I wanted to share with you two interesting political stories from my home state of Virginia that demonstrate the power of the vote.
In 2012, the Republicans in the General Assembly successfully passed a bill requiring abortion clinics to be treated as hospitals and instructed the state’s Board of Health to implement regulations on the clinics immediately. The Board initially declined to comply but later passed the regulations under pressure from then-Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli. Many clinics started making plans to close their business because they could not afford to comply with the regulations.
Then, last November, we elected a Democratic, pro-choice Governor named Terry McAuliffe. He quickly appointed five new members to the Board of Health and asked them to “review” the clinic rules. In response, Virginia’s new Commissioner of Health, Doctor Marissa Levine, announced just last week that the clinic regulations should be “amended.” That process could actually take a few years according to reports. So, because of one election, the clinics in Virginia can now breathe a little easier these days.
Meanwhile, in the northern part of the state, a woman named Barbara Comstock is the Republican nominee for an open Congressional seat. She is trying to portray herself as a moderate who will “work across the aisle” to save the Republic, cure Ebola, turn the economy around, blah, blah.
Her opponent, Democrat John Faust, has produced a campaign commercial pointing out how Comstock, who was once in the Virginia state legislature, supported a bill requiring women to get transvaginal ultrasounds before obtaining an abortion. The bill was eventually pulled after an embarrassing national outcry.
In response to this ad, Comstock said that “I’m not running for the Supreme Court” and argued that legislation overturning Roe v Wade would “not come up in Congress.”
Horse poop.
The fact is that in every Congress bills are introduced that would either overturn Roe v Wade, thus leaving the issue to the states, or declare the fetus a “person” which would outlaw abortion immediately. And it will be interesting to see if Ms Comstock co-sponsors any of those bills should she win this race. No doubt the anti-abortion lobbyists will be pressuring her from day one to do so.
Right now, however, the bills in the House of Representatives are not going anywhere because those bills would die in the U.S. Senate, which is controlled by the Democrats. So, the House leaders see no reason to make their members vote on this contentious issue since it would not be considered by the Senate. Why make your members walk the plank on that one?
But what Ms Comstock is not saying is that there is a good chance the U.S. Senate could be taken over by the Republican Party in November – and that would change everything. If that happened, nut ball Senators like Ted Cruz would be chomping at the bit to introduce and get considered legislation that would “save the babies.” He would love to take the floor of the Senate and further enhance his right wing credentials by leading the charge on a constitutional amendment banning abortion. And remember that President Obama cannot veto a constitutional amendment.
So, Ms Comstock should stop dodging this issue. She needs to be straight with the voters. If she wins her race (a good possibility) and the Senate falls into the hands of the Republicans, she just might be voting on legislation that is tantamount to her being on the Supreme Court anyway.

October 12, 2014 at 12:32 pm
Go Comstock! Why does that name ring a bell?
LikeLike
October 12, 2014 at 1:20 pm
Yes! Voting counts!
LikeLike
October 12, 2014 at 1:30 pm
John, my best guess would be the bell ringing stems from Anthony Comstock, who I am sure is a historical hero of yours. His ban on even information about birth control being mailed was quite incredible, don’t you think?
LikeLike
October 12, 2014 at 4:31 pm
Yes, if birth control meant chastity, but not if it meant masturbation.
LikeLike
October 13, 2014 at 9:58 am
Ah, the Comstock Act, right? Maybe John knew him personally?
LikeLike
October 13, 2014 at 9:57 am
Comstock used to work on Capitol Hill but I doubt if that’s where you heard her name. And yesterday the Democrats announced that they were pulling funding from her opponent which tells me they think they can’t beat her.
LikeLike
October 12, 2014 at 1:36 pm
I really liked the various reminders about the power of voting in your post Pat. The state-by-state strategy has worked for the anti-choice and evangelical population – not at all because it is a reflection of the average viewpoint, moral position, or change in attitude among Americans, but as a direct result of elections. Particularly the mid-term elections. As a recent abortion.com post also mentioned, gerrymandering, which is largely responsible for the Republican majority in the House certainly has a place should Congress vote on reproductive rights/justice issues.
