Ms. Wendy Davis Goes to Austin, TX
As if the scene was taken out of “Mr. Smith Goes to Washington”, the 13 hour filibuster by Texas State Senator Wendy Davis succeeded in killing SB537 by minutes. The vote failed to happen in the allotted time killing the bill for the time being. While filibustering the passage of the bill, Texas State Senator Wendy Davis could not visit bathroom facilities, take a sip of water, lean on any pedestal or desk, receive assistance from anyone else, and had to remain on issue.
“On Monday, the Texas State House voted overwhelmingly to pass a draconian proposal Texas SB537 that would ban all abortions after 20 weeks, as well as adding stringent new restrictions on how clinics get licensed. The intent was clear: Supporters of the bill, known as SB 5, openly acknowledged that the law would have closed 37 of the state’s 42 clinics, leaving hundreds of thousands of women in Texas and neighboring states like Oklahoma with no way to access abortion care. With a conservative majority in the State Senate and the support of Governor Rick Perry, the measure seemed certain to become law.”
The vote happened at 12:02 PM two minutes too late to be passed. Attempts to postdate the time to earlier than 12:00 PM by Republicans met with challenges from the Democrats and the Media until the time was conceded.
Raised by a single mom and at 19 a single mom herself, Texas State Senator Wendy Davis has been leading the charge for women’s choice. The impact of her challenges has been felt with her offices allegedly being fire-bombed due to her support on Planned Parenthood. 31% of the women in Texas are uninsured. The passage of this bill would have closed down 37 of the 42 abortion clinics in Texas leaving residents of Texas and Oklahoma with few places to turn to.
The closure would not only place an undeserved economic burden on pregnant women who would have no place else in which to turn. The closures would have come on top of state-directed counseling designed to discourage them from having the procedure, a mandatory ultrasound where the provider describes the fetal image and a mandatory 24-hour wait.
It is not too often we see a person with the courage literally take a stand in a hostile environment for what they believe is right.
Mr. Smith: “I always get a great kick out of that part of the Declaration of Independence. Now you are not going to have a country that can make these kind of rules work, if you do not have men that learned to tell human rights from a punch in the nose.”
First of all this appears to be a publicity stunt because Perry has already called for a second special session to redo this vote. Ms. Davis, I assume, is familiar with the rules of the Texas legislature and should know that her fillibuster would ultimately be for naught. She’s just too outnumbered.
As for the fire at her office in March of 2012, if you would have done a little research you would have known that a 40 year old homeless man was arrested for the crime. He had been in Ms. Davis’ office earlier in the day to show her a new species he had created. He left a part of an animal in her office that day. When arrested he led police to the abandoned house he used for shelter because he wanted to show them the aliens in the attic. Nothing was ever mentioned about Planned Parenthood.
I doubt Wendy would stage a publicity stunt on this topic as she comes from a heavy minority district with many women backing her up. She appears to be authentic. It was already stated by the Lt. Governor, they would be called back into session. As for Planned Parenthood, here is the data:
as referenced from here:
The original idea came from the MSN article and from there I went two layers deep using two more articles to substaniate what was being said. Anyhoo, thank you for the call-out.
A heavily minority district? She won by approximately 7,000 votes out of 288,000 cast. It is not a safe district and the smart money says that in an off year the district will change hands in 2014. The Texas GOP is already using this stunt to raise money and fire up the base in this district.
As to the true nature of the fire at Sen Davis’ office you should have gone to the source, the Fort Worth Star Telegram. With all due respect to Rolling Stone and MSN they are not hard news organizations. But, the “speculation” about the Planned Parenthood motive is a neat way to frame the issue…truth be damned.
– A heavily minority district? She won by approximately 7,000 votes out of 288,000 cast.
