Ohio lawmakers consider family planning bill

State lawmakers moved forward Wednesday with a bill that would send Planned Parenthood to the back of the line for public family-planning money, even as crowds of chanting protesters lined the Statehouse halls to oppose the measure.
Associated Press
Nov 15, 2012

The Health and Aging Committee planned a vote later Wednesday on the bill, which would then go to the House floor. The Senate would take up the measure after Thanksgiving at the earliest.

Chairman Lynn Wachtmann, a Republican from Napoleon, said he expected the panel to support the measure.

Protesters in pink T-shirts chanted "Hear us now!" as they packed the hall outside the committee's meeting. Some were staffers of Planned Parenthood. Other protesters wore shirts reading "Women are Watching."

State Sen. Nina Turner, a Cleveland Democrat, said at a news conference on the bill that Republicans in the Statehouse were ignoring the message sent by women with last week's re-election of Democratic President Barack Obama.

"It is absolutely immoral and unconscionable what the GOP is doing," Turner said. "They have not learned their lesson. They are at it again, but it is our job to teach them."

She said Planned Parenthood provides needed preventive health care to low-income women that would be jeopardized by the bill.

Wachtmann said other quality providers of women's health care have sprung up around the state and the bill would give those centers a chance at government funds.

"We have the potential of a lot bigger offering to a lot more women," he said. "This thought that the way everything is today is the best way to do it is just such an archaic thought."

Republican Senate President Tom Niehaus said his caucus is mulling the bill, as well as what action — if any — to take on another measure that would ban most abortions after the first detectable heartbeat. The so-called heartbeat bill, which has cleared the House and is stalled in the Senate, was another target of the Statehouse protesters, many of them female, on Wednesday.

NARAL Pro-Choice Ohio director Kellie Copeland said if that bill passes, the protests in Columbus will only get bigger and louder.

Asked what message on women's issues he took away as a Republican from last week's presidential election, Niehaus left that to others.

"There are a lot of pundits talking about what the election meant. What I try to stay focused on is what's important to Ohio right now, and that's jobs," he said. "I mean, what are we doing to help make Ohio the right place for people to start companies, employ people, and how do they go about getting jobs? That's where I want to keep the focus in the Senate."




Yeah, yeah, yeah and Mary was a virgin too?


Moderators have removed this comment because it contained Profane, obscene, sexual or derogatory language.

the office cat

deer... not to the Mormons. 'God' had intercourse the 'common way' with Mary and begat Jesus as a totally separate being.

the office cat

Samadams et al: Richard Nixon attempted universal healthcare. Ronald Reagan attempted universal healthcare. Bill Clinton attempted universal health care. George II even had a universal health care plan. For almost five decades presidents and congresses have been attempting universal health care...affordable health care. Businesses are trying to accomplish with cuts in hours what couldn't be accomplished with the 'redistribution of wealth' of the Koch Bros, Sheldon Adelson et al.
Ya know, Bush and his GOP gave us Medicare Advantage - which is exactly what YOU talk about as a good solution. All that accomplished was make it almost mandatory for people to have 'supplemental insurance' to cover the donut hole when the Republicans passed yet ANOTHER unfunded mandate.


This is a victory for us tax paying citizens in Ohio.
There is a Health Dept. in every county. They are cheap also.


Planned Parenthood seemed to have a lot of money available to run ads on TV during the election, perhaps they should have saved some it to run their services.
Planned Parenthood's new game plan is to have mega-abortion clinics in large cities. From their website:
Nationwide, the cost at health centers ranges from about $300 to $950 for abortion in the first trimester. The cost is usually more for a second-trimester abortion. Costs vary depending on how long you've been pregnant and where you go.

Robert Banks

I'm all in favor of obambots aborting future presidential hopefuls.


Moderators have removed this comment because it contained Libel and defamation.


Moderators have removed this comment because it contained Remarks that discriminate based on age, race, religion, disability, etc..


I wondered when one of you were going to play the race card.


Why would we want to continue to be the only major economic power on the planet that doesn't offer universal healthcare? Also, if Niehaus is lasered in on legislation that will improve the job situation in Ohio, why is he pushing this Planned Parenthood and abortion legislation; no jobs to be created here. Typical, talk jobs and focus on abortion.

