Glenn talks with 20/20's John Stossel




Don't miss Glenn Beck tonight on ABC's 20/20 at 10 PM ET. For a sneak preview click here...


Photo credit: ABC News


GLENN: From Radio City in Midtown Manhattan, third most listened to show in all of America and strangely we're proud of that. Hello and welcome. My name is Glenn Beck. John Stossel is on the phone with me. John is doing a piece on 20/20 where they followed me around for I believe 400 days and wow, what a I mean, you are going to look at this piece at the end and say what a colossal waste of time and money that was, really seriously. But he is doing a piece on me tonight and I'm going to speak in very nice tones to him because it hasn't aired yet. Too late either way.

STOSSEL: Too late. We are going to trash you, the dirt we have found on you.

GLENN: Let me ask you something, because you really did, you guys followed me I think for three solid days, two or three solid days. Did I say anything that is going to get me fired?

STOSSEL: No.

GLENN: Did I say anything that made you go, "Holy cow"?

STOSSEL: Yeah. When you said that you only became a Mormon because you wanted to have sex with your wife.

GLENN: Well, that

STU: (Laughing).

GLENN: Can I tell you something, John? Remember in the piece I said she hits me? I got so she hit me so hard after that, she's like, I can't believe you said that! I said, you should have said that then! Why are you hitting me now when you didn't do it on TV, make me look like a liar.

STOSSEL: Yeah, be better if she hit you right in front of the camera.

GLENN: I know. I would have had evidence. So John, we'll talk about that later. It's on tonight, 20/20. You don't want to miss it, or you may want to miss it. I'm not really sure at this point. Only John really knows, but that is on ABC 20/20 tonight where you kind of get a glimpse of my life, a little bit of the tour. I know you guys were there for the tour. I don't know what you included. And also me at home as well. So anyway

STOSSEL: We're still cutting it together. So some things are going in and other things are coming out.

GLENN: Oh, boy.

STOSSEL: It is frustrating in that we did follow you for several days and our story will be about eight minutes long. Heck, you're on TV for ten times that every day.

GLENN: Let me ask you this, John. Is this the story you expected to get?

STOSSEL: Yeah, I think it is. I mean, I

GLENN: I don't like the way you say that.

STOSSEL: I had never seen your comedy tour before. So I don't know all of what you do. I know you have a checkered past and I know you used to put away a lot of booze and you wrecked your career. So much of what we have on I already knew. I don't know that all your listeners do.

GLENN: Now, let me ask you this, John. When you said "I didn't know you did a comedy tour," I'm a little nervous just because, have you read the reviews from the New York Times, Newsweek?

STOSSEL: That was I just read them. I had never really met you before except briefly on the air and we do the interview and then I say, "Oh, the Times is covering the comedy tour, giving it great display. Maybe they got interested." And what a snarky, smarmy review. "Oh, there's no one in the theater with me here in New York. Oh, this lady came in and, oh, she was lost." I mean, it's like they felt they had to cover you because you're a big hit but then they couldn't even cover the content.

GLENN: Yeah, they couldn't cover it honestly. Let me switch gears and go to David Letterman because it's the same kind of thing. First of all, when it comes to people's children, I think your children are off limits. Let's leave politicians' children alone, let's leave families of anybody alone. Just leave them alone unless it's like Bernie Madoff's kids, you know what I mean, that are actually involved in it, or Chelsea Clinton when she was 25 and campaigning. Then, you know, you've got something they are bringing themselves into the story. But is it amazing to you on two stories, first the David Letterman, what the press has done to Sarah Palin, whether she is smart or dumb, this woman doesn't have a chance of survival with the media the way it is now, does she?

STOSSEL: It's a fatal conceit to predict what will happen, but

GLENN: Well, how do let me rephrase the question. How does somebody get a fair shake in the media, John? You've been in the media forever. How does somebody with a differing opinion from the elite view in New York, how do you survive?

