Slog

News & Arts

The Stranger Suggests

Critics' Best Bets
Music Arts & Food


Line Out

Music & the City
at Night

Wednesday, February 2, 2011

Republican Lawmakers Delay Public Testimony to Attack Pregnancy Center Bill

Posted by on Wed, Feb 2, 2011 at 12:32 PM

NARAL volunteers walking the marbled halls to drum up support for the bill.
  • NARAL volunteers walking the marbled halls to drum up support for the bill.
At 6:45 a.m. over 100 “life-affirming specialists,” church-loving retirees, and families with homeschooled teenagers opposed to this year’s Limited Service Pregnancy Center Accountability Act (SB 5274) stood huddled outside the state capitol building, blowing on their chilled hands and passing out pins that read “I (heart) Pregnancy Resource Centers." An hour later, roughly 300 people were lined up to oppose the legislation, which would require religious-powered pregnancy centers to inform women (verbally and in writing) that they don't provide medical care, birth control, or abortion referrals to women seeking those services (more on that here).


The crowd and testimony at the 8:00 a.m. meeting of the Senate Health and Long-Term Care Committee wasn't much different from last week's, with one striking exception: The most inflammatory pro-life rhetoric was coming from vocal Republican lawmakers in the committee, not from the hundreds anti-abortion advocates signed up to oppose the measure.

“I just want to thank the hundreds of people in opposition to this bill,” says Senator Randi Becker (R-2) in her opening remarks to those assembled. “Thanks for standing up and voicing your concern for a piece of legislation you strongly oppose.”

Becker and her conservative peers delayed the public testimony by repeatedly challenging women’s health advocates on the bill's constitutionality. They argued with that it would limit free speech*. They raised the “slippery slope” argument—that forcing centers to disclose what services they don’t provide would lead to gynecologists prominently advertising that they don’t perform back surgery. And throughout the hearing, Republican lawmakers attacked women’s health advocates in general. The interruptions forced committee chair Karen Keiser (D-33) to cut testimony short after hearing from only six people on each side of the debate.

*ACLU legislative director Shankar Narayan testified in favor of the bill on behalf of the ACLU. He stressed that the legislation met the constitutional standard of protecting free speech. Last year, the ACLU testified against a similar bill aimed at regulating limited service pregnancy centers—with a mandate that they provide "medically and scientifically accurate" information to women—on the grounds that it didn’t meet these standards.

“This is the second year in a row Planned Parenthood has [pushed] essentially to sue pregnancy centers out of existence,” Senator Cheryl Pflug (R-5) remarked to Dr. Kate McLean, an OBGYN doctor with the University of Washington Medical Center who was testifying in support of the bill. “But have we seen any measures from the life centers demanding that Planned Parenthood show pictures of aborted fetuses?” Pflug then name-checked a widely discredited study that claimed to show a correlation between breast cancer and abortion before asking McLean, "So do you think we should require physicians to disclose that [abortion causes breast cancer]?”

Dr. McLean, and others, ignored the baseless points raised by conservative lawmakers to patiently restate the bill's purpose: To make pregnancy centers disclose the services they do and don’t provide to the women who walk through their doors, and hold them accountable when they fail. “We have no problem with the centers—they offer women valuable services like free diapers, pregnancy tests, counseling,” explained Elaine Rose, the CEO of Planned Parenthood Votes of Washington. “But they deliberately locate their clinics near us and don’t disclose the limits of their services. We have clients who tell us they walk in their doors mistaking their clinics for ours. We’re trying to prevent that deception.”

Despite the sharp criticisms lobbed at the bill—and its advocates—this morning, five of the Senate Health and Long-Term Care Committee's nine members (all Democrats) are co-sponsoring the legislation. Women’s health advocates are “cautiously confident” the bill will make it out of committee for a full vote in the Senate.

 

Comments (9) RSS

Oldest First Unregistered On Registered On Add a comment
oh, THAT 1
I am so steamed! All I can say is, fuckers!
"Rude letter to follow."
Posted by oh, THAT on February 2, 2011 at 12:37 PM
Will in Seattle 2
Interesting.

Nothing on the openly gay guy running for GOP nominee for President, huh?

It's very sad how much time the R's waste on stuff that they themselves use more than anyone else.
Posted by Will in Seattle http://www.facebook.com/WillSeattle on February 2, 2011 at 12:42 PM
Some Old Nobodaddy Logged In 3
LOL, one of those volunteers in the pic knocked on my door last night, second from the right. I signed the petition, natch, had a nice chat.
Posted by Some Old Nobodaddy Logged In on February 2, 2011 at 12:51 PM
Urgutha Forka 4
Forcing planned parenthood to show pictures of aborted fetuses?

Don't the vast, vast majority of women get abortions at a stage where the fetus is about the size of a tic-tac?
Posted by Urgutha Forka on February 2, 2011 at 1:44 PM
5
Hey @3.
I got knocked up by a NARAL volunteer(?) last week too. She was engaged, articulate, and energized. She let me rant about the fiasco of national NARAL supporting Lieberman against Lamont in Connecticut and I made a donation. Maybe there is some hope, at least to go down fighting.
Posted by cracked on February 2, 2011 at 2:08 PM
Some Old Nobodaddy Logged In 6
@5

Either she was the same one or their group was prepared for this. When I brought up the Lieberman thing, she assured me that she represented the state group, which has a much different leadership/agenda than the national one. She didn't say anything bad about the national group, but she seemed all too eager to point out the difference.
Posted by Some Old Nobodaddy Logged In on February 2, 2011 at 2:27 PM
7
I was at the hearing and about the Connecticut over-rulling, it was stated today at the hearing that there is cause to believe that for what Pro-Choice advocates want, it is constitutional!!!!! I believe we have a chance.....email your Legislatures now and tell them to support SB5278
Posted by true2me on February 2, 2011 at 6:52 PM
8
Passing this bill is critical to making sure women get honest and unbiased information about health care. Is that too much to ask?

I was at the hearing today too and I could not believe Senator Pflug brought up the abortion and breast cancer debate. That has been discredited so many times. And the said thing is, I think she is/was a nurse.
Posted by carab on February 2, 2011 at 8:23 PM
9
@Carab - Yes Sen Pflug is a nurse. I can't believe it either. I was there in the Seante Gallery listening (because I couldn't get into the hearing). I'm thinking of sending her a copy of the report that discredited the abortion/breast cancer link. New reports show that actually NOT having a kid lowers your risk of having breast cancer - when you're pregnant the higher levels of estorgen in your body raises your risk of getting breast cancer. SO ACTUALLY. Having an abortion lowers your risk of getting breast cancer because you won't have the levels of estrogen in your body.

WEIRD RIGHT? And Sen. Pflug is a moron.
Posted by HANNAHE on February 3, 2011 at 1:50 PM

Add a comment

Advertisement
 

All contents © Index Newspapers, LLC
1535 11th Ave (Third Floor), Seattle, WA 98122
Contact Info | Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Takedown Policy