tv The Rachel Maddow Show MSNBC August 22, 2012 9:00pm-10:00pm EDT
i'm ed schultz. the "rachel maddow show" starts right now. good evening. >> thanks, man, and thanks to you at home for staying with us for the next hour. behold, a child's treasury of politicians refusing to answer very simple questions. very simple questions about their own records. we're not like the other networks. we don't have a magic wall in particular, we just have a wall, but you sort of get the idea. behold, a child's treasury. ha, it works! this is mike coffman. mike coffman is a republican congressman from the great state of colorado. he at one point was flirting with the whole birtherism thing. mike coffman told a group of donors in colorado in may that he was not sure where barack obama was born, but that mr. obama, he said quote, is just not an american. now, a great reporter from the local nbc affiliate in denver decided to ask mike coffman about that. right? the questions that the reporter
asks were totally reasonable. questions, they are question about mike coffman and something mr. coffman had done in public, but his answers in public earned him a proud place. watch. >> after your comments about the president, do you feel that voters are owed a better explanation than just i misspoke? >> i think that as i stand by my statement. that i misspoke and i apologize. >> okay, and who are you apologizing to? >> i stand by my statement that i misspoke and i apologize. >> we talk to you all the time. you're a very forthcoming guy. who is telling you not to talk? >> i stand by my statement that you have and i misspoke and i apologize. >> was it that you thought it would go over well in elbert county where folks are conservative and you would never say something like that in the suburb snz. >> i stand by my statement that i misspoke and i apologize.
>> is there anything that i can ask you that you would answer differe differently? >> i stand by my statement and i apologize. >> that was mike coffman of colorado, obviously, he stands by his statement that he misspoke and he apologizes. is that clear? right around the same time period earlier this year, yeah, i love it. a republican candidate for congress in arizona, jesse kelly, earned his place in the child's treasury of politicians refusing to answer questions about himself and he did so in a way that was so amazing that it made onlookers at the time, his own supporters, made his own supporters laugh along audibly as it was happening. a great local abc reporter in arizona was asking jesse kelly very reasonable questions about whether he intended to accept a controversial endorsement he got from an anti-immigrant group. listen. >> do you plan on accepting that endorsement this time? >> our campaign is going to stay
focused on lower gas prices, using american energy, lower taxes, and creating jobs. >> do you plan on accepting that endorsement? >> our campaign is going to stay focused on lower taxes. lowering gas prices using american energy and creating jobs. >> is that a yes or no? >> our campaign is going to stay focused on lowering gas prices, creating jobs, and using american energy. >> no comment? >> our campaign is going to stay focused on lowering gas prices, creating jobs, and lowering taxes. >> thanks. >> thank you. >> thank you. i don't know if they're laughing at you, but if you're not laughing, by definition, they're not laughing with you. jesse kelly, ladies and gentlemen. can you believe he lost that election? today, we have a couple new entries. yes. the gentleman that's shown right here in the book, his name is josh mandel, a republican running for senate in ohio against sherrod brown.
he was pressed this week by a very sharp local nbc reporter in dayton, ohio, about whether mr. mandel would have supported the auto bailout. very specific question. and mr. mandel's amazing answer earned him a page in the child's treasury. this is so great. >> he blasted those including senator brown and republicans who supported the wall street bailout. but refused to say what he would have done with general motors. >> i have a vision for taking the dayton area, taking some of the auto plants and former factories that used to be filled, filling them back up with dayton area workers to make pipes and tubes and fittings for manufacturing jobs. >> josh mandel, i appreciate what you're saying, but would you have supported the gm bailout. >> i'll try to protect auto jobs and grow auto jobs. we have talked about all of the great plans we have. >> you're not going to answer, are you? >> great seeing you. >> great seeing you. here's a very simple question
about yourself. would you have supported this policy? yes, it is great seeing you. what happen -- >> then there's the ongoing controversy this week of course over republican congressman todd akin of missouri and his remarks in the past few days that rape cannot cause pregnancy. that has turned into a political nightmare for a whole bunch of conservative politicians who have cosponsored legislation with todd akin about rape and pregnancy. or who at least share his political beliefs that if a woman does get pregnant when she's raped, the government should force her to give birth against her will. so one of the politicians who is kind of in trouble over the akin thing is the republican candidate for senate in washington state. his name is michael baumgartner. and he earned his place in our child's treasury of politicians refusing to answer very simple questions about themselves and their records when a local seattle reporter interviewed him about whether he really did agree with todd akin that rape
