* We talked the other day about a bill to require physicians to offer ultrasound tests to women who are seeking abortions.
Well, the legislation has attracted some hostile, mocking amendments. For instance, Amendment 1, which has since been tabled, would’ve changed the title from the “Ultrasound Opportunity Act” to the “Ultrasound and Erectile Dysfunction Information Opportunity Act“…
Consent to a prescription for medications for erectile dysfunction is voluntary and informed if and only if prior to prescribing medications for erectile dysfunction the physician who is to prescribe medications for erectile dysfunction has, in person, orally and in writing informed the man of all of the following:
(1) The particular medical risks, if any, associated with the condition of erectile dysfunction.
(2) The medical risks associated with the particular medication that would be prescribed, including, but not limited to, the medical risks of heart problems, stroke, hearing loss, vision loss, and priapism.
(3) That erectile dysfunction medication may be dangerous if the man has:
(A) heart problems, including heart pain (angina), heart failure, abnormal heart rhythms (arrhythmias), or a recent heart attack;
(B) high or low blood pressure (hypertension or hypotension) that isn’t controlled;
(C) a history of stroke;
(D) eye problems such as retinitis pigmentosa or blood relatives with certain eye problems; or
(E) sickle cell anemia, leukemia, or a health problem that can cause priaprism.
(4) The details of the medical or surgical method that would be used to treat priapism, stroke, cardiac arrest, vision loss, and hearing loss, including the offer to view a medically accurate video depicting treatment of priapism.
* Amendment 3, introduced by Rep. Sara Feigenholtz, substitues “person” for the original language’s “woman” and “medical procedure” for “abortion” and considerably broadens the scope…
Section 15. Offer of ultrasound required.
(a) At any facility where medical procedures are performed, the physician who is to perform the medical procedure, the referring physician, or another qualified person working in conjunction with either physician shall offer any person seeking medical care, including, but not limited to, cardiac, renal, liver, gallbladder, vascular, abdominal, obstetric, gynecological, muscle, ligament, tendon, eye, testicle, salivary gland, lymph node, breast, liver, kidney, and joint diagnosis or treatment, an opportunity to receive and view an ultrasound by someone qualified to perform ultrasounds at the facility, or at a facility listed in a listing of local ultrasound providers provided by the facility, at least one hour prior to the person having any part of a medical procedure performed, and prior to the administration of any anesthesia or medication in preparation for the medical procedure.
* Amendment 7…
A group or individual policy of accident and health insurance or managed care plan amended, delivered, issued, or renewed after the effective date of this amendatory Act of the 97th General Assembly that does not provide coverage for contraception may not provide coverage for erectile dysfunction medication.
This isn’t the first time that an ultrasound bill has picked up hostile amendments, but I’m pretty sure there are more of them this year.
* Related and a roundup…
* Virginia ultrasound law is the image of a few others
* Senate panel advances proposed strip club tax: A proposal to start charging an entrance tax on Illinois strip clubs limped out of a Senate committee Tuesday. Although the measure is now positioned for a vote in the full Senate, senators raised concerns that it unfairly relies on downstate strip club patrons to generate revenue for rape crisis centers in Chicago.
* Vote delayed on RN staffing levels for nursing homes
* Yellow lights a second longer?: State Sen. Dan Duffy’s longtime crusade against red light cameras took a baby step forward this evening when a Senate committee advanced his plan to extend the duration of a yellow light by one second at any intersection with a red-light camera. What’s an extra second get you? Duffy said studies from other states show that a longer yellow light means fewer accidents at an intersection. And it might mean fewer tickets for drivers, giving them a little extra time to get through an intersection. Even though the Senate committee voted to send it to the full Senate, Duffy’s plan has to change before it moves forward. Because of various concerns from lawmakers on the panel, they asked the Lake Barrington Republican to agree not to proceed further until he hears out their ideas and considers changes.
* House committee OKs fees for state parks: House Bill 5789, sponsored by Rep. JoAnn Osmond, R-Antioch, leaves it up to DNR to decide what the fees should be. The department supported the legislation, noting that it faces a 13.5 percent budget cut under Gov. Pat Quinn’s proposed fiscal year 2013 budget.
