A Nevada judge has tossed out a proposed so-called personhood initiative saying the language was too vague and violated state law that limits questions to one subject.
Like in Montana, the Nevada ballot initiative petition does not specifically mention abortion, but is a back door attempt to totally ban abortion in the state.
Carson City District Court Judge James Russell said the measure was too broad and general in nature to be put before voters in November.
"The issue to me is, are we adequately informing voters on what they're voting on," Russell said in a ruling from the bench after listening to about two hours of arguments.
Besides being vague, Russell said, the initiative violates a law limiting referendum questions to a single subject.
"There's no way for the voter to understand the effects of the initiative," he said.
The case came to court after a Nevada woman, a pharmacist and an OB-GYN together filed a legal challenge against the petition, arguing that the initiative proposes far reaching changes to the Nevada Constitution and laws, is misleading and fails to give voters a clear understanding of the changes it proposes and its purpose and effect.
It was reported today that Annie Bukacek of the Montana Policy Institute's anti-health care "conferences" and demonstrations and the abortion ban ballot initiative backed by Warburton, McGee, and Butcher, among others:
...is under investigation for alleged abuse of patients or fraud with regard to Medicaid billing involving Bukacek's medical practice. Questions about praying with patients also have been raised. Bukacek said she spent an hour and a half Wednesday with an FBI agent, a criminal investigator and two health-care fraud investigators...
National activists are again trying to use Montana as electoral proving grounds to challenge Roe v Wade since federal legislative efforts have been fruitless.
But after a whistle-stop tour from out-of-state activists failed to bring out local support, Wendy Warburton, R-Havre, and the rag-tag group of misfits who refuse to see the writing on the wall are also having trouble putting on a happy face today.
"They have a lot more money than we do," she said of local Montana-based organizations who oppose the constitutional amendment.
The amendment also failed to qualify for the ballot last election cycle.
Local Montana groups don't seem surprised at the lack of support the initiative idea is getting.
"We raise all of our money from the grassroots in Montana," [Allyson Hagen, Director of NARAL Pro-Choice Montana] said, "If we have more money, it's because we have more support."
Even those who Warburton thought would be on her side aren't supporting the amendment:
"the Montana Catholic Conference, a mainstay in the pro-life movement, is not supporting the proposal. It questions the strategy of an all-out challenge to Roe v. Wade at this time."
This weekend, one of the nations most infamous opponents of birth control will travel to Montana to pitch the so-called "personhood" amendment. The amendment is a total ban on abortion with no exceptions that is written in such a way that it could also ban many forms of birth control, some fertility treatments, and cause a host of legal and budgetary problems.
The Pill Kills project is among the more extreme and dangerous of the American Life League's activities. The campaign spreads lies such as telling women that birth inherently dangerous and may lead to "shrinking of the womb" and even death.
These "Bury Obamacare with Kennedy" signs, first seen at the 9/12 march in Washington DC, were the brainchild of Judie Brown, director of the American Life League and denounced by the Catholics she claimed to work to support as
"an outrage and an embarrassment to the Catholic community [that] scor[es] cheap political points at the expense of common good solutions to the current crisis in the health care system."
This campaign marks the fourth attempt in two years (two initiatives, two legislative referenda) in Montana to redefine personhood and interfere in Montana's constitutionally protected right to privacy. Anti-choice groups fell nearly 20,000 signatures short of qualifying for the 2008 ballot. In order to qualify for the 2010 ballot, proponents will have to collect 48,674 signatures, including 10 percent of the voters in each of 40 legislative house districts.
Good news -- CI-100 did not qualify for the ballot in Montana. It needed nearly 45,000 signatures to qualify. So far, less than half that number have been verified -- and too few remain to be verified to allow them to cross that threshold.
This is a big victory for the pro-choice movement in Montana -- so hats off to them.
It's also good news for progressives of all stripes headed into this fall. Increasingly, one has to wonder just what exactly will motivate a conservative to turn out to the polls -- John McCain, Bob Kelleher?
Across the country, seemingly with no warning, students are being asked to pay often double what they paid last year for birth control. In many cases, this increase was dramatic and not likely to change anytime soon. When members of our Students for Choice group came back to campus in Montana this fall, they immediately went to find out if they were going to be affected.
At U of M's campus, the cost of the Nuva Ring has already doubled from $18 a month to $36, and unless there is a fix nationally, other birth control options are likely to do the same in January going from $20/month to $50.
