Ohio governor OKs 20-week abortion ban, nixes heartbeat bill

COLUMBUS, Ohio –  Republican Gov. John Kasich signed a bill Tuesday imposing a 20-week abortion ban while vetoing stricter provisions in a separate measure that would have barred the procedure at the first detectable fetal heartbeat.
Kasich acted on both proposals the same day they landed on his desk.
The so-called heartbeat bill would have prohibited most abortions once a fetal heartbeat is detected, which can be as early as six weeks into pregnancy — or before many women know they are pregnant. Its provisions cleared the Republican-led Legislature during a lame-duck flurry last week after being tucked into separate legislation.
Similar measures elsewhere have faced legal challenges, and detractors in Ohio feared such legislation would lead to a costly fight in the courts. Opponents predicted it would be found unconstitutional, a concern Kasich shared.

More on this...

• Kasich under pressure from both sides as major abortion bills hit desk

• Ohio House committee approves bill banning abortion after 20-weeks

• Ohio fetal heartbeat abortion bill heads to governor's desk

Kasich said the heartbeat provision would have been struck down based on federal court rulings on similar measures elsewhere. Enacting the law would also invite challenges to current Ohio abortion prohibitions and would mean costly litigation.
"The State of Ohio will be the losing party in that lawsuit and, as the losing party, the State of Ohio will be forced to pay hundreds of thousands of taxpayer dollars to cover the legal fees for the pro-choice activists' lawyers," Kasich said.
"Therefore, this veto is in the public interest," the governor said.
Kasich, an abortion-rights opponent, chose instead to sign off on a 20-week ban similar to those now in effect in 15 states and blocked from enforcement in two others. The measures are based on the assertion that fetuses can feel pain then. Opponents have challenged the "pain-capable" characterization as scientifically unsound. Ohio lawmakers rejected a Democratic amendment that would have added exceptions for rape and incest.
Ohio lawmakers still have the option to override his veto. Doing so would require a three-fifths majority of each chamber.
The developments in Ohio are a prelude to a broad offensive to be launched in January by abortion-rights opponents emboldened by the election success of Donald Trump and the Republican Party.
GOP lawmakers in numerous states — including Texas, Missouri, Iowa, Indiana and Kentucky — plan to push for new anti-abortion legislation. Their efforts are being supported by a national anti-abortion group, Americans United for Life, which released a report Tuesday contending that many abortion clinics are in violation of state health and safety standards.
In Congress, Republicans are expected to advance legislation banning most abortions after 20 weeks and halting federal funding for Planned Parenthood as long as it performs abortions. The president-elect has pledged to support both measures
The Republican-controlled Ohio Senate acted with initial caution on the divisive heartbeat bill before passing it suddenly last week.
Abortion-rights groups oppose it and Ohio Right to Life, the state's oldest anti-abortion group, has remained neutral because of constitutional questions.

The idea of its backers was to spark a challenge to the U.S. Supreme Court's 1973 Roe v. Wade ruling that legalized abortion up until viability, usually at 22 to 24 weeks, that would ultimately outlaw abortion nationwide.
Also on Tuesday, the Oklahoma Supreme Court threw out a law requiring abortion clinics to have doctors who have admitting privileges at hospitals within 30 miles of their facility.
The court ruled that measure, which requires doctors with admitting privileges to be present for abortions, violates both the U.S. and Oklahoma constitutions. Republican Gov. Mary Fallin signed it into law in 2014, but courts had blocked it from going into effect. The U.S. Supreme Court earlier this year struck down a similar provision in Texas.

What did Stein gain from recount flop?