* Editorial: Push to record
* Kadner: Riley opposes shifting pension costs to schools
* Mitchell would reduce taxes for ‘S’ corporations
* Lawmakers across US file “Caylee’s Law” legislation: In Illinois, Senator Ira Silverstein filed Senate Bill 2537 in November; it was assigned to the Criminal Law Committee in January. Silverstein’s legislation creates three Class 3 felony offenses in cases where a parent or guardian fails to notify law enforcement of a child’s disappearance in a timely manner, learns of but does not report a minor child’s death or refuses to provide medical information or disturbs evidence related to the death, or provides false or misleading information to authorities during an investigation of a missing child.
* Caylee’s Law passes Senate committee
* Quinn holds back vote of confidence for Hogan
- And I Approved This Message - Wednesday, Mar 7, 12 @ 11:06 am:
If this post remains up for more than four hours you should consult a physician immediately.
- Holdingontomywallet - Wednesday, Mar 7, 12 @ 11:14 am:
“Hostile, mocking amendments” - sounds like a great use of their time (insert eye roll here).
- Cheryl44 - Wednesday, Mar 7, 12 @ 11:14 am:
Do these clowns in the GA understand what it is a lot of women think when they send a bill out of the Ag committee that is incredibly anti-women AND they call it an opportunity?
- Oswego Willy - Wednesday, Mar 7, 12 @ 11:15 am:
NEW BILL REQUIRES DOCTOR’S VISIT FOR ALL SICK DAYS TAKEN BEFORE RETURNING TO WORK
HOUSE BILL REQUIRES KIDS TO BRING DOG TO SCHOOL WHEN HOMEWORK IS EATEN FOR XRAYS
SENATE VOTES ON BILL - ALARM CLOCK CALIBRATION ACT FOR TARDINESS
COMMITTEE TO HEAR TESTIMONY ON FINDING LOST HOUR DURING DAYLIGHT SAVINGS
BILL REQUIRES PUBLIC APOLOGIES MUST HAVE LIE DETECTORS TEST TO PROVE THEY ARE REAL
- Elijiah Snow - Wednesday, Mar 7, 12 @ 11:18 am:
Whomever thought of that is a genius. Genius!
- Small Town Liberal - Wednesday, Mar 7, 12 @ 11:19 am:
- sounds like a great use of their time (insert eye roll here). -
Of course you have no comments for the legislators introducing the bills in the first place. Apparently anti-abortion bills aren’t a time waster, but amendments to those bills are. I guess the legislators pushing the bills have already finished their work on the budget and you’re giving them the green light for social issues? Makes sense.
- It's Just Me - Wednesday, Mar 7, 12 @ 11:19 am:
And these idiots wonder why they had trouble getting their petitions signed.
- Foxfire - Wednesday, Mar 7, 12 @ 11:29 am:
So good to know that legislators and staff have the time and resources to develop these amendments. Is it too much to ask that they use their creative energy to come up with some solutions to the state’s “real problems.”
- Aaron - Wednesday, Mar 7, 12 @ 11:33 am:
Anti-abortion clowns deserve to be derided in public and in the GA. I’ll borrow a line from the gun nuts, “It’s a constitutional right.”
- Fed up - Wednesday, Mar 7, 12 @ 11:36 am:
Glad to see we have got the budget all fixed and paid all the past due bills. After all the hard work hhese fine public servants deserve some play time.
- Plutocrat03 - Wednesday, Mar 7, 12 @ 11:42 am:
ditto Fed Up
- Small Town Liberal - Wednesday, Mar 7, 12 @ 11:45 am:
Foxfire, Fed up, Pluto - Do you folks not realize that to have amendments, there have to be bills? What about the legislators that introduced the bills? Are they exempt from your lame arguments about wasting time? Also, you realize requiring an ultrasound costs money, where’s the vitriol? Come on, at least try to make your arguments apply to everyone.
- Montrose - Wednesday, Mar 7, 12 @ 11:47 am:
Guess what folks - legislators work on issues outside of the budget. I know that is a shock, but they do. It is a legislating body and there are a few things going on outside of the budget process that matter to people on both sides of the isle. So, take a deep breath and move on to a substantive conversation of the bill and amendments at hand.
I am all for the amendments and they do a fine job of pointing out the hypocrisy of the bill.
- grand old partisan - Wednesday, Mar 7, 12 @ 11:50 am:
can we please, please, PLEASE drop that “anti-woman” claptrap. I am pro-life because I believe human life begins at conception, not because I’m a misogynist.