7,591 votes which was a 2.4% margin. 3% is usually considered a safe win. Although not a blow out, she won handily in a district which was 56.6% Anglo in 2000 and 47.6% in 2010. Minority went from 39.5% in 2000 to 47.5% in 2010. It is a good win in a district which was gerrymandered by the Texas Legislature and Perry to make it almost impossible to win by any other political belief. It is estimated the minority population now is ~54% while Anglo population remains pretty much the same. http://www.lonestarproject.net/sites/default/files/SD10FactPacket.pdf The state like Arizona is lowly moving away from Repubs. Money does not win all the time and the Repubs have pissed in their own water too many times to get much credence from those who are non-white. What is amazing is, the Repubs keep alienating minorities.
Davis’s stance on Planned Parenthood and Abortion has angered many who are opposed to it. It is not unusual to believe the fire bombing was the result of her beliefs. It is interesting to see how the Texas courts treat him since the menatlly ill issue came up. Typically being mentally ill is not a reason for committing a crime. “Mens rea” does not get you off the hook.
There is — certainly — a medical consensus that life has begun by 20 weeks (late term abortion providers would not disagree).
Roe’s key words were: “… Texas may not, by adopting one theory of life, override the rights of the pregnant woman that are at stake.”
These words represent a restraint that is normally expected to apply to the judiciary — not the legislature: judges not to impose substantive opinions — just interpret the meaning of law.
No mind; either branch could adopt the medical consensus on when a human life is present — which should unarguably represent a compelling state interest capable of overriding Roe’s fundamental privacy.
(Roe’s not too current list of competing theories of life were mostly theology, excepting quickening and viability. PS. The explanation — as in rationale — for making viability the point at which fetal life becomes compelling was nothing beyond a simple definition of viability itself. One big mess.)
The issue appears to be choice, the choice women must make after the man has made his already. The issue appears to be the closure of multiple abortion clinics leaving a few to handle thousands of women. The issue also appears to be Perry bullying the constituents and also the one person who has had the fortitude to stand up to him. No one has raised the issue of medical consensus and abortions typically happen well beyond this point.
I wouldn’t be too sure about the crazy man theory of the firebombing. The Reichstag was burned by a “crazy person”. And of course the Kennedy’s were killed by crazy people. It is easy enough, I suspect, to find a crazy person to do something crazy for you if you explain to him how important it is.
Not saying my paranoid conspiracy theory is the “true explanation,” but I have learned to be very, very skeptical of “hard news” sources.
I don’t think there is any compelling state interest. You have some people who think abortion is murder… they may be right. And you have some people who think abortion is something like having a malignant tumor removed.
Well, I suppose they might be right too. And while I don’t agree with them, I do agree that it’s none of my business. And the consequences for all of us for letting “the state” invade the most intimate privacy of some people will be far worse than the state turning a blind eye to what is a very private matter.
And no, I can’t give a convincing rationalization for why the State should ignore one kind of murder (if that’s what it is) and not the more usual kind of murder. Maybe it’s just my very strong sense that persons are entitled to the highest possible degree of protection from the State… that is, the rest of us.
I think most people would understand there is something fundamentally different between someone who shoots a convenience store clerk in a robbery, and a desperate woman who has an abortion to avoid what, for her, is an intolerable alternative.
Or, as Jesus said, “What is that to you? Follow thou me.”
Something the “religious right” never gets to in their Bible reading.
Try this on: in the not extremely distant future it may be possible due to medical advances to remove a fetus for treatment and then return it to the womb to complete gestation. The removed fetus will travel as a legal person and must retain that status upon return.
Now here is the question: If there is a stay behind twin will it become a legal person at the moment its traveling twin sees the light of day — or will it have to wait for that status until it is rejoined to the company of a now legal person? 🙂
since it seems unlikely anyone is going to have an abortion after having the twin operated on we can hope your question is moot.
of course, i suppose that if during the operation on twin A it was discovered that twin B had a profound disability… the question might arise.
still think its a good place for the state (us) to stay out of what is not our business.
actually i’m waiting for the anti abortion people to offer to raise these unwanted children
and i am waiting for the pro abortion people to offer to pay for the abortions of “poor” women.