LikeLike
October 13, 2014 at 10:01 am
Thanks, Kimmie. I do think it’s important to remind people, although as you kinda mentioned, gerrymandering does make it difficult to affect change. Still, there are times when the system does work. It sure has worked here in Virginia, which not long ago was a solid Red state. And now we crazy liberals have taken over!
LikeLike
October 16, 2014 at 2:24 am
I am afraid that will NEVER happen here in the “Lowly state of SC”!! 😦
LikeLike
October 12, 2014 at 2:24 pm
Every bill compromising access to abortion and/or contraception should have a rider attached to it mandating that every pregnant woman who chooses to carry a pregnancy to term rather than exercise birth control shall receive $240,000 for “choosing life”
Just see how far any “clinic regulation” bill would get with that rider attached to it!
You certainly will not see so called “pro-lifers” supporting it.
LikeLike
October 13, 2014 at 10:02 am
I dunno, Charles. I can actually see some of the crazies in Congress supporting something like that, despite the impact on the budget.
LikeLike
October 13, 2014 at 5:59 pm
I’d sure support it. Anything sexual Chuckles is for, I’m against.
LikeLike
October 17, 2014 at 8:26 am
The idea of a rider is excellent. Dunkie would probably cough up the $240,000 for at least five saved fetuses a year.
LikeLike
October 17, 2014 at 11:56 am
Don’t say fetuses, MT, You killers’ helpers have made fetuses into a curse word. Like c—s—–. Know what I’m sayin’?
LikeLike
October 17, 2014 at 2:26 pm
What are you saying John? I do not understand. Is it some kind of knowledge only people on your side of the issue understand?
LikeLike
October 17, 2014 at 2:38 pm
I want MT to use a term we can both agree to — young people.
LikeLike
October 17, 2014 at 2:46 pm
Here here right? Young at heart…
LikeLike
October 17, 2014 at 2:29 pm
Your thinking is right MTabb, although I have not yet seen an anti-choice zealot walk their talk beyond superficial covers and doubt they ever will.
LikeLike
October 18, 2014 at 2:03 pm
In all fairness to ONE anti choicer (not a zealot like the ones in Allentown PA), I have to speak up for Rogelio Tavera. He took in a young woman through her pregnancy, helping her finish her education and even helping raise the child till she was on a solid footing and was also reconnected to her family.
The zealots at the clinic offer 1) pieces of paper (they call literature) that are full of misinformation and outright lies, 2) invasion of women’s privacy, 3) shaming and disrespect of women’s agency, and, in the name of Catholicism, 4) examples of bigotry and hatred.
LikeLike
October 18, 2014 at 6:24 pm
The prepositional phrase in #3 confuses me.
LikeLike
October 21, 2014 at 6:44 am
Yesterday, Emily Atkin on Thinkprogress [dot]org revealed some interesting insights about modern conservatives including their anti intellectual, anti science, pro conspiracy stance on Ebola and climate change. While they claim “I’m not a scientist” on climate change (aka, deny, doubt climate change), they reverse their stance when offering xenophobic advice about how to respond to Ebola.
Atkin noted the immense disrespect many modern conservatives have not only for climate science, but also for mainstream science in general, because science doesn’t support their personal politics. Sound familiar? Conservatives ignoring the science about abortion because it doesn’t fit their personal politics?
LikeLike
October 22, 2014 at 7:17 pm
Get off this, will ya Kate? When you try to talk smart no one understand you, not even your buddies. Even your ad homs are better then this. At least they’re not boring.
LikeLike
October 22, 2014 at 7:18 pm
than
LikeLike
October 23, 2014 at 5:08 am
This short video details how the legal principles promoted by personhood measures would, and have, already been used to justify the arrests of and forced medical interventions on pregnant women and new mothers
vimeo[dot]com/109707888
LikeLike
October 23, 2014 at 12:45 pm
Continuing with my note about conservatives’ anti-science, anti-intellectual stance, I’d like to share the news from Pew. The researchers found that conservatives are consuming a right-wing media full of lies and misinformation, whereas liberals are more interested in media that puts facts before ideology.
This research can be read at
people-press[dot]org/files/2014/06/6-12-2014-Political-Polarization-Release1[dot]pdf
LikeLike
October 23, 2014 at 1:26 pm
Kate! Even though you’ve switched to ad hom, this is boring too. Much more interesting when you get nasty.
LikeLike