H 3114

I always write my best words in the early morning hours.  Unfortunately, I write them in my head as I lay in bed wishing I could catch another hour's sleep.  This morning, I was writing words of anger at the fact -- the fact -- of the obscene twenty-week abortion ban, the obscenely named "Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act" becoming law.

In a state that continues to rank above average in infant mortality, in which our governor has proudly fought federal health care for the poor, our legislature continues to waste our time and precious dollars on bills that would force women to turn their reproductive health over to the government.

In a state where gun violence rules families and neighborhoods, bills promoting the unabashed toting of weapons are as plentiful as, well, as anti-abortion bills.

But over the past years there has been a growing movement, voices that will be heard over the misogynists that have run amok over our state governments.

The headlines began in 2012 with two women representatives being banned from the Michigan House floor after Lisa Brown said the word "vagina" while speaking. 

In 2013 a woman in the Texas legislature, Wendy Davis, in pink sneakers, filibustered an anti-abortion bill that would close abortion clinics throughout the state.

Over these past years, women have come forward to talk about their abortions, no longer hiding from public opinion, realizing that unless we can put faces to the right to have an abortion, that right will be lost.

And each indignity, each lie, has added fuel to our fire.  From Hobby Lobby claiming religious freedom as the principle from which they could deny an employee contraceptive care, to the false identities used to film and edit a meeting with representatives of Planned Parenthood, women are realizing they have had enough and they are fighting back.  The younger generation, those who do not have memories from before Roe v. Wade, are aware that this important freedom is being jeopardized.  And they are pissed off.

Not too long ago, I worried that young woman, because they had always had this right, would not see that it was at risk.  I was wrong.  You can see it all over the media these days.

There is Amy Schumer's "ask your doctor" video and Samantha Bee's segment on Texas' attacks on abortion clinics ("How does removing access to health care improve health care?").  And John Oliver recently turned his pen to a scathing indictment of Texas HB 2, that bill that Wendy Davis filibustered against in 2013 and which is now being challenged in the Supreme Court.  

I have often whined about the failure of movies to show abortion as a normal medical option, but that is happening too.  Grandma, with Lily Tomlin, is a breath of fresh air and a paean to the strength of women who have had to endure the pressure and the venom of the anti-abortionist while making such an important and personal decision.

Yes, I think we have all had it.  Right now it is the Supreme Court hearing regarding that awful Texas bill that has closed most clinics in the state for reasons having nothing to do with women's safety and everything to do with limiting access.  But it is also the fact that more women (and girls), denied access to safe abortions, are seeking information on how to self-abort.  It has come down to life and death, to the days of coat hangars and back alleys, once again.

And because of this, woman are willing to fight, for themselves, for their daughters and their mothers.  Men are standing up and fighting for the women that they love and respect, who should have the right to the best health care and to make the best choices without government interference.

So while my sleep-riddled words this morning were variations on the angry and mocking words I have written before, as I became fully awake it occurred to me that H 3114 is one more step towards taking our bodies and our rights back.  We have fought hard and learned that there is no way that reason can influence those mean-spirited and intellectually limited narcissists in our state legislatures.  But armies of women can make enough noise, as we have before, and change those legislatures.

I am looking forward to women, young and old, standing up to run against the tyrants, with loud and fearless voices.  They may not have the corporate money of the right-wing, but they have the power of the cause.  I have said before that when we take back our government and our rights, it will not be with candidates who are cautious and try not to ruffle the electorate.  We are the electorate, and there really are more of us that want our rights protected.  If we aren't afraid to fight, we will eventually win.

So just as the Texas bill was weaseled into law, so goes H 3114.  But that is not the end of the fight.  It is a battle that has energized those of us who truly value life and freedom, and we will not let it go so easily.

Democratic Women

With terrorist groups using Donald Trump's hate speeches to encourage terrorism, I would like to suggest a little diversion from the terrifying idea that he or any one of those idiots could be our next president.  It is truly too soon after the Dubya years to contemplate.

Instead, let's take a peek at our own SC State Legislature, and the schemes and pranks they have up their sleeves for the coming legislative session.

We do have heroes stepping up to file a bunch of gun control bills (oops, I mean "gun safety"), and a particularly brilliant and much-needed erectile dysfunction bill, the usual nuts and bolts are spewing the usual old-white-christian-male nonsense.  I wish December saw them spending more time celebrating the joy of Christmas and less time ruminating on how to take away the rights of all us residents of Whoville.