victims should be forced by the government to give birth against their will. asked about that policy position, which is in fact his policy position, washington republican senate candidate mike baumgartner's response was this, and i quote, go f yourself. that's what he said to the reporter except he did not say f. mr. baumgartner put it in print, in an e-mail. my favorite part of this entry inory child's treasury is the reporter's response to getting that e-mail from the senate candidate. the reporter's response was, quote, question mark, is this really senator baumgartner? yes, yes, it was. but he does not want to answer any questions about how much he is like todd akin on that policy. and of course, neither does the brand new star of our child's treasury of politicians refusing to answer very simple questions about themselves and their records. and that of course would be the guy with the dog eared page, the republican vice presidential candidate paul ryan. the todd akin controversy this
week has earned paul ryan a special place in the child's treasury because of a local interview that paul ryan just gave to a cbs reporter in pittsburgh. paul ryan as you know has the exact same position as todd akin when it comes to abortion, when it comes to pregnancy and rape and how much sway the government has over your decisions in those matters. both men think rape victims should be forced by the government to bear their rapist's child against their will. when paul ryan was asked about that position by a local reporter in pittsburgh, he did everything he could to not answer for his own positions. amazing. >> his statements were outrageous. over the pale, i don't know anybody who would agree with that. rape is rape, period, end of story. >> ryan like romney distanced himself from akin's remarks, but he joined akin in opposing abortions even when a woman has been raped. >> should abortions be available to women who are raped?
>> i'm proud of my pro life record and i stand by my pro life record in congress. it's something i'm proud of, but mitt romney is top of the ticket and he will be president and he will set the policy of the romney administration. >> you sponsored legislation that has the language forcible rape. what is forcible rape? >> rape is rape, period, end of story. >> the forcible rape language meant nothing to you at the time? >> rape is rape. and there's no splitting hairs. >> rape is rape, and there's no splitting hairs. the problem for paul ryan is that he has been splitting hairs legally on what rape is. his entire career, he's been doing that. paul ryan cosponsored a bill last year with todd akin to redefine rape in federal law. it was hr-3, the third bill introduced by the republican majority when they took control of the house in 2010. that bill initially tried to redefine what rape is. it created a new category that they called forcible rape. why do you need that new category?
you need that new category to distinguish that kind of rape from other kinds of rape. to single out a subclass of rape that would allow you to still make a decision on your own pregnancy while victims of other subtypes of rape would not get that privilege in paul ryan's america. paul ryan was an original cosponsor of the bill to redefine rape, to make it harder on rape victims who wanted to get an abortion. as our own kelly o'donnell reported, he attempted to redefine rape a year earlier, offering another piece of legislation that allowed for abortion in limits circumstances, quote, unless the pregnancy is the result of an act of forcible rape or incest. you know, the real kind of rape, not that fake kind of rape. that doesn't qualify. but now, when paul ryan is asked about his own record on this, his own record to redefine what rape is -- >> you sponsored legislation that has the language forcible rape. what is forcible rape? >> rape is rape. rape is rape, period, end of
story. >> so that forcible rape language meant nothing to you at the time? >> rape is rape. and there's no splitting hairs. >> that's amazing. that -- that is amazing. it's amazing if you're some congressional special election candidate, but when you're vice president, i mean, you sponsored legislation to do x. well, i believe not x. but you sponsored legislation to do x, yes, and i proudly believe not x. also, i'm very proud of my record. there is a broader issue here. this is a test for the american media. this is a test for the press. paul ryan's record on abortion is just about identical to todd akin's record on abortion, but paul ryan not only does not want to talk about that. he's trying to rewrite history about it. and good on that local reporter in pittsburgh for asking about this. paul ryan obviously needs to continue to be asked about this until he actually gives a straight answer about it. this is a test for the press. and some of the press, a lot of local press, actually, has
turned out to be great in asking these questions and doing it in a dogged way. doing it in a really hard-nosed way that shows they have done their homework before the interview. the conservative beltway press, on the other hand, not so much. >> there's been lot of attacks already against you. but you kind of experienced this beforehand. what is your relationship with president obama? explain how reforming the tax code would help people. do you think obama wants trillion-plus deficits every year? tell us about your foreign policy experience? your wife and kids having a good time? >> they're doing fine. they like it. great to see you. thank you for your time. >> in the midst of the whole todd akin/paul ryan rape controversy, not even a question about todd akin or rape when you have paul ryan sitting right there? in that same hour, they dealt with the paul ryan/todd akin rape issue using correspondents and other discussance, but not
