Ohio Dems Announce Additional Reproductive Rights Legislation

 

Hoping to follow the success Issue 1 had at the polls enshrining reproductive care in Ohio’s constitution, Democratic state representatives wasted no time in proposing legislation to repeal the six-week abortion ban and eliminate various other restrictions.

 

State Reps. Anita Somani and Beth Liston, both physicians, said the plans they have under the “Reproductive Care Act” are only the first steps to undoing abortion restrictions in Ohio, but serve to bolster the changes made when Issue 1 passed with 56% of the vote in last Tuesday’s election.

 

“Tuesday showed us that Ohioans understand the science, that abortion is a medical decision that should not be made by politicians, but by a patient and their physician,” Somani said in a Thursday press conference.

 

The new bill seeks to not only upend the state law that instituted a ban on abortion up to six-weeks gestation – which is currently tied up in court– but also to remove transfer agreements for abortion providers that require providers to have hospital privileges within a certain distance from an abortion clinic, along with the 24-hour waiting period for patients to have an abortion.

 

“Twenty-four hour waiting periods impact those of most limited means, so that is another barrier to care,” Somani said.

 

The bill would also add “protections for reproductive health information,” prevent discrimination by employers due to reproductive decisions, and create protections for providers against prosecution for reproductive health care, according to Liston.

 

“Everyone should be able to exercise the rights that are now in the Ohio Constitution,” Liston said.

 

More below:

https://columbusunderground.com/ohio-dems-announce-additional-reproductive-rights-legislation-ocj1/

 

Stop discussing past elections. This isn't the thread for that. If anyone does it again I'm happy to give you a timeout.

 

If you would like to discuss past elections, there are sections for that.

The federal question is still out there -- with the demise of Roe, Republicans could revive enforcement of the Comstock Act.

Quote

Late last year, a Christian legal group called the Alliance Defending Freedom filed a lawsuit against the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA). In the lawsuit, the group challenged the FDA’s approval of an abortion pill called mifepristone. Originally approved in 2000, the drug ends early pregnancies by blocking the supply of certain hormones.

In April, Matthew Kacsmaryk, a Donald Trump-appointed federal judge in Texas, sided with the plaintiffs. In his ruling, which suspended the FDA’s approval of the drug, he cited the Comstock Act. His opinion, as Vox puts it, “partially rests on the proposition that, now that Roe has been overruled, the Comstock Act’s ban on mailing abortion medications has roared back into full effect.”

From there, the case went to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit in New Orleans, which reversed the suspension of the FDA’s approval. At the same time, however, it tightened the window in which mifepristone can be used from ten weeks of pregnancy to seven weeks. Crucially, it also barred delivery of the drug by mail.

https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/comstock-act-transform-abortion-debate-180982363/

 

1 hour ago, KJP said:

 

Naive legislators who enjoy building their personal brand more than learning how the legislative process works come up with these types of cockeyed proposals that they have no legal authority to actually pass and enforce. You see it on both sides and it is a symptom of unserious legislators who want to get press clippings over doing real work. I do give a little leeway to a new legislator who may not know how the process works, but if the person has been there a number of years or is in their second term, it is irresponsible to make such proposals that are patently unconstitutional.

12 minutes ago, Brutus_buckeye said:

Naive legislators who enjoy building their personal brand more than learning how the legislative process works come up with these types of cockeyed proposals that they have no legal authority to actually pass and enforce. You see it on both sides and it is a symptom of unserious legislators who want to get press clippings over doing real work. I do give a little leeway to a new legislator who may not know how the process works, but if the person has been there a number of years or is in their second term, it is irresponsible to make such proposals that are patently unconstitutional.

 

No, just no. This is not naivety or a lack of experience. Republicans are proposing things like this not because they don't know how bills or government work. They are doing it because the party and their voters are increasingly accepting of antidemocratic action, because they are getting comfortable with the idea of fascism if it means they get to control others and the system itself. The point is not whether any individual action or bill from these people moves forward, but that they are increasingly proposing and defending such things directly in the face of democratic results. You try so hard to obfuscate and create this false narrative about how it's merely new job jitters- and then lie about Democrats doing it too to soothe the guilt- but this is where the entire party is going. 

6 minutes ago, jonoh81 said:

 

No, just no. This is not naivety or a lack of experience. Republicans are proposing things like this not because they don't know how bills or government work. They are doing it because the party and their voters are accepting of antidemocratic action, because they are getting comfortable with the idea of fascism if it means they get to control others and the system itself. The point is not whether any individual action or bill from these people moves forward, but that they are increasingly proposing and defending such things directly in the face of democratic results. You try so hard to obfuscate and create this false narrative about how it's merely new job jitters- and then lie about Democrats doing it too to soothe the guilt- but this is where the entire party is going. 

wow, lets work on the critical reading there before you fly off the handle. 

You completely miss the point on this. Whether she was naive or whether she was chasing headlines or just trying to rile up her base, it is a pointless proposal that 1) could never pass and 2) even if it could, is patently unconstitutional and could never be enforced. 

The point was that you have more serious legislators in each party who actually work to get things done with the system in place and each party has their clown legislators. She would  fall into the clown legislator category with a number of other Republicans and Democrats. 

I know you disagree that someone on your side could fall into the clown category because in your view, its ok to do the wrong thing when you have good intentions.

6 hours ago, Brutus_buckeye said:

wow, lets work on the critical reading there before you fly off the handle. 

You completely miss the point on this. Whether she was naive or whether she was chasing headlines or just trying to rile up her base, it is a pointless proposal that 1) could never pass and 2) even if it could, is patently unconstitutional and could never be enforced. 

The point was that you have more serious legislators in each party who actually work to get things done with the system in place and each party has their clown legislators. She would  fall into the clown legislator category with a number of other Republicans and Democrats. 

I know you disagree that someone on your side could fall into the clown category because in your view, its ok to do the wrong thing when you have good intentions.