As for the ultra-sound proposal, I can’t say I really understand the outrage over the ultra-sound proposal. Even the most invasive ultra-sounds procedures are no more invasive than the abortion procedure the woman is voluntarily seeking anyway. And isn’t it pretty common practice for doctors to show you some image of whatever cyst, tumor, growth, etc that they are planning to remove from you?
- Rich Miller - Wednesday, Mar 7, 12 @ 11:51 am:
===Glad to see we have got the budget all fixed and paid all the past due bills.===
That’s odd. I wonder why you didn’t also post this comment on the concealed carry bill post today?
- Small Town Liberal - Wednesday, Mar 7, 12 @ 11:54 am:
GOP - How about we make up a group comprised overwhelmingly of women to make laws regarding your reproductive health? Think you’d be pleased with their understanding of your body?
- wordslinger - Wednesday, Mar 7, 12 @ 12:00 pm:
–Glad to see we have got the budget all fixed and paid all the past due bills.–
By that logic, I presume you want the ultra-sound bill withdrawn. And concealed carry. And anything else outside of the budget.
- John A Logan - Wednesday, Mar 7, 12 @ 12:05 pm:
these amendments do little to advance anyone’s argument and provide another example of why its hard to respect the members of the G.A.
- haverford - Wednesday, Mar 7, 12 @ 12:08 pm:
Wrong, GOP. Most early abortions are medical, as opposed to surgical abortions - a combination of pills, rather than an invasive procedure. Ultrasounds for that same timeframe must be done intravaginally - not the belly ultrasound we’re all familar with, which is why we all got to learn the term “dildonic” the other week when the Virginia stuff was going on.
Not to mention that it’s beside the point - it’s not medically necessary. We don’t make people get random (and sometimes invasive) procedures for any other medical or surgical procedure. That’s what the amendments are meant to highlight.
- grand old partisan - Wednesday, Mar 7, 12 @ 12:21 pm:
STL - As long as they were doing so in order to save the lives of an unborn child, and the prerequisite procedure they were mandating posed no risk to my own health, I’d be fine with it.
I watched my wife go through two pregnancies. They were both stressful for her, physically, mentally and emotionally. So I understand the whole “that’s easy for you to say” component of this debate. But I also watched my children grow, felt their kicks and listened to their heartbeats. They each developed little routines, waking and sleep patterns. They reacted to voices and music. They were alive. They had personalities. They deserved protection. And they were as much my children then as they are now. To think that if my wife were to have suddenly had a change of heart and wanted to abort them, she could have done so unilaterally??? Well, that doesn’t sit well with me. And it shouldn’t sit well with anyone.
A child’s life is a miracle. A gift from our creator. No one – not even their mother – has the right to take that away from them.
It’s not my fault that the abortion debate comes down to women’s rights versus the rights of a child. But it does. And I side with the children.
- Skeeter - Wednesday, Mar 7, 12 @ 12:26 pm:
GOP, why do you (and the bill’s original sponsors) feel that doctors are incapable of proving full and accurate advice to the patient? Why do you need Big Government dictating what the doctor must say and do?
On a somewhat related note, Peter Roskam has been tweeting up a storm the past day or so about something called IPAB that Roskam claims allows the government to make medical decisions.
The right wingers need to hold a meeting and get their stories straight. Do we want government making medical decisions or not?
- Skeeter - Wednesday, Mar 7, 12 @ 12:29 pm:
GOP, do you really feel that laws should be based on the “gift from the creator” theory?
- grand old partisan - Wednesday, Mar 7, 12 @ 12:39 pm:
Skeeter - fine, forget the creator. Let me ask you: why do you favor laws against murder? Regardless of what your answer is to that, I believe the same applies to abortion because a human being’s right to life begins at conception. Besides being my religious conviction, it’s really the only rational, objective measure.
- Skeeter - Wednesday, Mar 7, 12 @ 12:45 pm:
Because murder involves a living breathing human. Your view on “human life” is an entirely arbitrary one based on your religious views. A fetus is a bundle of cells that cannot exist outside the woman’s body. That seems to be a meaningful distinction.
But this is not a debate over whether abortion is good or bad. I was just struck by your religious justification, particularly since so many in the GOP are outraged that Muslims may ever want to use their faith to justify law.
This is a digression however, and nothing more. The issue relative the original post concerns the right’s claim to be against big government but wanting that government to be in the doctor’s office demanding that the government decide how a patient should be treated.