the actual paul ryan. why would you ask him about it? not everyone in the press has to be that bad at this. again, this is what paul ryan now says about the issue of rape and pregnancy. >> rape is rape. and there's no splitting hairs. >> so we still need a straight answer from paul ryan on this. what about all of the times you persony tried to split hairs on what constitutes rape? is there going to be an apology here? have you changed your mind about it? but while we're working on what the appropriate follow-up questions here need to siend like with paul ryan, don't just stop with the splitting hairs about rape nonsense. oh, there's more. >> his statements were outrageous. over the pale. i don't know anybody who would agree with that. >> i don't know anybody who would agree with that. todd akin said something that nobody has ever aspoused. let's get rid of him and that will take care of our problem. it's not actually true to
characterize todd akin in that way. todd akin himself has been citing somebody by name and explaining where he came up with this clockockamamy theory that body when raped can distinguish that the sperm in question is from a rapist and should be rejected as opposed to other sperm. he cited an anti-abortion doctor named john wilkke. think progress posted audio from a conservative talk show interview with todd akin in which he repeatedly references this dr. wilkke by name. >> you know, dr. wilke has released a statement and part of his letter, i think he really stated it clearly. >> who is dr. willke who he is citing as his source for the crazy theory that has captivated all of american politics? dr. john willke, a former romney campaign surrogate. a guy important enough to romney that they put out a stand-alone solo press release headlining
his endorsement. so paul ryan doesn't know anybody who would agree with todd akin's comments? he says, have you talked to your running mate about it? london's daily telegraph newspaper is reporting tonight that this dr. willke, the guy who convinced todd akin you can't get pregnant if you're raped, they're reporting he says he personally met with mitt romney as recently as this past october, not the last time mitt romney ran for president but this time, from the telegraph, quote, dr. willke said he did meet mr. romney in a presidential campaign stop in the doctor's home town of cincinnati, ohio, in october of last year. local news reports at the time noted the that the candidate held private meetings in the visit. he told me, thank you for your support. we agree on almost everything. if i'm elected president, i'll make some major pro life pronouncements. dr. willke said that to the daily telegraph on tuesday.
now, caveats here, this is the telegraph, which is, a, the british press, which is not what it used to be, and b, it's the telegraph, which even for the british press is not all that confidence inspiring, but it is supposedly not a paraphrased quote but a direct quote from this person who is very, very important in this national issue and it would be good to hear directly from the romney campaign if this is true or if they're denying if this took place. so far, they're refusing to answer any questions about this. we asked yesterday whether he has met with dr. john willke to discuss these issues given how important romney said he was to the campaign last time he ran. they have not responded to our questions. they have not said no. they have blanked us. these are questions that deserve answers. you're throwing todd akin essentially out of the party for this, but he's your guy, too? the romney campaign has also refused to make paul ryan available for an interview with us, surprise. but for any of my colleagues in
the press who do get an interview with mr. ryan, can i suggest asking him about the rape is rape comment? there's no need to split hairs. obviously, definitely, right? ask him about that. there's no explanation for that that makes sense. also ask him about the whole dr. willke thing. really, you have never heard anyone else espouse this that has no connection to your campaign. and he also said, quoting from the same interview he did today, nobody is proposing trying to deny birth control to anybody. we're going to be dealing with that walk later on in the show, but the broader issue here is this. this is a test for the american press. paul ryan and mitt romney are actively trying to rewrite and distort their own record on the issue of abortion and rape and pregnancy at a time when the country is focused like a laser on this issue and the republican party is trying to distance itself from its own members and their policy positions on this subject. this is just like the medicare issue. paul ryan said he wants to turn medicare into a coupon system. and even when some other people in the republican primary had issues with that, at least for a
second, i'm talking to you, newt gingrich, mitt romney said he would sign the paul ryan plan to end medicare as we know it, he said he would sign it into law. voucherizing medicare, yeah, i would sign it into law. now they're trying to run for the white house together by saying they're the ones committed to protecting medicare, the guys who committed on tape to ending medicare. this is a test of the press. do you just write down what they say? do you report on what these candidates say their record is, or do you report that but also compare it to what their actual record is? and then badger them when there's a difference between those two accounts? it's not what they say. it's about what they have done. when what they say is some distance from what they have done, that distance is the story. this is what the press is for. this is the good stuff. time to do our jobs, everybody. [ male announcer ] when this hotel added aflac to provide a better benefits package... oahhh! [ male announcer ] it made a big splash with the employees. [ duck yelling ]
