, pretty cool, awfully expensive electric car manufacturer? Tesla’s direct sales model has drawn opposition from car salesmen — middlemen who fear becoming superfluous as Tesla champions a direct-to-consumer auto-marketing model. That opposition has led to sales bans in five states and restrictions in two others.

In New Jersey, for example, Grist’s Ben Adler explains that Gov. Chris Christie’s administration is forcing the electric-auto maker to shut down its two sales offices. The promising news there is that a Democratic assemblyman recently introduced a bill that would unshackle Tesla from Christie’s new ban on its sales model.


Source
Tesla may be nearer to a compromise in Ohio, NJTV

John Upton is a science fan and green news boffin who tweets, posts articles to Facebook, and blogs about ecology. He welcomes reader questions, tips, and incoherent rants: johnupton@gmail.com.

Find this article interesting? Donate now to support our work.Read more: Business & Technology

,

Climate & Energy

,

Living

View this article: 

Ohio lawmakers: All right, folks, we guess it’s okay for you to buy Teslas

Posted in alo, Anchor, aquaculture, eco-friendly, FF, Free Press, G & F, GE, Keurig, LAI, LG, ONA, PUR, solar, TOTO, Uncategorized, wind energy | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Ohio lawmakers: All right, folks, we guess it’s okay for you to buy Teslas

San Francisco moves to ban plastic water bottles, scoffs at every other sad city

San Francisco moves to ban plastic water bottles, scoffs at every other sad city

Shutterstock

Two big pieces of news out of San Francisco this week: Barry Bonds started a brief stint coaching for the Giants, and the city made significant progress toward outlawing plastic water bottles. As a result, the average level of self-satisfaction exhibited by San Franciscans increased by a factor of three.

And that’s just from Bonds’ ego! Did you really think we were going to shame a city for striving to be more environmentally conscious? Not that we’re ruling out that San Francisco might have done it just a little bit to make every other American city look even worse. (Oh, come on! You were thinking it too!) Still, this is downright cheery news.

On Tuesday, the city’s board of supervisors unanimously approved a ban on selling single-use plastic bottles of water on city property. The ban, which still needs a second vote and the sign-off of San Francisco Mayor Ed Lee, will go into effect in October of this year for indoor events, and 2016 for outdoor events. Sporting events that require excessive water consumption — such as the San Francisco Marathon — could be excluded from these restrictions, but not without first attempting to secure other, more sustainable sources of water.

SFGate reports:

[Supervisor David] Chiu noted that it wasn’t until the 1990s that there was a plastic water bottle industry, which is now a $60 billion a year business. He said one goal of the legislation is to get people thinking about the waste, much like the city’s plastic bag ban, which has dramatically increased the number of consumers who use reusable bags.

“I want to remind people that not long ago, our world was not addicted to plastic water bottles,” he said. “Before (the 1990s), for centuries, everybody managed to stay hydrated.”

At which point, every other city supervisor struggled to recall what life was like at any point before approximately last Thanksgiving.

Chiu, however sassy about it, has a point. Since 1991, U.S. bottled water consumption per capita has tripled. And this is in spite of the fact that bottled water is widely acknowledged as an enormous scam: 25 percent or more of bottled water is just straight tap water, but you pay as much as 2,000 times more for it than the stuff that comes out of your kitchen faucet.

As scams go, bottled water also has an undeniable environmental impact. In 2007, production of water bottles for U.S. consumption alone used up to 54 million barrels of oil. Seventy-five percent of plastic water bottles are not recycled, instead ending up on beaches, in rivers, and partially full of unidentified liquid on nearly all the empty bus seats you’ve ever tried to sit in.

San Francisco, you’ll always be The City That Waits to Die to us. That said, Most Sustainable City in the United States has a pretty nice a ring to it, too.


Source
S.F. supervisors back ban on sale of plastic water bottles, SFGate

Eve Andrews is a Grist fellow and new Seattle transplant via the mean streets of Chicago, Poughkeepsie, and Pittsburgh, respectively and in order of meanness. Follow her on Twitter.

Find this article interesting? Donate now to support our work.Read more: Cities

,

Climate & Energy

,

Politics

See the article here:  

San Francisco moves to ban plastic water bottles, scoffs at every other sad city

Posted in alo, Anchor, FF, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on San Francisco moves to ban plastic water bottles, scoffs at every other sad city

Most big countries have climate laws

Most big countries have climate laws

Shutterstock

It’s easy to get depressed about the lack of global progress in fighting climate change. But most large nations are at least taking some action.