 

Why is it oftentimes when someone disagrees with you or you strongly disagree with them that you immediately go the critical thinking/reading route?  Many of us just lurk on here and get to read a lot of what you spew, and this has happened time and time again.  Makes your points seem even weaker with personal insults. 

 

Also, it's interesting how people are calling out the Republicans for the crap they are pulling now after the election (specific to this thread and what Ohio voted on), but more times than not you are quick to call out that Republicans AND Democrats (need to throw in a dig at the Dems) all do this.  No one here is saying otherwise.  It's quite obvious that desperate antics are pulled on both sides, but this is a whole new level in which Ohio Republicans are trying to go against what the voters had a direct say in.  You mention that certain Republicans are just mad.  No, the people leaving the Vote No signs out along the side of the road are mad.  These Republicans in the Statehouse certainly seem to have other ideas.  You can pretend to sit there and think they may feel this way or say this or that, but there is no telling what they are trying to do behind the scenes.  With how desperate Ohio Republicans are getting, I wouldn't put much past them at this point.

Edited November 15, 20231 yr by MissinOhio

8 minutes ago, MissinOhio said:

Why is it oftentimes when someone disagrees with you or you strongly disagree with them that you immediately go the critical thinking/reading route?  Many of us just lurk on here and get to read a lot of what you spew, and this has happened time and time again.  Makes your points seem even weaker with personal insults. 

Because he did not read the post and just reflexively took it as a defense of what Republicans were doing when in fact it was the exact opposite and was a post decrying the state of politics not offering a defense. If he took the time to read it instead of react, he would have seen that and of course there could have been a dialogue. He has a history of doing that, hence the stronger language.

 

11 minutes ago, MissinOhio said:

Also, it's interesting how people are calling out the Republicans for the crap they are pulling now after the election (specific to this thread and what Ohio voted on), but more times than not you are quick to call out that Republicans AND Democrats (need to throw in a dig at the Dems) all do this.  No one here is saying otherwise.  It's quite obvious that desperate antics are pulled on both sides, but this is a whole new level in which Ohio Republicans are trying to go against what the voters had a direct say in.

I think many people realize that both sides use their dirty tricks to hold onto power. IN this case you see Republicans acting poorly, and we will have to see how it plays out over time and if it dies down and amounts to nothing more than a tantrum or something more serious.  While you personally may understand that both sides play dirty tricks and engage in desperate antics, there is a faction that equates a moral superiority to their position and refuses to even acknowledge the flaws in their house because they feel that if a Democrat or progressive breaks the rules, it is because their heart was in the right place but when a Republican does it they are just evil. The individual I tend to spar with on this tends to hold that viewpoint.

1 minute ago, Brutus_buckeye said:

Because he did not read the post and just reflexively took it as a defense of what Republicans were doing when in fact it was the exact opposite and was a post decrying the state of politics not offering a defense. If he took the time to read it instead of react, he would have seen that and of course there could have been a dialogue. He has a history of doing that, hence the stronger language.

 

I think many people realize that both sides use their dirty tricks to hold onto power. IN this case you see Republicans acting poorly, and we will have to see how it plays out over time and if it dies down and amounts to nothing more than a tantrum or something more serious.  While you personally may understand that both sides play dirty tricks and engage in desperate antics, there is a faction that equates a moral superiority to their position and refuses to even acknowledge the flaws in their house because they feel that if a Democrat or progressive breaks the rules, it is because their heart was in the right place but when a Republican does it they are just evil. The individual I tend to spar with on this tends to hold that viewpoint.

 

Personal insults are weak.  You're trying way too hard for an internet forum.  So if posters take a stronger defense to what you're saying, there is absolutely no justification for that kind of response.  Again, this has been your kind of response many times in the past.  

 

The problem is very few people on here are saying otherwise.  We get that both parties throw tantrums, but what the Republicans are doing now (the whole point to this thread and the conversation) is more than just a tantrum.  It's not even that they are acting poorly, they are outright wrong in the handling of this.  Ohioans by a large margin voted Yes. They don't like the outcomes, and we have the governor himself saying they are going to look into it.  Very vague.  So as much as you want to paint the Democrats as acting morally superior, you see it way more often with the Republicans as of late.  The way you word your posts, you try to play even playing field, but it reeks of: ok maybe the Republicans do wrong sometimes, but the Democrats are really bad and do much worse.  How anyone can see otherwise I just don't get.  The desperation politics being played by the Republicans is ridiculous.

 

 

32 minutes ago, MissinOhio said:

 

Personal insults are weak.  You're trying way too hard for an internet forum.  So if posters take a stronger defense to what you're saying, there is absolutely no justification for that kind of response.  Again, this has been your kind of response many times in the past.  

 

The problem is very few people on here are saying otherwise.  We get that both parties throw tantrums, but what the Republicans are doing now (the whole point to this thread and the conversation) is more than just a tantrum.  It's not even that they are acting poorly, they are outright wrong in the handling of this.  Ohioans by a large margin voted Yes. They don't like the outcomes, and we have the governor himself saying they are going to look into it.  Very vague.  So as much as you want to paint the Democrats as acting morally superior, you see it way more often with the Republicans as of late.  The way you word your posts, you try to play even playing field, but it reeks of: ok maybe the Republicans do wrong sometimes, but the Democrats are really bad and do much worse.  How anyone can see otherwise I just don't get.  The desperation politics being played by the Republicans is ridiculous.

 

 

I am sorry you may feel that way. You are welcome to your opinion on my posts as that is your perception. I can only try and convey to you my intent. 

 

And I am not trying to scapegoat for Republicans my point is before people go crazy about things recognize that it was a highly charged election and one side did not come out victorious. Given the emotions on the issue, it is very reasonable for the other side to be angry about the results. That is called being human. Some of the initial rhetoric you may hear from them may not sound pleasant or that they want to disregard the will of the voters. Initially, that may be the case, but before the other side overreacts to the rhetoric lets pause and let cooler heads prevail.