We have a bill that will protect pastors from the ever present threat that they will be forced to perform a marriage ceremony on a gay couple.  There's the one that keeps popping up that would make absolutely sure that our judges will not practice Sharia Law in our South Carolina Courts.  And one that will protect us from being overrun by refugees; once they have food and a roof over their heads, I imagine the fear is that the next step will be to establish their own little governments.

Then we have one that would require every school district to display the words "In God We Trust" in every single school in the state.  Since they'll be spending the tax dollars on plaques instead of educational materials, maybe our pols figure a miracle is the only way our kids are going to get educated.

Of course, the real red meat for our right wingnuts is women's reproductive rights.  How can Lee Bright focus on decorating that tree with little mangers when he is imagining all the infinitesimal little tiny babies in all the women and girls that might not be born?  And his buddy in all things despicable, Kevin Bryant, can't hardly say his prayers for imagining what goes on in a woman's body when she has an abortion.  Let's not forget Wendy Nanney who represents all the women who want to control women, and her fact-free "pain capable" anti-abortion bill which is likely to start the session right where it left off in June, attempting to force its way into passage.

As half-time of the two-year legislative sport approached, Kevin Bryant tossed out a bill that would ban "dismemberment abortions."  And chomping at the bit, during the prefile period, a whole plethora of lunatics signed on to the comedically entitled "Defunding the Abortion Industry and Advancing Women's Health Act."  Thanks to the Americans United for Life this bill is spreading around the states like ebola.  So as well as pretending the goal of killing Planned Parenthood is to save "babies," the anti-abortion movement has now taken the absolute galling stand of claiming they are protecting women's health.

Well, here's my point.

We need to fight these idiots.  They are very small, bitter people who are incapable of seeing the irony or the falsehood of any of this legislation.  The same legislators who would like to force women to bring a pregnancy to term work just as hard to make sure that she does not have adequate health care.  In the case of working to kill Planned Parenthood, they also want to make sure that women of limited means don't have access to birth control.  Many of them will fight to prevent medically accurate sex ed.

Gee, it's almost as though the radical right wing wants to punish girls and women for having sex by making them bear children.  And then make them work a low paying job with inadequate child care.  And then blame them -- and the kids -- when they have problems.

Family values just don't get screwier than that.

Here in Charleston County, we have a group of Democratic women that are fighting for sanity in our legislature.  They support representatives that will work for us, that will fight to protect us from the rabid and rage-filled radicals of the right.  And this year they have a goal of joining forces with us to advocate for us in Columbia.

Charleston County Democratic Women (CCDW) meets once a month, on the first Thursday, at the Charleston - Riverview Holiday Inn.  You don't have to be a member to enjoy the $20 buffet dinner and the speakers, and you don't have to be a woman.  You do have to support the goals that will make lives better for women, which in fact, will improve all our lives.

Membership is $20 annually, and January is membership renewing time.  While the cost of the meeting pays only for the dinner, membership goes toward supporting the candidates that will move us forward in South Carolina.  Better education for our children, freedom from reproductive tyranny for women and families.

On Thursday, January 7, the speaker will be Dr. Donna Johnson, first female Chair of the MUSC Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology.  She will talk about why South Carolina gets an "F" in women's care.  And what we can do about it.

Start the year off right by supporting Charleston County Democratic Women, and by joining in the effort to make legislative changes that will in fact advance women's health, and improve the lives of all of us.

You can find Charleston County Democratic Women on Facebook, and get more information about Thursday's meeting.

I hope to see you there.

Big Anti-Abortion Rally in the SC Senate

On Wednesday, April 1, the South Carolina Senate is going to hear not one, not two, but four anti-abortion bills.  This will be the Medical Affairs Subcommittee, at 9 a.m. in 207 Gressette.  The bills are: H 3114, S 25, S 28, and S 130.  These are all basically the same bill, the 20-week ban that pretends to be science by claiming that fetuses at 20 weeks can feel pain. 

Is this a last ditch effort to pass one of these god-awful bills before recess?  It has the feel of a back-room plot, with old white men smoking big smelly cigars, doesn't it?  Just determined, before the break for the big religious holiday, to do something to get a wink and a back-slap from their Guy in Heaven.

