By Anna Spoerre
The version of the Republican-backed amendment approved by a House committee Monday, if passed out of the legislature and approved by voters, would outlaw abortion with limited exceptions for medical emergencies and survivors of rape and incest prior to 12 weeks gestation.
(Photo- Susan Klein, executive director of Missouri Right to Life, hosts a rally in the Missouri State Capitol rotunda last week -Annelise Hanshaw/Missouri Independent)
The latest version, approved by a different House committee Tuesday, proposed adding a new section to the constitution seeking to put stricter parameters on the abortion-right amendment — also known as Amendment 3 — approved by voters in November.
The bill’s sponsor, Republican state Rep. Melanie Stinnett of Springfield, said Monday’s version wasn’t one she “necessarily approved.” Stinnett said the latest version is again her own, based on feedback she received earlier in the session.
“It’s really just addressing the things that I really feel like are in line with the people’s expectations of what they were voting on in Amendment 3,” she said.
Susan Klein with Missouri Right to Life in testifying against the legislation said while Monday’s version sought to “repeal and replace” Amendment 3, the new version fails to do so.
Missouri Right to Life in a statement Wednesday called the revised amendment an “extreme gamble,” raising doubts about whether it would actually limit the number of abortions provided under the law.
Stinnett’s latest legislation would ask voters if they want to add language into the constitution that does the following: Require any minors seeking reproductive health care first obtain parental consent.
Define “reproductive health care” as anything related to women’s “potential or actual pregnancy,” including prenatal care, contraception, miscarriage, childbirth and abortion.
Clarify that women have the right to file medical malpractice challenges.
Specify that no private or public funding can be required to go toward reproductive health care.
Require that any legal challenges to the state law around reproductive health care be heard in Cole County.
Establish there is “compelling government interest” in reproductive health care.
The issue of “compelling government interest” in reproductive health care has been raised on several occasions as a court case challenging the state’s abortion regulations continues to play out in Jackson County.
Amendment 3 states that “the right to reproductive freedom shall not be denied, interfered with, delayed, or otherwise restricted unless the government demonstrates that such action is justified by a compelling governmental interest achieved by the least restrictive means.”
Referencing the language in Amendment 3, Jackson County Judge Jerri Zhang blocked a number of abortion regulations, including a 72-hour waiting period for an abortion and a mandate that physicians performing abortions have admitting privileges at nearby hospitals, citing a failure by the state to demonstrate compelling governmental interest.
Stinnett, when asked about this language Tuesday, said it was necessary.
“Our government in many ways has an interest in health, safety and welfare,” she said.
Missouri Right to Life also said the proposed amendment failed to challenge the abortion-right’s amendment’s non-discrimination clause.
“The judge in Jackson County used this provision to invalidate all of Missouri’s health and safety regulations,” according to the group’s statement Wednesday. “And she, or another court, will do it again with Amendment 3 still in the Missouri Constitution.”
House Minority Leader Ashley Aune, a Democrat from Kansas City, asked if a married 16-year-old would need to seek her parents’ permission to obtain birth control under this amendment.
“The sad reality is that too many young people don’t have that support,” she said, voicing concerns that the amendment is focused broadly on reproductive health care, including contraceptive access for minors. “I think we open it up to a lot of young folks falling through the cracks, especially the most victimized and marginalized.”
The latest version, approved by a different House committee Tuesday, proposed adding a new section to the constitution seeking to put stricter parameters on the abortion-right amendment — also known as Amendment 3 — approved by voters in November.
The bill’s sponsor, Republican state Rep. Melanie Stinnett of Springfield, said Monday’s version wasn’t one she “necessarily approved.” Stinnett said the latest version is again her own, based on feedback she received earlier in the session.
“It’s really just addressing the things that I really feel like are in line with the people’s expectations of what they were voting on in Amendment 3,” she said.
Susan Klein with Missouri Right to Life in testifying against the legislation said while Monday’s version sought to “repeal and replace” Amendment 3, the new version fails to do so.