STOSSEL: It's very, very tough because a lot of people believe time, Newsweek and the Washington Post and New York Times and they are powerful not because they have a big audience. Their audience is a fraction of yours, but the sense all over the media and local TV hosts all copy what they read in the New York Times. You really can get totally smeared. But at least now there are so many other choices. If it was ever possible, it's possible now.

GLENN: You've been following the shooting at the Holocaust museum?

STOSSEL: Only slightly. I mean, I was with you when you learned about it.

GLENN: Oh, that's right, you were.

STOSSEL: That you turned your show upside down for it because, I don't know. I mean, 20,000 people are killed by gunshot every day every year, sorry, and certain ones we consider much more important, a shot if it happens in a prominent place, if politicians were involved. I mean, this was one horrible, I also know why it's such a big story.

GLENN: Here is my angle on it because I forgot you guys were following me that day and you were in the office when that happened and I found out about it and we were working in a different, completely different way for the show and we flipped it all upside down and went in that direction and here's why. Because of what I believe is coming with the press. I think the press is I mean, have you noticed that this guy's rightwing? I mean, that's the way the press is he's a rightwing zealot. Since when is rightwing somebody who hates all the Jews? When is that rightwing? That's crazy. That's racist. That's not rightwing.

STOSSEL: Well, even crazy is that there are lots of people in the mainstream media who are hard right and far right, but nobody's ever hard left or far left.

GLENN: I just, I find it amazing that the media, when the abortion doctor was killed, immediately it was Bill O'Reilly's fault. When this guy goes and shoots, immediately, immediately it's, you know, it's the far right that's doing it. When the Muslim convert, the guys goes down in, where was it, Alabama and shoots our recruiters, he's just an isolated incident. It's so clear the bias in the media.

STOSSEL: What's remarkable is how so many of my colleagues would deny that. And not that they are lying. They genuinely don't see it. They are so surrounded by people who think just as they do and they read the New York Times that they just think that's the world, like asking a fish about water. What water?

GLENN: So this is why they just think we're stupid because we're just not readers or whatever it is. I can't tell you how many things my audience has been called, you know, that we're just not smart. I will put my audience against any audience. It is a very well read, very smart audience. And here we have these elitists whose numbers are dwindling in newspapers, magazines, television, everything. You would think somebody somewhere would say, you know what? Maybe we're wrong. Maybe we're wrong because nobody's reading our crap anymore. Nobody's doing this anymore, yet they just seem to get more and more embittered on their own point of view.

STOSSEL: But they can make a pretty good argument that they, or I should say we are losing audience not because we are saying the wrong things but because people have more choices.

GLENN: Yeah, but more choices, if you are providing what people want, they will go to it. I mean, my example is AM radio. You've got a lot of choices now, a ton of choices. AM radio is not easily accessible. It sounds like crap, it's staticy, go under a bridge, blah, blah blah, but this is the place offering this kind of content. People aren't going to go buy a magazine if you have the right content, they are not going to go buy a newspaper, but they will find they will seek out AM radio?

STOSSEL: Well, that's a good point and you're certainly proving your point with your ratings.

GLENN: John, I was thinking the other day, what I try to get across, and I you are probably the guy to make this point. The argument that we have about left/right in this country is so incredibly stupid because if the guy on the right is the guy who is a racist and a Nazi, a Nazi, then the guy on the left would have to be Stalin. Well, that is an argument between big government and big government. Well, I don't want either of those and I don't think most Americans want that, and they will say, well, I'm in the middle. Well, no, you're not. You're not in the middle of that. You don't want those to be your two ends. You want big government at one end and no government on the other end. What is how do you make the case to people now that we are arguing a ridiculous argument, we have been conned into a strawman argument here of big government versus big government. The best kind of government is the smallest. It doesn't matter. If Germany wouldn't have had a huge government, you know, and would have rejected framework, they could have had Hitler in, but he wouldn't have had any power to do anything, you know? It doesn't matter if Obama is in if he doesn't have the power to do anything. Doesn't matter if George Bush is in if he doesn't have the power to do anything. The smallest government is the one that is the best, but nobody seems to understand the small government idea anymore.

