At face value this seems like the thing that republicans wouldn’t support… that being said the article says that the assembly is “expected to pass a Republican-authored, bipartisan bill”.
@JackFromWisconsin @archomrade
It’s part of a long play to eventually take the decision to administer the pill away from doctors, so it can be legal for individual points-of-contact for accessing the pill to refuse to provide it based on personal religious beliefs. With a critical mass of refusers and no intervention by a doctor, the pill becomes effectively banned in some places.
But isn’t it way easier to walk into a pharmacy that’s out-of-area than it is to find and schedule with a doctor that’s out-of-area?
I guess I just can’t imagine this being any more effective at discouraging birth control than the current alternative, especially since I don’t see anything that says doctors couldn’t still prescribe it too?
@archomrade The end-game is to take the decision from doctors entirely and give it to someone else. Doctors are far less likely to refuse to prescribe the pill than pharmacists are to refuse to provide it, if they know they have the authority to block its access. It’s easier for all 1-4 pharmacists in a red district to collude than it is to get all doctors in the area to do it. The goal of this kind of legislation is to take that authority from doctors and give it to people willing to gatekeep.
@archomrade This is also the strategy that underpins right-wing efforts to make the pill over-the-counter: once doctors aren’t prescribing it the decision to carry it or not rests entirely with the point-of-contact for access. You can effectively build “dry counties” for the pill this way.
As a Minnesotan not completely in the know about the Wisconsin Legislature, what are the chances of this actually happening?