Missouri Right to Life in a statement Wednesday called the revised amendment an “extreme gamble,” raising doubts about whether it would actually limit the number of abortions provided under the law.
Stinnett’s latest legislation would ask voters if they want to add language into the constitution that does the following: Require any minors seeking reproductive health care first obtain parental consent.
Define “reproductive health care” as anything related to women’s “potential or actual pregnancy,” including prenatal care, contraception, miscarriage, childbirth and abortion.
Clarify that women have the right to file medical malpractice challenges.
Specify that no private or public funding can be required to go toward reproductive health care.
Require that any legal challenges to the state law around reproductive health care be heard in Cole County.
Establish there is “compelling government interest” in reproductive health care.
The issue of “compelling government interest” in reproductive health care has been raised on several occasions as a court case challenging the state’s abortion regulations continues to play out in Jackson County.
Amendment 3 states that “the right to reproductive freedom shall not be denied, interfered with, delayed, or otherwise restricted unless the government demonstrates that such action is justified by a compelling governmental interest achieved by the least restrictive means.”
Referencing the language in Amendment 3, Jackson County Judge Jerri Zhang blocked a number of abortion regulations, including a 72-hour waiting period for an abortion and a mandate that physicians performing abortions have admitting privileges at nearby hospitals, citing a failure by the state to demonstrate compelling governmental interest.
Stinnett, when asked about this language Tuesday, said it was necessary.
“Our government in many ways has an interest in health, safety and welfare,” she said.
Missouri Right to Life also said the proposed amendment failed to challenge the abortion-right’s amendment’s non-discrimination clause.
“The judge in Jackson County used this provision to invalidate all of Missouri’s health and safety regulations,” according to the group’s statement Wednesday. “And she, or another court, will do it again with Amendment 3 still in the Missouri Constitution.”
House Minority Leader Ashley Aune, a Democrat from Kansas City, asked if a married 16-year-old would need to seek her parents’ permission to obtain birth control under this amendment.
“The sad reality is that too many young people don’t have that support,” she said, voicing concerns that the amendment is focused broadly on reproductive health care, including contraceptive access for minors. “I think we open it up to a lot of young folks falling through the cracks, especially the most victimized and marginalized.”
She also highlighted the language around federal funding, pointing out that the federal government just this week froze Title X family planning funds earmarked for a number of states, including Missouri. Providers say this could cause thousands of low-income Missourians to lose access to care for family planning services, including contraceptives.
While Stinnett indicated she didn’t approve of Monday’s version of the bill, she did continue to include its requirement that any legal challenges to the state law around reproductive health care be heard in Cole County.
The Missouri Attorney General’s Office has been fighting unsuccessfully to move the Jackson County lawsuit to Cole County where last year, a judge attempted to remove the abortion-rights amendment from the ballot.
Stinnett said at Tuesday’s hearing that the Cole County language was included to address concerns around judicial load so that such cases could be brought forward quickly.
Just this week, another lawsuit by Planned Parenthood against the state was filed somewhere other than Cole County.
The new lawsuit filed Tuesday in the St. Louis Circuit Court challenges Missouri Attorney General Andrew Bailey, saying he “unlawfully blocked access to medication abortion” by issuing a cease-and-desist order to Planned Parenthood when the clinics were not prescribing the medication.
“The order violates due process by lacking any factual basis and failing to meet Missouri’s legal standards for government actions,” Planned Parenthood Great Rivers said in a statement Monday.
Stinnett’s legislation is scheduled to go before the House rules committee Thursday morning. If approved there, it will go to the full House for debate. She said she anticipates more amendments will be offered on the House floor.
1 comment:
The real question is why are they trying to undermine 52% of the population that voted to pass Amendment 3. The part of "law and order" is a joke when they do everything in their power to overturn the will of the majority in the most shady convoluted ways possible. Also, I'm calling BS on the speed of handling being the reason they want cases shifted to Cole county
Post a Comment