natural energy from green coffee extract, only from starbucks. you sponsored legislation that has the language forcible rape. what is forcible rape? >> rape is rape period, end of story. >> so that forcible rape language meant nothing to you at the time? >> rape is rape. and there's no splitting hairs. >> that's what happened today when pittsburgh political editor asked vice presidential candidate paul ryan about congressman ryan's own record, about his sponsoring a bill with todd akin that would in fact redefine rape, that as it were, would split hairs about rape. paul ryan had pushed that
language before. he never got nearly so much attention for it in the national press. joining us now, i'm happy to say, is craig gilbert, the washington bureau chief for the milwaukee sentinel which has been covering paul ryan for a long time, right from the beginning. thank you for joining wrus. >> nice to be with you. >> i know you have covered congressman ryan since he got into ryan in 1998, and it's not really what he likes to be known for. he's obviously avoiding direct answers on it right now, but from his history, what can you tell us about his record and his stance on abortion rights? >> well, he's always been a social conservative. with a few exceptions here or there, but i think he's -- he's not known for it, for obvious reasons because of his role on the budget committee, his kind of preoccupation with budget and fiscal issues. he would much rather talk about quantitative easing than rape and incest exceptions on abortion. this is not how he defined himself political and not how
he's defined in the media, either. >> i think we're seeing that in action. the think i'm trying to square, i guess, trying to get my head around is how he can so obviously want that, want that kind of reputation, and really have sort of earned that reputation in terms of what he has overtly done in talking about fiscal policy, but why then put yourself on the hard leading edge of all these antiabortion issues. he may have cosponsored the todd akin redefining rape bill with hundreds of other republican cosponsors, but his other bill redefining rape, it was him and one other cosponsor. he's really out there almost alone on the issues. why prioritize it when he hasn't wanted to talk about it? >> he's a strong social conservative. he's -- if you look at, you know, he likes to talk about the three legs of the reagan coalition being social conservati conservatism, economic conservatism, and national security conservatism. he has positioned himself as
pretty conservative in all three respects, but he's also, i think he sees economic issues not only as his particular interest, but i think he also sees economic issues at the portal for the republican party to reach out to moderates as opposed to the other issues. and he's talked to me about that, about kind of this is our way of broadening the coalition on economic and fiscal issues as opposed to social issues. at the same time, you know, he is with just a handful of exceptions, is among the most conservative members of congress on social issues. >> and that, i think, was what makes his long-term history so interesting, and makes it so important to hear from people who have covered him for a long time because they're very clearly, and him refusing to answer the questions, they actually can't stay in that position for very long. he's going to have to either repudiate his previous record or he's going to have to come up with some other explanation for why he's running on a ticket he never supported in the past. something is going to have to
give if they want to try to appeal to moderates and not have this block it. have you seen anything in his career to give you any sense of how amenable he will be to the idea of repute ydiating his pres position, giving up his opinions on rape that the romney campaign at large appears not to share? >> i think he understood when he got selected there would be issues where he would have to conform to the position of mitt romney. so you know, the campaign is going to be full of these awkward moments where his historic position is not the same as mitt romney's position. in some cases where mitt romney's position has changed over the years and paul ryan's hasn't. it's awkward on a couple issues. one, this is not the set of issues he wants to talk about. two, his position may be different from mitt romney's and three, it may be an issue where mitt romney himself has shifted his position over the years. >> i know this has come up in some general election campaigns that he's been in in the past with his democratic opponents trying to raise this.
there's lots more here to learn about paul ryan and to talk about. craig gilbert, washington bureau chief from the milwaukee sentinel. i really appreciate your time. >> thanks, anytime. >> all right, if you think the day is coming when americans will have to leave the country in order to get something they're supposedly able to legally get here, if you think that is something that's sort of far fetched, if you think that's something we use as hyperbole but it doesn't happen, it's really happening. it's happening in the american south, and that amazing story is coming up. to supply affordable, cleaner energy, while protecting our environment. across america, these technologies protect air - by monitoring air quality and reducing emissions... ...protect water - through conservation and self-contained recycling systems... ... and protect land - by reducing our footprint and respecting wildlife. america's natural gas... domestic, abundant, clean energy to power our lives...