 

What you hear after the election did not sound like people wanting to accept the results. However, after a few weeks, people typically resign themselves to doing so. Cooler heads usually prevail (unless you are Trump). 

Much of what you hear is just bluster (like the State Rep who wanted to remove judicial review). It really means nothing but venting.  All I was saying is that before over-reacting (which may not apply to you but certainly applies to others here) wait and actually see what is proposed. If the Republicans actually tried to get rid of judicial review (which they couldn't because it is patently unconstitutional) then it is something to get angry about. But before getting upset, wait and see what if anything comes from this. 

7 hours ago, Brutus_buckeye said:

wow, lets work on the critical reading there before you fly off the handle. 

You completely miss the point on this. Whether she was naive or whether she was chasing headlines or just trying to rile up her base, it is a pointless proposal that 1) could never pass and 2) even if it could, is patently unconstitutional and could never be enforced. 

The point was that you have more serious legislators in each party who actually work to get things done with the system in place and each party has their clown legislators. She would  fall into the clown legislator category with a number of other Republicans and Democrats. 

I know you disagree that someone on your side could fall into the clown category because in your view, its ok to do the wrong thing when you have good intentions.

 

I'm going to ignore your typical ad hominem on reading comprehension as others are already pointing out this is getting to be a very played out part of your modus operandi here. Instead, let's examine what the crux of the relevant argument seems to be. 

 

You are essentially saying that the reasoning behind such a proposal doesn't matter, not only because it's unlikely to pass, but also because it would be shot down by the courts as unconstitutional. Fine, let's accept that premise for a second. Could you therefore explain why the Republican Party is knowingly promoting unconstitutional legislation in the first place? If you're saying it's for the base, wouldn't you then be supporting what I've already said in that the Republican voters are starting to demand such anti-democratic action? Wouldn't you then still be supporting what myself and others are saying- that the party overall is headed in a very dangerous direction? 

I tend to think that the reasoning behind this rhetoric and these actions do matter, because unlike you- who may or may not actually even believe what they're typing out- I have no such confidence that something like this couldn't move forward. Even if 99% of such legislation ultimately failed, I'd still be worried about that 1%, as it begins to set a precedent that would be difficult to back away from. Such moves may fail now, but will they tomorrow if they continue to be normalized? Republicans are testing the waters, so to speak. They're seeing just how these proposals are being received by the conservative base and seeing how far they can push the boundaries before seeing any real pushback. And so far, they've been able to push far beyond what anyone who knows history should ever be comfortable with. 

 

No one on my "side" is threatening democracy. The leader of your party is currently talking about concentration camps in America. Get your house in order. 

If the attorney general tries to enforce abortion bans I'm sure we'll hear the usual excuses from Brutus about them blatantly violating the Ohio Constitution

16 minutes ago, jonoh81 said:

Fine, let's accept that premise for a second. Could you therefore explain why the Republican Party is knowingly promoting unconstitutional legislation in the first place? If you're saying it's for the base, wouldn't you then be supporting what I've already said in that the Republican voters are starting to demand such anti-democratic action?

1) Venting right after elections is pretty much what this is. IF it turns into policy positions, then be concerned. Right now it is venting.

2) What some low level state legislator who does not have a leadership role says is really nothing more than her opinion, she does not represent the leadership nor does she really have much authority to take action. While she may identify as a Republican, there is a dichotomy of opinions out there and she has an opinion, of which her opinion is a minority within her caucus. If this were coming from Stephens, Dewine or someone else in party leadership it would be different. 

3) What some low level state rep said is really no different than some of the garbage that comes out of the left wing members of Congress like AOC, Cori Bush, etc. They have one vote, that is about it. The party leadership is not giving them serious attention. If you start to hear a consolidation of leadership around this opinion, then certainly be concerned.

21 minutes ago, jonoh81 said:

Wouldn't you then still be supporting what myself and others are saying- that the party overall is headed in a very dangerous direction? 

I tend to think that the reasoning behind this rhetoric and these actions do matter, because unlike you- who may or may not actually even believe what they're typing out- I have no such confidence that something like this couldn't move forward.

I think the fringe on both parties are pulling in dangerous directions. Certain actions of legislators should give some pause, but until they have the power to do something about it, they are just pontificating for their base. Again, this is a both sides thing. While you are solely concerned about the right fringe, the left fringe is equally as dangerous and bad. Neither are honest players. We need to have the pragmatic middle who acts responsibly be more assertive. 

Do I have concerns about the rhetoric going on? Of course. You see Donald Trump running an election where his only platform is to seek vengeance on his political enemies. While concerning to a certain level, I think history has demonstrated that the majority of voters are turned off by him and despite what some of the polls may say, he wont win and he will sink many of those who are following his path. While I may not like the rhetoric, I have faith in the checks and balances in the system to keep things from getting off the rails and turning into a Venezuela.

27 minutes ago, jonoh81 said:

Even if 99% of such legislation ultimately failed, I'd still be worried about that 1%, as it begins to set a precedent that would be difficult to back away from. Such moves may fail now, but will they tomorrow if they continue to be normalized? Republicans are testing the waters, so to speak. They're seeing just how these proposals are being received by the conservative base and seeing how far they can push the boundaries before seeing any real pushback. And so far, they've been able to push far beyond what anyone who knows history should ever be comfortable with. 

So the thing about progressives is that they tend to believe in creating a world is devoid from reality and the thing about conservatives is that they dream of going back to a world that never actually existed.  There is always going to be a tug and pull in politics. Politics, at the end of the day is about sales. WHat can you sell people on that may or may not be good for them. Pretty much everything that passes (no matter the party you are from) has flaws and policies that often pass along party line votes have the most flaws (and negative externalities). That will not ever stop either side from pushing the boundaries, that is just human nature. The key is that you have enough people who understand and work within the system who will work to uphold it (even if they do not agree with the results). The check on that is that occasionally, when the one side pushes too far, the voters typically reign them in and there is a pullback in the next election.