I would like to understand why there are four of the same bills floating around, some with the same sponsors.  It makes no sense, which is at least consistent with the content of the bills.  Maybe it's a case of dueling egos, but if there is a rationale for flooding the Senate with copies of the same bill, I sure would like to be on top of it.

Let's just hope that a couple of the sane members of this subcommittee are planning some evasive action.

Here's one thing, though.  We can't expect our guys to fight this ugly fight without our support.  And we need those nasty women-haters to know we aren't going to sit by while they plan to keep us barefoot and pregnant.

So we need to call and email.  Every one of them.  Once, twice, as often as possible.

You know those anti-abortion wackos that block the Charleston Women's Medical Center?  The ones who show up at ACLU meetings, Planned Parenthood events, and pretty much any other place where people might gather to talk about preserving individual freedom?  They are tireless.  There aren't all that many of them, but the way they show up, Zelig-like, they seem to be everywhere.

That is the presence -- and the passion -- that we need to project.  Politicians may be bought, and they may have their own pet projects that disregard the needs of their constituents, but if you make enough noise, they will worry about their futures.  And those guys in the Senate who do support women's reproductive freedom and privacy need to know there are gazillions of us behind them, cheering them on.

So here's the thing.

Women of reproductive age, and the men who are also affected by these attempts to control their lives, need to shout the loudest, because they have the most to lose.  Be sure to tell these young women and men exactly what is going on this Wednesday.  The 20-week abortion ban seeks to prevent women from making critical medical decisions about their welfare and that of their families.  After the anti-abortion gang was able to get 24-week abortions banned with their "partial birth" false science, the 20-week abortion ban was next on their checklist.  And be assured that if this becomes law, they will be energized and will pursue ever more restrictive measures.  The goal is not just total ban on abortion, but a ban on contraception as well.

If you can be there on Wednesday, do it.  Your presence at the statehouse will be noticed.

Whether you are there or not, call and / or email the members of the Medical Affairs Committee.  You can do that from scstatehouse.gov by going to the Senate link, and then to the email link.  You can send individual emails, or an email to all Senate members.  I don't think it's possible to overdo your voice or your message.

You can also go to this ACLU link:

https://ssl.capwiz.com/aclu/issues/alert/?alertid=64213171&type=CU&ms=fb_150316_aff_SC_reproductive_rights

Feel free to add your own words to the prepared text.  And don't worry about how well you write; it is the message that matters.

If there is enough noise, it is possible that some committee members will be less eager to push these bills through.

Finally, spread this message through Facebook, Twitter, and your email lists.  The sad truth is that when these terrible bills do pass, it is a surprise to far too many of us.  Let's not let that happen.

And let's not let Lee Bright and Wendy Nanney dictate what happens in our doctors' offices.

When the Right Word Just Isn't Enough

A few days ago, I sent out an email suggesting everybody take a deep, calming breath, and get ready for the SC Senate round of "Let's Pass this Awful Anti-Abortion Bill."  The one that I was referring to was Wendy Nanney's pet, the 20-week abortion ban, that didn't make it through last season.  Wendy can't sleep till this bill gets passed, in spite of her contention that people have been just plain mean to her because of it.  Poor Wendy.  You might almost think that she is the one whose welfare is being threatened by the provisions of the bill.

Anyway, no time to take a breath, because that bastion of freedom for old white men, Kevin Bryant, has just sponsored S 531, a bill to ban "dismemberment abortions."  Or as those gentle folk at "Life News" would say, "Bill to Ban Dismemberment Abortions Tearing Babies Limb from Limb."

They may be barely literate, but they make up for it with hysteria.

As you may recall, fanning the flames of hysteria with misinformation and outright lies was a rousing success in the misnamed "partial birth abortion" battle.  This was thrilling for those whose grasp of science is conveniently misplaced but whose imaginations run to the wildly gruesome.  Personhood may not be as successful because it is too extreme, or it may just be that it doesn't raise the hackles as do phrases like "fetal pain" and the more objective sounding yet nonsensical "pain capable."  Giant paintings on the sides of buses, trucks and billboards may not actually represent scientific accuracy, but they certainly can produce Heironymous Bosch chills up one's spine.

In fact, the obsession with the gruesome, in spite of the professed concern for life, pretty much describes the anti-abortion battle.  Much like those so opposed to gays co-existing in their world that baking a wedding cake sends them into frenzies because of the portent of gay sex, the anti-abortion fanatic can't seem to stop seeing dead things.  Tiny dead things.

