Submitted by Elaine Magliaro, Guest Blogger
I have written a number of posts for the Turley blog about The GOP’s war on women and proposed extreme anti-woman legislation which has been sponsored by members of the Republican party (here, here, here, here, here, and here). In a piece for Mother Jones, Stephanie Mencimer said that Paul Ryan has a “long history as a culture warrior”—and that people are taking “a fresh look” at it since Mitt Romney named Ryan as his running mate. I thought I’d do some investigating of my own to find out more about the Wisconsin “culture warrior’s” position on women’s issues.
According to Laura Bassett, Rep. Ryan “voted to defund federal family planning programs, authored a budget that dismantles Social Security, Medicaid and Medicare, all of which disproportionately aid and employ women, and voted multiple times to prevent women in the military from using their own money to pay for abortions at military hospitals.”
Sylvia Casablanca, a medical doctor and holistic psychotherapist, wonders if Ryan will now “head the conservative war on women.” Casablanca wrote in a VOXXI article that Ryan “sounds, thinks, acts, so much like Rick Santorum!” She added that both men have spent much of their public lives “battling the things that matter most to women.” She continued, “He [Ryan] has been opposing contraception, eulogizing women who quit successful careers to be stay-at-home moms (like their own wives have done), and vowing to defund Planned Parenthood and repeal the Affordable Care Act. And, Ryan voted against the Lily Ledbetter Fair Pay Act.”
Casablanca feels that Ryan’s stance on the issues mentioned above are “zilch” compared to his “support of a federal ban on abortion in all circumstances, including incest and rape.”
In her Mother Jones article, Mencimer also wrote the following:
What isn’t so well known about Ryan’s record, though, is that one piece of legislation he supported is so extreme that it would have turned Romney’s children into criminals.
The Sanctity of Human Life Act, which Ryan co-sponsored, would have enshrined the notion that life begins at fertilization in federal law, thus criminalizing in vitro fertilization—the process of creating an embryo outside of a woman’s womb. In IVF, doctors typically create multiple embryos and then only implant the healthiest ones in the woman. Some of them stick and become babies, and some don’t. The embryos that don’t make it to the womb are either frozen for later use or destroyed. The Sanctity of Human Life Act, if passed, would make all those embryos “people” in the legal sense, so if they aren’t used or don’t become babies after being implanted, they would essentially become murder victims under the law.
H.R. 212: Sanctity of Human Life/Personhood Bill
Sponsor’s Summary: To provide that human life shall be deemed to begin with fertilization.
Excerpt from the text of H. R. 212:
SEC. 3. DEFINITIONS.
For purposes of this Act:
(1) FERTILIZATION- The term ‘fertilization’ means the process of a human spermatozoan penetrating the cell membrane of a human oocyte to create a human zygote, a one-celled human embryo, which is a new unique human being.
(2) CLONING- The term ‘cloning’ means the process called somatic cell nuclear transfer, that combines an enucleated egg and the nucleus of a somatic cell to make a human embryo.
(3) HUMAN; HUMAN BEING- The terms ‘human’ and ‘human being’ include each and every member of the species homo sapiens at all stages of life, beginning with the earliest stage of development, created by the process of fertilization, cloning, or its functional equivalent.
Link to MSNBC Hardball Video: Revisiting Ryan’s extreme pro-life positions: Chris Matthews talks with Kate Michaelman, former head of NARAL, and Politico’s Maggie Haberman about Paul Ryan’s extreme pro-life stance, and his support for a federal ‘personhood’ law.
In addition, Rep. Ryan is a cosponsor of some other “extreme” anti-woman legislation that has been introduced in Congress. To wit:
H.R. 3805: Ultrasound Informed Consent Act
Sponsor’s Summary: To ensure that women seeking an abortion receive an ultrasound and the opportunity to review the ultrasound before giving informed consent to receive an abortion.
H.R. 3: No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion Act
Open Congress Summary: This bill would make permanent and expand the Hyde amendment restrictions on the use of federal funds for abortions. It seeks to prohibit even indirect funding streams that may potentially come in contact with abortion services. For example, it would deny tax credits to companies that offer health plans that cover abortions and it would block anybody with insurance that covers abortions from receiving federal subsidies or medical cost tax deductions, even if the abortion portion is paid separately with personal funds. Women who use tax-free Medical Savings Accounts would have to pay taxes on the costs of abortions.
H.R. 358: Protect Life Act aka “Let Women Die” Bill
Open Congress Summary: Amends the new health care law so that no federal money could be applied to health insurance plans that cover elective abortions, even if the abortion coverage is paid for entirely with private funds. It also states that a federal agency can not force a health care provider that accepts Medicare or Medicaid to provide abortion services, even in cases when the mother’s life is endangered.