 

The biggest change I have seen though is that you have the far right and far left dominating the policy now vs pragmatic compromising that has been the history of how legislation is done. The concern about the Obama, Trump, Biden, and ??? years is that the pendulum is swinging ever more strongly to each side. It makes the transition and pullback more painful whenever you go from D to R and then back to D or vice versa. Obama spoke about big change, but when you are trying to steer a giant ship, big changes will make the ship capsize, incremental changes are better that take a period of years. I think this was one of the things that made the founders visionaries, by making it difficult to amend the Constitution to minimize wild swings in policy. 

1 hour ago, Brutus_buckeye said:

1) Venting right after elections is pretty much what this is. IF it turns into policy positions, then be concerned. Right now it is venting.

 

No. I will continue to be concerned that such things are even being proposed by one of the 2 main national parties of the country. The fact that such ideas are even being proposed is concerning enough, but this is a pattern with Republicans and the Right. It's not merely venting about the results of one voting cycle, but a steady escalation of extremist, anti-democratic rhetoric/action from a party that less than 3 years ago attempted a very real insurrection. 

 

1 hour ago, Brutus_buckeye said:

2) What some low level state legislator who does not have a leadership role says is really nothing more than her opinion, she does not represent the leadership nor does she really have much authority to take action. While she may identify as a Republican, there is a dichotomy of opinions out there and she has an opinion, of which her opinion is a minority within her caucus. If this were coming from Stephens, Dewine or someone else in party leadership it would be different. 

 

It was more than just one woman. 24 Ohio Republicans signed that pledge, and more Republicans nationally and in the media were basically calling for the vote to be ignored. And I don't know what you mean by "she may identify as a Republican". Are you suggesting the woman you're talking about isn't one?

And I don't think it's a minority, either in Ohio or nationally. Again, the leader of the party is talking about doing far worse if he wins re-election, and almost all Republicans will vote for him in 2024. 

 

1 hour ago, Brutus_buckeye said:

3) What some low level state rep said is really no different than some of the garbage that comes out of the left wing members of Congress like AOC, Cori Bush, etc.

 

Can you give some quotes or specific actions from any of Ohio or national Dems that call for or support the undermining of a democratic public vote? You keep trying to claim a Democratic equivalency for everything Republicans do, but never seem to offer any actual examples. 

 

1 hour ago, Brutus_buckeye said:

They have one vote, that is about it. The party leadership is not giving them serious attention. If you start to hear a consolidation of leadership around this opinion, then certainly be concerned.

I think the fringe on both parties are pulling in dangerous directions. Certain actions of legislators should give some pause, but until they have the power to do something about it, they are just pontificating for their base. Again, this is a both sides thing.

 

No, it's absolutely not, and you haven't given any shred of proof to support this claim. What's actually happening seems to be more that you're uncomfortable admitting Republicans have become far more extreme than Republicans have long claimed that Democrats are, and are making these silly, unsupportable "both sides" posts to project that extremism onto everyone as if it's normal. Dems have plenty of faults, but an embrace of fascist tendencies hasn't been one of them. 

 

1 hour ago, Brutus_buckeye said:

While you are solely concerned about the right fringe, the left fringe is equally as dangerous and bad. Neither are honest players. We need to have the pragmatic middle who acts responsibly be more assertive. 

 

So again, what are the examples of extremism by Democrats in Ohio or nationally? 

 

1 hour ago, Brutus_buckeye said:

Do I have concerns about the rhetoric going on? Of course. You see Donald Trump running an election where his only platform is to seek vengeance on his political enemies. While concerning to a certain level, I think history has demonstrated that the majority of voters are turned off by him and despite what some of the polls may say, he wont win and he will sink many of those who are following his path. While I may not like the rhetoric, I have faith in the checks and balances in the system to keep things from getting off the rails and turning into a Venezuela.

 

Whether most voters ultimately reject him, the reality is that Republicans have not and will not. The people that are rejecting that extremism are mostly center moderates and people to the Left. And if anything, our election and democratic systems have been shown to be far weaker than we thought because they still rely on leaders who uphold them. 

 

1 hour ago, Brutus_buckeye said:

So the thing about progressives is that they tend to believe in creating a world is devoid from reality and the thing about conservatives is that they dream of going back to a world that never actually existed.  There is always going to be a tug and pull in politics. Politics, at the end of the day is about sales. WHat can you sell people on that may or may not be good for them. Pretty much everything that passes (no matter the party you are from) has flaws and policies that often pass along party line votes have the most flaws (and negative externalities). That will not ever stop either side from pushing the boundaries, that is just human nature. The key is that you have enough people who understand and work within the system who will work to uphold it (even if they do not agree with the results). The check on that is that occasionally, when the one side pushes too far, the voters typically reign them in and there is a pullback in the next election.

 

Normal politics, which is what you're trying to suggest all this is, does not involve leaders calling for the will of the people to be ignored, the punishment of political enemies via the State, rounding up people into camps or an insurrection at the Capitol led by a losing president and a large number of government enablers across DC and multiple states. If you can't even admit that things are not normal, and that Republicans in Ohio and nationally are largely responsible for that condition, then there is no point in continuing this debate. We cannot debate the problem when one side is in an alternate reality. 

 

Edited November 16, 20231 yr by jonoh81

Ohio Lawmakers Debate Upholding or Upending Abortion Rights

 

Ohio House Speaker Jason Stephens threw cold water on a bid to thwart the recent abortion rights amendment Issue 1. Instead of attempting to deny the courts’ jurisdiction or rushing to the ballot with a repeal effort, Stephens argued lawmakers should focus on maternal and early childhood care.

 

Despite the speaker’s measured response, Democrats remain wary — recalling Republicans’ last-minute maneuvering to get a related issue on the ballot in August.