GLOBE International, a London-based legislators’ group, surveyed climate- and energy-related laws and policies in 66 big countries, which together produce 88 percent of the world’s greenhouse gases. It found that that 62 of the countries have a flagship climate law or regulation, 61 have laws promoting clean energy, and 54 have energy-efficiency laws. In all, there are 487 climate change–related laws or policies in the 66 countries — a sharp increase from decades past:

GLOBE InternationalClick to embiggen.

“Overall, we report substantive legislative progress [last year] in 8 of the 66 countries, which passed flagship legislation, and some positive advances in a further 19 countries,” the report notes. 

But GLOBE International President John Gummer, a climate adviser to the U.K. government, warns that much more action is needed: “We should be clear that the legislative response thus far is not yet sufficient to limit emissions at a level that would cause only a 2 degree Celsius rise in global average temperature, the agreed goal of the international community.”

The following map shows which countries have the most climate-related laws and policies. The light green color of the U.S. indicates that it lags behind global leaders on tackling global warming. But at least it’s ahead of Canada.

GLOBE InternationalClick to embiggen.


Source
The GLOBE Climate Legislation Study, fourth edition, GLOBE International

John Upton is a science fan and green news boffin who tweets, posts articles to Facebook, and blogs about ecology. He welcomes reader questions, tips, and incoherent rants: johnupton@gmail.com.

Find this article interesting? Donate now to support our work.Read more: Climate & Energy

,

Politics

Original article – 

Most big countries have climate laws

Posted in alo, Anchor, Dolphin, FF, GE, ONA, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Most big countries have climate laws

The 9 Worst Things Said About Women, Abortion, and Rape in 2013

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

Opponents of reproductive rights had a busy 2013. By the end of June, state lawmakers had passed 43 abortion restrictions into law—as many restrictions as were enacted in all of 2012, according to an analysis by the Guttmacher Institute, an abortion rights think tank. By August, when many state legislatures had wrapped up their 2013 session, lawmakers had introduced more than 300 abortion restrictions, according to the American Civil Liberties Union.

Defending these restrictions inspired a string of public figures to make foot-in-mouth statements about women, their choices, and their bodies. Below, we’ve assembled the worst of these comments.

Pregnancy from rape is too rare too justify rape exceptions to abortion bans.
Rep. Trent Franks (R-Ariz.) sponsored the year’s most high-profile abortion restriction—a House bill to ban all abortions in the United States at 20 weeks after conception. So it’s only appropriate that he uttered the most notorious abortion-related gaffe of the year: “The incidence of pregnancy resulting from rape are very low.”

Franks made that statement in June, by way of explaining to the House Judiciary Committee why it wasn’t necessary to amend the bill to include an exception for women who became pregnant by rape or incest. (In fact, women who are victims of rape frequently become pregnant.) But his comment generated so much backlash that, a few days later, Republicans quietly amended the bill to add an exception for rape and incest victims. Franks’ bill passed the House but was never taken up by the Democratic-controlled Senate. A spokesman for Franks told Talking Points Memo later that the congressman meant to say that abortions of pregnancies that resulted from rape were rare.

Rape is like a car accident: It calls for “extra insurance.”
Legislation that banned Obamacare health insurance plans from covering abortion was all the rage this year. Nearly half of all statehouses passed some form of a measure forcing women who wanted abortion coverage to purchase it as a separate abortion-only policy, called a rider.

Some of these state laws, including one the Michigan Legislature passed this month, did not include exceptions allowing insurance to cover abortions in cases of rape or incest. This May, when asked why should women be forced to pay extra to cover their abortions in these cases, Barbara Listing, the president of Michigan Right to Life, explained, “It’s simply, like, nobody plans to have an accident in a car accident, nobody plans to have their homes flooded. You have to buy extra insurance for those.”

Listing’s statement generated a lot of outrage—but it didn’t matter to Michigan legislators, who passed the ban anyway.

Male fetuses masturbate at 15 weeks—proving the need for an abortion ban.
Rep. Michael Burgess (R-Texas) said as much while defending that same 20-week abortion ban that inspired Franks to doubt that rape causes pregnancy. Burgess, who is a pro-life OB-GYN, told a House committee that he was positive fetuses could feel pain at 20 weeks after conception, despite a medical consensus to the contrary: “Watch a sonogram of a 15-week baby, and they have movements that are purposeful,” he said. “They stroke their face. If they’re a male baby, they may have their hand between their legs. They feel pleasure. Why is it so hard to think that they could feel pain?”

