I thought you would like to see this opinion piece written by Tom Arkoosh, who I am supporting for Idaho Attorney General. Tom is an accomplished lawyer who will run a professional office, dedicated to the rule of law. Please give him your support.
Candidate for Attorney General, former Congressman, and perpetual politician Raul Labrador still believes women and children are a separate second class of citizens. Throughout his terms in Congress, rather than elevate and protect women and children, Mr. Labrador voted against the Protect the Kids Act, against the Child and Family Services Improvement Act, and against the Violence Against Women Act. Idaho’s other Congressman, Mike Simpson, voted for all these protections.
Mr. Labrador has not changed. Today, in the midst of the most fraught assault on women’s reproductive health care in Idaho’s history, he aggressively advocates against protecting women and their doctors from the dire health consequences of a nonviable pregnancy. Idaho’s “trigger law,” which Mr. Labrador supports, prohibits the treatment of such dangerous pregnancy circumstances as tubal pregnancy or unyielding extreme high blood pressure except to prevent the mother’s death. Doctors advise they cannot tell when death will occur, therefore they cannot determine when to act. Further, the trigger law makes it a felony for a doctor to perform an abortion even to prevent a mother from dying unless a doctor can prove their innocence in court by claiming they acted in “good faith,” whatever that may be. If doctors act too quickly, they will be charged with a felony. If doctors act too late and the mother dies, they can be charged with murder. Poland has a law very similar to Idaho’s, and three doctors in Poland have now been charged with murder for waiting too long and the mother died.
Even when the Federal government steps in with a desire to protect Idaho’s women, Mr. Labrador says we should resist. Federal law requires facilities that receive Medicare funding to treat pregnant women whose health is in jeopardy. Mr. Labrador and his ilk call this “federal overreach.” This is not inappropriate overreach; rather, this is the work of rational lawyers doing the business we in Idaho should be doing for ourselves.
As Attorney General I would put an end to this callousness. First, I would engage with the Department of Justice to assure that we honor the Federal requirements to protect women’s reproductive health. Second, I would insist any Idaho statute that seeks to require a defendant to prove his or her innocence receive very strict scrutiny. Generally, that type of mean-spirted criminal law does not pass constitutional muster. Further, conditioning a criminal prosecution on such an ambiguous phrase as “good faith” cries out to be canceled by the courts. I would take the statute to task. Finally, I would advocate from the authority of the Attorney General’s office for a workable set of laws that reflect what Idahoans really want. We must, as Idahoans, end this fatal factionalism, come together for the common good, and adopt a set of life standards meant to assure the justice, liberty and tranquility pledged by the Constitution. Given every chance to make life better in Idaho, Mr. Labrador has repeatedly declined to participate in the work. This is not good sense. If he is elected, he has sworn to misuse the Attorney General’s Office to megaphone his aggressive assault on the common needs of Idahoans. In this fall’s election, end this folly with a vote for me as Attorney General.