 

School House Rock

 

Several lawmakers have publicly refused to take Issue 1’s passage as a final answer. Perhaps none so vehemently as state Rep. Jennifer Gross, R-West Chester. She’s pursuing a measure that would explicitly deny court jurisdiction over Issue 1 and make it an impeachable offense for any judge that defied the law.

 

Ironically, her apparent justification for nullifying the courts’ authority comes from a court decision. In a joint press release, Ohio Value Voters and Faith2Action argue the decision overturning Roe put “elected representatives” in charge. And so, the argument goes, lawmakers have the authority to withhold court jurisdiction.

 

Speaker Stephens dismissed that idea out of hand.

 

“This is Schoolhouse Rock type stuff,” Stephens said. “We need to make sure that we have the three branches of government and the Constitution is what we abide by.”

 

More below:

https://columbusunderground.com/ohio-lawmakers-debate-upholding-or-upending-abortion-rights-ocj1/

 

On 11/20/2023 at 9:38 AM, ColDayMan said:

Speaker Stephens dismissed that idea out of hand.

So House Dems making a deal to support the Speaker actually made a difference. Who would have thought?

Ohio Gets Abortion Rights. But What’s Next?

 

Thursday marked the official date that the reproductive rights amendment, approved overwhelmingly by voters in November as Issue 1, took its place in the Ohio Constitution.

 

The amendment marks a “beacon of hope” and a representation of what Ohio voters can do, according to Dr. Marcela Azevedo, a leader from Ohio Physicians for Reproductive Rights and a member of the team who wrote the amendment.

 

The amendment is a landmark in a year full of political battles over the constitution and abortion access in the state.

 

“2023 has been the most consequential year in Ohio constitutional history since Ohio’s iconic 1912 constitutional convention,” said Steven Steinglass, constitutional law professor and dean emeritus of the Cleveland State University College of Law.

 

Steinglass also said November’s Issue 1 was a “game-changer,” calling into question various state statutes instituted or attempted even before the U.S. Supreme Court decision in Dobbs overturned Roe v. Wade’s legalizing of abortion nationwide, such as 24-hour waiting periods and hospital privilege limits for abortion providers.

 

Legislators over the last few years have also attempted “trigger bans,” laws that, if passed, would have automatically banned abortion at certain levels of gestation if Roe v. Wade was overturned.

 

One law that was a part of Ohio’s reproductive health landscape before Roe v. Wade was overturned was the six-week ban, enacted in 2019. The law was on the books for three months before lawsuits tied up the legislation. It re-emerged after the Dobbs decision, but once again was pinned down by lawsuits months later.

 

More below:

https://columbusunderground.com/ohio-gets-abortion-rights-but-whats-next-ocj1/

Try that, monsters, and it's war

 

 

It's funny that the religious kooks are so caught up in this one battle that they're willing to keep proposing things that will bring out votes for the Democratic Party.  We've been on a losing streak with OHSC judges, but if they put up anti-abortion candidates, that losing streak might end.  I'm sure the powers that be in the statehouse are pissed that they won't just drop the issue for a few cycles.

On 12/20/2023 at 7:43 AM, KJP said:

Try that, monsters, and it's war

 

 

Austin Beigel, the guy behind this, is a far-Right religious whackjob and a real piece of work of the highest order. On abortion, he believes that life begins at fertilization, that there should be no exceptions for rape or incest- but curiously supports capital punishment for crimes of rape and even kidnapping- and wants to repeal the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances act, apparently so religious people can harrass and physically prevent people from seeking reproductive health services.

 

Here is his website for his Ohio House run: https://www.austinbeigel.com  His "issues" page is a real wow. 

 

On 12/21/2023 at 9:08 AM, jonoh81 said:

Here is his website for his Ohio House run: https://www.austinbeigel.com  His "issues" page is a real wow. 

 

I'm not surprised to see that banning pornography is one of his priorities. This seems to be emerging as one of the top priorities of the Christian Right now that they've successfully gotten Roe v. Wade overturned.

Maybe he's funded by the regular movie industry that wants us to go back to the days when if you wanted to see a boob you had to go to an R-Rated movie. So they had boobs every 5 minutes 

Evil is forcing their religion on us

 

Ohio’s lawless, gerrymandered politicians cooking up another outrageous scheme: “The bill would make it so the Ohio General Assembly, not the courts, would have exclusive authority over implementing Issue 1, which covers reproductive decisions.”

https://www.wlwt.com/article/ohio-issue-1-abortion-reproductive-rights-new-bill/46285727

Abortion Will Continue to be a Hot Political Topic for Ohio in 2024 Elections

 

Supporters of the constitutional amendment that enshrined reproductive rights in Ohio’s Constitution believe putting it on the ballot in 2023 was a key to its success, and they also believe the aftershocks will be felt at the ballot box in 2024.

 

The November Issue 1 campaign came to a head with a coalition of supporters, a galvanized public and an August campaign that strategists and analysts say only built on the momentum.

 

“There was an awakening here and people started to realize there was this power grab and an assault on democracy,” said Jeff Rusnak, of R Strategy Group.

 

More below:

https://columbusunderground.com/abortion-will-continue-to-be-a-hot-political-topic-for-ohio-in-2024-elections-ocj1/

 

Some good news- the Trumbull County grand jury decided not to indict the lady who had a miscarriage in her toilet. 

Good, next up, punitive measures to Guarnieri and that nurse who perpetuated and prolonged this nightmare. Let's punish the arresting officer(s) as well, if there was one.

 

Or ban them, and all those persecuting this poor girl, from receiving any medical care for the next few years. I'm happy with that option too.

 

https://apnews.com/article/ohio-miscarriage-prosecution-brittany-watts-b8090abfb5994b8a23457b80cf3f27ce

 

"Watts had been admitted to the Catholic hospital twice that week with vaginal bleeding, but she left without being treated."