STOSSEL: Well, I certainly agree with you there and one of the things I'm happiest about our profile of you tonight is I got a number of lines where you make the point about the size of the state and freedom and how you don't you are accused of being a Republican shill, but you take on both parties. But I don't know that most Americans want that. I do. And I wish they did but it's not intuitive. It wasn't intuitive to me. Thomas Jefferson said it's the natural progress of things for government to grow and liberty to yield. And I think if you ask most Americans, do you want government to make sure you're safe, well, yeah. Do you want government to make sure that you have healthcare or you guaranteed a right to healthcare? I think most people would say, "Yes," I want government to make sure the poor are taken care of, that we had food, clothing, shelter.

GLENN: So make the case against that, John. Make the case against government healthcare.

STOSSEL: The case against government healthcare is that it would be like the motor vehicle's experience, it would be like the post office, that it might be okay at the beginning, the eager beavers come in like the peace corps and they might do an okay job. But government always atrophies, the quality always atrophies. It took 70 years for the Soviet Union to fail. The best car the planned economies could produce was the Trabant. It was so bad you had to put the oil and gas in separately and shake the car to mix them together and yet that was the best that the government could produce and yet people think of government as, yes, they will take care of me. But it won't get better. We won't have innovation and eventually you'll have horrible lines and lousy treatment.

GLENN: Yesterday the Senate approved taking over and regulating all tobacco, et cetera, et cetera, and they made this big case that this is so great because people are going to stop smoking and they are going to be able to regulate. Aren't they paying for children's healthcare through smokers?

STOSSEL: Well, first they don't like it, then they were going to punish it by taxing it. But I think Americans say, "Well, we're never going to get rid of smoking or beer. So let's just tax it and support wonderful government."

GLENN: Yeah, but if they're trying to also stomp it out. I mean, I think they should be running ads promoting smoking. If they are going to be getting rich off it, if they are going to be running all these government programs, they shouldn't be trying to stomp out what's giving them money. That's like me going in the radio business and then going on the radio and saying radio is bad.

STOSSEL: There's a good parallel in gambling. The Republicans have banned Internet gambling and put all kinds of restrictions on gambling in various forms but then they get elected and their states depend on the lottery for money which and they introduced the lottery because we have to get the numbers racket out of business. But the Mafia numbers runners were offering much better odds than the states do.

GLENN: How did you survive in television so long?

STOSSEL: I started as a consumer reporter bashing business and everybody liked that and so I had established my reputation, and once I woke up to the evil of regulation and big government and changed focus, I had to fight for it and it was touch and go for a while, but I had a reputation already and now ABC will often say, you know, "Well, we don't agree with you but these are ideas that deserve to be heard."

GLENN: Did you think about editing me out of the interview tonight where my wife is sitting next to her because next to me just because I look so horrible in comparison?

STOSSEL: She does look a lot better than you do.

GLENN: I mean, I don't I mean, you could have just said "No" to that, John. You could have

STOSSEL: No.

GLENN: (Laughing). I haven't seen the piece yet, you know, but I have to say in a time where the, you know, media never does its job, you guys did an awful lot of work and very in depth and I could regret saying giving you any kind of credibility on this, you know, come, well, come tonight. But as it stands right now, I'm going to kiss your butt and say that you guys did a great job and then I'll, of course, on Monday deny it and say these guys didn't even do their homework, how could they possibly say they had film of me saying that, huh? Oh, boy.

STOSSEL: I'm dreading that, but it is what it is.

GLENN: I know. Thank you very much, John, I appreciate it.

STOSSEL: Thanks, Glenn.

