Alabama Politics in
Doc’s Political Parlor
& Home of Lawn Mower Repair

February 24, 2006

Friday 2/24/2006 DAILY NEWS DIGEST

Filed under: Uncategorized — Danny @ 6:15 am

http://www.al.com/news/birminghamnews/index.ssf?/base/news/1140776738124540.xml&coll=2 – Attorney General says millions of dollars are in budget for services to developmentally disabled individuals, advocates disagree.

http://www.al.com/news/birminghamnews/index.ssf?/base/news/1140776112124540.xml&coll=2 – DHR Commissioner says he wants to see private counseling clients on the side.

http://www.al.com/news/birminghamnews/index.ssf?/base/news/1140776413124540.xml&coll=2 – Finance Director labels ETF budget as “not financially responsible” in comments before Senate committee.

http://www.al.com/news/birminghamnews/index.ssf?/base/news/1140776527124540.xml&coll=2 – Committee chair criticizes Revenue Commissioner for lobbying for Riley’s tax reform proposal, express concerns that Department could target opponents.

http://www.al.com/opinion/birminghamnews/index.ssf?/base/opinion/1140776134124540.xml&coll=2 – Editorial urges legislature to act on tax relief for poor families following release of CPBB report on state income rates, sees Riley’s plan as most viable.

http://www.al.com/news/mobileregister/index.ssf?/base/news/1140776356124570.xml&coll=3 – Riley confirms that he is in discussion with Rep. Knight trying to work out tax reform plan.

http://www.al.com/news/huntsvilletimes/index.ssf?/base/news/1140776354124610.xml&coll=1 – Sen. Jeff Enfinger (D-Huntsville) announces that he will not seek reelection.

http://www.al.com/opinion/huntsvilletimes/index.ssf?/base/opinion/1140776239124610.xml&coll=1 – Editorial urges readers to contact legislators and demand their support for constitutional convention.

http://www.dailyhome.com/news/2006/dh-pellcity-0224-richardmcvay-6b23v3150.htm - Riley urges local GOP members to work to turn Alabama into a “true red state.”

http://www.dailyhome.com/opinion/2006/dh-editorials-0224-0-6b23v2431.htm - Editorial urges legislature to raise tax threshold now.

http://www.decaturdaily.com/decaturdaily/news/060224/taxes.shtml - Sales tax holiday proposal clears House on unanimous vote.

http://www.gadsdentimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060223/APN/602231033&cachetime=5 – Senate ends day early after failing to achieve quorum.

http://www.montgomeryadvertiser.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060224/NEWS02/602240311/1009 - Attorney General draws criticism from anti-abortion activist.

http://www.tuscaloosanews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060224/NEWS/602240350/1012/editorial1 - Editorial uses CBPP as impetus for yet another call for tax relief for poor families.

FROM TODAY’S ANNISTON STAR:

EDITORIALS

A rich opportunity

In our opinion
02-24-2006

The other day, when it was announced that President Bush’s budget will eliminate the “nutrition-in-a-box” program that provides healthy meals to senior citizens, Wisconsin Sen. Herb Kohl asked, “How do you justify doing something like this, while at the same time giving people like Herb Kohl huge tax cuts?”

Kohl is a multimillionaire.

Would that more of the well-to-do would ask themselves the same question.

Under the Bush tax plan, the wealthy are making out like bandits, while the poor and middle class are seeing programs they depend on being reduced or abolished.

And, judging from how little the Bush beneficiaries have protested this inequity, the well-to-do must feel that what they are getting what they deserve.

Closer to home, the same thing is happening.

After years of pushing to ease the tax burden on lower-income earners, Rep. John Knight’s proposal to raise the minimum income tax threshold from $4,600 to $22,900 is finally getting serious consideration.

But there is opposition.

It rankles the well-to-do that Knight’s proposal does not include a tax cut for them (as Gov. Bob Riley’s plan does). But most galling to the rich is that revenue lost by raising the income-tax threshold would be made up by eliminating the federal income tax deduction, which is a nice break for the rich, but doesn’t mean much to everyone else.