From Human Rights Watch:
US: House Vote Puts Women at Risk
Bill Would Permit Hospitals to Let Women in Need of Care Die
(Washington, DC) – The United States House of Representatives approved a bill on October 13, 2011, that would put women’s lives at risk, Human Rights Watch said today. The bill, if it becomes law, would reverse longstanding federal policy requiring hospitals to provide life-saving care regardless of expense, Human Rights Watch said.
The Protect Life Act, HR 358, would amend the healthcare reform law to grant hospitals far-reaching powers to deny patients abortion care, without any exception for emergency situations. US law currently requires hospitals receiving federal funds to provide emergency care to anyone in need up to the point at which they can be stabilized or transferred, if the original hospital is incapable of providing the care they need.
“The misnamed Protect Life Act is about allowing women to die if they need an emergency abortion,” said Meghan Rhoad, women’s rights researcher at Human Rights Watch. “It is a vicious attack on women’s rights and on the most basic right to life.”
The Paul Ryan Vision: Ban Abortion, Defund Contraception, Outlaw In Vitro Fertilization
What do you think about Paul Ryan’s position on women’s issues?
SOURCES
Paul Ryan: the ‘Personhood’ Crocodile? (Huffington Post)
Paul Ryan Sponsored Fetal Personhood Bill, Opposes Family Planning Funds (Huffington Post)
Paul Ryan, new head of the Republican war on women? (VOXXI)
Bill Press: The Paul Ryan-Mitt Romney ticket: trouble for GOP (Newsday)
Sandra Fluke: 8 Points on Ryan’s Voting Record on Women’s Issues (Politic365)
Rep. Paul Ryan Supported the “Let Women Die” Bill (Blog for Choice)
How Did Your Representative Vote on the “Let Women Die” Bill? (Blog for Choice)
See How Your Lawmaker Voted on the “Let Women Die” Bill, H.R.358 (Prochoice America)
Sandra Fluke: Paul Ryan on women’s issues — so bad it’s unbelievable … but true (Lean Forward/MSNBC)
Five Reasons Why Paul Ryan Is Bad For Women’s Health (Think Progress)
The Paul Ryan Vision of America: Ban Abortion, Defund Contraception, Outlaw In Vitro Fertilization (Democracy Now)
List of Bills Sponsored and Cosponsored by Paul Ryan (Open Congress)
The dog with the female name for dog that had to put it in iglatinPay has been kicked off this blog.
This blog just censored some statement that I made about the NSA. Y’all know what that agency does?
Quoting Tabbai on Holder:
“Holder’s non-decision on Goldman is more than unsurprising. It amounts to an official announcement that the government is no longer in the business or prosecuting smart criminals. It’s pathetic. The one thing you pay any lawyer to have is balls, and our nation’s top attorney has none.”
We need Tabbai in Sweden. We have not heard a word from the “white collar economic crime” prosecutors in the five years since they were established.
Must be a spot for pre-retirees.
But is Justice that? Hardly.
Read more: http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/blogs/taibblog/ag-eric-holder-has-no-balls-20120815#ixzz240YqxDAe
More from Monty Python:
idealist,
What are the “dollars and cents” that made sense to you? Can you explain?
ElaineM.,
I’m not good at these things:
“Paul Ryan’s budget plan would destroy the middle class
Michael Hiltzik
August 15, 2012”
But those dollars and cents made sense to me.
Jim, the clock reads 2012, not 1812. Knock off the self-righteous busy-body routine in which you know not only what is best for women, but also where you put yourself in charge of which topics we shall discuss.
No one buys your act today, Jim.
Paul Ryan targeted on women’s issues
By MAGGIE HABERMAN, EMILY SCHULTHEIS and LOIS ROMANO
Politico
8/19/12
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0812/79856_Page4.html
Excerpt:
Yet Democrats are hoping to tether Ryan’s positions on issues like abortion rights to a broader theme of his stand on issues like Medicaid cuts, Pell Grants and others. Education is a major topic with suburban women, pollsters on both sides say.
“I think he is very, very harshly anti-woman,” said Terry O’Neill, president of NOW. “And I think it’s important for women voters to really look at the disproportionate effect on women of the thing he takes the most credit for. He’s very proud of the Ryan budget. It slams women by privatizing Medicare. Ryan opposes equal pay for equal work. That is very specifically anti-woman. … He is attacking the economic security of women — and at the same time, he is systematically singling out women’s health care for restrictions.”
McIntosh, of EMILY’s List, made a similar point: “Really, it’s cradle to grave, Ryan is working against the programs that allow women to keep themselves and their families healthy. We’re talking about everything from access to basic health care to equal pay to Medicare. … We’re not just offering someone who is doing no harm compared with someone who’s absolutely committed to rolling back the clock. The president has an excellent record on women’s issues.”