Jill Stein's rowdy recount push ended with a whimper overnight, giving Donald Trump even more votes than he started with after final certification -- but it wasn't a total wash for the Green Party candidate, who brought in millions and put herself in a position to redistribute the leftover cash.
Stein raised about $7.3 million in three weeks to fund recount efforts, more than double what she raised for her failed presidential campaign.
The money poured in from 161,300 donors across the country. Another 10,000 volunteers signed up to help the drive. It’s unclear exactly how much remains -- millions went to recount costs and legal fees -- but she announced Tuesday she plans to donate leftover funds to election-reform and voting-rights groups.
“It was an amazing affirmation of the power of the American people to have a voice in their voting system and demand elections with integrity,” Stein said in a statement Tuesday.
On the surface, the recounts accomplished little. Her attempts to get fresh tallies in Michigan and Pennsylvania were blocked in court. Stein had suggested – without evidence – that voting machines in those states and Wisconsin could have been hacked in the November election.
Michigan Attorney General Bill Schutte, a Republican, argued in the lawsuit that a hand recount would cost taxpayers around $2 million. Other esimates put it as high as $12 million.
Though unsuccessful in Michigan, Stein was able to request and pay for the Wisconsin recount which started on Dec. 1. But that effort resulted in Trump picking up 131 net votes, as his victory was certified in all three states.
Trump boasted on Twitter: “The final Wisconsin vote is in and guess what - we just picked up an additional 131 votes. The Dems and Green Party can now rest. Scam!”
On Tuesday at a stop on this "Thank You" Tour in West Allis, Wisconsin, Trump said the recount showed "how important every single vote in America is."
"All that money, all that time, all that effort, we got 131 votes more than we had before," he told supporters.
The fizzling finish came after Stein faced accusations of wasting time and draining grassroots resources.
Stein’s own running mate initially was against the recount, as was Hillary Clinton’s campaign.
But Stein insisted all along her goal wasn’t to overturn the results of the presidential election but instead to instill confidence in the election results and voting systems. At the least, the effort has allowed her to stay in the spotlight, and with her announcement Tuesday puts her in charge of distributing the leftover funds she raised. It also connected her with more donors.
Jordan Brueckner, a spokeswoman for Stein’s recount drive, told FoxNews.com that all 161,000-plus donors will have a say in where the extra money is donated – a task perhaps easier said than done.
The campaign has pledged to divvy up the funds to a set of non-partisan organizations.
“We don’t have a name for the organizations but we’ll give the donors an option [of where the money will go],” she said during a telephone interview.
The amount of cash given to the groups will be based on a ranked-choice vote which will be made public on Stein’s website in the coming weeks, Brueckner said.
Democratic strategist Joe Trippi told The Hill he thought recount efforts were a way for Stein “to stay relevant, raise some money and take the stink off of them.”
“Instead of everybody screaming, ‘You made Trump happen,’ she is counting the votes to change that whole narrative.’”

Trump to pick Rep. Zinke, ex-SEAL, as Interior secretary

President-elect Donald Trump intends to pick Montana Republican Rep. Ryan Zinke as secretary of the Interior, multiple sources confirmed Tuesday evening to Fox News.
Zinke is a first-term House member and a former Navy SEAL commander.
Neither the Trump transition team nor Zinke has made a public statement. But Zinke reportedly has accepted the offer.
He was purportedly in the running with Washington Rep. Kathy McMorris Rogers, who met at least twice with Trump, a fellow Republican, in recent days.
McMorris Rogers has made no official statement either. But she posted a message late Tuesday on her Facebook page that suggested she will remain on Capitol Hill as part of House Speaker Paul Ryan’s leadership team.
“It was an honor to be invited to spend time with the President-elect, and I’m energized more than ever to continue leading in Congress as we think big, reimagine this government, and put people back at the center of it,” McMorris Rogers wrote.
Zinke was an early Trump supporter and serves on the House’s Natural Resources Committee. He met Monday with Trump in New York.