GLENN: You bet, bye bye. John Stossel tonight on 20/20.

How prepared are YOU to weather a future crisis? We recently published a brand new quiz so you can find out exactly how prepared you are. Whether you're a "prepper" with a bunker fit for the apocolypse or just want to feel more secure for the future, there is always something more to learn. That's why Glenn wants to give his newsletter subscribers his "Ultimate Preparation Guide," filled with practical tips for building a solid foundation to weather future crises. And let's face it—in our crazy world right now, who couldn't use a bit more peace of mind?

Enter your email below to get "Glenn's Ultimate Preparation Guide" sent straight to your inbox!

Editor's Note: Arizona House Bill HB2770 has since been shut down! AZ Rep. Rachel Jones tweeted that the AZ Freedom Caucus shut down the bill before it could reach the board. It is encouraging to see states stepping to protect the American people from getting one step closer to a Central Bank Digital Currency. Hopefully, Arizona will be a precedent for the other states!

On today's radio broadcast, Glenn warned about dangerous Central Bank Digital Currency (CBDC) language being smuggled into routine legislation in REPUBLICAN-led states. This is unacceptable, and as Glenn said, we can't let this legislation pass as it now stands.

The legislation being used to smuggle in this CBDC language is the Uniform Commercial Code (UCC), a routine piece of legislation passed on the state level that helps standardize commercial and business transactions. However, a new round of UCCs being deliberated RIGHT NOW amongst a swath of Republican-led states anticipate the use of "electronic money." In a public letter sent to the Republican states currently deliberating this legislation, the Pro-Family Legislative Network said this can only refer to the Central Bank Digital Currency (CBDC) under consideration and testing by the Federal Reserve. Biden's Executive Order 14067 issued in March of 2022 started the push for CBDC, and now these states, knowingly or unknowingly, are laying the legislative groundwork for making CBDC a reality.

There is absolutely no reason why Republican-led states should aid in laying the foundation for CBDC, yet 12 of them are deliberating it RIGHT NOW, with one UCC bill already on one GOP governor's desk! We have to act NOW to stop these UCCs in their tracks and demand our lawmakers amend the bills without the "electronic money" language.

If your state is listed below, contact your representative NOW to put an end to CBDC language.

1. North Dakota

North Dakota House Bill HB1082 passed BOTH chambers and is now sitting on Governor Burgum's desk. Burgun has 3 DAYS to veto this bill once it's placed on his desk—if not, it will pass automatically. If you are a North Dakota resident, it is absolutely CRUCIAL that you contact Governor Burgum's office NOW and demand that he veto this bill and re-introduce it without the "electronic money" language.

2. Arizona

Arizona House Bill HB2770 has been SHUT DOWN! See the above editor's note for more details.

Arizona House Bill HB2770 passed the House majority and minority caucuses. Arizona residents, contact your representative's office NOW so that they amend this bill without the "electronic money" language.

3. Arkansas

Arkansas House Bill HB1588 is in committee, and if passed, will head to the House floor. Though the bill is only in its beginning stages, it's important for Arkansas residents to stop this bill in its tracks and amend it without the "electronic money" language.

4. Missouri

Missouri House Bill HB1165 is also in its beginning stages in committee. That means it's important to contact your representative as soon as possible to amend it without the "electronic money" language.

5. Oklahoma

Oklahoma House Bill HB 2776 passed the House Committee and will go to a chamber vote soon. If passed, it will go to the Senate, then the governor's desk. If you are an Indiana resident, contact your representative's office NOW to amend the bill without the "electronic money" language.

6. Indiana

Indiana Senate Bill SB0486 passed the Senate and is headed to the House. Republicans control Indiana's executive office and BOTH chambers of the legislature. There is no excuse for this bill to pass. If you are an Indiana resident, it's vital you contact your representative NOW and demand they amend this bill without the "electronic money" language.

