Notorious Abortion Bill Inspired by Draft Legislation From National Anti-Abortion Group
Published: July 3, 2013
If opponents hit back with pesky facts and medical evidence to prove otherwise, don’t fret because lawmakers also get a defense script in the cookie-cutter legislation: “More specifically, the State of [insert name of state] has a legitimate concern with the health of women who undergo abortions,” a line we heard on repeat from anti-choice lawmakers.
With a pre-abortion sonogram law in place and the recent dismantling of Planned Parenthood and abortion providers through budget cuts, Texas lawmakers seem to have already drawn from other draft bills and a strategic joint resolution that lays out how and why to cripple the reproductive health provider, recommending “that the [Legislature] immediately freeze any currently allocated state funding for abortion providers, in particular Planned Parenthood,” a move state GOP leaders certainly made last year.
The Texas authors may just have a knack for tying themselves to groups that draft model legislation. AUL’s process is much like the American Legislative Exchange Council, a shadowy coalition of businesses which drafts bills for statehouses that benefit their interests. Turns out, both lawmakers are members — in fact, Laubenberg was selected as ALEC state chair earlier this year.
While the highly publicized all-day filibuster by state Sen. Wendy Davis (D-Forth Worth) killed the abortion-restrictive bill, Gov. Rick Perry is reviving the now twice-failed zombie legislation for a second special session, started on Monday, which is already attracting thousands of livid protestors — or “unruly” mobsters, as our GOP leadership has characterized them — who are fed up with the perceived assault on women’s rights.
In this round, we can anticipate the same lack of understanding and dismissal of fact from the bill architects and the same lackadaisical responses about a bill that would effectively outlaw abortion in Texas, leaving some women hundreds of miles from the nearest clinic and endangering them by requiring less safe drug protocols.
Considering the enormously high stakes and potential for physical harm, it’s a [insert adjective here] shame that some legislators don’t know what the [insert choice expletive] they’re actually saying.
> Email Mary Tuma