In this country, theoretically at least, self-appointed messengers of God are still unable to force people to their will based on warped ideas about religion.  So they are forced to resort to gumming up the works with the pretense of science, gussied up with horrid images.

And it works.

I believe it's time we fight hyperbole with hyperbole.  We need our legislators to get out there and write some bills that really, really stand out.

For example, for some inexplicable reason, domestic violence just doesn't have an emotional impact in our red state.  So, to take a cue from those far more adept at inflaming the masses, how about we call it the "Punching and Gunning Down Women Prevention Bill?"

Or the "Don't Starve Our Toddlers Act" in support of expanding food stamps (can also be used for minimum wage).

If that is too coarse for legislators on our side of the aisle, how about a "Prevention of Medical Surveillance" bill to counter the anti-abortion bills?  After all, we here in SC fear being spied upon almost as much as having our guns taken away.  "Death panels" was so effective in revving up fear of Obamacare that perhaps it could be taken out of mothballs and brought back for a bill to actually regulate insurance companies when the Supremes kill the ACA.  Or it can be used here at home against opponents of Medicaid expansion.

I do think we are too timid, and that is why we are constantly in the position of defending ourselves from the onslaught of rabid verbiage that takes center stage in a battle for our civil liberties and safety.  Until we are able to flood Congress and the State Legislature with equally dramatic bills full of fighting words, we will be at a disadvantage.  Thus far, the twenty-first century has not been the time for a reasoned approach.  To anything. 

When 20-Week Abortions Are Banned

There are some rumors that H 3114, the bill that would ban abortion at twenty weeks, could come to a vote in the South Carolina House this week.  Debate began on it last week and was adjourned to this Wednesday, February 11.  I know I have only been tracking bills in South Carolina for a couple of years, but it seems to me that some bills just don't want to be tracked, and there are ways to keep the public from learning when and where and what happens next.  This is one of those bills.

The twenty week ban is a sneaky proposition.  Its premise, the "pain-capable" nonsense is false science; legislators, prompted by a National Right to Life model bill, bring up the same outlier research, and ignore the consensus of the medical and scientific community, that is, that pain receptors are not developed until 24 weeks at the earliest.  This is the kind of fake science that slings about emotional and suspect terms like "unborn baby" and "preborn" (which never fails to remind me of the "pre-owned" leased-car-for-sale euphemism).

This is the kind of science that is used when cigarette manufacturers try to prove cigarettes don't cause cancer, and fracking doesn't pollute the environment.  A doctor, a scientist, a "medical expert" is paraded about.  (Remember the joke about "What do they call the medical student that graduates at the bottom of the class?"  "Doctor.")  And the testimony is repeated, and becomes "fact."

And then there are the not just false, but crazy, claims that we have heard from actually elected officials, of masturbating fetuses:  "If they feel pleasure, why is it so hard to believe they feel pain?"  Yes, laugh so we don't cry at the horror of these bizarre fantasies wending their way into legislation which could destroy lives.

If this bill passes in South Carolina, what effect would it have?  In fact, for most of us, it would have no effect at all.  Because the reality is that an abortion at or after twenty weeks is extremely rare.  It occurs when there are severe complications in a wanted pregnancy.

Let me repeat that:  At twenty weeks or later, an abortion is extremely rare, and occurs when there are severe complications in a wanted pregnancy.

But the inflammatory rhetoric has resulted in most of us assuming that late-term abortions happen all the time, that they are frivolous, and that actual viable human life is snuffed out at the whim of the woman and her abortion doctor.

It was exactly this type of deception that brought us the "partial birth abortion" con job, and the subsequent federal law of 2003 which the Supreme Court upheld in 2007.  The term "partial birth" is not a medical term but a successfully inflammatory political one.  Given its success, it is not surprising that the next step on the war to ban abortion would be to save the "pain capable" twenty week fetus.

And what would happen if that bill were to pass?  For most of us, nothing.  Because the procedure is rare, it would not affect most of us.  But for the small percentage of women who suffer through the awareness that something serious is wrong with their pregnancy, this law would be a travesty and a tragedy.  It means doctors feeling the cold breath of the law watching and demanding documentation, and the possibility that they will be falsely accused of committing murder.  For the woman, it will mean adding to the crisis the fact that the government is surveilling her medical decisions.  It may mean that she is unable to make the decision to abort as soon as possible, adding days and weeks of agony to this already horrific situation.  It could mean that she is not allowed to have the abortion at all.  

