Democrats Sound Off On GOP Abortion “T.R.A.P.” Bill

nonono

FRIDAY UPDATE: As the Denver Post's Joey Bunch reports, Rep. Gordon "Dr. Chaps" Klingenschmitt couldn't even hold it together long enough to keep Republicans unified on a plainly anti-abortion message bill with zero chance of passage. That takes skill, ladies and gentlemen:

A bill that aimed to put more regulations on abortion clinics in Colorado failed in a House committee Thursday, after supporters of regulations said it would make the process safer and opponents called it an attempt to make abortions harder and more expensive to get. The bill was killed on a 8-5 vote.

Rep. Gordon Kligenschmitt, R-Colorado Springs, voted with the Democrats, saying the bill appeared to give state approval to abortions. [Pols emphasis]

Awesome, "Dr. Chaps!" You've discovered the only way to make this bill even more pointless.

—–

2015-02-12 13.07.45

A press release from NARAL Pro Choice Colorado today publicizes a bill from Colorado Republicans to pass a host of Texas-style restrictions on abortion in Colorado, House Bill 15-1128:

Among our core values is a belief that government has no right to interfere with our personal, private medical decisions. So when anti-choice male Colorado legislators introduce HB 1128, a ‘women’s health’ bill that would impose unnecessary restrictions on Colorado abortion care providers and reproductive health care access, we stand up and say, No, not in our state. Furthermore, the bill establishes "personhood”, which Coloradans voters have rejected three times at the ballot box.
 
Colorado doctors and health care providers shouldn’t be harassed out of business by anti-choice politicians, and Colorado women shouldn't be denied access to care for political, not medical, reasons. Abortion is one of the safest procedures performed in the United States.  According to the Centers for Disease Control less than half a percent of all abortions lead to complications that might lead to hospital care.Abortion providers are already regulated by their professional licensing boards and follow standards set by the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists and Centers for Disease Control.
 
In other states, anti- choice Targeted Regulation of Abortion Providers (TRAP) laws have reduced access to reproductive health care, including abortion care. In Texas TRAP legislation resulted in the closure of 32 out of 40 clinics that provided reproductive health and abortion services. Women in those states are now driving hundreds of miles across the state, in some cases across state lines, to get the care they need. Further, these laws impact the most marginalized, low income women and women of color who already experience the greatest barriers to accessing the care they need.

Although this legislation is being pushed by Republicans as "not banning abortion," in fact the entire bill pertains to the regulation of abortion clinics–and imposes regulations like requiring a doctor at an abortion clinic have admitting privileges at a local hospital. In practice, these regulations have resulted in the closure of most abortion clinics in states like Texas where they've been enacted.

Also interesting in this legislation, as the release above alludes to, is a provision that once again seeks to "define" an unborn child. That is, from the moment of conception.

"UNBORN CHILD" MEANS THE OFFSPRING OF HUMAN BEINGS FROM CONCEPTION UNTIL BIRTH.

Conception is also defined thusly:

"CONCEPTION" MEANS THE FUSION OF THE HUMAN SPERMATOZOON WITH A HUMAN OVUM.

Really, folks, it wouldn't be a Colorado Republican abortion bill without a little Personhood! This is where their bill that "doesn't ban abortion" gets tricky–and might, if passed, do exactly what they say it wouldn't. The bill is expected to die today, but not before giving Democrats another opportunity to prove again why that whole "war on women" thing is not, you know, fake. But for a couple of House races and Bob Beauprez, this could have been a very different situation.

And that is a lesson for both sides.

24 Community Comments, Facebook Comments

  1. JeffcoBlueJeffcoBlue says:

    Those silly social issue warriors. The Denver Post ought to write an editorial.

    • Bokonon says:

      The Denver Post?  

      Good luck with that.  After the favors that they did for the GOP during the last election, and their dismissal of abortion rights as a real, serious political issue, don't hold your breath waiting for a self-correction.

      • bullshit!bullshit! says:

        I've heard that there is still a lot of anger on the editorial board over the Gardner endorsement. It was not unanimous, was pushed from the top, and at least one member of the board feels like it was a credibility destroyer for the Post.

        I hope that becomes public. This is one wound I'd prefer time not heal.

        • Diogenesdemar says:

          Meh. False premise.

