They fall for it every time

by: wizardkitten

Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 03:47:56 AM EST

As Nazgul points out - it is rumored that this legislation will come up for a vote in the House this week, and that would be a monumentally stupid thing to do. Are you listening, Speaker Dillon?
- promoted by wizardkitten)

How can you tell it's an election year in Michigan? Simply by the extremist, sensationalist, waste of time legislation that is written soley to drive a wedge in the population, inflame emotions, and get the suckers on the Radical Right to open their checkbooks once again and give to the candidate who promises, no, really, they mean it this time, that they will finally outlaw abortion once and for all, all those wanton women will have to get married before they have sex, there won't be any need for birth control, either, because sex is only for procreation, right?, (we'll legislate that next, don't worry), and your mailbox will be safe from the horrible fliers with the gruesome pictures, and we can all get back to work on denying gay folk their civil rights. (What, are the gays busy this year? Or are we just waiting until summer to use them to drive the money into the campaign coffers?)

By now you have heard that the Republican Senate followed through on their promise to be the Good Dogs for the Right to Life of Michigan by passing the partial birth abortion ban (which is a political term only, designed to mess with your mind, has no meaning in the medical world). Not going to argue the merits here of a redundant law that is already on the federal books- but we do need to look at how the Republicans are using this as a tool against Democrats.

Republicans don't give a damn about "life" and we all know it. What the do give a damn about is gaining political power, getting people to give them money, and using whatever measures they can in the goal of obtaining the two. How can you tell?  The ink wasn't even dry on the bill when the MRP released an attack on Mark Schauer for his vote. From MIRS-

The Michigan Republican Party (MRP) wasted no time in taking aim at Senate Minority Leader Mark SCHAUER (D-Battle Creek), who voted against the partial birth abortion ban.

...

"Mark Schauer is out-of-step with the majority of Americans and Michiganians who believe this practice is both barbaric and dangerous," said MRP Chair Saul ANUZIS. "My guess is that he is spending too much time running for office and too little time listening to the people he was elected to represent."

We can hazard a guess that the people that Schauer was "elected to represent" probably didn't even have this issue on the radar. Jobs and the economy are first and foremost on everyone's mind. But still, that won't stop Saul and the MRP from distorting the issue, of course.

So now that Saul has tipped his hand on where this is going to go, we turn to the House, where already the Republicans are accusing the Democrats of "blocking" this vote. Hadn't even hit committee yet and the talking points are being set, using the underhanded tactic of citing legislation already introduced, just waiting to capitalize on the Senate vote. Watch as they turn this into a wedge issue on the House Democrats.

Today, MIRS asked House Judiciary Chair Paul CONDINO (D-Southfield) what he expects to happen to the bill when it reaches his committee.

"The first thing we'll look for is whether or not the legislation is constitutional," Condino said. "Just because Rep. Brian PALMER (R-Romeo) says it's constitutional, doesn't mean we're not going to do our own checking."

Condino's reference to Palmer was in regard to a House Republican news release today that was titled: "House Republicans fight to protect unborn children." The news release was about efforts by Palmer and Rep. Kim MELTZER (R-Clinton Twp.) to have the House move Palmer's  HB 4613, which is the same as SB 776. Palmer had the bill drafted last April right after the Court's ruling.

The GOP news release opened with: "House Democrats today dealt a serious blow to Michigan's unborn children as they blocked efforts by state Reps. Brian Palmer and Kim Meltzer to ban partial birth abortions."

Will House Democrats subject their colleagues to the same treatment that Schauer is now receiving? That brings us to Andy Dillon, the recall hanging over his head, and shadowy references to promises that Andy may or may not have made. Follow over the flip...

That seems to be the thinking of Ed RIVET, spokesman for Right to Life of Michigan (RTL). MIRS asked Rivet today if RTL would bring the issue up in connection with Dillon's recall, if the Speaker doesn't bring it up on the House floor.

"Right now, we're taking the Speaker at his word that he will bring it up," Rivet replied.

Regarding the recall efforts, Rivet added that RTL will "let people know when lawmakers are pro-life and should continue to be supported."

Rivet also insinuates that Andy made deals and is under RTL's control. How insulting. And arrogant.

Meanwhile, Dillon spokesman Greg BIRD said the Speaker has not made a commitment to put the ban up for a vote.

"We've been assured by Chairman Condino that the bill will receive thorough consideration," Bird said. "A commitment to move the bill has not been made by the Speaker."

In response to this Rivet said he's not sure Bird is privy to everything that Dillon may have committed to.

So RTL seems to think they have the House Democrats in their pocket and this will once again come down to Granholm, who probably will tell them to stuff it, given the language of the bill. She has always made the case that any bill should have a provision that includes the health/life of the mother, this one seems to go out of it's way to negate that. Faulty language was pointed out by Gretchen Whitmer yesterday-

Whitmer said the primary American organization representing obstetricians and gynecologists opposes the bill because they say it is unscientific and contains descriptions that don't match any procedure described in medical texts or journals -- leaving doctors with an unclear guideline.

And when you read it, it becomes clear that the bill insists that it's not about the health of the mother. Right at the top of SB 776 is confusing and contradictory language that begs for a veto.

The legislature finds all of the following:

(a) That partial-birth abortions pose serious risks to the health of a woman, no credible medical evidence exists that partial-birth abortions are safe, and partial-birth abortions are never medically necessary to preserve the health of the mother.

(b) That the state has a compelling interest in preserving and protecting the life of the mother and the child by prohibiting partial-birth abortions.

And it gets more convoluted from there. Was this done on purpose to force the Democrats in a corner and keep this issue alive the entire year? Given the tactics of the Republican Party, is it even possible to think otherwise?

Don't be fooled Democrats. Don't let them use this to divide the party, or your colleagues will be faced with the same treatment that Schauer is receiving.  Bury this bill in committee and let them yell about blocking. After all, the Republican Senate has turned that into its forte'- no reason you can't as well, especially when anything you do in this regard will be used against you.

And for good measure, why don't you stand up and call this political stunt out for what it is, and then proclaim that you are going to work on the issues that really matter to Michigan citizens. Sounds like a plan.