- grand old partisan - Wednesday, Mar 7, 12 @ 12:56 pm:
skeeter - you’re right that this is a digression from the original post, but let me just say this: if the Catholic Church came out tomorrow and said abortion was fine, I’d still be against it. I didn’t become consciously pro-life until I had kids, and realized that what was growing in wife’s womb was clearly not just a “bundle of cells.” My children could have existed outside my wife’s body long before their actual delivery dates. “Viability” is a difficult concept to definte. So, logically (to me at least), the only objective “starting point” for life is conception.
That being said, I don’t have any problem with anyone of faith - even Muslims - using their faith to inform public policy positions. I do have a problem with the brutal way that Islamic law treats women, however. Just sayin’
Finally, in terms of hypocracy relating to privacy issues, I’ll just reiterate that I don’t see abortion as just another medical decision to made between a doctor and a patient. That, to me, is akin to saying that slavery was just a business transaction.
- ArchPundit - Wednesday, Mar 7, 12 @ 1:00 pm:
===And isn’t it pretty common practice for doctors to show you some image of whatever cyst, tumor, growth, etc that they are planning to remove from you?
I just had a cyst removed from my wrist (dang rhyme) and no ultrasound or anything besides the doctor manually poking at it until surgery.
- ArchPundit - Wednesday, Mar 7, 12 @ 1:04 pm:
Hit send to soon–the point being, it should be a decision between a doctor and the patient as to what should be done before an abortion. That’s a completely different argument than whether abortion should be legal. As it is legal, the doctor and patient should be deciding how to proceed, not the legislature.
- Allen Skillicorn - Wednesday, Mar 7, 12 @ 1:08 pm:
Duffy’s Sb3502 one second for safety, would be very popular and is good policy. Safety should always take priority over money.
- mark walker - Wednesday, Mar 7, 12 @ 2:01 pm:
I don’t think the bills mocking the required ultrasounds, some of which are physically invasive, are strong enough. Just requiring delays, extraneous information, unnecessary equipment, before prescribing for erectile disfunction are not equivilent — they should be legally requiring a colonoscopy to be comparable.
- OneMan - Wednesday, Mar 7, 12 @ 2:06 pm:
Considering how I feel about urban Democrats understands of budgets, state finances, suburban education transportation funding, yeah I can see your point.
Unfortunately for all of us, laws are not made by people with master degrees in technical fields who live in the suburbs, because only people like me should have any say in an issue that impacts me….
- OneMan - Wednesday, Mar 7, 12 @ 2:09 pm:
Still don’t understand why folks get their shorts in a bunch over laws that have no chance to pass but are handy red meat for some base or the other….
I remember a few years ago there was a proposed law that would have required you to either have completed a union run painting apprentice program or have an MBA to be a painting contractor. Obviously red meat for the painters union and it went nowhere.
- Wensicia - Wednesday, Mar 7, 12 @ 2:42 pm:
==Still don’t understand why folks get their shorts in a bunch over laws that have no chance to pass==
But these laws, and worse, have passed in other states. The fact we currently have a Democratic majority isn’t excuse enough to keep from protesting/mocking this stuff when it’s actually presented in a bill.
- Cheryl44 - Wednesday, Mar 7, 12 @ 3:29 pm:
I just checked my gmail spam and there are 6 different emails about going back to school and learning to be a certified ultrasound technician. I’m guessing those have to do with all the nonsensical anti-women legislation up for a vote all over the place.
- hisgirlfriday - Wednesday, Mar 7, 12 @ 3:44 pm:
“can we please, please, PLEASE drop that “anti-woman” claptrap. I am pro-life because I believe human life begins at conception, not because I’m a misogynist.”
No one is calling you or anyone a misogynist for thinking life begins at conception.
What is misogynist is thinking that a woman is incapable of understanding what she is doing when she terminates a pregnancy or that she is incapable of asking her doctor for more information when terminating a pregnancy without men in the Illinois General Assembly’s agriculture committee ordering an ultrasound be done and shown to her before she can provide informed consent for a medical procedure.
These amendments are ridiculous, but so is the ultrasound bill in the first place. (I have less imagination than these folks so would have simply offered an amendment that mandates that a man gets an opportunity of a sonogram when he gets a vasectomy too.)