Transvaginal ultrasounds are not intrusive because women get “vaginally pregnant.”
In February, abortion rights foes in the Indiana Legislature pushed a bill that would force women who wanted to use an abortion pill to end their pregnancies to undergo not one, but two medically unnecessary ultrasounds—one before taking the pill, and one after.

Many Indiana residents found the idea of forcing doctors to probe women for no good reason to be repugnant. But Indiana Right to Life legislative director Sue Swayze didn’t see the problem. “I got pregnant vaginally,” she said. “Something else could come in my vagina for a medical test that wouldn’t be that intrusive to me. So I find that argument a little ridiculous.”

The Indiana Legislature removed the second ultrasound—but not the first—from the bill before it eventually became law in May.

Moving across state lines while pregnant is “reprehensible.”
Earlier this year, Olympic skier Bode Miller and his short-term girlfriend Sara McKenna became embroiled in a nasty custody battle over their newborn son. Miller—despite skipping McKenna’s prenatal appointments because, as he texted her, “U made this choice against my wish”—fought for custody of the child after a pregnant McKenna moved from California to New York to attend Columbia University.

Miller briefly prevailed in May when a New York family court judge found McKenna’s “appropriation of the child while in utero”—i.e., her decision to move while pregnant—to be “irresponsible, reprehensible,” and just shy of abduction. The decision incensed women’s rights advocates. A five-judge appeals panel reversed that decision in November, explaining, “putative fathers have neither the right nor the ability to restrict a pregnant woman from her constitutionally protected liberty.”

Rape is okay when the victim seems “older than her chronological age.”
Montana Judge G. Todd Baugh caused a scandal this year when he sentenced teacher Stacey Rambold, 54, to just 30 days in prison after Rambold was convicted of raping a 14-year-old student. But Baugh was resolute in the face of a national outcry. He told the Billings Gazette that the student, Cherise Moralez, was “as much in control of the situation” as Rambold, and was “older than her chronological age.” Moralez committed suicide while Rambold’s criminal trial was ongoing.

Baugh later apologized for his remarks, although he did not apologize for his sentencing decision. And in his apology, he took pains to explain that he didn’t think Rambold’s crime was that bad: “I think that people have in mind that this was some violent, forcible, horrible rape…It was horrible enough as it is, just given her age, but it wasn’t this forcible beat-up rape.” Montana prosecutors are still fighting for a harsher sentence for Rambold—who finished serving his 30 days this September.

Pregnant women are just “little girls” who don’t understand their own bodies.
Supporters of mandatory ultrasounds or waiting periods for women who want abortions often say they want women to fully contemplate the consequences of an abortion before having one. It’s a patronizing sentiment—especially when articulated by Greg Brannon, a pro-life North Carolina OB-GYN and a GOP candidate for the US Senate. Brannon, a Rand Paul endorsee, has described pregnant women as “little girls who don’t understand what’s going on to their bodies”—adding that if they show up to his office with their boyfriends, he will “whoop on them with love” to get married.

Rape exceptions to abortion bans are “little gotcha amendments.”
There are those who think that placing rape and incest exceptions in bills restricting abortion access is a common-sense nod to overwhelming public opinion in favor of these exceptions. Others think proponents of abortion rights only harp on rape and incest exceptions to embarrass abortion foes.

GOP Kansas Senate Majority Leader Terry Bruce is among the latter group. This spring, his party advanced an omnibus abortion bill that would have defined life as beginning at conception. As Democrats proposed amendments, including exceptions for cases of rape and incest, to make the bill less draconian, Bruce said, “These amendments are little gotcha amendments. I’m getting a little irritated at it.”

Getting an abortion after being raped is criminal evidence tampering.
In January, Republican state Rep. Cathrynn Brown of New Mexico caused an uproar with a bill to make obtaining an abortion in cases of rape or incest felony evidence tampering punishable by up to three years in prison.

Brown quickly clarified that the bill was only meant to give prosecutors a means to go after rapists. But you’d be forgiven for fearing that the legislation could be used to target abortion providers or rape victims themselves. The bill defined tampering with evidence to include “procuring or facilitating an abortion, or compelling or coercing another to obtain an abortion, of a fetus that is the result of criminal sexual penetration or incest with the intent to destroy evidence of the crime.”

The bill, introduced to a Legislature controlled by Democrats, was doomed from the start, moving Huffington Post‘s Kate Sheppard to call it “some world-class trolling.”

Source: 

The 9 Worst Things Said About Women, Abortion, and Rape in 2013

Posted in FF, G & F, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, PUR, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on The 9 Worst Things Said About Women, Abortion, and Rape in 2013