The Big Dog's back

The Repub party is a total joke and embarrassment to mankind.


In recent years and up to the current time, as deeply as it pains me to say it, I agree with you wholeheartedly. Of course, the same's true of the Democrat Party. Their evils and expenditures differ (a little), but the end result is the same: Politicians and government get more powerful while everybody else suffers.


@ SamAdams:

IMO, the last chance for the Repubs was 1964. Sen Goldwater was demonized and LBJ's foreign policy 'mistakes' caused him not to seek re-election four yrs. later.

The East Coast liberal wing of the party chose a direction not unlike the Dems.

IMO, time to "go Galt" and protect you and yours as best as possible.

FYI: A technical but very informative piece I read this morning:


The Congressional Repubs could give Mr. Obama everything he wants and it won't make one iota of difference in the final result. It 'cannot' end well.


I would like to educate folks about the so-called "Heart Beat Bill."
Have any of you dissected an animal and removed segments of heart tissue? It continues to "beat" for some time. The group of cells do not even need to be an organ. So basically, with really good equipment a heart beat can be found as soon as cardiac tissue differentiates in the embryo. It is still a group of cells.


You are no mother of mine.

Also, I linked the text of the Heartbeat Bill under Wiredmama's comment. Feel free to copy paste anything from it that you would like to educate us on..as this comment did nothing of the sort.


This bill is telling women what they can and cannot do with their own bodies. It is just like what Romney said he wanted....to reverse Rowe VS Wade. The GOP will NEVER listen to anything else. They have this stuck in their craw, and it is part of their platform. As long as these people have this idea, it will remain part of their plans. They see it as their RIGHT; to tell woman what they can and cannot do with their own bodies.

This will set back the planned parenthood and abortion rights to what the GOP wanted all along. The Right to Life people have wanted this for some time now and slowly but surely they are winning their war. They have tried every angle possible and they finally have done what they set out to do: stop abortions.

They problem is, with stopping them they have cut out all the other things that go with that: the day after pill, the right to an abortion after rape, the right to abortion if you so chose for health reasons, the right to abortion if you chose NOT to carry your child.

Next will be the right to obtain contraceptive devises for low income women, and for those who cannot afford to pay the full price for those items. Even your so called Obamacare will not cover all this.

So who is going to pay for all these children born to the women who did not want to bear these children? Who is going to pay for the births? The care of these unwanted and ill conceived kids? Welfare is going to take an even bigger hit. So is children's services to say nothing of the role that future adoptive services will have to find homes for. Don't think for a second that some of these women won't give these kids up, especially when they didn't want to be pregnant in the first place.

This plan was not thoroughly thought through by the GOP. It could not have been. They can't FORCE these women to care for kids they didn't want nor plan for. So society is going to have to. I hope it's ready for that. And I hope it can stand to care for the ones that are born with birth defects that need special medical attention that costs hundreds of thousands of dollars. Because we are going to be paying for that as well.

Oh, yes, thanks, GOP. You really listen. You think you cornered the morality market and that you have the answers by withdrawing support for planned parenthood and getting rid of abortions and contraception? It would have been far more blessed had you listened to reason and come down off that high moral horse you have been riding for centuries. Come down to the realites of life and learned to listen to the REAL world for awhile.

Had you done so, you may have had an elected president this time around. Instead, you gave us the lesseer of two evils. Thanks a lot. You really should have just listened. How hard can that be?


Wiredmama (or any of you, for that matter), here is the Heartbeat Bill http://www.legislature.state.oh....
Can you show me where, in that bill, you find anything to support all of that War on Women garbage people keep reciting?

People really ought to read http://www.whyprolife.com/aborti... and also the pages linked at the bottom of it and THEN think..think about whether they really want to let abortions be given for every reason imaginable.
Don't you see what you are doing to our kids? The mindset that YOU are helping to enforce in them?

IF it ISN'T a medical emergency or a rape, then I see no reason why an abortion should be granted. See how quick society starts waking up if we crack down and regulate abortion in such a manner. See how quickly we would reverse the socioeconomic decline in America if, suddenly, personal responsibility "just got real."
And ask yourself if the type of woman (or man, for that matter) that disagrees with me is really the type of person who represents you.


You know, Verdict, I read the legislation and there is no exception for rape or incest in there.

