By Dave Andrusko
Wisconsin’s pro-abortion governor is nothing if not consistent. Tony Evers (D) stated flatly in advance that he will veto a package of pro-life measures, even one that does no more than require that abortion survivors receive treatment equal to that given to premature babies born at the same gestational age.
Note how Wisconsin Public Radio describes one of the bills passed by the state Senate Wednesday:
The measure would require doctors to provide medical care to fetuses born alive after an attempted abortion.
“Fetuses”? Hello, Laurel White, these are babies,
“How can a governor who wants to support healthy moms and babies veto a bill that simply ensures babies who are born alive after a failed abortion attempt are given the same standard of care as a child born naturally?” asked Heather Weininger, Executive Director of Wisconsin Right to Life.
Contrary to Democrats’ talking point, the bill– Assembly Bill 179– is not about abortion—but what happens to a baby after a “failed” abortion.
“Deciding not to let a vulnerable, defenseless newborn die is not anti-abortion, it’s anti-murder,” Sen. Roger Roth, R-Appleton, said during floor debate. “No child should be left to die, no matter how they came into this world.”
Of course what really raises the ire of Democrats is that the bill has enforcement provisions. White writes, they “may be charged with a felony, fined up to $10,000 and imprisoned for up to six years.”
Along with Wisconsin Right to Life, the Wisconsin Catholic Conference support the Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act. As the Wisconsin Catholic Conference explains, the bill
would require any health care practitioner present when a child is born alive following an abortion to give the same degree of care to preserve the life and health of the child as would be given to any other newborn. And after giving such care, it requires the practitioner to ensure that the child is immediately transported and admitted to a hospital.
The three other abortion-related laws Gov. Evers has promised to veto include: a requirement that abortionists tell women undergoing chemical abortions that they may save the baby if they change their mind and do not take the second of two abortifacient drugs; a bill to prevent the use of Medicaid money to pay for abortions which very limited exceptions; and a ban on abortions that are sought “because of the race, color, national origin, ancestry or sex of the fetus or solely because of a diagnosis or potential diagnosis of Down syndrome or another congenital disability.”
As state Sen. Patrick Testin, R-Stevens Point. put it, “It’s important the we stand united against discrimination at all stages of life.” He added, “How could anyone object to this?”
Gov. Evers, for one. Back in May he tweeted
We shouldn’t be limiting the right for women to make their own healthcare decisions. That’s why I’ll veto the bills passed by the Assembly last week if they arrive on my desk. It’s time to listen to women.#StopTheBans
Referring to the other three bills Evers has promised to veto, Weininger said
How can a governor who claims to care about non-discrimination policies promise to veto a bill that protects babies who may be valued less because of their gender, race, or level of ability? And if he was truly pro-women, as he claims to be, why would he veto a bill that ensures women are equipped with life-saving information and fail to support a bill that would give more funding to women’s healthcare facilities?”