7. Kentucky

Kentucky Senate Bill SB64 passed the Senate and is now being deliberated in the House. If you live in Kentucky, contact your representative's office to amend the bill without the "electronic money" language.

8. Montana

Montana Senate Bill SB370 passed the Senate and was sent to the House on March 3rd. If you are a Montana resident, contact your representative's office NOW so that the bill doesn't without changing the "electronic money" language.

9. Nebraska

Nebraska's Legislative Bill LB94 passed committee and the first floor vote. As Nebraska only has one legislative chamber, this bill is dangerously close to passing the legislature and being sent to the governor's desk. If you are a Nebraska resident, contact your representative's office NOW and demand they amend the bill without the "electronic money" language.

10. New Hampshire

New Hampshire House Bill HB584 is currently in House committee deliberations and has not yet reached the House floor. If you are a New Hampshire resident, contact your representative's office NOW to amend the bill without the "electronic money" language.

11. Tennessee

Tennessee House Bill HB0640 didn't successfully pass the House. However, it was deferred to a Senate committee and has now taken the form of Senate Bill SB0479, which is now in committee. This bill is still alive, and it's important for you, Tennessee residents, to stop it before it reaches the floor! Contact your representative to amend the bill without the "electronic money" language.

12. Texas

Texas House Bill HB5011 was filed and is ready to be taken up by committee. Fellow Texans, let's not let this bill progress any further! Contact your representative and demand they amend the bill without the "electronic money" language.

6 things you NEED to know about the Silicon Valley Bank collapse

NurPhoto / Contributor | Getty Images

Silicon Valley Bank's collapse is sparking traumatic memories of the 2008 financial crash. Should we be worried SVB is signaling a similar economic catastrophe, or is everyone overreacting to the media's hype? Glenn told his listeners to be "healthily terrified." This event is sure to have ripple effects throughout the economy, but the more you are informed about it, the more you can prepare. Here are 6 things you need to know about Silicon Valley Bank's crash—explained in simple words.

1. The short answer to what happened: SVB didn't have enough money to pay its depositors.

Remember the scene from It's a Wonderful Life when all of the residents make a run on George Bailey's bank demanding their money? Fortunately for them, their money was in the altruistic hands of George Bailey, who used his honeymoon savings to give the depositors the money they demanded.

Silicon Valley Bank's depositors weren't so lucky.

In short, the depositors made a run on Silicon Valley Bank, demanding the withdrawal of their money. But SVB simply didn't have the liquid money available to give their depositors, causing regulators to shut down the bank shortly afterward.

2. It all started with COVID...

Why didn't SVB have enough money for its depositors? To explain this, we have to go back to the pandemic era.

The pandemic saw a rapid decrease in spending and a massive increase in bank deposits. Due to the uncertainty of the future and lockdowns limiting ways to spend money on recreational activities, like restaurants, bars, and other outlets, many Americans stocked up money in their accounts. In fact, SVB's deposits doubled in 2021 alone, bringing in more money than they could lend out to their clients.

To make a return on their available cash, SVB wanted to invest it, as many banks do. Since they had reached their lending limit, they decided to invest it in U.S. Treasury Securities, which are the government's means of funding itself without using taxation (in a nutshell). These are considered "ultra-safe" investments because they are backed by the "full faith and credit of the federal government."

Unlike other forms of investments, investing in Treasuries means the government will do everything within its legal power to pay back the money used to fund itself. In other words, it is typically very safe... so what happened?

3. Then came the magic cocktail—record-high inflation and rising interest rates...

Interest rates ruined the typically "ultra-safe" investment. Due to 40-year record-high inflation, the Fed lifted rates eight times by a total of 4.25 percentage points in 2022, raising interest rates from 0.25 percent to 4.375 percent. This means the value of U.S. Treasuries investments plummeted rapidly. SVB reported that it lost $1.8 billion due to the decreased value of its Treasuries investments after a year of rising interest rates.

