Let's start by boiling the issues down to the basics.
Pro-birth (mostly) Republicans hold firm to their belief, no matter that said belief is completely lacking in factual basis, that there is something sacred in a human embryo/fetus.
Pro-FREEDOM (mostly Democrats and some Republicans) believe the "sacred" aspect of the situation is actual FREEDOM (personal sovereignty,* aka not allowing religious zealots to impose their rules on others without due process of law, the other commonly used expression for this freedom is Bodily Autonomy) for already breathing humans (i.e. women of childbearing age). In other words, it's perfectly fine for a religious zealot to disagree with the right of half the population to make their own choices. But it is NOT acceptable for them to take action to impose ANY requirement on women to abridge their FREEDOM in any way. Or for medical care providers to be prevented from providing necessary medical care to women who need it. Whether by law or threats or any kind of intimidation, personal sovereignty for already breathing humans holds sway over the imagined or philosophically believed rights of any human embryo or fetus.
The Arizona Eagletarian holds firm to the premise that Arizona, one of the "United States of America" was founded on near sacred philosophical documents that have evolved over the course of its two and a half plus century history.
The bottom-line is and will continue to be, for however long our Democratic (Republic...I won't go into a drawn out explanation right now about the fact that republic comes from the words "res publica," or, for the good of the republic. Dominionism, a bastardization of Christian faith, is not for the good of the republic. However, Thomas Paine's writings, including Rights of Man, expounds along with Common Sense, the foundation of OUR republic. Not one iota of which has a darn thing to do with anything other establishing (majority rule) underscored by protection of the rights of minorities.
All of which is the conceptual opposite of what Dominionists and pro-birth factions vehemently propound.
From the Arizona Republic this afternoon:
Senate kick-starts Arizona abortion ban repeal after House Republicans block similar billMary Jo Pitzl,
Stacey Barchenger, Ray Stern Arizona Republic 3:21pm April 17, 2024
Arizona House Republicans twice blocked attempts on Wednesday to repeal a near-total abortion ban that dates from 1864.
But
Republicans in the Arizona Senate crossed over to vote with Democrats, kick-starting the legislative process required to pass an abortion ban repeal.
The House action was orderly and relied on procedural motions, but the result was clear: There was no appetite among most House Republicans to nullify
the law that was revived last week by a 4-2 state Supreme Court ruling.
Rep. Matt Gress of Phoenix was the only Republican who backed the motion from Democratic Rep. Stephanie Stahl Hamilton to bring a repeal up for a vote. But without another Republican, the repeal supporters lacked the 31 votes they needed to surmount objections from House Speaker Ben Toma.
But in the Senate, Republicans Ken Bennett of Prescott, T.J Shope of Coolidge and Shawnna Bolick of Phoenix joined Democrats to reject three GOP attempts to shut down a vote to introduce a repeal bill. Bolick and Shope then voted with Democrats to introduce the repeal bill.
The measure, which will be called
Senate Bill 1734, received its "first read" on Wednesday. That means the bill is active but still needs to work its way through the legislative process. The state constitution requires new bills be heard by each legislative chamber on three separate days, unless lawmakers approve it with a two-thirds majority.
House deadlocks on abortion repeal, preserving GOP control. House Democrats vowed to keep up their repeal attempts.
“This is not going away,” said Rep. Lupe Contreras, of Avondale and the House minority leader. “We’ll bring it back to the floor again.”
Stahl Hamilton, a Tucson Democrat who sponsored House Bill 2677, predicted if Republicans continue to refuse to allow a vote on repeal, they will pay a price in this year’s elections.
[Given the performance of citizen initiatives on this subject since the Dobbs debacle, where in BRIGHT RED states, i.e. Kansas and Ohio, that prediction, and despite obvious rumblings and ramblings of "powerful" Arizona Republican state lawmakers declaring their interest in subterfuge to subvert the will/vote of the Arizona people in November, seems to be an incredibly safe prediction.] “We will definitely flip the Legislature,” she said, echoing Democrats’ intent to wrest control from Republicans.
The 1864 law bans abortions at any stage of pregnancy, with exceptions only for the life of the mother. Doctors, or anyone who aids in an abortion, could face three to five years in prison.