that's smarter power today. [ male announcer ] aggressive styling. a more fuel-efficient turbocharged engine. and a completely redesigned interior. the 2012 c-class with over 2,000 refinements. it's amazing...inside and out. ♪ join mercedes-benz usa on facebook for the best summer sweepstakes. join mercedes-benz usa on facebook those surprising little still make you take notice. there are a million reasons why. but your erectile dysfunction that could be a question of blood flow. cialis for daily use helps you be ready anytime the moment's right. you can be more confident in your ability to be ready. and the same cialis is the only daily ed tablet approved to treat ed and symptoms of bph, like needing to go frequently or urgently. tell your doctor about all your
medical conditions and medications, and ask if your heart is healthy enough for sexual activity. do not take cialis if you take nitrates for chest pain, as this may cause an unsafe drop in blood pressure. do not drink alcohol in excess with cialis. side effects may include headache, upset stomach, delayed backache or muscle ache. to avoid long-term injury, seek immediate medical help for an erection lasting more than four hours. if you have any sudden decrease or loss in hearing or vision, or if you have any allergic reactions such as rash, hives, swelling of the lips, tongue or throat, or difficulty breathing or swallowing, stop taking cialis and get medical help right away. ask your doctor about cialis for daily use and a 30-tablet free trial.
there is one other element of what congressman paul ryan is going through right now that has not gotten a ton of attention but it strikes me as strange. at first i thought he had misspoken, but he said it again almost verbatim on the campaign plane today. apparently, this was not a misstateme misstatement. this is part of a standard canned rehearsed argument. and if that is the case, it's a very strange argument for somebody running for what he is running for. watch this. >> should abortions be available to women who are raped? >> well, look, i am proud of my pro life record and i stand by my pro life record in congress. it's something i'm proud of, but mitt romney is the top of the ticket and mitt romney will be president and he will set the policy of the romney administration. >> mr. ryan further clarified on
the campaign plane when he reiterated the same point and further clarified while he would include rape victims among the american women he would force to give birth against their will, mr. romney would not include rape victims in that, but it is a weird answer, though, right? his answer is essentially, you know, he is running for president, not me. paul ryan's argument there, as a candidate for vice president, is i realize my position sounds a little crazy, but don't worry about that. i'm only trying to be vice president. and what are the chances that a environment will ever be president? don't worry about my policies, i'm just some guy. see, this kind of thing is why this story is not going away. it's not going away in politics and it's not going away in the ree real world and real people's lives. that story is ahead. this is the plan that revolves around you.
introducing share everything. unlimited talk. unlimited text. tap into a single pool of shareable data and add up to 10 different devices, including smartphones and tablets. the first plan of its kind. share everything. only from verizon. get $100 off select motorola 4g lte smartphones like the droid razr. scroll... tap... pinch... and zoom... in your car. introducing the all-new cadillac xts with cue. ♪ don't worry. we haven't forgotten, you still like things to push. [ engine revs ] the all-new cadillac xts has arrived,
[ john ] no. ♪ were you just... no. are you supposed to be driving that in here? no! yo! teresa here? ♪ no. so is it okay if i stay out just a little bit longer? so...okay... so no. did mom say we could eat all that? [ john ] yes. [ male announcer ] in a world filled with "no," it's nice to finally say "yes." the new line of oscar mayer selects. the tastes you love and no artificial preservatives. it's yes food. big news from the vice presidential campaign trail today. big, big policy news from congressman and presumptive vice presidential nominee paul ryan. >> nobody is pro posing to deny birth control to anybody. >> that is a new position for congressman ryan. and frankly, it's a new position for the republican party. until this week, until they got
saddled with mr. legitimate rape and have tried to make a big show of rejecting him, the republican party in general and paul ryan specifically had been quite open in their efforts to roll back access to birth control. they did not used to deny thisicize what they were doing. back in february, paul ryan was among the chorus of republicans inveighing against the new health insurance rules that required insurance to cover contraception. rules like that in state law had been a practical part of women's contraception in 28 states. the new federal rule essentially made it national. when mr. ryan was asked at the time on "meet the press" if he thought his own party, republicans, were maybe focusing too much on birth control and opposing this new rule to make birth control more accessible, his answer was no. republicans in the senate tried and failed to overturn the birth control insurance rule. house republicans were also planning to do that until they got cold feet on the issue. house republicans including paul ryan did of course vote to
repeal the whole health care law. they did that twice for good measure. along with more than 30 separate votes to repeal, defund, or knock out portions of the law. paul ryan has also voted multiple times to defund planned parenthood, one of the largest providers of contraception services and it his budget would eliminate for all title 10 family planning programs all together. gnaw just planned parenthood, everything. but paul ryan has not just spend spent his time in congress trying to roll back access to birth control. he also sponsored a bill that would declare all firstalized eggs in the united states to be people, which would have the effect of banning the most popular birth control women use. >> nobody is proposing to deny birth control to anybody. >> except you and almost all of the republicans in congress right now. except all of the things you have proposed and sponsored that would restrict access to boirth