Here's the deal: the Deficit Reduction Act, a federal bill that went into affect in January of this year, had the inadvertent effect of raising the prices of birth control. In turn, college clinics and other family-planning clinics were no longer able to receive the discounts they used to receive from pharmaceutical companies. Many of the women who rely on these clinics for contraception are students or low-income women, and now they may not be able to afford birth control.
Last week, pro-family-planning lawmakers defeated a direct attack on birth control by a vote of 231 - 189. Rep. Mike Pence (R-IN) introduced an amendment to bar Planned Parenthood from receiving federal funds for family planning services through Title X, the nation's family planning program.
Each year approximately three million low-income women receive basic health care through 4,600 Title X clinics nationwide, including 575 Planned Parenthood clinics. For many women, particularly those who do not qualify for Medicaid and those who have no health insurance, Title X clinics provide the only basic health care that they receive. Disqualifying these clinics from Title X would have put hundreds of thousands of couples immediately at risk of losing family-planning services.
Not surprisingly, our state's lone Representative, Denny Rehberg, supported this amendment. Rep. Rehberg, who has a 0% voting record on reproductive rights issues apparently didn't get the memo that increased access to birth control and family planning services reduces unintended pregnancy rates and the need for abortion.
Please take a minute to express your outrage at Rep. Rehberg's vote against access to birth control and family planning.
On Mother's Day 2007, as I was enjoying my morning coffee and reading the local newspaper with my husband and kids, I noticed an ad that listed healthcare providers who oppose Roe vs. Wade. The ad read:
The sanctity of human life has always been one of our most cherished heritages. The family unit is the foundation of our society. The devotion and sacrifice of mothers over the years and the continual care and concern for their unborn has been the cornerstone of the family...As health-care professionals, we call upon the American people to once again reaffirm the right to life for future generations of the unborn and join with us in our efforts to restore respect, dignity and value to each human life - born or unborn.
Being staunchly pro-choice, I had a flash of irritation but I quickly turned the page and decided not to let the religious right ruin my Mother's Day. A couple weeks later, a co-worker informed me of a friend that had been denied basic healthcare at her locally-owned pharmacy, Snyder Drug. This pharmacy has decided to no longer carry birth control. When she approached the owner to find out why he informed her that he believes that birth control is dangerous for women. Say what?!! So, I also put on my investigative hat (borrowed from Shane Mason and made of tin-foil ). Lo and behold, the new owners of the pharmacy were listed on the anti-choice ad from Mother's Day. Now I think there are a lot of common sense arguments that can be made to counter this particular pharmacist's claims, but my gut reaction is to share a part of my family history. In this case and many others: the personal is political.
I spend every day of my life embroiled in the debate around reproductive rights as the director of NARAL Pro-Choice Montana. Most of you reading this probably think my job is about protecting women's access to abortion care. That's true, but what you might not realize is that more and more, my job entails defending women's right to access birth control, reproductive healthcare, and our young people's right to receive medically accurate information about sexuality in Montana schools.
98% of women will use some form of birth control at some point in their lives. Despite the fact that birth control is basic health care for women, renegade pharmacists across the country have been routinely denying to fill women's prescriptions for birth control and Emergency Contraception (the morning-after pill). Some pharmacists even go so far as to lecture women, humiliate them in public, or refuse to hand back the prescription after they refuse to fill it.
In Great Falls, Snyder Drug has new ownership. With that new ownership came a new policy: they will no longer be filling women's prescriptions for birth control. The new owners have ties to the anti-choice community and now own two pharmacies in Great Falls. My organization is in the process of working with local activists in Great Falls to do more research into their policy and what they are telling consumers about birth control, what other drugs they dispense (Viagra anyone?), see what other pharmacies in Great Falls are refusing to fill birth control or EC prescriptions, and come up with an action plan.
NARAL Pro-Choice Montana believes pharmacies have an ethical obligation to honor valid, legal prescriptions and avoid jeopardizing their patients' health. In Montana's rural communities, there may only be one pharmacy in town. What if that one pharmacy was refusing to fill birth control prescriptions? Since when does a pharmacist have the right to decide whether or not to fill your prescription and interfere in the doctor-patient relationship?
If you're interested in getting involved with NARAL Pro-Choice Montana or want to know what you can do in your community to protect reproductive rights, go to: www.prochoicemontana.org or contact me at prochoice@mt.net.