Stahl Hamilton acknowledged that while the
failure to nullify the law might be politically advantageous, she
lamented that it does nothing to protect pregnant women and health care providers.
Wednesday’s session was a contrast with the previous week,
where Democrats erupted in angry shouts of “shame, shame” aimed at their GOP colleagues.
Toma condemned those actions and urged lawmakers to refrain from repeating them.
“I would ask everyone in this chamber to respect the fact that
some of us believe that abortion is the murder of children,” he said. “It is not OK to shout at each other, it is not OK to engage in the kind of behavior I saw on this floor last week.”
[Because Ben Toma is Speaker of the House, and declares abortion to be "murder of children" he has some right to prevent the House from debating and taking action to nullify the insanity imposed on Arizona by the AZ Supremes last week? Declaring a totally anachronistic statute to instead nullify the personal sovereignty of Arizona women is absurd and a religious insanity. I consider HIS refusal to allow legislative action on this matter to be much more offensive than the verbal expression he denounced from last week.]
He defended the court’s ruling, as he urged lawmakers to reject the call for a repeal.
”The last thing we should be doing today is repealing a [
totally anachronistic statute] law that has been enacted and reaffirmed by the [
a NON-state of Arizona] Legislature
several [
a very dubious claim] times,” he said.
Democrats argued that HB 2677 deserves a vote.“This issue is very simple,” House Minority Leader Oscar de los Santos, D-Phoenix, said. “
Do we support or do we oppose an 1864 territorial abortion ban?”
The answer, twice over, was “no.”
After the first attempt failed, Rep. Alma Hernandez, D-Tucson, tried again. She argued that
Republicans play with the rules all of the time to deny Democrats the ability to have their bills heard. And she reminded lawmakers of the consequences of their actions.
“
There are so many people watching right now and watching what Arizona is doing,” Hernandez said, adding that to not even consider a bill that would protect rape victims is appalling.
Democrats had counted on Rep. David Cook’s support for the repeal motion. But the Globe Republican stuck with his caucus.
“I’ve never rolled my leadership or my speaker,” Cook said. [
In other words, he was effectively intimidated by Ben Toma into abandoning his convictions regarding FREEDOM.]
He said he supports a repeal, but it must be done “the right way” and waiving the rules isn’t proper, he said. [
Ostensibly, the "right way" precludes offending the members of the majority caucus]
Abortion opponents pack House galleryWednesday’s actions played out before a House gallery filled with [
Anti-FREEDOM for already breathing HUMANS] supporters of Arizona Right to Life.
Bob Pamplin of Mesa said he wanted to see Republicans stand for the unborn, regardless of the political consequences.
“I’m going to support life [instead of FREEDOM for HUMANS] and I think that’s what elected officials that say they’re pro-life need to do also, not just put their finger in the air and see which way the wind is blowing,” he said.
Another abortion opponent, Michael “Mike Check” Rogers, wore a shirt that said: “Democrats created abortion to control the black population.” [
Just because an Anti-FREEDOM advocate makes a specious claim like this, corporate media must appease them by lending credibility rather than calling out the nonsensical nature of the claim.]
He said he opposed a repeal of the 1864 law and hoped Republican lawmakers chose unborn babies instead of [
FREEDOM] “votes.”
Still, he thinks the abortion ban needs some “tinkering.”
“I don't like doctors being in jail for two to three years,” Rogers said. “But I don't think we have to gut the entire law in order to get rid of those bad branches of the tree.”
One of the people in the gallery heckled Gress as he was telling reporters that he was still confident a repeal would happen if supporters could get the measure brought up for a vote.
“Hey Gress, when are you going to register as a Democrat?” one man in the gallery shouted [
i.e. intimidation]. “Traitor.”
Cathi Herrod, president of the anti-abortion Center for Arizona Policy, said she was “pleasantly surprised” to see Gress and the Democrats’ repeal bid shot down. But she expected to see another repeal try soon, adding: “It’s not over until sine die.” That term refers to the conclusion of Arizona's legislative session.