In Georgia the law grudgingly allows for "medically futile" pregnancies, but not for exemptions for a woman's emotional or mental condition.  State Representative Terry England felt that there should be no exceptions:

“Life gives us many experiences,” England said in response to concerns that a woman would have to carry a fetus to term that was not expected to live. “I’ve had the experience of delivering calves, dead and alive -- delivering pigs, dead and alive. … It breaks our hearts to see those animals not make it.”

And in the US House of Representatives, Texas idiot Louis Gohmert agrees, actually telling a witness during hearings that she should have carried her pregnancy to term even though it had been determined that the fetus had no brain function.

This nightmare scenario that dim-witted legislators and the anti-abortion movement like to call life-affirming, means the possibility of carrying a fetus to term that will not be able to sustain life, or will be so severely disabled that it would require a life-until-death of pain and surgical interventions.  It would mean a family torn to shreds in emotional despair and financially devastated.

None of us begin a pregnancy assuming the worst could happen.  If it does, the last thing we need is Wendy Nanney or Lee Bright telling us what we should do about it.

So we need to shout, all of us, against this bill.  We need to call and email our legislators, over and over, and tell them why this bill is false science, and that it is not the business of our legislators to determine medical issues.  We need to fight for those who may need someday to have the freedom to choose a late-term abortion.  It is indeed a rare occurrence, but it is something that could happen to any of us.

Spread the word by email, Facebook or Twitter.  Write or call your legislators.  Write or call any legislators you know.  We people of reason really do outnumber those on the other side of this war on women's medical freedom and privacy.  Now is the time to let them know it.

Honoring Our Legislators

As the clown car pulls out of the Columbia station, I think we should all take a few moments to reflect on what I believe has been a year of astounding idiocy.

For example, who can ever get enough state symbols?  Whenever we start to think there is nothing our legislators can agree on, we can always turn to choosing another state symbol.  But wait!  This year, we managed to turn a simple request to recognize the Columbian mammoth as state fossil into a battlefield.  Just as we keep fighting the Civil War, this was yet another chapter of science versus the bible.  Senator Kevin Bryant added an amendment that referred to the animal "as created on the sixth day with the beasts of the field."  Not to be outdone, Senator Mike Fair then put a block on the bill based on his failure to grasp the theory of natural selection.  These religious objections and aimless incursions into the realms of science are just another day of governing down here;  my favorite objection, however, is that we have just too darned many state symbols.

Anyway, my personal opinion about the state symbol debate is that the more time they spend arguing about state-whatevers, the less time they have to do real damage.  Like the way they mangled attempts to legalize medical marijuana.  Our moral mediocrity members, by way of protecting us from relief of pain in our illnesses, whittled down what should have been a simple bill by creating complexities that Obamacare drafters could only have written in their dreams.  Talking out of the other side of the mouths that they use to spout stuff about individual freedom, our legislators showed their concern that we not succumb to the evils of the wicked weed by narrowing the type of oil, its point of origin, the specific type of research, and I believe the hours of the day and days of the month it can be accessed.  And probably a dozen or more other stipulations that will keep that plant out of the hands of those in need.

But no prizes to those who worked hard to make the bill meaningless; it's been done already.  Right here in South Carolina, in 1980, the South Carolina Controlled Substances and Research Act had so many inclusions and exclusions that it has never actually been used.  Not once.  While we wait another 35 years for the next attempt at a law that would actually allow people to use medicinal marijuana, we'll just have to keep relying on that oxycodone, the stuff that will get you high and addicted, while PhRMA gets ever richer.  Hey, it's legal.

Well, that was a little too heavy for a clown car award, especially if you start to think about the people you know who experience chronic pain, and/or the drug dependency and side effects of oxy use.  So I'm not even going to talk about Wendy Nanney's work to become god's crusader for exposing (and controlling) women's medical decisions.  But Wendy did give us a lighter moment.

It seems she was driving home one day and noticed a bicyclist do something dangerous.  And in the time it took her to get where she was going, she had devised a bill that would require licensing and classes for cyclists.  Except that the minute it went public, and to her surprise and consternation, friends of hers in the bicycling community were up in arms; two hours later, the bill went down.  Wendy defended her bill by saying that it wasn't really about big government; only those over 15 years old would have to be licensed.