Elaine,
Yep…In agreement….. Unless and not likely…A viable 3rd party candidate comes forward…… I’ll just have to vote old style…. And vote against the other guy….
AY,
Paul Ryan’s budget plan would destroy the middle class
Michael Hiltzik
August 15, 2012
http://articles.latimes.com/2012/aug/15/business/la-fi-hiltzik-20120815
Excerpt:
It certainly hasn’t taken long for the blue-eyed, smiling visage to be scrubbed off Paul Ryan’s putative policy masterwork, a federal budget proposal that supposedly would cut the government deficit to a shadow of its former self, as if by magic.
Within hours of the Wisconsin congressman’s anointing as Mitt Romney’s vice-presidential running mate, the budget plan’s salient features were being widely publicized: It would deliver a handsome tax cut to the richest Americans while eviscerating the programs and services the rest of the country depends on. These include healthcare services, banking and clean water regulations, road repair and education assistance.
Yet all the discussion has overlooked the real damage the Ryan budget would do to an important segment of the American public. We’re not talking about the very poor and the near poor. Their lives would be made immeasurably worse, to be sure, by a budget that would shrink Medicaid and force cutbacks in food stamp, educational and law enforcement services, among so many other things. Ryan at least pays lip service to maintaining the national safety net, ineffective as his proposals to do so may be.
But the middle class would be destroyed. The Ryan budget’s impact on middle-income Americans comes in many forms, some of them exceedingly disingenuous. Let’s look at a few.
Start with the revenue side. Here, as in other respects, the Ryan plan is silent on specifics, beyond asserting that “the key to pro-growth tax reform is lowering tax rates while broadening the tax base.”
Ryan advocates cutting the top income tax rate to 25% (from 39.6%, the pre-Bush top marginal rate scheduled to take effect Jan. 1).
The only way to do so while keeping overall tax revenues at 19% of gross domestic product, Ryan’s stated goal, is to eliminate a wide range of tax breaks. On the surface, this might look palatable to a middle-class taxpayer convinced that the fat cats get all the breaks anyway. In fact, the most popular breaks save billions for the middle class.
More than 70% of the mortgage interest payments claimed as deductions ($240 billion) appear on returns filed by people in the income range of $60,000 to $200,000, according to the IRS. Many of these middle-class homeowners base their annual financial planning on tax breaks such as the mortgage deduction. Only about 1.4% of the total is claimed by taxpayers earning $1 million or more.
This is among the reasons that, as the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center recently calculated, sharply lowering marginal rates while cutting out the most popular tax breaks results in net tax cuts for the wealthy and increases for everyone else. (This is what Ryan means by “broadening the tax base” — it means he’s coming for you.)
The more insidious assault on the middle class comes from program cuts. Most of the commentary on Ryan’s budget has focused on his master plan for Medicare and Medicaid, both of which he would gut. But it’s a mistake to think the burden would be shouldered exclusively, or even chiefly, by the poor.
Ryan would replace the existing Medicare system of guaranteed treatment (with a nominal individual premium) with one providing vouchers for service through private commercial insurance plans. By design, the vouchers wouldn’t cover all costs, and because their value would rise in accordance with a standard inflation measure, not with medical inflation, the gap would widen over time.
When’s Floyd supposed to be bonded out? See next post…..
These types of people need to do there true calling and become catholic priests…… Then they can screw with impunity…….
Just remember folks…. Ryan went to Miami of Ohio….. Paid for by you and me…… Saved his survivor social security benefits….. Another program he wants to cut…..
I’ll say they should again…. If Stockman has come out against Ryans budget plan….. One needs to really look at it…… The trickle down proponents in the loop at the time have come out against it as failed policy……buyer beware….
ItchinBayDog,
Cheers Big Ears? Maybe Jeers Big Ears would be more appropriate.
Never has a RepubliCon ticket been so anti dog. The Dogs Against Romney group dislikes Ryan as well. Talk about appealing to the RepubliCon base. Ya cant get any baser than Big Ears.
Elaine M: All you need is trust in dog.
To all: In Birmingham, England the folks are quite funny and often have little quotes and qibbles that they squawk and squeek. One is a cheer when they hoist a mug of beer: Cheers Big Ears. One of my Barmy friends emailed the dog pack with a photo of Ryan: Cheers Big Ears! This is a phrase that we should adopt.
The dogpack watched the movie Blazing Saddles last night. When the town was deciding to let the Freedmen into the fold in order to help fight off the criminals one of the town leaders got up to support the idea rather reluctantly, but then quipped “BUT NOT THE IRISH !” After the movie was over a Paul Ryan commercial came on and the whole dog pack barked in unison: “BUT NOT THIS IRISHMAN!”