This raises the following question: why didn't SVB just weather the storm and wait for interest rates to decrease? There are two issues with this. The first is that, with so many of their assets held up in Treasuries investments, SVB still wouldn't have enough liquid assets to give their depositors during the bank run.

The second issue is that Treasuries investments have a ten-year limit. In 2021 during the Trump administration, interest rates were at an all-time low of 0.125 percent.

The record-fast increase of interest rates in 2022 caused very little chance for rates to go back down to their historic 2021 lows within ten years for banks to make their money back on their investments.

To avoid this, SVB planned to sell their investments at a loss and re-purchase Treasuries investments at the decreased value, giving them an extra ten years to bet on decreased interest rates in the future.

But people caught on to SVB's plan and didn't want to ride with the risk.

4. Account holders withdrew their money... FAST.

As aforementioned, SVP lost $1.8 billion when it sold its depleted Treasuries investments. While they were betting on being able to re-purchase the devalued securities, hoping that they would go up in value in the future with lowered interest rates, investors were worried about the risk.

Once they made the announcement of their $1.8 billion loss, their stocks began to drop, and venture capitalists warned the companies they invest in to pull out of SVB. This had a snowball effect, leading to a "bank run" of depositors demanding to withdraw their money from their SVB accounts.

This led to the perfect storm: SVB's investment losses coupled with the influx of withdrawals were so immense that regulators had to step in and shut the bank down to protect depositors. The government currently "running" SVB, for all practical purposes, is the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC). The FDIC closed SVB on Friday and reopened the bank on Monday, March 13th as the Deposit Insurance Bank of Santa Clara.

5. Some people may lose their money. 

Banks insure accounts with $250,000 or less with FDIC insurance. That means, in cases of bank failure, exactly like this one, the FDIC covers all accounts less than $250,000. The FDIC said SVB customers who had less than $250,000 in their accounts will have access to all of their money when the bank reopens. Since it reopened this week, they should have access to their funds.

However, many of SVB's depositors had more than $250,000 in their accounts—it is Silicon Valley after all. Therefore, their accounts were not covered by FDIC insurance. Will they get their money back? There is a chance that they will not.

It is unclear how much SVB currently has to cover uninsured deposits. It is likely not enough. The FDIC has issued a "Receiver's Certificate" to the uninsured account holders with the amount in their account that is not covered by FDIC insurance.

The FDIC said it will pay some of the uninsured deposits by next week by liquidating any additional assets held by SVB. However, if the liquidated assets are not enough, many of SVB's uninsured account holders could lose their money for good.

6. Is this 2008 all over again?

SVB's collapse was the largest bank failure since 2008, when Washington Mutual failed with $307 billion in assets. Its failure, along with the collapse of the Lehman Brother's investment bank, triggered the worst financial crisis since the Great Depression. Are we in danger of repeating 2008?

Some argue that we are not in danger of another economic catastrophe, simply because SVB holds less than 1 percent of the nation's assets. However, as Glenn warns, there is a danger of banks repeating the same mistakes as SVP.

SVP wasn't the only bank to use its surplus deposits to invest in U.S. Treasuries, which means that other banks are wrestling with the depleted value of their securities investments due to rising interest rates.

Bank of America, for example, lost $109 billion in their securities investments due to rising interest rates, the most among its peers—and Bank of America is no small fish in the ocean of assets.

Other major banks recorded other massive losses in their securities investments due to rising interest rates. JP Morgan Chase lost $36 billion, Wells Fargo lost $41 billion, Citigroup lost $25 billion, and Goldman Sachs lost $1 billion. If the little banks collapse, will they get the same effort and attention from the federal government as the "big guys?"

The critic may argue that these are still small values given the incredibly large amount of assets held in banks nationwide. However, this is missing the point. Major banks have majorly invested in securities since the pandemic-era skyrocketing rate of deposits. Now those investments are depleted in value.

