Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: Opponents react to HB 40 passage
Next Post: Cullerton: Don’t call it a stopgap or a lifeline
Posted in:
* Rep. Sara Feigenholtz…
“Today is a victory for every woman in our state because it protects every woman’s right to choose,” Feigenholtz said. “I applaud my colleagues who took the critical vote that removed the dangerous anti-choice trigger language from the original act. Today, we stated unequivocally that access to safe legal abortion will remain protected in Illinois.”
“After repeated threats from the White House and President Trump’s remarks to strip abortion rights away from women, this legislation was necessary to safeguard a woman’s right to make decisions that affect her personal health in Illinois,” said Feigenholtz. […]
Before the vote, Feigenholtz sponsored a bus from Chicago to Springfield to enable dozens of activists and concerned citizens to have their voices heard.
“Everyone has the right to not only see democracy in action but also participate in it. I was honored to give my constituents that opportunity,” said Feigenholtz, who earlier this year participated in the historic Women’s Day March in Chicago. […]
Feigenholtz also had a message for Governor Bruce Rauner, who has publically opposed the bill which would give all women, regardless of economic status, the ability to receive the full complement of reproductive healthcare options.
“Governor Bruce Rauner is clueless about what women go through when trying to access reproductive health care in Illinois,” said Feigenholtz. “He sits in his ivory tower spending millions on TV campaign ads- what he needs to do is spend a day in the shoes of a woman struggling to access reproductive health care.”
* Ameya Pawar…
Three years ago, Gov. Bruce Rauner put his name – and his signature – on a pro-choice pledge. Last week, he broke his word to Illinois families, threatening women’s health.
This afternoon, I spoke in solidarity with hundreds of people at the Women’s March on Springfield to rally support for House Bill 40. It’s a common-sense bill that would end the trigger criminalizing abortion if Roe v. Wade were overturned. It would also expand reproductive health coverage for low-income women.
Women’s reproductive health is a basic right. We can’t let extreme politicians like Bruce Rauner take that away. Please share this image on Facebook to show your support for HB40.
This bill shouldn’t be used as another political game for a failed governor. While Gov. Rauner tries to protect his political career by rallying his far-right base, I’ll stay focused on protecting women’s health.
We need to pass House Bill 40 to make reproductive health care more affordable and end the potential criminalization of abortion in Illinois. Please share this message on Facebook or forward this email to three friends.
Gov. Rauner broke his word to all of us. Together, we can hold him accountable – and protect women’s health.
Thank you for being part of our movement,
Ameya
* JB Pritzker…
“Today the Illinois House took a courageous step in protecting women’s healthcare and pushing back against the GOP’s attack on Illinois women,” said JB Pritzker. “I marched in Springfield today, and for more than a quarter century I’ve marched, petitioned, and spoken out to protect women’s reproductive rights in Washington and across our state. It’s because I stand for the values of those I respect the most – my mother, my sister, my daughter, my wife – that I keep fighting. As your next governor, I will continue standing up to protect access to quality healthcare for all Illinois women.”
posted by Rich Miller
Wednesday, Apr 26, 17 @ 9:40 am
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: Opponents react to HB 40 passage
Next Post: Cullerton: Don’t call it a stopgap or a lifeline
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
I wonder how this will play out with African American pastors?
Comment by Rocky Rosi Wednesday, Apr 26, 17 @ 9:43 am
What voters think about publicly funded abortions, especially from bankrupt Illinois, might be an unintended consequence of progressives over playing their hand.
Comment by Deft Wing Wednesday, Apr 26, 17 @ 9:52 am
Abortion is not healthcare, healthcare does not take the life of an unborn child. Women’s reproductive rights- if she is having an abortion she has already used her reproductive rights as she has already reproduced as that life began at conception. Science matters, life begins at conception.
Comment by Arock Wednesday, Apr 26, 17 @ 9:54 am
I like the term “failed governor”. Let’s use it frequently.
Comment by wondering Wednesday, Apr 26, 17 @ 9:58 am
I find this baffling.
Democrats want taxpayers to participate in life destroying decisions with regard to publicly funded abortions, but then they reverse themselves on healthcare and want to convince taxpayers that there will be people dying if current national healthcare policies are changed.
Which is it? I guess one life is more expendable than the other?
I am personally pro-child, pro-adult, and pro-senior.
I’d like to see the GOP continue to be more pro-child and maybe taxpayer funded abortions would be less necessary for economic reasons.
Comment by cdog Wednesday, Apr 26, 17 @ 9:58 am
Representative Feigenholz has been in office in Springfield since 1995.
If this issue is so crucial to women’s health, why did she wait 22 years to introduce a bill that would for the first time use Illinois taxpayer money to fund abortion?
Are they other 46 states and the Federal Governmnet which do not voluntarily use taxpayer money to fund abortion run by extreme politicians?