Now this to me is proof that Wendy sincerely cares about life before birth and after age fifteen.  Any life falling in between is on its own.

Wendy Nanney -- You have to be this tall to be required to get a bicycle license.

Another heated battle that should not have been was about whether to bring sex ed into the twenty-first century, which for some of our legislators would have been too much too soon, as we never actually made it all the way into the twentieth century.  Mike Fair, staunch defender of his own religious distortions, sees no need to bring any education, much less sex education, up to the level of "medically accurate."  Seems to me he was back there complaining that "minimally adequate" was too high a standard for educating our children.

The problem may just be that Mike is uncomfortable with the thought that these young kids might end up knowing more than he does.  So after months of serious legislators, organizations and constituents fighting to get it to the point of passage, he put a block on the bill.   Proving that one idiot can move an entire Senate, and in fact, an entire state -- backwards.

In the final minutes of debate on another bill which attempts to provide much needed awareness to our children, one senator wakes up and rises to ask, "Why are we teaching sexual awareness to our four-year-olds?"  The sponsor of the bill informs him that it is not "sexual awareness" but "sexual abuse awareness."  Watching this debate, a wise friend commented, "Forget the kids; our legislators need sex ed."

And so it goes; another year down the tubes.  If it's any consolation, these guys did approve a raise for themselves.  Might be coming out of the savings from denying people food stamps and Medicaid, but it will be well worth it to keep these idiots off the street.

If you have a favorite moment from this year in South Carolina's legislature, please leave a comment and share it with us all.  Sometimes you just gotta laugh.

More About Bicyling and Pregnancy

Yesterday I wrote about the overreaching South Carolina Representative Wendy Nanney's idiotic bill which would require bicyclists and moped owners to get licensed and insured (with the exception of those expendables who are under 15), and her quick about-face after protestations by the cycling association.

It occurs to me that I may have sounded snarky (moi?!) in reference to bicyclists.  That was not at all my intent.  In fact, I believe that we need to make all our streets safe for cyclists.  Good for people, good for the environment.  I have driven too many times, half-awake, in the early morning, swerving to avoid a bicyclist at the last minute, not because they were not riding safely, but because of narrow roads where cars and bicyclers were forced to share too little space.

But the fact is, it is easier for those like Nanney to make laws fattening the pockets of industry, forcing new rules, paperwork and cost on her constituents, creating greater government bureaucracy, and with absolutely no contribution to insuring the safety and well-being of the public.  Easier than making sure that every new and repaved road has safe walking and bicycling lanes.

This is the way it is also for her fight against pregnant women.  Far easier, and apparently more satisfying, to make laws to force a woman to be pregnant than to ensure a better life for women.  The rate of teen pregnancies could be lowered by better education -- not just sex education, but an education that brings hope to teens for a good future.  Family planning, including contraception, would go a long way to provide families with financial and emotional security, so that wanted children will grow healthy.  Guaranteed health care and nutrition may eliminate the need for some of those twenty week abortions, and certainly reduce the rate of infant mortality -- a statistic of which Nanney should be embarrassed.

But, as the saying goes, when all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail.  And our representatives here in South Carolina, mostly see their job as making laws to make us do stuff that won't make our lives any better.  Getting a license to ride a bike on streets that aren't safe won't make cyclists any safer.  Making children and women get pregnant and stay that way rather than providing good education and health care is also the cheap way out.  And I mean cheap in the sense of quality as well as cost.

So my apologies to any cyclist that may have been offended yesterday.  It may not appear so at first glance, but you have a lot in common with those girls and women who have come under fire from our fierce and fanatical legislators.  And I will fight for your right to better roads if you will fight for a woman's right to reproductive health care.

    

When Nanney Backs Down

This morning I read that the appropriately named Wendy Nanney, House representative from Greenville, had introduced a bill that would require bicyclists and moped operators to be licensed and insured.  "Hmph," I muttered, there goes Mama Nanney again.  I gave a wee bit of thought to what a boondoggle that would be for the insurance industry, one of the groups that our legislators take good care of here in South Carolina, and then went on to other matters.

Hours later the headline in The State informed that after great protest, Nanney had withdrawn the bill.

Now, let's back up a little here.  Wendy Nanney is the legislator that is pursuing with no less than religious zeal the bill that would prohibit abortions after twenty weeks.  She has brought all the power that the Bible and bad science can bear, and many of her partners in crime lined up to co-sponsor the bill.  It mattered not that scientists had proven that the "facts" of her bill were wrong.  And she cared not that women's health and medical care were being invaded and compromised by the requirements of the bill.  Wendy was out to save "lives."