I personally don't understand the rationale for the heartbeat detection being the line that is drawn.

Beyond that I don't expect you to understand why these attempts at controlling women's decisions about issues concerning their bodies are so offensive.


Moderators have removed this comment because it contained Lengthy excerpts from other websites.


Sorry, Reese. My response to you has been deemed lengthy and off-topic. I suppose that would also mean that your reply (which I was replying to) is also off-topic.
Personally, I feel the moderator had an emotional reaction. Perhaps.

the office cat

@ verdict "IF it ISN'T a medical emergency or a rape..."
ONE QUESTION for the all-knowing Verdict. WHY is a child conceived in rape, incest or threatening the life/health of a mother ANY LESS ENTITLED to life? With the insertion of your 'If it isn't' comment you demonstrated your hypocrisy and fact that even you don't ascribe to "life begins at heartbeat" in these exceptions. Get thee behind us, Sata.


Uh, what? I am talking about fairness, not entitlement. How is it fair to force a raped woman to deliver the child of her rapist? She did not choose to have relations with him.
On a related note, rape is likely a temporary thing. Surely we will weed it out of society soon enough (as new technology emerges to combat it).

I did not mention incest, Reese did. In fact, I responded that incest should not even factor in because, unless it was a rape, it was between consenting adults.

I am NOT looking at this in any religious context. Maybe you are and that is why you can't seem to fathom my position.


BUT IF, after all of that (including reading the entire document/s I linked), you still feel "pro-choice" about it..then I think we have to be fair and begin to talk about equal "pro-choice" rights for men. Not every man feels ready for a child either, you know. Let us not be hypocrites.
We wouldn't have to force the woman to have an abortion, tho. We just make a law that says the woman can keep the child if she wants, or not..but the man is not legally responsible if he declares that he is not ready for a child.
Are you sure you wouldn't rather just crack down and bring personal responsibility back? You should know where this is going..in another generation or so. And people will have no one to blame but their own votes.

the office cat

@verdict... how about equal 'pro-choice' rights for embryonic children? How about rights of a child who will be born with a severe birth defect? Or a child who will be placed for closed adoption and have no right to knowledge of its heredity or identity? I'm still not sure of your motivation - it certainly isn't for the child AFTER birth.


Stop trying to avoid the issue with nonsensical and half-sensical rants.
If women can declare they are not ready for a child, men should get the same right. A movement will be started, you can count on that. It was in the works all along, I am sure.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g... explains the procedure of a suction abortion, followed by an actual first trimester abortion as seen through ultrasound.
The viewer can see the child's pathetic attempts to escape the suction curette as her heart rate doubles, and a "silent scream" as her body is torn apart.


Do women need Planned Parenthood?
Only for abortions, apparently. Everything else can be taken care of by your primary physician. "That's..what they're there for," as one PP employee explained..to one of the Indiana women calling to find out where they CAN still go with their Medicaid.
Want more? This next one is just epic. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a...

And the Obama Admin is threatening to cut Medicaid by $40 billion to Indiana if they de-fund PP. Now, THAT would leave low income women without access to those things..NOT the de-funding of PP, as some of his more thoughtless supporters have suggested.
Obama cares, huh? Riiight.


Let's just say you just don't get any of this.

Planned Parenthood is a provider of health care, not an insurance company. So, whether there is Obamacare or not, providers are needed. Many women, especially low-income people, like Planned Parenthood because they are accessible in areas where this healthcare is needed. You can't really understand why a woman would prefer one health care provider over another, but many women and men,but especially women, who have used Planned Parenthood for preventative health care needs, feel very strongly about keeping them available for their health care needs.


YOU don't get it..the big picture, that is. I am not talking about Obamacare and I am not talking about insurance companies. I AM talking about providers.
One of the videos played recorded calls of PP employees saying they do not even provide certain services. And even IF they did, why should we fund a separate entity that offers the same services that your primary physician already provides?

I mean, seriously. A former director of Planned Parenthood, Abby Johnson, went on national television and admitted that PP is not focused on any type of preventative care at all!
She, by the way, left PP..after she saw a baby, on ultrasound, trying to get away from the abortionist's instruments. She claims that Planned Parenthood doesn't want women, OR their own employees, to know what actually goes on during the abortions.