control, except for that, nobody is proposing to deny boirirth control to anybody. now that he's trying to become vice president, he does not want you to remember his record on birth control or abortion, and honestly, i don't think that either party wanted this to be the center of the fight this year, but republicans put these issues at the center of their policy agenda in the states. and in congress for the last twro years, and then they picked a guy to be their vice presidential nominee who is one of the party's true hard liners on these issues. so, i don't think democrats particularly wanted to run on abortion rights and defending access to contraception, i mean, i dont think this administration is afraid of it. they have been better on it than most democrats have been, but you can see when they're out on the campaign trail, they would rather be talking about the economy. same thing with the republicans, they would rather be talking about the economy or welfare or whatever. but none of them expected to be campaigning on abortion and birth control the week before the conventions. but this is not going away. this is a political fight that
now can't be avoided because it is an actual thing that has been dragged right up to the top and right into the center of what is supposed to be mainstream politics. it's not a theoretical thing. the republican vice presidential nominee really did sponsor a bill designed to ban hormonal birth control and he did it just last year. and republicans in the states really have in the last two years enacted more restrictions on abortion rights at any time since roe v. wade became law, and it's having a real impact in people's lives. it's not just a talking point that they want to shut down the government rather than funding planned parenthood, that's a thing that happened. and last year, republicans in eight years moved to disqualify some family plans from the funding. three states have done it this year. it's not something to make points about. it's really happening and having a real and in some cases devastating on the ground effect on real american lives.
earlier this month, the texas tribune published a stomach churning story about american women leaving the country. american women crossing the border to go to pharmacies in mexico to buy a drug they hope will end their unwanted pregnancies. the pharmacies they visit are largely unregulated. you're talking to the guy who works at the counter. without a doctor's supervision and without qualified medical advice, women are not getting proper instructions on how to use the drug they're buying there, a drug that requires a prescription in the united states. and that is not prescribed here on its own for abortions. one texas clinic director telling the texas tribune that her clinic's patients have often ingested the drug in varying amounts. some would take an entire bottle within days. based on what friends and family had told them. one mexican pharmacist who is unlicensed and untrailed and still allowed to sell the drug over the counter said he had heard ofgirls hemorrhaging
after taking the pills. i have tried my best to explain the consequences but there's only so much i can do. another pharmacist said, it sells, that's the problem. i don't tell them how to take it, just tell them you might have problems later. you probably heard the term back-alley abortions. when abortion was illegal in the united states in the years before the roe v. wade decision, abortions were obviously still sought by american women, and they were still provided to american women, but by and large, they had to be performed skretdly. it was illegal. here's a photo from that era. the caption reads still dazed, the client of an abortion doctor is being carried out of the raided apartment for the hospital. detectives surprised the doctor in the midst of an illegal operation being performed on a kitchen table. this is what illegal abortion was in this country. if you were lucky, it was an actual doctor with real training and equipment operating on you
even if it was, say, on a kitchen table before the police rescued you and dragged you to the hospital, but there's a reason why the coat hanger is thesomeble of illegal abortion because a lot of abortions weren't even as safe as the kitchen table. illegal abortion was listed as the official cause of death for almost 2,700 american women, 700 women a day. and in the days of backe alley coat hanger abortions, thousands of women died, thousands of american women died because they did not have access to safe abortion. it was illegal but that did not stop it. now, the new coat hanger can be pharmaceutical. a drug you have to get in another country with no doctor's advice, with rumor and good luck with your advice on dosage. the new back alley is across the border where texas women are resorting to pharmacies in mexico to do what americans have the right to get here from a
doctor. that's what the climate is like in tex techright now. a story about women crossing the border and risking their lives and health in unregulated pharmacies was reported in the texas tribune a week and a half ago. texas deeply cut family planning programs last year and they enforced forced ultrasounds. they force anyone who wants to have an abortion to have a medically unnecessarily ultrasound against her will. they force her to do that a day in advance of when she's going to get an abortion. if you can't handle that, make mexico? take your chances. on top of those xiszing restrictions and what we already know about their impact in texas in the last 24 hours, a federal appeals court has okayed the state of texas's plan to cut all state funding from planned parenthood clinics. this had been blocked by an injunction. it's been cleared. clinics that provide health and family planning services to nearly half of the 130,000