CIA Cartoons

Gingrich: Furor over CIA report on Russian election meddling 'stupid'

Gingrich: Hack claim is perfect example of propaganda media

Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich said Monday that calls for an investigation of claims Russian government actors intervened in the U.S. election were "as stupid as anything I've seen the left try."
"Think about it. Barack Obama’s now saying that his administration was so incompetent that they stood around sucking their thumb while the Russians snuck in and hacked into an American election because of the utter incompetence of the Obama defense system," Gingrich told Fox News' Sean Hannity on 'Hannity'. "Now, I don’t know why one would want to go make that case."
Gingrich went onto say that he did not believe the claims of Russian hacking had any effect on the outcome of the election.
"I don’t believe that the Russians carried Pennsylvania. I think Donald Trump did," the former Speaker said. "I don’t think that the Russians carried Wisconsin ... I don’t think the Russians carried Michigan. Donald Trump did. The problem the left has is they cannot come to grips with the reality that the American people are turning against them, that the American people defeated them, and frankly, if the election were held today, the margin would be even bigger."
CIA REPORT OF RUSSIAN INTERFERENCE IN 2016 RACE DIVIDES REPUBLICANS
Gingrich contrasted the furor over the CIA assessment of Russian interference in the campaign with the coverage of Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton's email scandal.
"What it does is it trivializes the serious. There were really serious security problems. There would normally be, I think, jail time for things on this scale," he said. "But I think it’s ironic that the New York Times and the Washington Post, they can’t cover the things that are real, so they have to make up junk in order to hide behind the noise."

Kasich under pressure from both sides as major abortion bills hit desk

Ohio Gov. John Kasich, who built a reputation during the raucous GOP presidential primaries as an affable and moderate alternative, is suddenly finding himself at the center of the national abortion debate -- and under pressure to cast a decision bound to make him more unpopular with one side or the other.
Two bills passed by the legislature await his signature or veto. If signed into law, they would become two of the most restrictive time-based abortion measures in the country.
The more controversial is known as the “heartbeat bill.” It would ban abortion as soon as a fetal heartbeat can be detected -- roughly around the six-week mark. The second prohibits abortions after the 20-week mark in almost all circumstances.
Kasich, who said during the Republican presidential primaries that he’s “pro-life with the exceptions of rape, incest and the life of the mother,” faces a looming deadline for a decision.
After receiving the bills, he has 10 days to sign or veto.
If he does nothing, the bills become law. However, with the "heartbeat bill" which passed as an amendment to another measure, the governor could use his line item veto and nix only the amendment.
The "heartbeat bill" passed last Tuesday, and the 20-week ban passed the following day.
Kasich's press secretary Emmalee Kalmbach told FoxNews.com the governor's office has not officially received the bills.
So far, the governor's office has stayed quiet on his intentions.
"A hallmark of lame duck is a flood of bills, including, bills inside of bills and we will closely examine everything we receive," Kalmbach said.
Anti-abortion advocates are fighting hard against the "heartbeat bill," arguing it would in some cases prohibit abortion before women even realize they are pregnant. Critics argue such a strict cut-off denies women time to weigh their options.
The bill also includes no exceptions for rape or incest and would criminalize the procedure for doctors.
NARAL Pro-Choice Ohio Executive Director Kellie Copeland said the bill is “out of touch with Ohio values and is completely unacceptable.”
“Once a woman has made the decision to end a pregnancy, she needs access to safe, legal healthcare in her community,” Copeland said in a written statement. “This bill would effectively outlaw abortion and criminalize physicians that provide this care to their patients.”
If Kasich signs the bill, it would pose a direct challenge to multiple Supreme Court rulings that say women have a constitutional right to abortion until the point of viability, which occurs around 24 weeks.
Similar “heartbeat” bills in North Dakota and Arkansas were blocked by lower courts this year. They were appealed to the Supreme Court, which refused to hear the cases in January.
But conservative lawmakers in Ohio say this year may be different.
They point to the presidential election of Donald Trump and cite his campaign promise to appoint Supreme Court justices who will overturn Roe v. Wade, a 1973 decision that made abortion legal, as a positive sign the legislation has a shot.
“A new president, new Supreme Court appointees change the dynamic, and there was consensus in our caucus to move forward,” Senate President Keith Faber recently told reporters, adding that he believes the bill’s chance of surviving a constitutional challenge is greater now.
But if the measure becomes law, the ACLU has already vowed to fight it.
The ACLU of Ohio tweeted, “Just a reminder, if the unconstitutional #HeartBeatBill passes and become law, we will challenge it in court.”
The Guttmacher Institute, a nonprofit research organization that supports pro-choice and tracks abortion legislation, said if the measures become law, they would be some of the most restrictive in the land.
In the four decades since Roe v. Wade was handed down, states have enacted 1,074 abortion restrictions. Of those, 288 – or about 27 percent – have been put in place since 2010, according to the Guttmacher Institute.
The 20-week “pain capable” bill, meanwhile, would change the time abortions could be performed to 20 weeks from 26 weeks, which is the current law in Ohio.
Since he’s been in office, Kasich has signed 17 bills sponsored by Ohio Right to Life. If Kasich signs the "pain capable" bill, Ohio would become the 15^th state in the nation to pass a 20-week abortion ban.