OT Slightly
Just goes to show it is never too late to read a book published two years ago. Even if you are the CIA. And even if it was written by a former CIA agent in Iraq.
“Today’s Headlines: U.S. Says Iraqis Are Helping Iran to Skirt Sanctions”—NYTimes email
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/19/world/middleeast/us-says-iraqis-are-helping-iran-skirt-sanctions.html?_r=1&nl=todaysheadlines&emc=edit_th_20120819
PS to ElaineM.
Beautiful work.
All we “women” love you for defending us, including male groupies like me.
Just the facts, you say. Yes, and not enough are presenting them. So good on ya’.
“Abortion would be a sacrament…..”.
My motto forever.
I will wade through it all later.
Just let me urge again that ads should be made (anti GOP) showing what kind of idiots, by their own words, show that they have so many holes in their heads that
they will vote for these dinosaurs.
Amazing that our nation has so many idiots.
Jim must be trolling. He can’t be that stupid. Just trying to rile you up. And he succeeds.
Jeez, maybe Jim is that stupid. Poor guy.
He must have gotten gonorrhea and never got over the trauma of the dripping penis. Women, usch, he says!
Paul Ryan….. Thy name is S-H-I-T!!!!!!
Paul Ryan Abortion Record: 4 Reasons Why VP Pick is Bad News for Women
Dan Lesser
http://www.policymic.com/articles/12800/paul-ryan-abortion-record-4-reasons-why-vp-pick-is-bad-news-for-women
The tornado of media coverage following Paul Ryan this past week has traced a route through his budget plan, his quirks, and his professed admiration of (ironically pro-abortion and atheist) philosopher Ayn Rand, but it has left largely untouched the topic of Ryan’s social agenda. Those who already believe Ryan is an extremist on budgetary issues will find that he is an extremist on abortion as well.
Here’s why.
1) Ryan believes raped women should bring the fetus to bear
You were raped? Tough luck, says Ryan. He is staunchly against any sort of compromise when it comes to abortion. A fetus, even if the offspring of a rapist, has rights just like you and me. No, really – Ryan thinks fetuses have the same right to personhood as a person. The Sanctity of Human Life Act, a bill that Ryan supported, states that a fertilized egg should “have all the legal and constitutional attributes and privileges of personhood.” For his dogmatism, the National Right to Life committee has awarded Ryan a 100% voting score every year since his admittance into the House of Representatives in 1999.
2) Ryan would have Romney’s children thrown in jail for in vitro fertilization
If Romney were honest – if he wasn’t a politician intent on ascending to the presidency – he would acknowledge that he differs greatly from Ryan on abortion. After all, he did say, “I believe that abortion should be safe and legal in this country.” Can’t get much more opposed to Ryan’s position than that. That quote not only exemplifies Romney’s flip-flopping tendencies, but it also acts as a stunning backdrop for Ryan’s views. Three of Romney’s children employed in vitro fertilization to bring children into the world. During the process to create a so-called ‘test-tube baby,’ multiple embryos are created. The problem with this, in the eyes of hard-core anti-abortionists like Ryan, is that only one embryo is implanted in the woman. The rest are either frozen or discarded, and so, according to some, a few unfortunate embryos are ‘murdered.’ Paul Ryan, in no uncertain terms, believes Romney’s children are murderers. One would think such a diametrically opposite viewpoint on an important topic would have precluded Ryan from being on Romney’s VP list.
3) Ryan would let women die
Ryan voted in favor of a bill that would, among other atrocities, allow hospitals to deny emergency abortions to women who are in danger of dying in labor . Ryan staunchly opposes federal funding for Planned Parenthood, which among other things, conducts cancer screenings and supports STD disease prevention for women. He voted to ban federal employees from choosing health insurance plans that include abortion coverage. He voted for and cosponsored a bill that would have imposed a tax on small businesses that allowed their employees to choose health insurance plans that included abortion coverage. He has voted time and time again to endanger the lives of women.
4) Ryan is against stem cell research
In 2005, 2006, and 2007, Ryan voted against stem-cell research. Nothing complex here – Ryan thinks embryos, most of which would otherwise go to waste, are more valuable than science that is likely to save untold millions of lives.
Somehow, Paul Ryan has the temerity to not just espouse these beliefs, but also claim that they can be reconciled with a small government mindset. This is the man who voted to make doctors criminals for failing to determine if the expected sex of a pregnancy is a factor in a woman’s decision to seek an abortion. He also voted in favor of two year prison sentences for doctors who perform abortions – even emergency abortions. How can a sane person think that is not a perfect example of the heavy hand of government?