Advocates for the affluent are already attacking the elimination of the deduction as a tax increase on the middle class — a deceptive strategy, indeed unethical strategy, but one that works on middle-income earners whose tax burden is only slightly less that that borne by the poor.

What we need is for Rep. Knight and his supporters to find a way to give the middle class a break as well, but more than that, we need the wealthy of our state to do what Herb Kohl did: Denounce the unfair tax code we have and let it be known that they will support efforts to change it — even if it costs them money.

Alabama has many decent citizens who just happen to be financially better off than most folks. It is time that their voices were heard.

INSIGHT


Legislature attacking women’s rights

By Cheryl Sabel
Special to The Star

02-24-2006

Here in Alabama, pious politicians want to make laws to display the Ten Commandments, allow prayer in school and teach creationism, while restricting or criminalizing abortion and failing to pass legislation to address hate.

Pending legislation (HB19) that has already passed the Alabama House seeks to impose additional criminal penalties if a pregnant woman is killed or is assaulted and miscarries as a result of the assault. The bill does so by defining a “person to include a fetus.”

Although supporters of this legislation point to exceptions in the bill regarding abortion, the underlying purpose is to ultimately criminalize abortion. The bill naturally begs the question: How is a fetus a “person” with rights in some instances, but not in others?

I agree with Lynn Paltrow, executive director of National Advocates for Pregnant Women, who has said that the recognition of fetal personhood “is to recognize that such a legal construct effectively removes pregnant women from the protections of the constitution and civil law.”

But a fetus is not a person until it is born. And, as Paltrow suggests, statutes that really do protect pregnant women can be drafted. Rather than creating independent fetal rights, a law enhancing the sentence of anyone who hurts or kills a woman who is pregnant at the time of the assault can be crafted. “This acknowledges the existence and value of the fetus, and the loss to the woman,” Paltrow argues.

Furthermore, as has happened in other states, HB19 also could be used to prosecute women who have chosen to carry a pregnancy to term, but who have directly or indirectly harmed the fetus by failing to properly care for themselves.

A woman is not an incubator, and a fetus should not have rights that trump those of the woman in whose uterus it resides.

Another bill, SB124, would include a fetus under existing laws pertaining to disposal or burial of a dead body. Women having abortions would have to sign papers that would be sent to the Health Department; this would constitute an invasion of privacy and a form of harassment and intimidation.

Yet another bill, HB250, has been introduced to require “any abortion be performed … only by a physician with admitting privileges to a hospital within the local service area” and that “anesthesia must be given by a licensed anesthesiologist or licensed certified nurse anesthetist.” In the rare case where a woman has a medical emergency as a result of an abortion, she can be treated in the emergency room of a hospital, and, if necessary, be admitted from there. Physicians who perform abortions are so few that most travel a circuit, going from clinic to clinic. This bill, with its needless red tape and financial burden, seeks to narrow the pool of available physicians who care for women and to place impossible financial constraints on clinics that provide abortion services.

The most recent horror to be introduced in the House is HB609, submitted by 30 lawmakers. This bill, called the “Health Care Rights of Conscience Act,” basically does away with a patient’s rights pertaining to a host of health-care services — including birth control and artificial insemination — and states that “any individual who may be asked to participate in any way in a health-care service” may decline such service with legal protection for such conduct. Further, “[a] health-care payer [i.e. insurance company] has the right to decline to pay” for any service or product “that violates its conscience.”

We must resist every attempt to restrict women’s right to reproductive choice. Women are one-half of humanity, yet male politicians, supported by clergy, continue to strive to keep women subservient, powerless and unequal. Already in Alabama we have allowed stealth attacks from our Legislature in the forms of the Parental Notification Act and the Women’s Right to Know Act. Both of these bills were drafted and pushed through by anti-choice forces.

We have to say no to further restrictions and abuses. There can be no compromise. We must fight every limitation that is put on a woman’s ability to control her own body.

Cheryl Sabel is acting president of the Montgomery chapter of the National Organization for Women. She can be reached at mgmalnow@knology.net

No Comments »

No comments yet.

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Leave a comment

Powered by WordPress

Close
E-mail It