Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Novara
Novara's Journal
Novara's Journal
May 1, 2015
Missouri Satanist plans to challenge her state’s 72-hour waiting period for abortions by claiming the delay violates her religious beliefs.
The woman, identified only as Mary by her local Satanic Temple, said she regards the waiting period as “a state sanctioned attempt to discourage abortion” and plans to challenge the law on religious grounds, reported the Friendly Atheist blog.
The waiting period places an “unnecessary burden” on her religious belief that her body is subject to her will alone, she said.
“The waiting period interferes with the inviolability of my body and thereby imposes an unwanted and substantial burden on my sincerely held religious beliefs,” she said.
Her statements echo language in the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, under which Hobby Lobby claimed protection in its successful U.S. Supreme Court challenge to the Affordable Care Act’s contraception mandate.
Under the law Mary plans to challenge, she would be required to wait three days between her initial appointment, where she must undergo counseling, and the abortion procedure.
<snip>
He said Mary would deliver an exemption form for the waiting period when she arrives at Planned Parenthood, and Greaves said the group would pursue legal action if her religious waiver is not respected.
Read more: http://www.rawstory.com/2015/04/missouri-satanist-72-hour-waiting-period-for-abortions-violates-my-sincerely-held-religious-beliefs/
Missouri Satanist: 72-hour waiting period for abortions violates my ‘sincerely held religious belief
Missouri Satanist: 72-hour waiting period for abortions violates my ‘sincerely held religious beliefs’Missouri Satanist plans to challenge her state’s 72-hour waiting period for abortions by claiming the delay violates her religious beliefs.
The woman, identified only as Mary by her local Satanic Temple, said she regards the waiting period as “a state sanctioned attempt to discourage abortion” and plans to challenge the law on religious grounds, reported the Friendly Atheist blog.
The waiting period places an “unnecessary burden” on her religious belief that her body is subject to her will alone, she said.
“The waiting period interferes with the inviolability of my body and thereby imposes an unwanted and substantial burden on my sincerely held religious beliefs,” she said.
Her statements echo language in the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, under which Hobby Lobby claimed protection in its successful U.S. Supreme Court challenge to the Affordable Care Act’s contraception mandate.
Under the law Mary plans to challenge, she would be required to wait three days between her initial appointment, where she must undergo counseling, and the abortion procedure.
<snip>
He said Mary would deliver an exemption form for the waiting period when she arrives at Planned Parenthood, and Greaves said the group would pursue legal action if her religious waiver is not respected.
Read more: http://www.rawstory.com/2015/04/missouri-satanist-72-hour-waiting-period-for-abortions-violates-my-sincerely-held-religious-beliefs/
May 1, 2015
Missouri Satanist plans to challenge her state’s 72-hour waiting period for abortions by claiming the delay violates her religious beliefs.
The woman, identified only as Mary by her local Satanic Temple, said she regards the waiting period as “a state sanctioned attempt to discourage abortion” and plans to challenge the law on religious grounds, reported the Friendly Atheist blog.
The waiting period places an “unnecessary burden” on her religious belief that her body is subject to her will alone, she said.
“The waiting period interferes with the inviolability of my body and thereby imposes an unwanted and substantial burden on my sincerely held religious beliefs,” she said.
Her statements echo language in the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, under which Hobby Lobby claimed protection in its successful U.S. Supreme Court challenge to the Affordable Care Act’s contraception mandate.
Under the law Mary plans to challenge, she would be required to wait three days between her initial appointment, where she must undergo counseling, and the abortion procedure.
<snip>
He said Mary would deliver an exemption form for the waiting period when she arrives at Planned Parenthood, and Greaves said the group would pursue legal action if her religious waiver is not respected.
Read more: http://www.rawstory.com/2015/04/missouri-satanist-72-hour-waiting-period-for-abortions-violates-my-sincerely-held-religious-beliefs/
Missouri Satanist: 72-hour waiting period for abortions violates my ‘sincerely held religious belief
Missouri Satanist: 72-hour waiting period for abortions violates my ‘sincerely held religious beliefs’Missouri Satanist plans to challenge her state’s 72-hour waiting period for abortions by claiming the delay violates her religious beliefs.
The woman, identified only as Mary by her local Satanic Temple, said she regards the waiting period as “a state sanctioned attempt to discourage abortion” and plans to challenge the law on religious grounds, reported the Friendly Atheist blog.
The waiting period places an “unnecessary burden” on her religious belief that her body is subject to her will alone, she said.
