Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: k2blader
http://www.mitchellrepublic.com/main.asp?SectionID=3&ArticleID=9209&SubSectionID=83

Friday, February 20, 2004

Some hesitation on abortion-ban bill

By BOB MERCER, Republic Capitol Correspondent


PIERRE - Key lawmakers, top aides to the governor and several representatives of organizations that oppose abortion huddled in a closed-door meeting Thursday evening at the state Capitol. They privately discussed whether or not to proceed toward final passage of legislation next week that would ban nearly all abortions in South Dakota.

After the meeting, the measure’s prime sponsor, Rep. Matt McCaulley, R-Sioux Falls, said he would oppose any attempt to pull back.

“I’m committed to the bill in its present form. It’s moving forward,” McCaulley said. “It says South Dakota is not going to wait. We’re going to lead the country by protecting unborn life in our jurisdiction.”

The legislation, HB 1191, has already won approval in the House of Representatives. It is scheduled for a hearing Saturday morning before the Senate State Affairs Committee. But the question of whether to continue pushing for passage of the legislation has split abortion opponents in the Legislature.

One group, led by McCaulley, wants to push ahead in the hope that the law would force the U.S. Supreme Court to revisit the 1973 Roe vs. Wade decision that legalized abortion nationwide. One of their arguments is that some members of the court might change before a South Dakota challenge reached there in the next three years or so.

The other group sees no chance of the Supreme Court’s current membership reversing itself and doesn’t want a defeat that would further cement the Roe vs. Wade decision into place. That cluster of lawmakers includes Sen. Jay Duenwald, R-Hoven, a long-time leader in the state and national Right to Life anti-abortion organizations.

“South Dakota Right to Life does not support HB 1191 in its current form, but we are working to get it into an acceptable format that will truly protect lives,” Rachel Hansen, the state organization’s executive director, said after the meeting. The organization previously had simply taken a “right idea, wrong time” position.

One of the suggestions under consideration by some senators is an amendment supported by Right to Life that would remove the bill’s criminal language. The bill currently seeks to make performance of an abortion a Class 5 felony.

What would be offered instead is a new sentence modifying South Dakota’s informed-consent law, so that the physician or agent must certify in writing that the woman had received the information already required under law and that she had sufficient time to review and understand it.

The other main concept of McCaulley’s legislation - that life begins at conception and that unborn life should receive the same protection of law as born life - would continue to be reflected in the amendment. But there are many substantial differences in the language and the statements about that concept between the House-passed bill and the amendment.

McCaulley was firm in his dislike for the possible amendment.

“There’s two parts to 1191: What we believe, and what we’re going to do about it. I would view any attempt to remove what we’re going to do about our beliefs as an unfriendly amendment,” McCaulley said.

Beside McCaulley and Duenwald, others observed entering or leaving the meeting were Jamison Rounds, a brother of and a top aide to Gov. Mike Rounds; Brent Wilbur, a private attorney who also serves as legal counsel to the governor on various issues; Sen Lee Schoenbeck, R-Watertown, the bill’s lead sponsor in the Senate; Senate Republican leader Eric Bogue, of Faith; and the assistant GOP leader, Sen. Mac McCracken, R-Rapid City; as well as several other legislators and lobbyists.

Eighteen senators - 15 Republicans and three Democrats - signed as co-sponsors of the original legislation, the exact number needed for passage. Three of them - Bogue, McCracken and Sen. Drue Vitter, R-Hill City - are among the nine senators on the state affairs committee that will hear the bill.

9 posted on 03/23/2004 5:51:12 AM PST by Sweet Land
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies ]


To: Sweet Land
Depressing...............................

(Thank you for the confirmation)



26 posted on 03/23/2004 2:41:46 PM PST by k2blader (Some folks should worry less about how conservatives vote and more about how to advance conservatism)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies ]

To: Sweet Land
It seems from article below which is on the South Dakota Right to Life website that they opposed the bill not only because of timing but also because the bill contained a health exception that allows the abortionist to perform abortions throughout the pregnancy at his discretion.

Any one involved with pro-life legislation long enough knows that a health except like this is a killer amendment that renders the law useless. Which is why PRO-ABORTION law makers always try to add "health exceptions" to pro-life bills.

Pro-abortion lawmakers in the US Senate tried to add a "health" exception to the Partial-Birth Abortion ban but every pro-life lawmaker and organization opposed the exception because it would have make the ban useless.

http://www.sdrl.org/legislative_priorities/1191%20VETO%20OVERIDE.htm

1191 VETO OVERIDE

If 1191 should pass, besides a challenge in state court, 3 things can happen, they are --

1. Challenged in district court. We lose and appeal to circuit court.
We lose and appeal to Supreme Court and Cert. is denied.

Results: Law is dead, NO lives are saved, state has spent $1,000,000 of which $500,000 will go to help the advocates of abortion in their fight against any good pro life bill that we may bring when the opportunity for success is there.

2. Challenged in district court. We lose and appeal to circuit court.
We lose and appeal to Supreme Court and Cert. is accepted.
We argue in court and lose.

Results: Law is dead, NO lives are saved, state has spent $1,000,000 + of which more than $500,000 will go to help the advocates of abortion in their fight against any good pro life bill that we may bring when the opportunity for success is there, but the opportunity will be set back for at least 10-15 years and probably more because of the principle of stare decisis which means that the law is settled and there is no reason to revisit it.

3. Challenged in district court. We lose and appeal to circuit court.
We lose and appeal to Supreme Court and Cert. is accepted.
We argue in court and win.

Results: We have just enacted the most liberal abortion law for SD in the history of the state. The health exception in 1191 allows abortion at any time from conception to birth. All discretion is left to the abortionist, including partial birth abortion. It is solely his decision.

Of the three possibilities for 1191 the first is by far the most likely. The second is less likely but the consequences are far worse, we have not only not saved babies, as some claim 1191 will do, but have precluded doing anything substantive as to preventing abortions for at least a decade, probably another thirty years. If the third possibility should happen, I wonder if the proponents are willing to accept the consequences?

Probably the gravest consequence of all in passing 1191 is that we have deluded the vast majority of South Dakotans who understand what abortion really is, and have worked long and hard to eliminate, into believing we have done something to advance the cause, when in fact we have done the opposite.
40 posted on 03/29/2004 6:50:23 PM PST by wvprolifer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies ]

To: Sweet Land
So, NRTL thinks abortion is murder, yet doesn't think murder should even be a Class 5 felony. How about even a misdemeanor or ticketable violation? These guys suck.
42 posted on 03/30/2004 4:20:49 AM PST by Conservative til I die
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson