Fact checking the fact checkers

The “Republican war on women” is a trope. It is a figurative use of language which does not literally mean that helmeted Tea Partiers are lobbing hand grenades into hair salons, pedicure spas, state and federal capitals, and corporate boardrooms. And thank goodness for that.

But the Associated Press, a staunch participant in the “fact checking” movement, has entered the fray in an attempt to sway your opinion.

In an article published widely on Sunday, 10/21/12, the AP claims that abortion “laws [are] more restrictive – even though it’s legal, many states set up new hurdles”.  Then the article describes the circumstances of abortion in South Dakota. The caption of a photo of Rapid City Dr. Marvin Buehner claims that “he can perform pregnancy terminations only when there is a risk to the mother’s life.”

Holy cow! What’s the matter with these South Dakota Republicans? In spite of Roe vs. Wade, have they made it illegal to perform abortions unless the life of the mother is threatened? Is it possible that women in South Dakota cannot obtain an abortion unless their life is threatened by the pregnancy?

It turns out the that AP has earned four Pinocchios… their fact checking is all wet.

The South Dakota legislature has recognized a woman's right to terminate her pregnancy under these conditions:

• In the 1^st through 24^th week, a woman has a right to an abortion following a 72 hour waiting period..
• After the 24^th month, if necessary to preserve the life or health of the mother.

So what is the basis of Dr. Buenher's claim? Certainly, if in his judgment a termination is advisable in the first 24 weeks, he can perform a legal abortion. But the catch is that the state will not pay for it with Medicaid funding. (The federal Hyde Amendment, passed in 1977, prohibits the expenditure of Medicaid funds for abortions unless the life or health of the woman is at risk.)

Does this mean that, because taxpayer funds from Massachusetts and Rhode Island are not to be used for abortions in South Dakota, abortions are not obtainable there? Ridiculous.  Here are the options. 

1. The woman pays for the abortion herself  
2. The woman’s sex partner pays for the abortion (a much fairer outcome)  
3. The woman applies to a foundation (such as Planned Parenthood) for help

But in no case are Tea Partiers militantly prohibiting the abortion.

If you want to know what a real war on women looks like, consider Islamic extremists. The current prime example is the Taliban of Pakistan, who recently boarded a school bus and shot a fifteen year old girl in the head, repeatedly, for the high crime of promoting education for women.

The Pakistanis are our allies. Except that their Taliban hate our values, our women, and their rights. The Republicans look pretty darned fuzzy in comparison.