“The waiting period interferes with the inviolability of my body and thereby imposes an unwanted and substantial burden on my sincerely held religious beliefs,” she said.
Her statements echo language in the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, under which Hobby Lobby claimed protection in its successful U.S. Supreme Court challenge to the Affordable Care Act’s contraception mandate.
Under the law Mary plans to challenge, she would be required to wait three days between her initial appointment, where she must undergo counseling, and the abortion procedure.
<snip>
He said Mary would deliver an exemption form for the waiting period when she arrives at Planned Parenthood, and Greaves said the group would pursue legal action if her religious waiver is not respected.
Read more: http://www.rawstory.com/2015/04/missouri-satanist-72-hour-waiting-period-for-abortions-violates-my-sincerely-held-religious-beliefs/
May 1, 2015
<snip>
We need to make so much noise that reproductive rights become an issue for corporate America. When Wal-Mart, Angie’s List and a number of other companies raised objections to Indiana’s religious freedom law, Gov. Mike Pence and state legislators quickly amended the law to clarify that it does not condone discrimination against gay men and lesbians. A similar sequence of events occurred in Arkansas.
Public pressure and the threat of government action to raise the minimum wage no doubt prompted McDonald’s and Target in recent weeks to increase the pay of their lowest-paid workers. Yes, it’s not much, but it’s a start.
The GOP’s about-face on the religious freedom laws underscores what I have long believed: that many establishment Republicans care more about protecting their economic interests and public image than about same-sex marriage, abortion or other social issues. Once major corporations realized that they might be subject to boycotts in states that legalized discrimination against LGBT people, both conservative businesspeople and Republican legislators called for change. Public support for adding a few coins to the pittance that low-wage workers earn, along with fear that lawmakers or voters might force bigger wage hikes, clearly prompted some companies to bump up hourly pay.
Would the same happen if we made a bigger ruckus about access to reliable contraception and safe abortion? I don’t know, but we’ve largely let business off the hook on reproductive health in recent years. Meanwhile, last year the U.S. Supreme Court granted privately held companies like Hobby Lobby and Eden Foods the right as corporate “persons” to impose the religious beliefs of their owners on their employees. As a result, they now ban insurance coverage for IUDs and other safe and effective forms of contraception despite mandates in the Affordable Care Act. I suspect that many more CEOs are largely uninterested in the private health care decisions of their employees; they have largely remained silent while access to reproductive health care has constricted nationwide because there is no political or economic downside for doing so, even as their employees pay a steep economic, personal and financial toll for the GOP’s anti-choice agenda.
Read more: http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/a_new_model_in_the_fight_for_abortion_rights_20150430
A New Model in the Fight for Abortion Rights
A New Model in the Fight for Abortion Rights<snip>
We need to make so much noise that reproductive rights become an issue for corporate America. When Wal-Mart, Angie’s List and a number of other companies raised objections to Indiana’s religious freedom law, Gov. Mike Pence and state legislators quickly amended the law to clarify that it does not condone discrimination against gay men and lesbians. A similar sequence of events occurred in Arkansas.
Public pressure and the threat of government action to raise the minimum wage no doubt prompted McDonald’s and Target in recent weeks to increase the pay of their lowest-paid workers. Yes, it’s not much, but it’s a start.
The GOP’s about-face on the religious freedom laws underscores what I have long believed: that many establishment Republicans care more about protecting their economic interests and public image than about same-sex marriage, abortion or other social issues. Once major corporations realized that they might be subject to boycotts in states that legalized discrimination against LGBT people, both conservative businesspeople and Republican legislators called for change. Public support for adding a few coins to the pittance that low-wage workers earn, along with fear that lawmakers or voters might force bigger wage hikes, clearly prompted some companies to bump up hourly pay.
Would the same happen if we made a bigger ruckus about access to reliable contraception and safe abortion? I don’t know, but we’ve largely let business off the hook on reproductive health in recent years. Meanwhile, last year the U.S. Supreme Court granted privately held companies like Hobby Lobby and Eden Foods the right as corporate “persons” to impose the religious beliefs of their owners on their employees. As a result, they now ban insurance coverage for IUDs and other safe and effective forms of contraception despite mandates in the Affordable Care Act. I suspect that many more CEOs are largely uninterested in the private health care decisions of their employees; they have largely remained silent while access to reproductive health care has constricted nationwide because there is no political or economic downside for doing so, even as their employees pay a steep economic, personal and financial toll for the GOP’s anti-choice agenda.