 

How can anyone read this article and not be furious. EVERYONE who touched her case needs to suffer. What a failure on every level; there must be retribution. MAGA has ruined this country with Dobbs and its collateral damage. RUINED!

 

Edited January 11, 20241 yr by TBideon

Ohioans Voted for Abortion Rights, But Lack of Funding Disrupts Services

 

The landscape following the passage of Ohio’s abortion rights amendment shows state funding sources going to anti-abortion groups and causes, while abortion rights groups struggle with decreasing funding and increasing demand.

 

State legislators have already made moves in hopes of undermining the enforcement or effectiveness of the amendment, which 57% of voters approved in November to allow abortion in the state up to fetal viability, and enshrine other rights like fertility treatment and miscarriage care into the Ohio Constitution.

 

Most recently, state Rep. Jennifer Gross, R-West Chester, continued her campaign, along with Rep. Bill Dean, R-Xenia, to bring a bill that would take authority over the amendment out of the hands of the judicial branch and leave it to the legislative branch to handle. This proposal flies in the face of traditional checks and balances in government and the authority of judicial review.

 

House Speaker Jason Stephens previously said the bill didn’t have much hope in the General Assembly. However, the House Rules and Reference Committee, of which he is the chair, sent the bill to the Civil Justice Committee at the beginning of January.

 

More below:

https://columbusunderground.com/ohioans-voted-for-abortion-rights-but-lack-of-funding-disrupts-services-ocj1/

 

Ohioans Voted to Make Abortion Legal Last November, But Issues Remain

 

The road toward the November general election will include many more debates about abortion and reproductive rights in Ohio.

 

The conversation is taking shape in the form of campaigning candidates and their stances on upholding the constitutional amendment approved by 57% of voters last November, and the potential for a national abortion ban floated by Republicans on the federal level.

 

Several lawsuits and legislative measures are working their way through the Ohio Statehouse and the court system.

 

Most recently, Ohio Attorney General Dave Yost filed his opposition to a request in a Franklin County court by abortion providers that would pause a 24-hour waiting period required in state law before an abortion can be conducted, among other laws the suit challenges.

 

More below:

https://columbusunderground.com/ohioans-voted-to-make-abortion-legal-last-november-but-issues-remain-ocj1/

 

Ohio Democrats Want Protections for Contraception Access

 

Democrats from Ohio’s U.S. Congressional delegation want the right to contraception codified into federal law, an effort that’s now in its third attempt on Capitol Hill.

 

U.S. Reps. Joyce Beatty, Emilia Sykes, and Greg Landsman met on a Tuesday press call to talk about the measure, and to demand a vote from the Republican majority.

 

“It is our job as lawmakers to uphold the will of the people we serve and codify the right to contraceptive access to everyone, no matter what their ZIP code is, or who their governor or their legislature might be,” Sykes said.

 

The proposed “Right to Contraception Act” was originally created in response to comments made amid the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Dobbs, which overturned Roe v. Wade and the national legalization of abortion.

 

More below:

https://columbusunderground.com/ohio-democrats-want-protections-for-contraception-access-ocj1/

Abortion Advocates in Ohio Seek to Further Destigmatize the Topic

 

Even before the fall of Roe v. Wade in 2022, abortion rights advocates were tired of dancing around the subject.

 

Around that time, the group Women Have Options celebrated their 30th anniversary and, with partners in the LGBTQIA+ community and specific aims in mind, a new name was born: Abortion Fund of Ohio.

 

As a group with Black leadership and leadership who had received abortions, AFO board president Jordyn Close said the name change reflected a need to address and subvert “deep-seated stigma” for individuals who had had abortions, and those doing the work to advocate for abortion rights.

 

“It doesn’t make sense to try to fight for something or deter stigma around something while also being afraid to say what it is we’re fighting for,” Close told the Capital Journal. “We’re not going to get any closer to liberation by throwing the people that have had abortions under the bus.”

 

More below:

https://columbusunderground.com/abortion-advocates-in-ohio-seek-to-further-destigmatize-the-topic-ocj1/

 

The Fight Over Abortion Rights in Ohio Continues into 2024 Election

 

Abortion was a key talking point in Ohio’s November election last year, and in the special election held one year ago this week.

 

Ohio Secretary of State Frank LaRose even said last summer that the special election held Aug. 8, 2023 — which proposed to raise the threshold for voters to pass constitutional amendments — was “100%” about stopping last November’s reproductive rights amendment.

 

Democrats and reproductive rights advocates said Thursday the fight over abortion rights will continue with candidates on the 2024 ballot holding differing views on what the future of abortion should be in the state and country.

 

Ohio Minority Leader Allison Russo maintained a message that Democrats and others have brought up since the anniversary of the Dobbs decision, the U.S. Supreme Court decision in 2022 that put abortion rights into the hands of the states, undoing the national legalization that had been in place since the 1970s.

 

“It is clear that abortion rights are once again on the ballot in 2024,” Russo said in a Thursday press conference hosted by U.S. Sen. Sherrod Brown’s campaign.

 

Russo was joined by Cleveland OB/GYN Dr. Maria Phillis, Reproductive Freedom For All chief campaigns and advocacy officer Elizabeth Schoetz, and Ohio resident Kaitlin Rizk, who spoke about the abortion she had five years ago.

 

More below:

https://columbusunderground.com/the-fight-over-abortion-rights-in-ohio-continues-into-2024-election-ocj1/

 

Abortion in Ohio is Legal, But Still Difficult

 

Even though abortion is legal in Ohio, accessing abortion care can be burdensome.

 

Northwest and Southeast Ohio don’t have any surgical abortion centers — meaning folks in those corners of the state have to travel far distances, sometimes even going out-of-state, to receive abortion care. 

 

“People go wherever they can get in quickest and that might be Columbus, it might be Cleveland, it might be Cincinnati, it might be Pennsylvania,” said Erica Wilson-Domer, president and CEO of Planned Parenthood of Greater Ohio. 

