ONTD Political

Kansas bill would force doctors to warn women of a false cancer risk before an abortion.

12:24 pm - 05/09/2012

File this under #ItNeverEndsDoesIt?: Lawmakers in Kansas have passed a bill that would both turn the state’s tax code into a weapon against abortion access and require doctors to lie about the abortions and breast cancer link. Because what’s a little science in the face of blinding ideology, folks?



The bill, passed by the Kansas House of Representatives, is modeled after similar legislation pending in the U.S. Congress and four other states. It would rewrite state tax law to:

• Ban corporations from taking tax credits for making charitable donations to Planned Parenthood.

• Apply sales tax to any drugs used in performing or inducing an abortion. [Does this happen to any other medications?]

• Ban employers from deducting any money they contribute to health insurance plans that include supplemental coverage for abortion.

• Prohibit individuals from deducting any health care costs (including supplemental insurance premiums) related to abortion.

Taken in and of themselves, those may each seem like pretty small moves. But they’re just the latest in a series of schemes hatched by GOP lawmakers to drive Planned Parenthood out of business and limit health insurance coverage for abortion. Call it the ‘death by 1,000 papercuts’ method of policy-making; each seemingly minor step—tax code changes, ultrasound and waiting period requirements, etc.—works to circumvent overturning Roe v. Wade and instead quietly, incrementally and methodically chip away at reproductive rights.

“The anti-abortion forces continue to use the power of the state to impose their views, and impose their views even through the tax system,” said Peter Brownlie, president of Planned Parenthood of Kansas and Mid-Missouri.

The bill would also 1) require doctors to tell women that abortion causes breast cancer (despite the fact that no such link exists) and 2) bar state employees—including doctors at state university hospitals—from performing abortions on state property or state time (despite the fact that this could jeopardize the accreditation of a school’s obstetrics and gynecology program).

The chances of the bill passing in the state Senate are still unclear. If it does pass, said Elizabeth Nash, a state issues manager with think tank The Guttmacher Institute, it could be a template for other states to follow.




source

kaisenji 9th-May-2012 06:49 pm (UTC)
WHAT THE FUCK IS THIS?
one_hoopy_frood 9th-May-2012 07:09 pm (UTC)
carmy_w 9th-May-2012 07:37 pm (UTC)
And if it does pass, it is guaranteed to cost the state another chunk of legal fees defending it, the jackasses.

They've spent well over a half million defending prior legislation this year. The AG's office isn't even doing the work!
They're hiring firms charging upwards of $300/hour.
amyura 9th-May-2012 10:13 pm (UTC)
Well that's really fucking consistent with fiscal conservatism, isn't it.
othellia 9th-May-2012 08:10 pm (UTC)
The bill would also 1) require doctors to tell women that abortion causes breast cancer (despite the fact that no such link exists)

HOW IS THIS LEGAL? HOW?
clevermanka 9th-May-2012 08:16 pm (UTC)
It's Kansas. WE CAN OUTLAW YOUR FUCKING SCIENCE.
carmy_w 9th-May-2012 08:55 pm (UTC)
Which makes me want to outlaw their votes with a baseball bat, or a dull knife, or....
clevermanka 9th-May-2012 08:57 pm (UTC)
...or a moving van? Yeah, it'd be nice, wouldn't it.
carmy_w 9th-May-2012 09:05 pm (UTC)
Hey, that's an idea!

One big cargo van-cram ALL of them inside, and drive them....where? I don't even want to pollute the earth with their nasty asses anymore!

How much would Virgin Space Lines charge to ship the whole thing to the dark side of the moon??
sesmo 9th-May-2012 08:45 pm (UTC)
violetrose 9th-May-2012 08:48 pm (UTC)
God, after the PP wanksplosion post, I am really, really done with anti-choicers.

I don't give a shit anymore. They are all horrid, repugnant fucks that don't care about women, never have, and never will. There is no redeeming value in their views whatsoever.

The bill would also 1) require doctors to tell women that abortion causes breast cancer

They know this, but continue to lie through their teeth about it. I guess it's an attempt to prove they don't hate women.
violetrose 9th-May-2012 08:52 pm (UTC)
Um, I realise this was quite an... angry comment. Admittedly it was said in light of some of the comments on that PP post.
carmy_w 9th-May-2012 09:02 pm (UTC)
Don't feel bad!

I haven't even seen that post yet, and this mess has me that pissed off!
violetrose 9th-May-2012 09:17 pm (UTC)
Trust me, you don't want to read the post. :/
carmy_w 9th-May-2012 09:20 pm (UTC)
Was it on ONTDP?

My curiosity overcomes me!
violetrose 9th-May-2012 09:23 pm (UTC)
No, it was the official LJ PP fundraising post.
carmy_w 9th-May-2012 09:26 pm (UTC)
Yeah, I just came across it on my home page.

The person who invents a way to smack people over the internet will make a FORTUNE.
amyura 9th-May-2012 10:16 pm (UTC)
No, I think it was a really good comment and you should feel good.

rhodanum 9th-May-2012 10:29 pm (UTC)
No need to apologize. As I said over on that absolute mess of a post, there is a time and a place for civil, measured discourse... and there is a time for white-hot anger.

I'd say the latter is more than justified -- in fact it's been justified for years when it comes to places like the US, where the very act of becoming an abortion provider can put your life at risk or endangers your whole family and your co-workers, not to mention your patients, the people who need aid when they're at their most vulnerable.
kalikahuntress 10th-May-2012 12:56 am (UTC)
Don't feel bad, these people are evil and apparently don't care about how their actions hurt/kill people so really I could care less about them.
tabaqui 10th-May-2012 12:14 am (UTC)
Right fucking there with you.
bludstone 9th-May-2012 08:50 pm (UTC)
i hate cuts for politics instead of actual real budgetary reasons. This shit is obnoxious. Fuck. It damages the principled position and really -hurts- people.