Read more: http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/a_new_model_in_the_fight_for_abortion_rights_20150430
May 1, 2015
<snip>
We need to make so much noise that reproductive rights become an issue for corporate America. When Wal-Mart, Angie’s List and a number of other companies raised objections to Indiana’s religious freedom law, Gov. Mike Pence and state legislators quickly amended the law to clarify that it does not condone discrimination against gay men and lesbians. A similar sequence of events occurred in Arkansas.
Public pressure and the threat of government action to raise the minimum wage no doubt prompted McDonald’s and Target in recent weeks to increase the pay of their lowest-paid workers. Yes, it’s not much, but it’s a start.
The GOP’s about-face on the religious freedom laws underscores what I have long believed: that many establishment Republicans care more about protecting their economic interests and public image than about same-sex marriage, abortion or other social issues. Once major corporations realized that they might be subject to boycotts in states that legalized discrimination against LGBT people, both conservative businesspeople and Republican legislators called for change. Public support for adding a few coins to the pittance that low-wage workers earn, along with fear that lawmakers or voters might force bigger wage hikes, clearly prompted some companies to bump up hourly pay.
Would the same happen if we made a bigger ruckus about access to reliable contraception and safe abortion? I don’t know, but we’ve largely let business off the hook on reproductive health in recent years. Meanwhile, last year the U.S. Supreme Court granted privately held companies like Hobby Lobby and Eden Foods the right as corporate “persons” to impose the religious beliefs of their owners on their employees. As a result, they now ban insurance coverage for IUDs and other safe and effective forms of contraception despite mandates in the Affordable Care Act. I suspect that many more CEOs are largely uninterested in the private health care decisions of their employees; they have largely remained silent while access to reproductive health care has constricted nationwide because there is no political or economic downside for doing so, even as their employees pay a steep economic, personal and financial toll for the GOP’s anti-choice agenda.
Read more: http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/a_new_model_in_the_fight_for_abortion_rights_20150430
A New Model in the Fight for Abortion Rights
A New Model in the Fight for Abortion Rights<snip>
We need to make so much noise that reproductive rights become an issue for corporate America. When Wal-Mart, Angie’s List and a number of other companies raised objections to Indiana’s religious freedom law, Gov. Mike Pence and state legislators quickly amended the law to clarify that it does not condone discrimination against gay men and lesbians. A similar sequence of events occurred in Arkansas.
Public pressure and the threat of government action to raise the minimum wage no doubt prompted McDonald’s and Target in recent weeks to increase the pay of their lowest-paid workers. Yes, it’s not much, but it’s a start.
The GOP’s about-face on the religious freedom laws underscores what I have long believed: that many establishment Republicans care more about protecting their economic interests and public image than about same-sex marriage, abortion or other social issues. Once major corporations realized that they might be subject to boycotts in states that legalized discrimination against LGBT people, both conservative businesspeople and Republican legislators called for change. Public support for adding a few coins to the pittance that low-wage workers earn, along with fear that lawmakers or voters might force bigger wage hikes, clearly prompted some companies to bump up hourly pay.
Would the same happen if we made a bigger ruckus about access to reliable contraception and safe abortion? I don’t know, but we’ve largely let business off the hook on reproductive health in recent years. Meanwhile, last year the U.S. Supreme Court granted privately held companies like Hobby Lobby and Eden Foods the right as corporate “persons” to impose the religious beliefs of their owners on their employees. As a result, they now ban insurance coverage for IUDs and other safe and effective forms of contraception despite mandates in the Affordable Care Act. I suspect that many more CEOs are largely uninterested in the private health care decisions of their employees; they have largely remained silent while access to reproductive health care has constricted nationwide because there is no political or economic downside for doing so, even as their employees pay a steep economic, personal and financial toll for the GOP’s anti-choice agenda.
Read more: http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/a_new_model_in_the_fight_for_abortion_rights_20150430
May 1, 2015
Oh come on! Handcuffed? Where'd she get the gun?
They're not even trying to lie plausibly anymore.
Atlanta officers shoot black woman in patrol car in gunfight: police
Source: Reuters
(Reuters) - Atlanta police shot and killed a handcuffed black woman on Thursday after she fired on two officers from inside a patrol car, the city's police department said.
The woman had been arrested and was in the back of the vehicle in downtown Atlanta around 5 p.m. local time, Atlanta Police Sergeant Gregory Lyon said in an email.
