Thursday, June 09, 2011

Michigan House Republican Introduces Bill to Restrict "Morning After" Pill

Thought I'd wait and see if the press picked up on this, but since they went with the pit bull ban instead, I guess I'd better throw it out there.

From the GOP lawmaker who brought you the "let's tax the prisoners" legislation, comes this piece of garbage designed to limit choice for women and perhaps catch some campaign $$ from the RtL crowd at the same time:

2011 House Bill 4688: Restrict “morning after” pill

Introduced by Rep. Anthony Forlini (R) on May 26, 2011, to prohibit sale of the “morning after” pill in the same manner as other prescription or non-prescription drugs. Instead, the drug could only be administered by a physician subject to similar disclosure and informed consent regulations as apply to regular abortions, and only after an actual physical exam, not a video exam or internet interview.

As far as I know, as it stands now anyone over 17 can get the morning after pill from any regular pharmacy. This legislation would make it extremely difficult is not impossible to get the drug in a timely manner, rendering its use pretty much out of the question since time is of the essence in this situation. Not many people have the ability to get a doctor's appointment at the drop of a hat, some don't even have a regular doctor at all, and we don't even have to mention the added out-of-pocket cost or the hit on your insurance, do we?

The "less government" Republicans in our legislature have introduced a bunch of odious anti-choice legislation this year; so far stealing your money has taken priority over the right-wing social wedge issues though. But now that they have some time on their hands, look out...

UPDATE 6/13: Add this one to the pile:

House Bill 4715: Restrict late term abortions to neonatal facilities
Introduced by Rep. Thomas Hooker (R) on June 7, 2011, to ban abortions after the fetus has completed 19 weeks of gestation except in a hospital that has a neonatal unit.

http://www.michiganvotes.org/Legislation.aspx?ID=138369

Chip, chip, chip...