Intel committee chairman: Report on Russia meddling conflicts with DNI testimony

The Republican chairman of the House Intelligence Committee says a reported CIA assessment that Russian government actors interfered in the U.S. election to help Donald Trump win conflicts with the mid-November public testimony from the nation’s intelligence chief, according to a new letter obtained by Fox News.
In a letter Monday to Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, Rep. Devin Nunes, R-Calif., said, "On November 17, 2016 you told the Committee during an open hearing that the IC (Intelligence Community) lacked strong evidence connecting Russian government Cyber-attacks and Wikileaks disclosures."
In response to a question from ranking Democratic Rep. Adam Schiff, Clapper had said, “As far as the WikiLeaks connection, the evidence there is not as strong and we don't have good insight into the sequencing of the releases or when the data may have been provided. We don't have as good insight into that.”
The Nunes letter continued, “According to new press reports, this is no longer the CIA’s position…I was dismayed that we did not learn earlier, from you directly about the reported conflicting assessments and the CIA’s reported revision of information previously conveyed to this Committee.”
Nunes is requesting a briefing from the CIA and FBI on the current assessment of alleged Russian involvement related to the U.S. election no later than Dec. 16.
The Washington Post reported Friday that the CIA concluded in a secret assessment that Russia interfered in the race to boost Trump, not just undermine confidence in the system. Intelligence agencies reportedly found individuals connected to the Russian government gave WikiLeaks hacked emails from the Democratic National Committee, as well as from Hillary Clinton Campaign Chairman John Podesta – though the agencies did not have “specific intelligence” showing Kremlin officials directed the activity.
Trump has challenged the report, calling the assessment “ridiculous.”
Some Republican senators, though, have sought a bipartisan congressional probe to investigate further. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., endorsed those calls Monday morning, saying: “The Russians are not our friends.”
In a statement earlier Monday, Nunes said his committee will “closely oversee the production  of the report on these attacks requested by President Obama to ensure its analytical integrity” – but he does “not see any benefit in opening further investigations, which would duplicate current committee oversight efforts and Intelligence Community inquiries.”
The top Democrat on the committee, Rep. Schiff, D-Calif., criticized Trump and his allies for calling the intelligence community’s work into question.
“Every day the President-elect and his team continue to denigrate the work of the intelligence community, to the detriment of the agencies' important work and the success of his own presidency,” he said in a statement.
A spokesman for Clapper told Fox News that the DNI would respond directly to the committee.