          (The Ed board assumes that anyone reads their rag . . .)

          • Bokonon says:

            Even if their circulation numbers are down, the Denver Post still has an influence.  In the case of the Gardner endorsement … and in the general way they covered the 2014 elections … the Post was still the voice of instutional legitimacy.  They had an effect.  I saw it in action.  

            • FrankUnderwood says:

              Gardner did not win because of the Denver Post endorsement. He won because Udall ran an awful campaign in which two our of every three words out of his mouth were "reproductive" and "choice."

  2. MADCO says:

    Tsk, tsk= CoPols always over dramatizing every little thing.  See- abortion and women's health rights are real issues, not really – becasue -see? It's not going to pass.

    So we can elect Corey Gardner, because you know, Udall was not lefty enough to warrant our support. And in a few minutes we can elect Buckpedal, Tipton or some other R over Bennet because nothing will pass. Nothing is going to happen.

     

    Oh- and the BIg Line is wayy off.

     

  3. mamajama55mamajama55 says:

    And Rep. Klingenschmitt was the only Republican to vote against this bill. Why? Because it didn't go far enough – did not ban all abortions.

    I wonder if he'll refer to this vote as a time when he was bipartisan.  Or a maverick. Or something.

     

  4. Diogenesdemar says:

    No human spermatazoa, no human ova,  . . . hmmmm

    . . .  then maybe corporations aren't people after all ?

  5. SocialisticatProgressicat says:

    A quick public service announcement.  Anyone who views animated GIFs as an abomination, as I do, and would like to stop their brain-numbing display, can do as follows:

    Firefox:
    Get the SuperStop addon or
    Navigate to about:config, double-click on image.animation_mode and set it to "once" or "none"

    Chrome: Pick up GIF Jam at the Chrome store.  It will put a little stop/play icon up in the righthand corner.  I recommend leaving it on stop

    Internet Explorer: I have version 11, and the <Esc> pressed after the page loads stop the cursed things.

  6. Bokonon says:

    You know, I really hope that a lot of the moderate voters who sat out this last election or who voted for GOP candidates are following this, and that they are paying attention to the nonstop wingnut parade that is going on in the capital building.

    Right before the election, I had some really depressing discussions with voters of this type – friends, co-workers, etc.  They told me that the GOP had moderated, that the GOP was better for jobs, that all politicians are crazies and crooks anyway, that it was time for a change from the Democrats … all sorts of rationalizations.

    Now the change is here.  It is not the change they were expecting.   Do they notice?   Do they care?

  7. FrankUnderwood says:

    I don't know why we let these nut cases get us all riled up. We all knew this bill was DOA. The only surprise was that it was an 8 to 5 instead of 7 to 6, courtesy of Satan's nemesis. But did anyone think that this would actually pass the House? (I'm surprised they didn't start it in the Senate where Ellen Roberts would have been placed in a very awkward position.)  And even if it did pass, does anything think Hick would have signed it?  And even if Hick signed it, does anyone think that there are not five justices on the U.S. Supreme Court who would shit can it.

    Sometimes our side of the aisle can be just as obsessed with empty symbolic gestures as the right wing.

  8. Old Time Dem says:

    These clowns could use some help drafting.

    "'"CONCEPTION' MEANS THE FUSION OF THE HUMAN SPERMATOZOON WITH A HUMAN OVUM."

    To make any sense, that should be "a human spematozoon," unless the drafters think there is a single sperm that fertilizes every egg.

  9. mamajama55mamajama55 says:

    It's Super Spermie!

  10. Craig says:

    Is anyone else having a flash back?   Is anyone else here old enough?  Can anyone say Penn Pffifner, Jr.?  OMG.  At least you had to respect him because he was absolutely true to the total right wing BS he spouted.  Are we seeing his incarnation?  Frighteniong.

    • FrankUnderwood says:

      Super Sperm does look alot like Penn Pffifner!  And I'm old enough to remember him. He built the Jeffco Democratic Party into what it is today!  

      With apologies to Mike Feeley who played almost as much of a role as Pffifner did. But Feeley couldn't have done it with Pffifner and his sidekicks:  Jim Congrove, Barry Arrington, and my personal favorite, Mark Paschall.

Leave a Reply

Comment from your Facebook account


You may comment with your Colorado Pols account above (click here to register), or via Facebook below.