Congressman Ron Kind Appears to have a very low opinion of women

On 31 March congress voted on a bill that would curtail the use of tax credits used for expense medical and insurance payments to write off expenses related to abortion. The bill contains exceptions for cases involving rape, incest, and to save the life of the mother. According to LifeNews.com Wisconsin Representative Ron Kind opposed the bill because it could have "some perverse unintended consequences." The remainder of his quote follows:

Well, Mr. Barthold, one of my fears of what’s before us today is that it could lead to some very perverse unintended consequences — almost encouraging low-income women, that would have this benefit denied from them, to file false claims of rape — whether it’s against a boyfriend, whether it’s against an acquaintance, perhaps even a husband — in order to avoid, you know, the consequences that this legislation, the financial consequences that this legislation would bring. And I’m not quite sure how many of my colleagues on the other side have just thought through those unintended results — the filing of false issues like that.

This statement by the congressman about the level of commitment particularly of low-income women to avoid the consequences of the law. It leads to several questions:

1. Why does Representative Kind believe that simple denial of a "benefit" would lead to widespread false claims against rape? 
2. Does he really believe that low-income women are less concerned about the moral, ethical, and legal implications of failing a false police report regarding rape than about having the "benefit" of an abortion?
3. Does he really believe that women are going to subject their boyfriends and husbands to the potential consequences of a rape charge in order to simply receive an abortion? 
4. Does he really think that women are going to be willing to submit themselves to the consequences of filing a false police report?
5. Has Rep. Kind even thought through the complete consequences of his unintended consequences for any woman that takes such a path as he suggests?
6. Is he not aware of the process that begins as soon as a woman claims rape?

The claim of rape is likely to delay an abortion because the medical provider must call authorities and complete a rape kit which includes a complete exam  to determine damage done during the alleged rape. Medical professionals and law enforcement can actually determine if the woman was raped. The woman must be interviewed by the police about the incident and are, if she is under the age of 18, want a parent or guardian present. Even if her charge holds through the initial process if it is untrue she is more likely to recant than a victim who was actually attacked. The things that will be gone into during discovery and possibly even used in court would cause women who weren't actually victims to recant, opening themselves up to penalties for filing a false report.

His statement is offensive because it assumes a higher potential for dishonesty among low-income women in pursuance of abortion. Is it possible that he is, while placing the decision fully with the woman, unintentionally signalling that low-income woman who seek services in abortion clinics after the law takes effect are more likely to be "advised" to take this route by clinic employees? Or that clinic employees will take that claim of the woman and not report to the authorities? If either of these is the case than the clinic is responsible for the woman breaking the law.

Feminists should be outraged, if they really believe in their cause, because Kind is painting a negative picture of women and their motives. Have they so much made abortion their sacrament and protecting the right to the procedure such a part of their schtick that they are not willing to criticize a congressman on their own side for saying such a thing.