Perhaps Representative Feigenholz should look in the mirror before accusing others of playing political games.
If the bill was truly supported by a majority of Illinois residents (which no poll indicates is true either here or nationally) democrats would have passed this years ago when they had 12 years of democratic governors and control of the legislatures.
Comment by Lucky Pierre Wednesday, Apr 26, 17 @ 9:59 am
IL Legislative Research Unit already determined in 1989 that there is no trigger law. Sara Feigenholtz and others keep trying to scare the pro-choice base with this inaccurate claim that there is a trigger law.
Comment by Chris Wednesday, Apr 26, 17 @ 10:00 am
“Bruce Rauner fails” and #DoYourJob are the Rauner memes.
All Democrats need to continue to push these two thoughts.
To the Post,
This vote and subsequent Senate vote, and if it passes the Senate…
… the reality is the continue erosion of truth, and pushing the Ounce of Deception reality that IS the Diana and Bruce Rauner credibility.
It’s not about changing the minds of hundreds of thousands of voters, it IS about putting forth to suburban women that Duana Rauner can’t be trusted, herself by her own words, and not trusted to vouch for Bruce Rauner by his own expected actions.
If this expected veto erodes enough of the RaunerS’ personal cetdibility now, and builds upon that for the next 19 months, then Rauner will continue to have serious suburban women voters issues, and Diana Rauner is now as un-credible as Bruce.
Personal PAC can make a difference within the narrow margin. I’ve seen this movie before. Democrat Diana Rauner, the Social Service president won’t be able to waste her own credibility anymore, she’ll be as negative a Bruce.
“Bruce has no social agenda” - Diana Rauner.
Welp, the possible veto all but negates the deception, because the possible veto is… truth.
Comment by Oswego Willy Wednesday, Apr 26, 17 @ 10:08 am
“I wonder how this will play out with African American pastors?”
Probably not much different than legal abortion has played out all these years. I very much doubt masses African-American voters will run into the arms of a political party who’s anti-choice but wants to take health insurance and other vital public assistance away from so many young people.
In Illinois, they’d run in to the arms of a political party who’s owned by a few billionaires, and who is making Illinois so much worse in its owners’ quest to strip the power of many thousands of workers. I don’t see this happenin’.
Comment by Grandson of Man Wednesday, Apr 26, 17 @ 10:14 am
To put some numbers into the discussion. Per the Illinois Department of Public Health, there are about 160,000 live births and 40,000 abortions each year in Illinoia. About 25,000 of the abortions are to single women.
The claim that Medicaid would pay for 30,000 abortions seems a bit of a stretch but not a great one. Most of these would be for abortions that would happen without government funding. This part of it is a cost shift.
If the actual number of abortions increases, this might be cost neutral as Medicaid would avoid paying for the live delivery instead of the abortion.
Medicaid already pays for more than half of all live births in Illinois. Which implies that about 80,000 children per year are born into poverty.
Comment by Last Bull Moose Wednesday, Apr 26, 17 @ 10:14 am
What HB40 does is protect everyone’s Constitutional Right to Privacy, which is what Roe V Wade is based on.
If you dont care about the Government monitoring your own personal life, then you should be against this bill.
But its been clever marketing by Republicans to use the slogan Pro-Life instead of Anti Right to Privacy. And here I thought Conservatives were all about Small Government.
Comment by Mike Cirrincione Wednesday, Apr 26, 17 @ 10:16 am
Bruce Rauner has built a carefully constructed image dropping his G’s, wearing his Carhartt, and driving around in his trash can van. Anyone paying attention figured out long ago that there are two different “Bruce Rauner’s”. What this bill does is show the hypocrisy between the Bruce Rauner “character” and his actions as governor. It’s a narrative that needs to be driven home every day.
Comment by Pundent Wednesday, Apr 26, 17 @ 10:17 am
@cdog:
Government should also cut off funding for Erectile Dysfunction meds subsidized via the tax code thru the ACA, Medicaid, Medicare, Employer Provided Insurance, Private Insurance, and Big Pharma.
This will reduce unwanted pregnancies.
Comment by Mike Cirrincione Wednesday, Apr 26, 17 @ 10:21 am
This is going to be a huge ROI. Think of the monies saved in the long run!
Comment by Puddintaine Wednesday, Apr 26, 17 @ 10:30 am
A veto to this would be a huge middle finger to every rape survivor who was forced to make this horrible decision.
Comment by Rogue Roni Wednesday, Apr 26, 17 @ 10:35 am
Mike C., I agree with you on that. Get taxpayer funded BigPharm advertising off the TV, too. It’s ridiculous.
LastBullMoose has interesting numbers. 80,000 born into poverty. (Of course all the parents are legally in the US so entitled public healthcare at taxpayer expense.)
Maybe Rauner should try harder to get a deal, not a perfect deal, and get on with creating more jobs, training, and educational opportunities so these folks can have equality of opportunity for upward mobility. Maybe there would not be such a great need for abortion and so many children born into poverty. Geez.