 

But for those in neighboring states with near-total bans, Ohio can be an abortion destination. 

 

“We’ve seen about a 25% uptick in travelers,” Wilson-Domer said. “I know that Southwest Ohio has doubled their volume of travelers from out of state, if not more.”

 

There were 18,488 abortions performed in Ohio in 2022, a 27.4% decrease compared to 2012, according to Abortion Forward. Of those abortions, 1,287 were people who came to Ohio from a different state, according to Abortion Forward. 

 

“People need abortion care,” said Abortion Forward Deputy Director Jaime Miracle. “When somebody decides to have an abortion, they should be able to get access to it, and they need access to it, and they’re going to do what they have to do to get access to it.”

 

More below:

https://columbusunderground.com/abortion-in-ohio-is-legal-but-still-difficult-ocj1/

Good news on a bad law. The 24 hour waiting period has been temporarily blocked. 

https://www.acluohio.org/en/press-releases/ohio-judge-blocks-laws-mandating-24-hour-waiting-period-abortions-violating

 

ACLU press release: COLUMBUS- Today, the Franklin County Court of Common Pleas granted our request to temporarily block several Ohio laws that together forced abortion patients to wait a minimum of 24 hours after receiving unnecessary state-mandated information in person before accessing their desired abortion care. This is the first ruling on the merits of the Ohio Reproductive Freedom Amendment to the Ohio Constitution, which took effect in December 2023.

The judge held that the challenged requirements – the 24-hour waiting period requirement, the in-person visit requirement, and the state-mandated information requirements for abortion care – do not advance patient health and violate the reproductive rights guaranteed by the amendment. Jessie Hill, cooperating attorney for the ACLU of Ohio, delivered oral arguments in this case on Friday, August 16.

 

Six-Week Abortion Ban Officially Overturned in Ohio

 

A Hamilton County judge has permanently overturned Ohio’s six-week abortion ban that had been tied up in court since its inception in 2019, but was put into effect for several months after Roe. v. Wade was overturned.

 

Hamilton County Judge Christian A. Jenkins had already temporarily stopped enforcement of the law when the case entered his courtroom in the fall of 2022 several months after the Dobbs decision overturning national abortion rights established in Roe.

 

Thursday’s decision means the law is struck down unless the Ohio Attorney General decides to appeal the decision.

 

In November 2023, Ohio voters passed a reproductive rights amendment with 57% support.

 

“Ohio’s Attorney General evidently didn’t get the memo,” Jenkins wrote. “For even after a large majority of Ohio’s voters … presumably both women and men — approved an amendment to the Ohio Constitution protecting the right to pre-viability abortion on November 8, 2023, the Attorney General urges this court to leave ‘untouched’ all but one provision of the so-called ‘Heartbeat Act’ clearly rejected by Ohio voters.”

 

More below:

https://columbusunderground.com/six-week-abortion-ban-officially-overturned-in-ohio-ocj1/

Ohio GOP Wants to Make Abortion Access More Difficult

 

State lawmakers in Ohio want to prohibit local governments from using public dollars in support of abortion. They’re casting a wide net.

 

Legislation sponsored by state Rep. Josh Williams, R-Sylvania, bars public funds from being given directly or indirectly to an organization that provides abortions that aren’t necessary to protect the life of the mother.

 

In addition, the bill prohibits funding going to any group providing services for people seeking such abortions like transportation, housing or wage reimbursement. Williams’ measure also takes an apparent swing at public employees by explicitly including paid time off as a prohibited expenditure.

 

The bill uses a claw back provision as its enforcement mechanism. If a municipality expends funds in violation of the act, the state would reduce its share of the local government fund appropriation. Dollars withheld under the law would then be directed to a new fund supporting crisis pregnancy centers.

 

Williams’ bill requires local governments to report relevant spending on a monthly basis. If they don’t report — or don’t report accurately — they risk losing their entire local government fund appropriation.

 

More below:

https://columbusunderground.com/ohio-gop-wants-to-make-abortion-access-more-difficult-ocj1/

Ohio AG Yost Continues to Fight for Abortion Bans, Against the Will of Voters

 

Ohio Attorney General Dave Yost will appeal a Hamilton County court’s decision to strike down the state’s six-week abortion ban with no exceptions for rape or incest that was put into effect for several months after Roe v. Wade was overturned in 2022.

 

Yost, along with Ohio Department of Health director Bruce Vanderhoff and the State Medical Board of Ohio’s Kim Rothermel and Bruce Saferin, were listed in the notice of appeal filed this week in the 1st District Court of Appeals. The 1st District is the appellate court that oversees Hamilton County.

 

The state attorney general is appealing Hamilton County Judge Christian Jenkins’ decision in October which struck down a 2019 law that banned abortions after six weeks gestation, a time at which supporters of the law said fetal cardiac activity could be detected.

 

The law was blocked in court almost from the moment it was enacted, with abortion rights advocates suing to stop enforcement of the law.

 

More below:

https://columbusunderground.com/ohio-ag-yost-continues-to-fight-for-abortion-bans-against-the-will-of-voters-ocj1/

 

Ohio Abortion Battle Continues into 2025

 

The battle to change Ohio laws surrounding abortion regulations is still broiling, even as a new presidency brings concerns on a federal level as to where abortion rights may stand in the coming years.

 

With the approval of the reproductive rights constitutional amendment in 2023 by 57% of Ohio voters, attorneys set their sights (or adjusted their arguments) on the individual laws in the state concerning abortion, like the six-week abortion ban, the 24-hour waiting period, the mandatory two-visit minimum patients must meet before having the procedure, and an attempt to stop telemedicine visits as a means of receiving medication abortion treatment.

 

Ohio’s six-week abortion ban was struck down by Hamilton County Judge Christian Jenkins, who said the constitution now barred such regulations. Attorney General Dave Yost disagreed, and is currently appealing the decision to the First District Court of Appeals.