She then fired on the officers, who were also black, sitting in the front of the car, Lyon said. The officers returned fire. The woman was taken to a local hospital where she later died, he said.
The shooting comes as protests reignite in cities around the United States over police use of lethal force against minorities, especially of unarmed black men.
Read more: http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/05/01/us-usa-georgia-police-idUSKBN0NM32V20150501?feedType=RSS&feedName=domesticNews
Oh come on! Handcuffed? Where'd she get the gun?
They're not even trying to lie plausibly anymore.
April 30, 2015
<snip>
To recap: A reviewer who thinks it’s not surprising that the study found male students authored more papers than female students on the basis that men, on average, can run faster thinks that it’s the paper’s authors would might be unduly influenced by “ideologically biased assumptions.” The reviewer also suggested that perhaps the male students tended to get published in better journals than their female counterparts “simply because men, perhaps, on average work more hours per week than women, due to marginally better health or stamina.”
I mean, when you’re reaching to supposed physical differences between men and women to explain away gender disparities in academia, you might want to question how your ideological bias against seeing sexism at all costs might be blinding you to the empirical evidence.
Read more: http://feministing.com/2015/04/30/peer-reviewer-says-female-researchers-should-get-a-male-co-author-to-check-study/
PEER REVIEWER SAYS FEMALE RESEARCHERS SHOULD GET A MALE CO-AUTHOR TO “CHECK” STUDY
PEER REVIEWER SAYS FEMALE RESEARCHERS SHOULD GET A MALE CO-AUTHOR TO “CHECK” STUDY<snip>
To recap: A reviewer who thinks it’s not surprising that the study found male students authored more papers than female students on the basis that men, on average, can run faster thinks that it’s the paper’s authors would might be unduly influenced by “ideologically biased assumptions.” The reviewer also suggested that perhaps the male students tended to get published in better journals than their female counterparts “simply because men, perhaps, on average work more hours per week than women, due to marginally better health or stamina.”
I mean, when you’re reaching to supposed physical differences between men and women to explain away gender disparities in academia, you might want to question how your ideological bias against seeing sexism at all costs might be blinding you to the empirical evidence.
Read more: http://feministing.com/2015/04/30/peer-reviewer-says-female-researchers-should-get-a-male-co-author-to-check-study/
April 30, 2015
You knew this information would get out anyway.
Preliminary Baltimore police report: no evidence Gray fatally injured during arrest: ABC
Source: Reuters
(Reuters) - A preliminary probe has found no evidence that 25-year-old Freddie Gray was fatally injured during his videotaped arrest in Baltimore, a local ABC affiliate reported on Thursday, citing sources briefed on the police report and on findings made by the medical examiner.
The medical examiner found Gray's catastrophic injury was caused when he was slammed into back of the police transport van and apparently broke his neck. Law enforcement sources also said Gray sustained a head injury that matches bolt in the back of police van, the affiliate reported.
Gray's death a week after his arrest sparked violent protests over police treatment of minorities. The police report was not released to the public, but handed over on Thursday to the city's chief prosecutor. The U.S. Department of Justice has also launched an investigation into Gray's death.
Read more: http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/04/30/us-usa-police-baltimore-idUSKBN0NL1GO20150430
You knew this information would get out anyway.
April 30, 2015
This post is part of A is For’s new Clinic Escort Story Series, in which real volunteer clinic escorts share their experiences and insights from the frontlines of abortion access. This series is dedicated to capturing the reality of what patients go through to access safe abortion care all across the United States.
<snip>
Men do not often figure in the stories we tell about abortion, except as that jerk who knocked you up and then took off as soon as you told him you were late. So many people, myself included, have weighed the pros and cons of an abortion and then gone through with the procedure without the assistance or consent of the man who got them pregnant. From the stories feminists tell about abortion, one could be forgiven for thinking that abortion, like birth, often operates within a “woman’s sacred space.” But more often than our narratives around abortion would suggest, a person seeking an abortion asks a man to come with them, and invites him to share in the space of vulnerability and strength that abortion engenders.
Despite the dearth of men in our narratives about abortion, from where I stand on the sidewalk, it seems that there are a lot of men involved in abortion. Some are clearly involved because that morning, their partner woke them up with, “You got me into this mess; you sure as hell are getting me out of it.” But many men are involved because they care about their partner, spouse, or child and are trying to be supportive as best they can, whether or not they agree with the choice to have an abortion.