They can either sell those investments at a loss, or they can wait and hope that they will recover over time. However, if those investments are no longer liquid, what happens when their depositors come knocking? Will they have enough liquid assets to cover a massive bank run? These are the lingering questions that our banks need to address.

As Glenn says, this will impact you—it is only a matter of time. What will you do to prepare?

Glenn just purchased the entire historical Roe v. Wade archive as a solemn reminder of our nation's past and the vital importance of honoring the sacredness of life. Since Roe was overturned in 2022, many states have been stepping up to protect both their unborn citizens AND the mothers carrying them.

Which states are doing the most to protect their most vulnerable? Here are the top 12 states with the strictest laws against abortion.

1. Alabama

​Alabama has some of the nation's most protective pro-life measures, banning all abortions in the case of life-threatening circumstances for the mother. That means abortion is banned at every ​stage of pregnancy. Health care providers found guilty of performing abortions face a class-A felony, the most serious charge besides Capitol Murder, with the potential of carrying a life sentence in prison. However, the pill, Plan B, is classified as "contraception" rather than abortion. Taxpayer-funded Medicaid does not cover abortion procedures except in very limited circumstances.

Alabama is one of the few states to add protections within its state constitution for the unborn. The state:

Acknowledges, declares, and affirms that it is the public policy of this state to recognize and support the sanctity of unborn life and the rights of unborn children, including the right to life.

2. Arkansas

Like Alabama, Arkansas bans abortion at every stage of pregnancy except in life-threatening situations for the mother. However, Plan B is still considered "contraception" and is legal. Taxpayer-funded Medicaid does not cover abortion procedures except in very limited circumstances. Additionally, Arkansas added the amendment to its state constitution, declaring:

The policy of Arkansas is to protect the life of every unborn child from conception until birth, to the extent permitted by the Federal Constitution.

3. Idaho

Idaho bans abortions at every stage of pregnancy with the exceptions of life-threatening situations to the mother and instances of rape and incest. The health care practitioner who gave an abortion must prove "affirmative defense," which means they have to prove in court why the abortion is necessary and meets the legal criteria. Patients approved for abortion must wait 24 hours after counseling to receive the procedure. Anyone who performs an abortion unless it's in one of the approved cases will face felony charges. Like Alabama and Arkansas, taxpayer-funded Medicaid does not cover abortion procedures.

Unlike Alabama and Arkansas, Idaho law does not include explicit constitutional or statutory protections for abortion.

4. Kentucky

Kentucky has also banned abortion at all stages of pregnancy except in life-threatening situations for the mother. There are no exceptions for rape or incest. However, abortion providers are fighting the all-out ban on abortion through appealing to the state's previous abortion ban after six weeks of pregnancy. The appeal is ongoing.

Though Kentucky voters voted down a proposal to add an amendment to the state constitution banning abortion, the state adopted the following policy towards abortion in 2018:

Children, whether born or unborn, are the greatest natural resource in the Commonwealth of Kentucky.

5. Louisiana

Louisiana also banned abortion at all stages of pregnancy with no exceptions for rape or incest. However there is an appeal to allow abortions in the case of rape and incest. Healthcare practitioners who violate this ban are subject to criminal prosecution. Moreover, Louisiana adopted an amendment in their state constitution—specifically, the Louisiana Declaration of Rights, banning the construction of any constitutional right to abortion:

To protect human life, nothing in present constitution shall be construed to secure or protect a right to abortion or require the funding of abortion.

6. Mississippi

Mississippi bans all abortions except to save the life of the mother or in cases of rape or incest that have been reported to law enforcement. Though Mississippi did not adopt a constitutional amendment to ban abortion as a right, the Mississippi Code says:

Abortion carries significant physical and psychological risks to the maternal patient, and these physical and psychological risks increase with gestational age.

Moreover, doctors who perform illegal abortions face civil and criminal charges.