 

More below:

https://columbusunderground.com/ohio-abortion-battle-continues-into-2025-ocj1/

 

Ohioans Gear Up For Fight Against GOP Contraceptive Bans

 

Ohio advocates are looking to a new year that will include fighting for contraceptive access protections on a federal and state level as recent CDC data shows the amount of Americans using birth control methods.

 

In the newest National Survey of Family Growth, analyzing numbers from 2022 to 2023, the CDC found 35.7% of females ages 15 to 49 used a “family planning service” over that year, with the biggest age group receiving services shown to be women aged 20 to 29. The most common service was birth control, used by 23.5% of women.

 

“Use of family planning services allows women to achieve their desired birth timing, spacing and family size,” the CDC stated in the report. “Women may receive related medical services when they receive family planning services, such as Pap tests. For others, the family planning services visit may be their only contact with the medical system.”

 

The new data comes at what advocates call a “heightened moment” for reproductive rights concerns, with a shift in presidential leadership and Republican-led statehouses who have moved anti-abortion and other measures related to bodily autonomy.

 

Dwayne Steward, executive director of Equality Ohio, said concern over bodily autonomy extends to the LGBTQ+ community, particularly transgender individuals who are using this time to “stockpile” medication like hormonal replacement therapy, to make sure they have what they need in case the medications or services to get the medications are taken away.

 

More below:

https://columbusunderground.com/ohioans-gear-up-for-fight-against-gop-contraceptive-bans-ocj1/

Some Ohioans Rushed to Get IUDs Before Trump Took Office

 

Ohio doctors saw an increase in women getting long acting reversible contraception in the weeks following President Donald Trump being elected.

 

Planned Parenthood of Greater Ohio noticed a 30% increase in call volume during the week of the election, most of them about accessing contraception or asking what another Trump presidency means for accessing reproductive health care, said Dr. Bhavik Kumar, chief medical officer of Planned Parenthood of Greater Ohio. Intrauterine devices can last between three to 12 years, depending on the type, according to Planned Parenthood. 

 

Some of their centers saw a 200% increase in the number of IUD insertions in December compared to November, he said. 

 

“We can never tell exactly why everyone’s coming in, but anecdotally and talking to patients, they’re all expressing some level of fear, uncertainty and bracing themselves for a couple of years of uncertainty given the way that this administration behaved the first time,” Kumar said.

 

Planned Parenthood reported a 760% increase in people making IUD appointments and a 350% increase in people making birth control implant appointments at their health centers the day after the election compared to Election Day, said Planned Parenthood Spokesperson Priscilla Vazquez.

 

More below:

https://columbusunderground.com/some-ohioans-rushed-to-get-iuds-before-trump-took-office-ocj1/

It never ends...

Ohio Law Designed to Restrict Abortion Blocked by Judge

 

A Hamilton County judge blocked a 2020 Ohio law on Thursday that required the burial of fetal or embryonic remains after an abortion.

 

Hamilton County Judge Alison Hatheway ruled in favor of abortion clinics in the lawsuit, filed in 2021, saying Senate Bill 27 has “unconstitutional provisions” that “cannot be severed,” therefore the only solution is to permanently block the law from going into effect.

 

“If S.B. 27 were allowed to go into effect, it would severely impede access to abortion resulting in delayed or denied health care,” Hatheway wrote in her decision.

 

The state had not offered any points to support the argument that S.B. 27 is the “least restrictive means to advance the individual’s health in accordance with widely accepted and evidence-based standards of care,” she ruled.

 

“As the (clinics) argue, it is clear why the state has been silent on this issue,” Hatheway wrote. “S.B. 27 simply does nothing to serve patient health.”

 

More below:

https://columbusunderground.com/ohio-law-designed-to-restrict-abortion-blocked-by-judge-ocj1/

 

Ohio Democrats Continue Fight for Reproductive Rights

 

Ohio Democratic lawmakers will try to push back against existing abortion regulations and align state law with the state constitution in a new bill to codify reproductive care.

 

State Reps. Anita Somani, D-Dublin, and Desiree Tims, D-Dayton, introduced House Bill 128 this month, which seeks to repeal “archaic laws in our state that do not improve outcomes or access to care,” Somani said, laws that include “unnecessary ultrasounds” and hospital transfer agreements that hinder physicians from conducting care at certain clinics or facilities that provide abortion care.

 

“They were passed to create roadblocks for those seeking abortion care and those providing that care,” Somani said.

 

The bill is a reintroduction of a measure from the last General Assembly that only had one committee hearing, never received a vote and died with the end of a session run by a Republican supermajority which has in the past shown more support for anti-abortion measures than reproductive rights efforts pushed by the Democrats.

 

More below:

https://columbusunderground.com/ohio-democrats-continue-fight-for-reproductive-rights-ocj1/

New Ohio Bill Aims to Declare Embryos and Fetuses as Dependents on Taxes

 

Ohio taxpayers could claim “conceived children” as dependents on their taxes under a bill recently introduced in the General Assembly.

 

The bill began after state Rep. Gary Click, R-Vickery, championed a “personhood” bill that would have created rights for embryos and fetuses at the moment of conception. That bill wasn’t moved by the legislature, but a critic of the bill asked Click if the bill allowed embryos and fetuses to be claimed on taxes.

 

“Somebody that was trying to nitpick at me actually gave me a good idea,” Click said.

 

And thus came a bill last year with similar language on creating tax credits for “conceived children,” which has been reintroduced this year as Ohio House Bill 87.

 

Click said it’s had time for improvements that weren’t available in the short time frame the bill had at the end of last General Assembly.

 

“We took some input from some folks that we received last year and tried to improve it,” Click told the Capital Journal.

 

More below:

https://columbusunderground.com/new-ohio-bill-aims-to-declare-embryos-and-fetuses-as-dependents-on-taxes-ocj1/