patients for low income women. this is a state where access to reproductive health care is already so dire that women are seeking abortions from off-label drugs getting from unlicensed, unregulated fapharmacies in mexico, and now tens of thousands of women who still did have access to birth control and family planning services are getting cut off from those services in the last 24 hours. joining us now for the interview is a reporter for the texas tribune. she has been reporting on women going to mexico to purchase medicine. thank you very much for joining us tonight. i have been following your reporting closely. great to have you here. >> thank you. rachel. >> let me ask you if i got anything wrang in trying to suberisu summarize your reporting. did i get anything wrong? >> i'm not sure if i want to correct you. i don't think there's need for that. i will clarify that planned parenthood clinics that are part of the program are still in the
program. the state is trying to figure out a way with the attorney general to figure out a date for when they can cut off planned parenthood, so there are tens of thousands of women who may be confused right now, but planned parenthood is still officially part of the program until the state excludes them officially. and we're waiting to find out more information about that. >> thank you for clarifying that. and in terms of the legal fight overobviously, the state has its own process for what is going to happen with the funding and how it's going to go to the clinics and the clinic's patients, but do you know what may happen next in the legal fight for this? this happened at a relatively high level court today. are they going to be further appeals? >> there are two cases going on. planned parenthood filed a lawsuit last spring after governor perry said the state was going to go it alone, forego federal funding in order to enforce the state's rules which have excluded abortion providers and abortion affiliates. planned parenthood filed a lawsuit to stay in the program,
and they were audible to get an injunction from a district judge here. the state went to the federal court and was able to get another injunctions which was lifting basically the lower koirt's order, and that has been in place and planned parenthood has been able to stay in the program over the last couple months. a lot of people were wondering when the appeals court was going to weigh in on this, and yesterday they did. and they have told the state that, you know, you can legally ban planned parenthood from the program while we wait for a district court to provide or to hold a hearing on this matter some time in the fall, probably october. >> when you did the reporting that led to the story that i summarized in detail about women crossing the border from texas to mexico and accessing these unregulated pharmaciepharmaciesu talk to health care providers in south texas about seeing women who have done that, the aft aftermath of self medicating to
give themselves abortions, were health care providers describing that as something there's an uptick in, is it something they have always seen? >> it's hard to track the numbers on this just because not everybody reports when they have tried to use these pills. the health providers i talked to said that anecdotally, they have noticed in the last year or so, more women seem to be using alternate means of trying to have an abortion, whether that's taking herbal pills. a doctor told me last week that a woman shovedchugged a six-pac hot beer thinking it would make her throw up. there are women crossing the border or having their friends or family members get this medication for them so they can try it at home and try to self induce an abortion in the privacy of their own home. we only her about the reports. the public reports here because the abortion providers have told us that they're seeing this in their clinics. we don't know how much this may be happening out there in the
real world, but we do know there has been extensive research that has been done on the issue of the use and a few studies have shown it's very commonly used in countries with abortions is not legal or not widely available, and it's used in latin america as well. because of that proximity to mexico, you have a lot of people here in texas, especially in the border area, who are perhaps resorting to this method. >> reporter for the texas tribune, thank you so much for joining us tonight and for your reporting on this. i have not seen other reporting on this phenomena in the country, but i have a feeling what you have done is going to spark people into looking into if this is happening in other places. thank you for joining us. >> thank you. so if contesting a tough election is just too hard, why not try to get your opponent thrown off the ballot? it's happening all over, and there are surprising culprits. that's next. ♪ [ male announcer ] to hold a patent
that has changed the modern world... would define you as an innovator. to hold more than one patent of this caliber... would define you as a true leader. to hold over 80,000... well, that would make you... the creators of the 2012 mercedes-benz e-class... quite possibly the most advanced luxury sedan ever. ♪ join mercedes-benz usa on facebook for the best summer sweepstakes. until i show them this. the new oral-b pro-health clinical brush. its pro-flex sides adjust to teeth and gums for a better clean. the new pro-health clinical brush from oral-b. for a better clean. you expect something $40in return. billionaire oil tycoons charles and david koch and their special- interest friends are spending $400 million to buy this year's elections and advance their agenda. what's their payback? politicians who will pass laws that benefit special interests, but hurt the middle class;
more tax cuts for the rich, eliminate the minimum wage, big cuts to our schools, but big subsidies for oil companies, tax breaks for corporations that ship our jobs overseas, even replacing medicare with a voucher system, which means higher profits for insurance companies, but higher costs for seniors. the oil-billionaire koch brothers and their special- interest friends are spending their billions on false attacks and tv smear campaigns to try to buy our elections and advance their greed agenda. don't let the kochs use their billions to buy this election. learn how at...