Yet, when she looked out on the street and saw that bicyclists were being careless, and decided that it was her duty to write a law forcing them to, well, take a course and then pay for a license, there was such an outcry that she dropped the cause immediately.

So why are some "lives" more expendable than others?  Why would a woman making decisions about her own body be so much more important than a cyclist riding in a way that endangers themselves and puts others at risk?  In fact, Nanney points out that her bill would only require licensing for those fifteen or older.

Please, please explain to me why a child would not need the safety precautions that an adult cyclists requires???  This makes about as much sense as requiring a woman whose pregnancy is at risk to carry the pregnancy to term, while not making health care available for all pregnant women.

I worry about the mental health of many of our legislators.  It seems that they work so hard to prove their worth that their judgment fails.  And then they are rewarded with way too much power over us.

I also wonder that the Palmetto Cycling Coalition has more political clout than groups like the ACLU and the National Organization for Women.

Or it may be something else entirely.  After all, the South Carolina Restaurant and Lodging Association was quiet while a bill was passed allowing guns in bars and restaurants.  While they claim that was because owners were split on whether they were in favor of the bill, many owners say they were not made aware of the bill.  Of course, the NRA has more clout with legislators than both the Restaurant and Lodging Association and the Palmetto Cycling Coalition (and throw in NOW and the ACLU).

Which must make you want to ask who has so much clout that Nanney and her buddies would tirelessly pursue abortion bans and personhood bills?

As with the NRA, we need to follow the money.  It's not the right-to-life groups, really, that are keeping these horrible bills afloat, year after year.  They are merely the very loud and committed spokespeople.  They are being controlled by groups like the NRA, groups like the American Enterprise Institute, groups run by Karl Rove and the Koch Brothers.  It may not seem like they are being controlled; maybe it is really just the Partnership from Hell.  But it amounts to the same thing.

The people with the money and power, who stand to lose some of that money and power if we unite against issues like living wage and health care, have learned that they can get followers to rise up and pledge their support for the candidates who will further their power agenda.  All they have to do is create a smokescreen of "moral issues."  Nixon did it with his "law and order" campaign.  Reagan's handlers realized that there were millions who could be turned to their advantage by pretending that the quest for power was a religious quest.

And today we have anti-abortion groups, anti-gay groups, anti-Moslem groups, all working to foment fear.  They support the candidates (and the candidates support them)  so that none of us can muster the strength or the dollars to fight the people who control the country:  big agriculture, pharmaceuticals, oil, Wall Street.  Fortunately for bicyclists, Wendy Nanney didn't think their lives were important enough to turn into a cause.

Pathways to Censorship

Well, the South Carolina House took a break from is persecution of women yesterday to weigh in on college reading lists.  According to our representatives, a licensed physician needs to be regulated by our legislators and so do our university professors.

Wait a minute!  Are these the guys (and Nanney) who are constantly harping on freedom and how regulation is destroying our country -- God bless America, hallelujah!?  Apparently, this bunch has done a bit of research and found that there are some areas, none of which would adversely affect themselves, where we citizens need to be instructed -- by them.

For example, Wendy Nanney has it on good faith (faith being the instructive word) that at twenty weeks a fetus feels pain.  So she has another God-fearing expert testify to that effect, and wins out handily against the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists.

And now we have a budget amendment that would have part of a university's funding held up until they ban using "pornographic content" in classes.  Representative Mac Toole from Lexington adds that "pornographic content" is not defined because we will know it when we see it.

Oh, my, if only Molly Ivins were here to do justice to this state of affairs.  She was the go-to gal on ignorance in the Texas lege.  She once said about a state legislator from Dallas:  "If his IQ slips any lower, we'll have to water him twice a day."  And now that I think of it, taking care of infirm legislators here in SC could be considered a jobs bill.

While we are whiling away our time, setting around trying to make ends meet, we do have hard working legislators making sure we don't step out of line.  Freedom is okay, as long as it's accompanied by lots of campaign contributions.  After all, money is speech.  Which is exactly what they want us to understand about our colleges.  The politicians have the money, so they own the speech.

I am thinking this might be one of those instances where we might just sit back and watch censorship in action.  After all, we'll know it when we see it.