(btw, from my “Normal” education, the right to privacy is not actually contained in the US Const. It’s derived from years of case precedent.)
Comment by cdog Wednesday, Apr 26, 17 @ 10:42 am
## A veto to this would be a huge middle finger to every rape survivor who was forced to make this horrible decision.##
How so? Is every rape survivor on medicaid?
Comment by Colby jack Wednesday, Apr 26, 17 @ 10:58 am
## A veto to this would be a huge middle finger to every rape survivor who was forced to make this horrible decision.##
How so? Is every rape survivor on medicaid ?
Comment by Colby jack Wednesday, Apr 26, 17 @ 10:59 am
===IL Legislative Research Unit already determined in 1989 that there is no trigger law===
LRU does good work. They’re not a court, however. And that’s an old report. As we’ve already discussed, the Supreme Court has since altered the precedent.
Comment by Rich Miller Wednesday, Apr 26, 17 @ 10:59 am
If only Democrats were this good at messaging on fiscal matters as they are on this.
Comment by ste_with_a_v_en Wednesday, Apr 26, 17 @ 11:08 am
Rich - Thanks for your response about the LRU. What precedent changed and would it apply to a law enacted in 1975 before the precedent change… when the lawmakers at that time knew (or should have known) that the language had no legal effect? Very odd to make language known to have no legal effect to suddently have a legal effect that was not intended by lawmakers. If they wanted to have a trigger law, they could have made one. They clearly choose not to make a trigger law. They didn’t say what the crime was, who would be prosecuted, etc. Sara F. and friends seem to be really stretching this in order to scare their own supporters into action. Seems manipulative.
Comment by Chris Wednesday, Apr 26, 17 @ 11:23 am
Does anyone honestly think that if Roe were overturned and this so-called trigger law looked like it might take effect (it would be wrapped up in court proceedings forever) that the state wouldn’t overturn the trigger law in a heartbeat? To act like the sky is falling because Roe *might* get overturned and this language *might* be a trigger law and a court *might* enforce it before the legislature could overturn the trigger law is an extreme stretch. I think the women’s march folks yesterday should have made a stop at Sara F. office to ask her why she’s using scare tactics to manipulate her base. You’d think people could at least honestly represent things to their own base of supporters.
Comment by Chris Wednesday, Apr 26, 17 @ 11:29 am
Mrs Blue Dog (I took over my husbands cell phone). I really wish people like Sen. Feigenholz would not speak for me or my dozens of other lady friends.
Comment by Blue dog dem Wednesday, Apr 26, 17 @ 11:46 am
Mad Brown is a woman and I hope Sen. Feigenholz keeps speaking for me and every woman.
My healthcare choices are mine, whatever they may be.
Healthcare procedures including abortion are not for anyone to decide but patient and doctor.
My health insurance can pay for a vasectomy so should I get to know how many men have has a vasectomy? This also alters a ‘right to life’ no one talks about this.
Comment by Mad Brown Wednesday, Apr 26, 17 @ 12:22 pm
## What HB40 does is protect everyone’s Constitutional Right to Privacy, which is what Roe V Wade is based on. ##
Mmmm, no. It about taxpayer funding of abortions. Hipaa covers the privacy of medical records.
Comment by Colby jack Wednesday, Apr 26, 17 @ 12:57 pm
The part of the bill that calls for Medicaid funding for abortions must be symbolic only. Because of the Hyde Amendment, the feds won’t reimburse for abortions funded through state Medicaid programs, so abortions wind up being wholly funded by states, i.e., outside the auspices of the Medicaid program. PS. I am commenting during my unpaid lunchtime. I did not expend your tax dollars while reading and typing.:)
Comment by anon fed employee Wednesday, Apr 26, 17 @ 2:24 pm
my body, my choice. I would probably not make that difficult choice to have an abortion, but I sure have used birth control pills…hey there Roman Catholic church, that IS often used for health care too, never mind family planning. The choice side approves of a variety of health care choices for women. use them, don’t use them. The anti choice side prevents women from making choices, including when a woman is raped. HB40 or get out Rauner.
Comment by Amalia Wednesday, Apr 26, 17 @ 3:09 pm
To all those who are”pro-life,” what is your stance on the death penalty? I find that, very often, some is in support of both. I question that inconsistency. How is it wrong to take an unborn life, but okay to take an adult’s?
Comment by truthbetold Wednesday, Apr 26, 17 @ 3:52 pm
Consider the number of unwanted children born to live a life dependent on state benefits. Welfare, food stamps, WIC, foster homes. Some end up in prison some don’t. Either way the taxpayer is going to foot the bill for all the programs. Adopt a child and provide for him. Otherwise let the mother/father decide.
Comment by anon state employee Wednesday, Apr 26, 17 @ 4:11 pm