Trump victories certified in Wisconsin, Pennsylvania

President-elect Donald Trump's victories in Wisconsin and Pennsylvania were certified Monday, further affirming his win over Democrat Hillary Clinton in last month's presidential election.
Wisconsin finalized its recount, which showed Trump beating Clinton by more than 22,000 votes, on the same day that a federal judge issued a stinging rejection of a Green Party-backed request to recount paper ballots in Pennsylvania's presidential election and scan some counties' election systems for signs of hacking.
Later Monday, Pennsylvania certified the state's results in the Nov. 8 election, which saw Trump defeat Clinton by more than 44,000 votes.
Green Party candidate Jill Stein successfully requested, and paid for, the Wisconsin recount. In addition to her failed Pennsylvania recount attempt, Stein's bid for a similar statewide recount in Michigan was blocked by the courts. Stein only got about 1 percent of the vote in each of the three states, which Trump swept on his way to the White House. She argued, without evidence, that voting machines in all three states were susceptible to hacking.

The numbers barely budged in Wisconsin after nearly 3 million votes were recounted. Trump picked up a net 131 votes and the final results changed just 0.06 percent.
In Pennsylvania, U.S. District Judge Paul Diamond said there were at least six grounds that required him to reject the Green Party's lawsuit, which had been opposed by Trump, the Pennsylvania Republican Party and the Pennsylvania attorney general's office.
Suspicion of a hacked Pennsylvania election "borders on the irrational" while granting the Green Party's recount bid could "ensure that no Pennsylvania vote counts" given Tuesday's federal deadline to certify the vote for the Electoral College, wrote Diamond, an appointee of former President George W. Bush, a Republican.

"Most importantly, there is no credible evidence that any `hack' occurred, and compelling evidence that Pennsylvania's voting system was not in any way compromised," Diamond wrote. He also said the lawsuit suffered from a lack of standing, potentially the lack of federal jurisdiction and an "unexplained, highly prejudicial" wait before filing last week's lawsuit, four weeks after the Nov. 8 election.

The decision was the Green Party's latest roadblock in Pennsylvania after hitting numerous walls in county and state courts. Green Party-backed lawyers argue that it was possible that computer hackers changed the election outcome and that Pennsylvania's heavy use of paperless machines makes it a prime target. Stein also contended that Pennsylvania has erected unconstitutional barriers to voters seeking a recount.

A lawyer for the Green Party said Monday they were disappointed and unable to immediately say whether they would appeal.

"But one thing is clear," said the lawyer, Ilann Maazel. "The Pennsylvania election system is not fair to voters and voters don't know if their votes counted, and that's a very large problem."

A federal judge halted Michigan's recount last week after three days. Trump won Michigan by fewer than 11,000 votes out of nearly 4.8 million votes cast. It was not immediately clear when the state would certify its results.

MeMe Cartoons

Terrified by Trump: Activist groups stoke fears, raise funds on incoming administration

Veteran to anti-Trump protesters: Quit being crybabies

Stoking the fears of a Trump presidency, liberal activist groups have launched campaigns online and around the nation to help people cope – and even survive – their version of democratic doomsday.
Some are based on Trump’s mixed signals about illegal immigration, while others seem aimed at a more generalized sense of unease. One effort that launched this week, called “WhatDoIDoAboutTrump.com,” is depicted by its organizers as a non-partisan “website [that] turns Trump angst into action – online and off.”
“Not sure how to protect yourself if some of Trump’s campaign promises become reality?” the San Francisco-based site asks.
It provides links to websites of organizations, such as the American Civil Liberties Union, which advise people about what steps to take or what they may face if Donald Trump follows through on some of his promises. One link leads to “Welcome to the OH CRAP! WHAT NOW? SURVIVAL GUIDE,” which describes itself as “a crowdsourced collection of health, legal, and safety plans and resources + social, digital and economic security related resources urgent now as an outcome of the recent US election.

Hundreds of Rutgers University students march last month to protest some of President-elect Donald Trump's proposed policies. (The Associated Press)

Experts say scaring consituencies about politics is standard operating procedure for activist groups, but what's different this time are the intensity, and the fact that it has started well before Jan. 20, 2017, when Trump will be sworn in.
Corinna Kester, one of the founders, says the group, which includes a former national press secretary for the Democratic National Committee, is not pushing an agenda.
“If people are upset about the election, we encourage them to figure out how to get involved and work with that, from donating to petitions to protests.”