I might be philosophically opposed to government funding of private institutions, but can we -please- address real bloat and corruption before going after this stuff?

Im donating some money to PP, brb.
sesmo 10th-May-2012 01:32 am (UTC)
If you don't support government funding of private institutions, do you support government run hospitals or poor people dropping dead for lack of healthcare?
bludstone 10th-May-2012 01:38 am (UTC)
I dont think the government has done a very good job with healthcare. I think we need more healthcare.
It would sure be nice if it was legal for nurses to run local neighborhood care facilities.

Just because I dont support the government doing something, doesnt mean i dont want that something done at all. This is a common misconception.
sesmo 10th-May-2012 01:44 am (UTC)
I don't think insurance companies & hospitals have done a very good job with healthcare. I think we need more healthcare. It would sure be nice if people could get the healthcare they need, without having to worry about going bankrupt.

The problem with relying on charity, which really is the only alternative to providing funding via the government for those who cannot afford something, is that it doesn't work.
bludstone 10th-May-2012 01:49 am (UTC)
I think we have the same goal here (more access to healthcare,) just different ways to get there.

Frankly, the government working with corporations (fascism) even to provide healthcare is spooky.

They certainly have fucked up their most recent efforts something fierce.
roseofjuly 10th-May-2012 06:44 am (UTC)
Depending on what you mean by "run," they can. In some states nurse practitioners can practice independently, and in many areas NPs and physician assistants do the majority of day to day work in community health centers and public clinics. They may be supervised by/collaborate with a physician who comes around biweekly or so.

Problem is the shortage of PAs and NPs, especially in certain specialties, and the aggressive tactics of the AMA in controlling care for profit (a lot of them don't want NPs to practice independently but want them "supervised" by physicians, even as specialists are eclipsing primary care providers).

Sorry...I'm studying for my oral exams - or rather, I am done studying - and so health care systems and financing are on my brain.
fizzyland 9th-May-2012 08:54 pm (UTC)
"Having solved all other problems, brave Kansas lawmakers have finally grappled with the important issue of forcing doctors to lie to women."

I would think that appeals to the court system would end up invalidating laws that force the repeating of lies but at this point, I'm not that confident that it's even a consideration.
carmy_w 9th-May-2012 09:00 pm (UTC)
You are exactly right on both counts. Thankfully enough, most of our Kansas judiciary is NOT rooted in the stone age! And our legislators just really don't give a rat's ass whether the stuff is constitutional or not.

Plus, the jackasses are pulling this shit during years when we are cutting school funding to the bone, cutting funding for programs for the poor and disabled.

BUT WE CAN STILL PAY LAWYERS TO FIGHT for their right to tell women what they can and can't do-the fuckers.
rhodanum 9th-May-2012 10:35 pm (UTC)
And our legislators just really don't give a rat's ass whether the stuff is constitutional or not.

I'd hazard a guess that some know damn well whether a law is unconstitutional or not, same as they know that the judiciary will slap that shit down fast. It's just a case of them pandering to their 'moral vote', while also being able to pat their chest and say 'well, I tried, folk! Not my fault them librul activist judges are everywhere!'
moonshaz 9th-May-2012 11:42 pm (UTC)
EXACTLY. That is EXACTLY what it's about.

So they're not only misogynistic douche bags, they're fucking hypocritical, disingenuous misogynistic douche bags.

This is a sadly inadequate expression of the true extent of my rage, but it's all I've got at the moment:



johnjie 9th-May-2012 10:05 pm (UTC)
How is it legal to make doctors LIE to their patients???
johnjie 9th-May-2012 10:06 pm (UTC)
I mean, obviously I understand that some doctors do lie to their patients anyway, but surely there's something which stipulates against it??
mysid 9th-May-2012 10:15 pm (UTC)
"The law requires me to tell you that abortion increases your chance of cancer, but my Hippocratic Oath requires me to tell you that there is no link between abortion and cancer."
amyura 9th-May-2012 10:17 pm (UTC)
My big epiphany recently with anti-choicers is that they really shouldn't pretend that they care about children with all their demonizing of "abortion for convenience reasons" and calling pregnancy and childbirth and raising a child with severe disabilities "inconvenient." If you take parenting seriously, as I and all pro-choice parents I know do, they're fucking LIFE-CHANGING.

They know they can't win on reason, so they resort to lies.
alryssa 9th-May-2012 10:18 pm (UTC)

4o5pastmidnight 9th-May-2012 11:50 pm (UTC)
Between this and last night reading something that a pro-lifer said about how women wanting to abort to save their lives is "one of the most selfish things [she's] ever heard," I just fucking can't with these assholes anymore.
nycscribbler 10th-May-2012 12:05 am (UTC)
what.

HOW DO THEY THINK THIS SHIT IS LEGAL?
tabaqui 10th-May-2012 12:15 am (UTC)
I am not generally a violent person but swear to fuckin' EVERYTHING, at this point, all i want is a baseball bat wrapped in barb wire and some of these monumental fuckheads in front of me.
roseofjuly 10th-May-2012 06:41 am (UTC)
How is it even legal to exclude one particular organization from tax deductions? Isn't targeting a particular entity in the law not constitutional? If PP has 503c status then it should count.

And ANY healthcare costs? Including a hospital stay due to complications (rare)? What about preventive antibiotics that are prescribed afterwards? The follow up visit with your gyn? This is stupid.
This page was loaded Dec 26th 2014, 7:18 am GMT.