If you want to stop abortions because you believe that life beings an conception, then SUPPORT contraception as a legislator or if you find that objectionable, then simply use your bully pulpit as an official to speak about the moral implications of conduct, but leave the taxpayers and doctors and the Illinois statutes out of it.
Don’t abuse your authority as a legislator to get between women and their doctors and the exercise of a constitutional right just because you think you know better than the person exercising that
- Small Town Liberal - Wednesday, Mar 7, 12 @ 3:48 pm:
- Considering how I feel about urban Democrats understands of budgets, state finances, suburban education transportation funding, yeah I can see your point.
Unfortunately for all of us, laws are not made by people with master degrees in technical fields who live in the suburbs, because only people like me should have any say in an issue that impacts me… -
Straw man. Reproductive rights are a pretty personal, so it’s no surprise that women take these issues very personally. If the tables were turned, men would as well. That’s all I was saying.
- jerry 101 - Wednesday, Mar 7, 12 @ 4:32 pm:
“A gift from our creator. No one – not even their mother – has the right to take that away from them.”
Strange…I coulda sworn that my mother was my creator. I’m pretty sure I didn’t exist until she created me from her own body.
- grand old partisan - Wednesday, Mar 7, 12 @ 4:34 pm:
I think the left needs to find a new euphemism, because “reproduction rights” imply some things that are contradictory to your argument. After all, I’m pretty sure that women are not able to “reproduce” all on their own. A man has a role and legal financial/responsibilities in the reproductive process, so why don’t they have any “rights” in this matter. Additionally, one has to ask, what exactly is being “reproduced.” Seems to me that, by definition, a human could only “reproduce” another human. Why doesn’t the human being reproduced have any rights in the matter?
- grand old partisan - Wednesday, Mar 7, 12 @ 4:43 pm:
== I’m pretty sure I didn’t exist until she created me from her own body
All on her own? Really? As others have rightly pointed out here today, I’m no expert on the female body….but I’m pretty sure that is impossible
- grand old partisan - Wednesday, Mar 7, 12 @ 4:44 pm:
btw, jerry101, at what point would you say you began “existing?”
- amalia - Wednesday, Mar 7, 12 @ 5:14 pm:
Grand Old Partisan, since you are a Roman Catholic you will recall that life begins at conception was not always church policy, that the concept of quickening was used, and that from science we know that viability in the first 8 or 12 weeks of fetal development is not possible.
Sarah Feigenholtz, rock on with your mocking amendment self!!!
- Peggy R/Southern - Wednesday, Mar 7, 12 @ 5:35 pm:
GOP–Nice job holding your own here today!
The ultrasound will show the woman that the baby is NOT merely a clump of cells,but a life formed into a human body sooner than we realize. Most women don’t understand it. There are shady, unregulated abortionists out there. Most abortuaries are not held to the same safety standards as outpatient surgical facilities.
Seeing the baby in an ultrasound scares the abortion movement. It’s not anti-woman. Like it or not, women, not men, have bodies that carry babies from conception until birth. Whether you think a god designed that or not, it is a fact that’s hard to get around.
The Church is not afraid of science, but of what immoral things may be done with science. There is scientific thought in what the Catholic Church believes and teaches. Abortion has always been wrong to the Church.
While there is a lot of silly unimportant business being pursued in SPFLD, it’s hard to fault legislators who want to save human lives.
- amalia - Wednesday, Mar 7, 12 @ 5:52 pm:
Peggy R, thanks for underestimating what women understand. if you are not afraid of science, then you will recognize that there is not a heartbeat in the fetus at the moment of conception and that there is not a tiny fully formed baby like the flying pix on crosses in Renaissance paintings. As for the Church…..my church is called the Church too and it is not Roman Catholic.
- Aaron - Wednesday, Mar 7, 12 @ 9:50 pm:
Peggy, the Church is afraid of science otherwise they wouldn’t have tried to stifle it for centuries. And Peggy the way to prevent “unregulated abortionists” is not to make it legally impossible to get an abortion. Stop treading on a woman’s constitutional right.
- jake - Thursday, Mar 8, 12 @ 12:59 am:
Given the absurdity and maliciousness of the ultrasound bill itself, I think the mocking amendments are completely appropriate. The people who are introducing the amendments are in general conscientious and responsible legislators. In this case they are expressing scorn and outrage by use of ridicule, and I think they are completely justified.