We can say, in one sense, it is intensifying divisions in America.
- Fred Siegel, senior fellow, Manhattan Institute

Organizations and, in many cases, lawyers, are urging people and groups they deem at-risk under a Trump presidency to take action now to protect themselves. School administrators are assuring students concerned about immigration raids that they won’t be spirited away, some city officials are vowing to provide a sort-of buffer to any federal attempts to strip benefits or programs. On Monday, the Los Angeles Unified School District announced that it was setting up a hotline and "support sites" in response to the deep anxiety among students about Trump as president.
The Rev. Al Sharpton is organizing a rally of black activists and lawmakers in Washington D.C. days before Trump’s inauguration in mid-January to, as he told The Hill, “put the Democrats on notice to use the confirmation hearings to really go after” Trump’s nominees.
One of the most high-profile efforts aimed at creating preemptive buffers against Trump policies are so-called sanctuaries for immigrants who are here illegally.
Students at various colleges are pushing their campuses to be designated sanctuaries. Some cities are moving toward declaring themselves safe zones for such immigrants, saying they will not report them to immigration authorities if they come across them during the course of providing a service.
On Tuesday, the Santa Ana City Council voted to designate the municipality a sanctuary, a non-binding action that they may make enforceable through an ordinance, according to the Los Angeles Times.
The Times noted that “the move is in direct defiance of President-elect Donald Trump, who was critical of illegal immigration and sanctuary cities during his campaign.”
“The day after Donald Trump got elected, our kids were falling apart emotionally,” the Times quoted Councilmember Sal Tinajero, who is a high school teacher, as saying. “They thought their parents would be deported.”
“The reason you’re seeing this push now is that us leaders ... want to tell them they are going to be protected. If they are going to come for them, they have to come through us first.”
Trump has denounced such efforts as divisive and the people who have protested his election as “crybabies.” His supporters, as well as some who voted for Democrat Hillary Clinton or third party candidates, say it behooves everyone to accept the results of the election and work to be united.
“This sounds like a large group therapy session,” said Fred Siegel, a historian who is a senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute and professor at Saint Francis College. “There’s a way in which this is all good and right in democratic terms.”
Siegel said the trend to organize in advance of Trump assuming the presidency is intriguing, and more in line with the kind of actions taken against policies and governments that are seen in Europe, particularly France.
“We can say, in one sense, it is intensifying divisions in American society,” Siegel said to FoxNews.com, “What that represents is President Obama’s success in Europeanizing American politics.”
“In France, the argument has always been when something occurs in Parliament that is unacceptable to you, you take to the streets. These [actions] are occurring in advance of – not in response to – policy being initiated.”
Louis DeSipio, a political science professor at the University of California-Irvine, said that the patchwork efforts to organize against Trump and his expected policies reflect an already-divided nation.
“President-elect Trump set out broad principles, and wasn’t specific about some policies,” DeSipio said. “There will always be people who are unhappy about an election. In any election, you can see a complete reversal of fortunes. The challenge for any president in this situation is to build bridges to some of his former opponents.”
President George W. Bush did so in response to concerns – among those who did not support his election – over how he would handle education and Medicare prescription costs, DeSipio said.
“He worked with Democrats, with Sen. Ted Kennedy, on both of those issues,” he said.
DeSipio expressed misgivings about efforts underpinned by a refusal to accept Trump as president, a movement that has a hashtag -- #notmypresident.
“Philosophically, I don’t accept it,” DeSipio said. “He was accepted by rules in place before the election.”
The approach of some groups to try to influence policy and laws at the local level can be both healthier and more practical in many cases, he added.
“We may get some criticism from Trump supporters,” said Kester. “But we’re all getting involved in a democracy.”