hey, programming note. actually, a couple of them. first, i want to tell you that on tomorrow's show, we have a special report on what the voting rights people say may be the sleeper issue that has them the most worried this year about whether or not people are actually going to be able to vote on election day. it is a technique of voter intimidation that is associated, historically, with one specific
area of the country, but we've got a report tomorrow on it spreading in a way that could be very important in november. it's an exclusive on tomorrow night's show that we are already working on. that's ahead. oh, and also, i will be on david letterman tonight. but we'll be right back. [ female announcer ] the power of green coffee extract is now in our new starbucks refreshers™ -- a breakthrough in natural energy. made with real fruit, starbucks refreshers™ are delicious low calorie drinks you can feel good about. ♪ rethink how you re-energize. ♪ get a boost of natural energy with a new starbucks refreshers™, in three ways. natural energy from green coffee extract, only from starbucks.
drug and alcohol abuse is up. and those dealing with grief don't have access to the professional help they need. when you see these issues, do you want to walk away or step up? with a degree in the field of counseling or psychology from capella university, you'll have the knowledge to make a difference in the lives of others. let's get started at capella.edu okay. one of the side shows this year and really amped up anti-obama hysteria in right-wing politics has been this raft of efforts to try to keep president obama off the ballot in some american states this november, even though he is the president of the united states. there was the arizona republican secretary of state who threatened to keep president obama off the ballot unless the state of hawaii sent proof -- and no, i mean real proof -- that the president's supposed birth certificate was authentic. there was also the lawsuit
earlier this year in alabama, the guy that was suing who asked the judge in his case to postpone proceedings until he could get some further legal assistance from -- yes, the birther celebrity lawyer dentist, orly tatiz. shockingly, the judge refused to wait for miss taitz and threw the case out. miss taitz is embroiled herself right now in another effort to get president obama off the ballot in indiana. that effort is apparently not going all that well, but i'm sure she will keep trying. so the birther stuff has mostly, i think, now been channeled into donald trump's hair and into more or less pal. ably insane efforts. but now there is an effort to keep mitt romney off the ballot in the state of washington. and lest you think this is a case of the left going after the right the way the right has been going after the left, it's not.
it's not the left. it's not democrats who are trying to keep mitt romney off the ballot. the challenge to mr. romney in washington state is actually coming from the right. and here's why. or at least, here's how. in 2010, when democratic u.s. senator patty murray won re-election in washington, her republican opponent was a guy who looks like rick lazio there, but isn't. dino rossi. technically, though, the republican party of washington never actually nominated dino rossi to be their nominee. republicans didn't actually nominate anyone for the senate race that year. and that's because, essentially, the republican party in washington decided they were going to stay neutral in a primary fight between that guy, dino rossi, and this guy, a sarah palin-endorsed tea party guy. dino rossi, ultimately, beat the tea party guy in a statewide primary. that is how dino rossi earned his way on to the ballot to earn the right to lose to patty murray in the general election. but the republican party never technically nominated him for the seat. the republican party never technically nominated anyone.
and it turns out that's really important. because the rules in washington state say, if you want to be considered an official major party in the state, and thereby earn the right to have your candidates on the ballot, just by asking, because after all, you're a major party, in order to qualify for that, you've got to have your party's official candidates running and winning at least 5% of the vote, in a whole bunch of statewide contests, including the one for u.s. senator. technically, the republicans did not have a candidate for u.s. senator in 2010. they never technically nominated dino rossi. and so, technically, the republican party is no longer a major party in washington state. which means, technically, they are not allowed to have their presidential nominee on the ballot in november, just by asking. the republicans, because they aren't a major party, will have to do what all the other minor parties have to do, which means they have to hold a minor party convention. they have to collect a thousand signatures, and most importantly, they have to have done all that, they have to have done the convention and
collecting all the signatures weeks ago. the deadline is long past, and they did not do any of that. so the libertarian party in the state of washington filed a lawsuit last week, saying the republicans blew it, by chickening out of a fight between dino rossi and the guy endorsed by sarah palin, the republicans messed up the requirement that they as a party have an official candidate on the ballot in that senate race. and by messing that up, the republicans say they messed this up too. they messed up their status as a major party. they thereby messed up getting mitt romney on the washington state ballot for president. if the lawsuit succeeds, mitt romney and paul ryan might have to run as written-in candidates in washington state. and look, nobody expects mitt romney and pall ryan to have any chance in heck at winning washington state. so it probably, in the long run, does not matter whether romney is on the ballot or not. and at or after tomorrow morning's superior court hearing on this case, some judge in washington state, i'm sure, will find a way to put mr. romney and mr. ryan on the ballot,