So much of my work on the sidewalk is helping these men hold it together so they can be strong for the person having the abortion. Sometimes a “You doing ok?” is enough to shake a man out of listening to the hate the protestors spew at him. Other times, he is clearly rattled when he gets back inside, so I make a mental note of when his meter will next expire and position myself by the clinic door when he is due out so that I can be a physical and emotional barrier between him and the protestors.
When I escort men to feed the meter outside the clinic, I am always struck by how vulnerable abortion renders them. But when I watch them escort their children, spouses, or partners back to the car after the abortion is done, I am always struck by how strong they become when caring for their loved ones. More than anything, I want them to know that the true measure of their manhood is their decision to stand with this person in their time of need, not whatever nonsense the protesters might tell them.
Read more: http://www.aisfor.org/clinic-escort-stories-i-help-men-as-a-clinic-escort-too/#sthash.RqZid6R0.dpbs
Clinic Escort Stories: “I Help Men as a Clinic Escort, Too.”
Clinic Escort Stories: “I Help Men as a Clinic Escort, Too.”This post is part of A is For’s new Clinic Escort Story Series, in which real volunteer clinic escorts share their experiences and insights from the frontlines of abortion access. This series is dedicated to capturing the reality of what patients go through to access safe abortion care all across the United States.
<snip>
Men do not often figure in the stories we tell about abortion, except as that jerk who knocked you up and then took off as soon as you told him you were late. So many people, myself included, have weighed the pros and cons of an abortion and then gone through with the procedure without the assistance or consent of the man who got them pregnant. From the stories feminists tell about abortion, one could be forgiven for thinking that abortion, like birth, often operates within a “woman’s sacred space.” But more often than our narratives around abortion would suggest, a person seeking an abortion asks a man to come with them, and invites him to share in the space of vulnerability and strength that abortion engenders.
Despite the dearth of men in our narratives about abortion, from where I stand on the sidewalk, it seems that there are a lot of men involved in abortion. Some are clearly involved because that morning, their partner woke them up with, “You got me into this mess; you sure as hell are getting me out of it.” But many men are involved because they care about their partner, spouse, or child and are trying to be supportive as best they can, whether or not they agree with the choice to have an abortion.
So much of my work on the sidewalk is helping these men hold it together so they can be strong for the person having the abortion. Sometimes a “You doing ok?” is enough to shake a man out of listening to the hate the protestors spew at him. Other times, he is clearly rattled when he gets back inside, so I make a mental note of when his meter will next expire and position myself by the clinic door when he is due out so that I can be a physical and emotional barrier between him and the protestors.
When I escort men to feed the meter outside the clinic, I am always struck by how vulnerable abortion renders them. But when I watch them escort their children, spouses, or partners back to the car after the abortion is done, I am always struck by how strong they become when caring for their loved ones. More than anything, I want them to know that the true measure of their manhood is their decision to stand with this person in their time of need, not whatever nonsense the protesters might tell them.
Read more: http://www.aisfor.org/clinic-escort-stories-i-help-men-as-a-clinic-escort-too/#sthash.RqZid6R0.dpbs
April 29, 2015
<snip>
In the current political environment and with so much shaming in popular culture, women get the message early and often that, while they may have the legal right to get an abortion, there’s still something wrong with that choice. We are seriously overdue to have a public dialogue about abortion, a need reflected by the fact that nearly one-third of American women will have one in their lifetime. However, women should share their own stories only if they choose to, and no woman should ever have to justify her personal medical decisions — about abortion or anything else.
Silence about abortion means that the void is filled with myths, stereotypes, and stigma.
<snip>
It’s time we talk openly about the caring and compassionate doctors and clinicians who provide abortion services. We also need to educate the public about how safe the procedure is, and about the consequences for women in need when more burdensome and unnecessary restrictions are passed by politicians. From 72-hour waiting periods to mandatory ultrasounds, there is real harm to women when legislators begin to take the place of doctors.
Read more: http://time.com/3838489/cecile-richards-celebrities-talk-about-abortion/
Cecile Richards: We Need to Talk—Really Talk—About Abortion
Cecile Richards: We Need to Talk—Really Talk—About Abortion<snip>
In the current political environment and with so much shaming in popular culture, women get the message early and often that, while they may have the legal right to get an abortion, there’s still something wrong with that choice. We are seriously overdue to have a public dialogue about abortion, a need reflected by the fact that nearly one-third of American women will have one in their lifetime. However, women should share their own stories only if they choose to, and no woman should ever have to justify her personal medical decisions — about abortion or anything else.
