On Nov. 8, Mississippi voters will vote on Initiative 26, a personhood constitutional amendment that defines a person as “every human being from the moment of fertilization, cloning, or the functional equivalent thereof.” Personhood amendments like this are an extreme invasion of a woman and family’s privacy, not only criminalizing abortion but potentially outlawing common forms of contraception.

While the religious right are standing firmly behind the amendment, not all anti-abortion supporters are thrilled about the this radical overreach. Today on Fox and Friends, Mississippi Gov. Haley Barbour (R) expressed considerable concern over the bill’s ambiguity, noting “a lot of pro-life people have problems with this particular language.” Following up with MSNBC’s Chuck Todd, Barbour reiterated that he believes “life begins at conception” but that he may not vote for the bill because of the “ramifications” it will have on a woman’s reproductive rights and health:

BARBOUR: I believe life begins at conception. Unfortunately, this personhood amendment doesn’t say that. It says life begins at fertilization, or cloning, or the functional equivalent thereof. That ambiguity is striking a lot of pro-life people here as concerning. And I’m talking about people that are very, outspokenly pro-life. [...]

TODD: How are you voting on it?

BARBOUR: Really I haven’t decided. If you would have asked me when this was first proposed, I would’ve said A, the legislature would’ve passed it 100 to 1. And B, I believe life begins at conception and therefore I would be for it. I am concerned about some of the ramifications on in vitro fertilization and [ectopic] pregnancies where pregnancies [occur] outside the uterus and [in] the fallopian tubes. That concerns me, I have to just say it.

Watch it:

Barbour is correctly concerned about the “profoundly ambiguous” language of the bill. Fertilization can be defined at least four ways, beginning either with the sperm’s penetration of the egg or, as those behind the bill suggest, when the embryo is formed even before its implantation in the uterus. Such a definition could ban the birth control pill, stem cell derivation, and — as Barbour notes — in vitro fertilization procedures for couples trying to have a baby.

But it is important to note that Barbour’s preferred ban from “conception” still subjects women to serious ramifications. Conception is medically defined as the implantation of the embryo. Most women don’t even know that they are pregnant until four to six weeks after this occurs. “Life at conception” rules would be the most radical ban on abortion yet, completely eradicating a woman’s constitutional right to choose.

RGA Chairman and Mississippi Gov. Haley Barbour

The Wall Street Journal notes that the GOP governors also use the proposal to take aim at one of their favorite scapegoats — undocumented immigrants:

The RGA has floated most of the ideas before, but one jumped out as new. Solution No. 5 would “require the federal government to take full responsibility for the uncompensated care costs of treating illegal aliens.” Keep in mind that federal law already prohibits illegal immigrants from enrolling in Medicaid.

But RGA Policy Chairman and Mississippi Gov. Haley Barbour said illegal immigrants sneak onto the program in his and other states and add to its tab.

“Let’s don’t kid ourselves,” Gov. Barbour told reporters during a briefing at RGA headquarters in Washington. “There are people who are getting on the system and violating the law.”

Undocumented immigrants can get emergency care through Medicaid, but they must pay for all non-emergency care and are not eligible for other Medicaid benefits.

Because illegally enrolled non-citizens make up such a small portion of people on Medicaid, the proposal is clearly more about ideology than cost-cutting. Barbour and Virginia Secretary of Health and Human Resources Bill Hazel both declined to say how much it actually costs their states when undocumented immigrants don’t pay their hospital bills, but “Democratic governors haven’t cited it as a significant cost.”

Studies have found that “because most illegal immigrants are relatively young and healthy, they generally don’t need as much health care treatment as U.S. citizens.” According to USA Today, they account for less than 2 percent of national medical spending.

Ironically, Republican efforts to block immigrants from enrolling in government insurance programs means that undocumented immigrants are much less likely to have health insurance than other families, which drives up health care costs when they inevitably show up in emergency rooms to get care. An effort to add legal immigrant children to the State Children’s Health Insurance Program was blocked in the Senate in 2007, and lawmakers added language to ensure that illegal immigrants were excluded.