Glenn Beck: Spineless Specter


Glenn Beck is seen here on the Insider Webcam, an exclusive feature available only to Glenn Beck Insiders. Learn more...

GLENN: I want to talk to you a little bit about Arlen Specter and the bogus choice that we are being presented. The other thing I want to talk to you about is the swine flu, and I want to play the role of the three advisors if you were the president of the United States and ask you what would you do. But I think I want to start with Arlen Specter. This is so critical. I heard when I was listening to our flagship station here in New York City, WOR as I was driving in, I'm listening to Gambling. John Gambling is talking about Arlen Specter and he makes complete and the co hosts that were on with him, they were all talking and John says, no, the government doesn't need to get more or the Republicans don't need to move, you know, farther left. They just need to reestablish the principles that they have abandoned, they no longer stand for. And one of the co hosts said, you know what, John, I don't think most people are conservative. Because he said they are conservative and they were using, I think the wrong terms. And the co host said, John, you know what I think. Most people, they would just like some fiscal responsibility and then liberal freedom. And I was hoping that somebody would point this out and nobody did, but I think this is the typical conversation that is happening all around the country right now and it's frustrating to everybody involved because they were all right. Everybody that was in that conversation was right, but they're arguing because the terms no longer mean anything solid. They mean something different to everybody. I learned this a long time ago from my father actually. He said to me when we were having a conversation about God. He said, well, you know, Glenn, god has too many different meanings. It just, you can't really have a conversation about God with people because you will see god differently than I see God and we'll see God differently than somebody who is a Buddhist will see God. So God doesn't mean the same thing because of our upbringing, because of the culture that we grow up in, et cetera, et cetera. He said, you really want to be able to have a "Start from scratch" conversation about God, you need to call him first cause because nobody calls him first cause. But that's what he is. How did the Earth start, how did the universe, what was first cause. Now I can talk to somebody who doesn't believe in God, somebody who's deeply religious, somebody who sees God in a completely different way. I can talk to all of them, first cause. And I don't get caught up in all the petty arguments of, "Well, you just belong in some sort of being," you don't get caught up in it what we're talking about, what is the first thing that happened? What is first cause?

So let's have a first cause kind of conversation here about our political system. Everybody is caught in the trap of right, left, conservative, liberal and Democrat/Republican. Forget about that and I'll tell you why we have to forget about it. Because it has been so distorted and so it is my opinion. I don't have anything to back this up historically speaking yet, but I'm looking for it. It is my opinion that the progressive movement intentionally latched onto liberal because it took classic liberalism then out of the picture. And that is the problem with our system right now. That is the frustration. I contend most Americans are classic liberals. How many in this audience even know what a classic liberal is? In this audience we probably have the highest percentage. Any of talk radio have the highest percentage would know what a classic liberal is. The reason why most people don't know what a classic liberal is, is because of the progressive movement. It was distorted. The progressives distorted liberalism. Classic liberal basically is a libertarian. It is somebody who believes in personal responsibility. It is somebody who believes in the natural rights of man. It is somebody who believes in the self as the first cause or not first cause but the determining factor. It believes in small government. But the progressives latched onto that, and it was distorted. And when they did that and I don't know when they did it and I don't know who did it and I don't know how it came to be, but I will find the answer on that. I believe it was by design and here's why I believe it was by design. Because once you destroy the argument or destroy the place at the table of the classic liberal, of the libertarian, then you're only having a discussion between the same thing, just different paint color.

Let me describe it as this. I believe our system has become Kentucky Fried Chicken and Popeye's. Now, I personally like Popeye's. I like the service at Kentucky Fried Chicken. So there are times that I can't take the people just throwing the food at me and yelling at me. So I'm going to go to Kentucky Fried Chicken. But there are other times that I'm like, I don't like the chicken as much. It's better chicken at Popeye's. And this is the argument that we have. We have two choices between Kentucky Fried Chicken and Popeye's. What a lot of Americans want is a hamburger. Kentucky Fried Chicken, if you will, took the hamburger choice away. They started calling themselves Kentucky Fried Hamburgers and so now people are saying, you want a hamburger? Well, you should be over here having chicken. No, no, no, you're eating chicken, too. "No, I'm not. I'm eating a hamburger, and we make the best hamburgers ever." And then pretty soon Popeye says, "We're making hamburgers as well." No, that's chicken, too. That's just called a chicken tender. "Nope, it's a hamburger and ours is flame broiled." No, it's not. You put it in oil. This is clearly fried. "No, that's Kentucky Fried Chicken." No. Neither of you guys are serving hamburgers! I just want a hamburger, please. This is what's happening. We're arguing about chicken places. When the real moment of revelation is when America steps back and goes, "Wait a minute. My gosh, it is chicken. Soylent Green! It's chicken! As soon as somebody stands at the counter and says, "Where's the beef!" Then we'll be able to have an honest conversation in America about Arlen Specter. But you can't have an honest conversation about Arlen Specter because he is the quintessential example of chicken in both houses. He was serving people chicken who wanted steak, but they were convinced that it was either chicken or that, you don't really want steak. I mean, we can't we may not even eat. If we don't take this chicken, we may not ever eat. No, really, there is another choice. We can stop by the hamburger store on the way. "No, no, only chicken. We must have this chicken and pretend that it's beef." I don't think so. That's a waste of your food choice. You get to choose three times a day. "Chicken. Chicken and pretend that it's beef."

Here's what's happening. The chicken, if you will, is progressivism. It is big government, lots of spending, lots of control. And whether that control is how much you pollute, you know, carbon dioxide and the control is cap and trade or the control is how much or where you can get your healthcare and how much you pay into it, there's control and big government on the other side. And then over here with the other chicken place where they swear it's beef, they give you big, gigantic government in prescription drugs, they give you big gigantic government in the control of the, all of the defense and all of the control of how we fight our foreign policy but yet we never really win over here. We never really use everything we have, which is almost like the other chicken place, we don't really use everything we have. You have the big control of the, well, we've got to have all of these eavesdropping things, all of these different things that we've got to have, we've got to have for our security over here. Oh, no, we have to have all the controls on the banks because, well, we have to have all this security and then pretty soon the other chicken place is saying, yeah, we have to have all those controls on the banks for your security as well. And pretty soon they're both saying exactly the same thing. There hasn't been a change. There hasn't been a change. There's not going to be a change. You are going to continue to eat chicken. So let's reintroduce the hamburger joint because as we all know, America is not known for Kentucky Fried Chicken. While it's on the menu and it is a choice, that's not what made American fast food. What made American fast food and what changed the world was McDonald's. So let's talk about the glorious McDonald's for a second. McDonald's is libertarianism. McDonald's is our founding fathers. McDonald's is the Constitution. McDonald's is natural law and nature's god. It's not coincidence that they named I started the monologue with first cause. It's not a coincidence that the founders always talked about nature's god and the laws of nature because they said those are immovable. No matter how you see God, no matter what it is, doesn't matter if you're a Jew, Christian or a Muslim, nature's god. He endows everyone with certain inalienable rights, life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. It was originally life, liberty and property. They changed it to not help slave states. Of course, we don't learn that anymore but we certainly don't learn about nature's god anymore. Progressives believe that God is inconsequential, he does not give you rights. Progressives do not believe in the natural laws of God, in nature's god, in nature's laws. They do not believe you are born with certain inalienable rights. This is where collectivism comes. Whatever is good for the collective, whatever is best for the state, whatever it is this person has to do to help everyone else, forced help. This is where universal healthcare comes from. You are un American if you don't do this. This is where if you're against the war, you're un American if you speak out against the war. It's the collective mindset.

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.