Silence about abortion means that the void is filled with myths, stereotypes, and stigma.
<snip>
It’s time we talk openly about the caring and compassionate doctors and clinicians who provide abortion services. We also need to educate the public about how safe the procedure is, and about the consequences for women in need when more burdensome and unnecessary restrictions are passed by politicians. From 72-hour waiting periods to mandatory ultrasounds, there is real harm to women when legislators begin to take the place of doctors.
Read more: http://time.com/3838489/cecile-richards-celebrities-talk-about-abortion/
April 29, 2015
Kansas Gov. Sam Brownback has embarked on a public relations tour promoting his signing of one of the nation’s most extreme anti-choice laws, while the state’s attorney general is asking lawmakers for funds to defend the law amid a budget crisis.
The arch-conservative governor this month signed SB 95 into law, which will make Kansas the first state in the nation to criminalize a medical procedure used after a miscarriage and during second-trimester abortions.
<snip>
While the governor tours the state, attorney general Derek Schmidt told lawmakers there that defending the radical law against the almost certain legal challenges to come could cost the state as much as $450,000, according to the Associated Press.
The attorney general’s office is requesting up to $50,000 by the end of June, as the atni-choice law will go into effect July 1. Schmidt said another $100,000 to $200,000 for the rest of the fiscal year, and up to $200,000 more for the following fiscal year, could be required to defend the medically unnecessary law.
Kansas has already spent more than $1 million defending anti-choice laws against legal challenges, and has yet to lose in court.
The request for legal defense funds comes at a time when Kansas faces a major budget crisis: a $400 million budget shortfall that is only likely to increase, according to updated revenue projections, reports the Kansas City Star.
The budget crisis has followed the far-right economic agenda that Brownback has pursued since taking office, slashing taxes for the state’s wealthiest while gashing public programs.
The governor, who faced a GOP uprising before he was re-elected in November, has hedged on previously scheduled tax cuts. Brownback has expressed openness to raising taxes on alcohol and tobacco to address the shortfall. The proposal would cut the projected shortfall by less than half.
The Republican-dominated Kansas legislature appears steadfastly opposed to increasing revenue through any new taxes.
Read more: http://rhrealitycheck.org/article/2015/04/28/kansas-official-seeks-legal-defense-funds-anti-choice-law-amid-budget-crisis/
Another right wing moral cripple
Kansas Official Seeks Legal Defense Funds for Anti-Choice Law Amid Budget CrisisKansas Gov. Sam Brownback has embarked on a public relations tour promoting his signing of one of the nation’s most extreme anti-choice laws, while the state’s attorney general is asking lawmakers for funds to defend the law amid a budget crisis.
The arch-conservative governor this month signed SB 95 into law, which will make Kansas the first state in the nation to criminalize a medical procedure used after a miscarriage and during second-trimester abortions.
<snip>
While the governor tours the state, attorney general Derek Schmidt told lawmakers there that defending the radical law against the almost certain legal challenges to come could cost the state as much as $450,000, according to the Associated Press.
The attorney general’s office is requesting up to $50,000 by the end of June, as the atni-choice law will go into effect July 1. Schmidt said another $100,000 to $200,000 for the rest of the fiscal year, and up to $200,000 more for the following fiscal year, could be required to defend the medically unnecessary law.
Kansas has already spent more than $1 million defending anti-choice laws against legal challenges, and has yet to lose in court.
The request for legal defense funds comes at a time when Kansas faces a major budget crisis: a $400 million budget shortfall that is only likely to increase, according to updated revenue projections, reports the Kansas City Star.
The budget crisis has followed the far-right economic agenda that Brownback has pursued since taking office, slashing taxes for the state’s wealthiest while gashing public programs.
The governor, who faced a GOP uprising before he was re-elected in November, has hedged on previously scheduled tax cuts. Brownback has expressed openness to raising taxes on alcohol and tobacco to address the shortfall. The proposal would cut the projected shortfall by less than half.
The Republican-dominated Kansas legislature appears steadfastly opposed to increasing revenue through any new taxes.
Read more: http://rhrealitycheck.org/article/2015/04/28/kansas-official-seeks-legal-defense-funds-anti-choice-law-amid-budget-crisis/
Profile Information
Member since: Fri Apr 10, 2015, 07:15 AMNumber of posts: 5,841