7. Missouri

Missouri bans all abortions except in the case of a medical emergency concerning the mother, with no exceptions for rape or incest. Those seeking to get an abortion must prove "affirmative defense," which means they have to prove in court why the abortion is necessary and meets the legal criteria. Minors seeking an abortion through "affirmative defense" must do so with parental consent. Moreover, those seeking an abortion must be offered an ultrasound.

Moreover, Missouri adopted the following statute protecting the unborn:

It is the intention of the general assembly of the state of Missouri to: (1) [d]efend the right to life of all humans, born and unborn; (2) [d]eclare that the state and all of its political subdivisions are a ‘sanctuary of life’ that protects pregnant women and their unborn children; and (3) [r]egulate abortion to the full extent permitted by the Constitution of the United States, decisions of the United States Supreme Court, and federal statutes.

8. Oklahoma

Oklahoma was the first state to successfully ban all abortions after conception following the overturn of Roe v. Wade and continues to lead the way as one of the toughest states on abortion. Exceptions include life-saving procedures for the mother or pregnancies resulting from "rape, sexual assault, or incest." Those who perform legal abortions can be reported and prosecuted criminally under state law HB427 and be charged at least $10,000 per illegal abortion procedure. Violations also include insurance companies or private citizens caught funding abortions.

Though Oklahoma has not adopted a state constitutional amendment concerning abortion, its Public Health Code states that it cannot be “construed as creating or recognizing right to abortion."

9. South Dakota

South Dakota bans all abortions except in life-threatening cases for the mother. There are no exceptions for rape and incest. However, it is legal to travel out of state to get an abortion. There are no state constitutional provisions protecting against abortion.

10. Tennessee

Tennessee bans all abortions except in life-threatening cases for the mother. There is currently a movement in the Tennessee state legislature to enact exceptions for rape and incest. Like Idaho and Missouri, healthcare practitioners who gave an abortion must prove "affirmative defense," which means they have to prove in court why the abortion is necessary and meets the legal criteria. Those who provide abortions illegally can be criminally prosecuted.

Tennessee's state constitution was amended to supersede a 2000 Tennessee supreme court case, which held:

A woman’s right to terminate her pregnancy is a vital part of the right to privacy guaranteed by the Tennessee Constitution [and that] the right is inherent in the concept of ordered liberty embodied in our constitution and is therefore fundamental.

The new state constitutional amendment reads as follows:

Nothing in this Constitution secures or protects a right to abortion or requires the funding of an abortion.

11. Texas

Texas bans all abortions except in life-threatening cases concerning the mother. There is a movement in the Texas state legislature to provide exemptions for rape and incest.

Moreover, Texas received a lot of heat for its law not only criminalizing providing illegal abortions but enabled citizens to report illegal abortions. However, several cities in Texas are pushing back against the abortion ban. After Dobbs, Texas increased the penalties for performing an abortion up to life in prison, including a civil penalty of no less than $100,000 per abortion performed.

Attorney General Ken Paxton said the following:

Now that the Supreme Court has finally overturned Roe, I will do everything in my power to protect mothers, families, and unborn children, and to uphold the state laws duly enacted by the Texas Legislature.

The cities of Austin and San Antonio passed ordinances preventing city funds from being used to investigate the provision or receipt of abortion care.

12. West Virginia

West Virginia bans abortion at all stages of pregnancy, except in the case of a “nonmedically viable fetus”, ectopic pregnancy, or medical emergency. According to the West Virginia state legislature, "Nonmedically viable fetus" means:

A fetus that contains sufficient lethal fetal anomalies so as to render the fetus medically futile or incompatible with life outside the womb in the reasonable medical judgment of a reasonably prudent physician.

Victims of rape and incest can obtain abortions up to eight weeks after conception, but only if they report to law enforcement first.

In 2018, West Virginians voted to add the following language to the state constitution:

Nothing in this Constitution secures or protects a right to abortion or requires the funding of abortion.