During a committee meeting in the Missouri House of Representatives on Tuesday, Republican Representative Chuck Gatschenberger made some rather odd remarks while discussing a bill that would impact abortions in the state. The bill in question, HB No. 1613, would make ultrasounds mandatory for women considering an abortion. Also, women would be required to wait at least 72 hours after first visiting an abortion provider before actually receiving an abortion. Currently, the state requires a 24-hour waiting period.
Gatschenberger is the bill’s sponsor and introduced the bill in late January. He was discussing the bill during a meeting of the Committee on Children, Families and Persons (yes, that is the actual name of the committee) when he decided to compare a woman’s right to choose with him buying a car or shopping for home remodeling materials.
To get more stories like this, subscribe to our newsletter The Daily.
“Well, yesterday, I went over to the car lot over here. I was just going to get a key made for a vehicle. And I was looking around because I’m considering maybe buying a new vehicle. Even when I buy a new vehicle—this is my experience, again—I don’t go right in there and say I want to buy that vehicle, and then, you know, you leave with it. I have to look at it, get information about it, maybe drive it, you know, a lot of different things. Check prices. There’s lots of things that I do, putting into a decision. Whether that’s a car, whether that’s a house, whether that’s any major decision that I put in my life. Even carpeting. You know, I was just considering getting some carpeting or wood in my house. And that process probably took, you know, a month, because of just seeing all the aspects of it.”
Well, unfortunately for Gatschenberger, there were Democratic women in the room and the whole meeting was captured on video. Below is video of the meeting from Progress Missouri:
One of Gatschneberger’s colleagues, Democratic Rep. Stacey Newman, ripped into Gatschenberger regarding his callousness. She let him know that it was extremely offensive to compare a woman’s reproductive health choices with kicking the tires on a car or purchasing some new carpeting for his house. As you’d expect from an old, white Republican male, he couldn’t understand how anyone would take offense to what he said. He then proceeded to mansplain to Newman what he meant.
Newman: Your original premise, that a woman who is receiving any type of care with her pregnancy, regardless of what decisions are involved, is somehow similar to purchasing a key for an automobile—
Gatschenberger: If you were listening to my explanation, it had nothing to do that. In making a decision—not making a life-changing decision—but making a decision to buy a car, I put research in there to find out what to do.
Newman: Do you believe that buying a car is in any way related to any type of pregnancy decision?
Gatschenberger: Did I say that?
Newman: That’s what I’m asking you.
Gatschenberger: I did not say that. I’m saying my decision to accomplish something is, I get the input in it. And that’s what this bill does, is give more information for people.
Newman: So you’re assuming that women who are under care…for their pregnancy, need additional information that they’re not already receiving?
Gatschenberger: I’m just saying they have the opportunity, it increases the opportunity. If you want to know what this bill does, increases the opportunity.
Let’s not mince words here. This is offensive, sexist and regressive on so many levels. The whole point of this bill is to allow men to have say over what women do. There are no ifs, ands or buts about it. The fact that this bill was introduced by an old, conservative male makes that abundantly clear. Obviously, he wants abortion to be illegal. However, since he can’t do that, he wants to insert obstacles in the path of a woman and her right to choose.
His hope is that by forcing women to have an ultrasound and then wait an additional three days before having an abortion, more women will feel ‘guilt’ or look for alternatives other than abortion. Also, with the law in place, his thought is that many women won’t even go forward with it due to the additional steps they need to take in order to have the procedure done. Finally, there is the shaming aspect behind all of this.
Here’s one thought on Gatschenberger’s idiotic remarks. While he feels it is necessary to make informed choices when buying a car or carpeting or wood, there is no law in place preventing him from walking to a car lot and buying a car at that very moment. Nor is there one in place stopping him from going into Lowe’s and purchasing a whole roomful of carpeting on the spot. Yet, he used those as examples of choices he has available to him where he feels he needs to sit back and wait to make an informed decision.
I wonder, is he going to now introduce a bill requiring consumers to wait a mandatory 72 hours after first looking at a car before they can purchase it? Don’t hold your breath.
Justin Baragona is the Managing Editor at Politicus Sports as well as Senior Editor at PoliticusUSA. He was a political writer for 411Mania.com before joining PoliticusUSA. Politically, Justin considers himself a liberal but also a realist and pragmatist. Currently, Justin lives in St. Louis, MO and is married. Besides writing, he also runs his own business after spending a number of years in the corporate world. You can follow Justin on Twitter either with his personal handle (@justinbaragona) or the Sports site’s (@PoliticusSports).