The 1864 law was revived last week in
a state Supreme Court decision that made headlines nationwide [and perhaps even in more of the world than just the US]. The following day, attempts to push an immediate repeal were shut down by Republicans,
triggering loud protests from Democrats.
The ruling, combined with the
importance of the abortion issue in this year's national election, has drawn national media to the Arizona Capitol.
Stahl Hamilton introduced
HB 2677 earlier this year. It never got a committee hearing, but it could be brought up for a final vote if there is enough support. The bill is a "
clean repeal" of the 160-year-old law, meaning it simply removes the abortion measure from the law books without adding anything new.
Pro-abortion rights, anti-abortion supporters rally outside CapitolRoughly 100 people gathered outside the Capitol early Wednesday at a Right for Life event to remind GOP lawmakers who might waver, and support the repeal, of their views. They prayed for lawmakers to “stand for those who cannot stand for themselves [
including those who are NOT YET actual breathing HUMANS],” passing out
plastic yellow flowers and red rose buds.
Micah Killough, 41, of Mesa, said he and his family wanted to encourage GOP lawmakers to stand true to their views on abortion and not cave to pressure to repeal the ban after the state Supreme Court ruling last week. [
and obviously, to avoid standing for FREEDOM for breathing HUMANS]
“That’s my concern,” Killough said, “that they’re going to bend to what they perceive to be public opinion, as opposed to standing on principle [this seems to be an
Orwellian declaration]. We want them to know that they have constituents that stand with them and do support the right to life and support protecting children.”
Killough and his five children each held stems of yellow flowers. Asked about their significance, his youngest daughter spoke up.
“The guy said it was because babies are beautiful like flowers," the 10-year-old said.
Hours later, after the vote, supporters of abortion rights and leaders of a November ballot measure gathered outside the House.
“
Cowards, that’s the word that comes to mind,” Rolande Baker, 72, of Oro Valley, said of Republicans who voted down the bill. "C-O-W-A-R-D-S.”
Baker and three friends observed the House proceedings from the gallery, then left to join a rally outside the House in support of a citizen initiative to write abortion rights into the Arizona Constitution in November. Baker is a volunteer signature gatherer for the campaign.
"Just this morning, despite a week of empty rhetoric acknowledging the ban hurts Arizonans and is too extreme, anti-abortion rights [
i.e Anti-FREEDOM] politicians in this very building chose not to repeal it, prolonging the fear, uncertainty and injustice of the court’s ruling,” said Dr. Candace Lew, an obstetrics and gynecology physician and chair of the Arizona for Abortion Access campaign.
“Vote them out!” “Shame!” supporters shouted at the rally outside the House.
Republican lawmakers
are discussing strategies to compete [in other words, try to hoodwink Arizona voters with subterfuge] with the Arizona for Abortion Access initiative, which would enshrine the right to an abortion in the Arizona Constitution. The initiative already has
far more than the minimum number of voter signatures to qualify for the Nov. 5 ballot.
There were no measures on Wednesday's calendar that would allow Republicans to insert some of those strategies into an existing House concurrent resolution.
Those plans were made public on Monday when a House GOP memo outlining various measures to counteract the initiative was also sent to House Democrats, presumably accidentally.Meanwhile, the state Senate has a busy calendar with non-abortion bills queued up for a vote. There is a chance that if a repeal is approved by the House, the measure could be sent to the Senate immediately, but it would take several days of work before it could be up for a final vote.
*****
*That no man is good enough to govern another man without that other's consent. I say this is the leading principle, the sheet-anchor of American republicanism . . . Now the relation of master and slave is
pro tanto a total violation of this principle. The master not only governs the slave without his consent, but he governs him by a set of rules altogether different from those which he prescribes for himself. Allow ALL the governed an equal voice in the government, and that, and that only, is self-government. --
Abraham Lincoln, 1865
The great fact underlying the claim for universal suffrage is that every
man is himself and belongs to himself, and represents his own
individuality, not only in form and features, but in thought and feeling.
And the same is true of woman. She is herself, and can be nobody else
than herself. Her selfhood is as perfect and as absolute as is the selfhood
of man.
-- Frederick Douglas, 1886
