Radio Iowa

Iowa's Radio News Network

You are here: Home / Archives for Abortion

GOP-led legislature passes ban on abortions after sixth week of pregnancy

By

Representative Shannon Lundgren.

Republicans in the Iowa House and Senate have voted for what would be the country’s most restrictive anti-abortion policy if the governor signs it into law. After nine hours of debate, 51 Republicans in the House approved a bill that bans abortions after a fetal heartbeat can be detected, about the sixth week of a pregnancy.

Representative Shannon Lundgren, a Republican from Peosta, acknowledged the bill is designed to challenge Roe v Wade, the decision that legalized abortion.

“The science and technology have significantly advanced since 1973,” Lundgren said. “It is time for the Supreme Court to weigh in on the issue of life.”

Twelve hours after Lundgren’s remarks, Republican Senator Rick Bertrand of Sioux City celebrated as Republicans in the Iowa Senate were poised to pass the same bill.

“My God, doesn’t it feel good when Republicans vote like Republicans?” Bertrand asked. “…My friends, today we will make history. Today we will begin this journey as Iowa becomes ground zero now, nationally, in the life movement and the starting line back to the Supreme Court.”

Democrats like Senator Joe Bolkcom of Iowa City predicted the state will waste millions in court defending a law that’s been overturned in other states.

“This extreme bill is the new form of GOP coercion of Iowa women,” Bolkcom said. “It’s time for you to quit playing doctor.”

Senator Matt McCoy

Senator Matt McCoy, a Democrat from Des Moines, called the bill “anti-woman.”

“This is unconstitutional and this will not stand,” McCoy said. “….All you have done is disenfranchise more women, as if you need to give them one more reason to vote against you this fall.”

Representative Sandy Salmon, a Republican from Janesville, said the bill “thrusts Iowa to the right side of history” in challenging Roe v Wade.

“With this bill, we make Iowa one of the safest places for the baby in the womb in the entire nation,” Salmon said.

Representative Amy Nielsen of North Liberty was among the many House Democrats who spoke against the bill Tuesday evening, arguing it basically bans nearly all abortions in Iowa since few women realize they’re pregnant at week six.

“I and every woman in this state deserves to have someone stand up for them and say: ‘Your choice is worth saving,'” Nielsen said.

Representative Beth Wessel-Kroeschell, a Democrat from Ames, said if the bill becomes law, women with the resources will travel to another state, like neighboring Illinois, to get an abortion.

“These restrictions do nothing to reduce or eliminate abortion,” Wessel-Kroeschell says, “but put roadblocks between a woman and her physician and making the best medical decision for her.”

And Wessel-Kroeschell suggested House Republicans passed the bill because they’d been “backed into a corner.”

“You see no way out of this legislative session until this bill passes,” Wessel-Kroeschell said. “The Senate is holding you hostage with their extreme agenda and you are willing to take this extreme vote, just to get out of here.”

A handful of Republican senators threatened to block progress on budget bills if the House failed to pass this bill. A spokeswoman for Governor Kim Reynolds says the governor is “100 percent pro-life,” but Reynolds “will not comment on any bill until she sees it in its final form.”

The bill would allow abortions after the sixth week of pregnancy in limited circumstances, such as a medical emergency, a fetal abnormality or if the pregnancy was the result of rape or incest. The bill also would ban selling or donating fetal tissue from abortions or still births for medical research.

Among the 46 “no” votes in the House on the bill were all the Democrats present, along with the following six Republicans: Chip Baltimore of Boone, Jane Bloomingdale of Northwood. Lee Hein of Monticello, Dave Maxwell of Gibson, Andy McKean of Anamosa and Louis Zumbach of Coggon.

All 28 Republicans in the Senate present voted for the bill, along with independent Senator David Johnson of Ocheydan. All the Democrats present in the Senate voted “no” on the final vote, which was taken at 2:21 a.m.

(This story was updated at 2:21 a.m.)

Ex-Texas Representative who regrets never banning abortion testifies at Iowa House hearing

By

Tom Delay

Former Texas Congressman Tom Delay, the former majority leader in the U.S. House of Representatives, was among the speakers at a hearing in the Iowa Capitol tonight.

Delay is now part of a coalition of 120 groups pressing for bills — like the one pending in the Iowa House — that would ban abortion after a fetal heartbeat is detected.

“I am very proud of Iowa taking the lead on passing a heartbeat bill because it is time,” Delay said. “Ladies and gentlemen, it has been 45 years…Something has to change.”

Delay is an opponent of the 1973 Roe v Wade decision that legalized abortion and he told Iowa legislators public attitudes are changing because of what people can see on a sonogram.

“It’s not a piece of flesh. It’s not a bug. It’s not a parasite,” Delay said. “It’s a little baby.”

People lined up outside the hearing.

Delay spoke briefly with Radio Iowa after the hearing, suggesting his travels to Iowa and other states are a bit of penance for inaction during his 15 years in congress.

“I regretted all this time that I was in congress and, frankly, had the strength of power, that I didn’t get rid of abortion,” said Delay, who resigned from congress in 2005 after being accused of campaign finance irregularities.

Planned Parenthood of the Heartland CEO Suzanna de Baca testified immediately after Delay.

“We are once again being forced to plea for women’s basic reproductive rights,” de Baca said. “How insulting for women who remember what life was like before Roe w Wade.”

According to de Baca, before 1973, one in six deaths among pregnant women “were the result of an illegal abortion.”

“If you advance this legislation, Iowa will be dragged back into the back alley days,” de Baca said.

De Baca and others were cheered by a large contingent gathered outside the hearing room, watching the hearing on a large monitor. Dr. Amy Bingaman, an obstetrician and gynecologist in Des Moines, called the six-week abortion ban an attempt to insert politics into the practice of medicine

“I am fighting for my patients, your wives, your sisters, your children,” she said.

The Iowa Senate passed a six-week abortion ban at the end of February. A similar ban attached to another abortion-related proposal and is now eligible for debate in the full House.

Iowa House panel advances bill with tougher abortion ban

By

The committee room where lawmakers discussed new abortion restrictions.

A ban on nearly all abortions in Iowa after the sixth week of a pregnancy has cleared a House committee with the support of a dozen Republicans.

However, at least two of those Republicans made it clear they want changes in the bill if or when it’s debated by the full House.

“I believe that we all respect life in this room, but there’s a disparity between how we treat life inside the womb and how we treat life outside the womb,” Representative Rob Taylor, a Republican from West Des Moines, said before adding this caveat:  “As this bill stands today…it needs a lot of refinement.”

Representative Dave Heaton, a Republican from Mount Pleasant, was another reluctant “yes” on the bill, although he did not voice his reasons during the committee meeting. Representative Michael Bergan of Dorchester was the only Republican to vote against the measure.

All the Democrats on the committee, including Representative Timi Brown-Powers of Waterloo, voted against the bill.

“I’m a mother of one who had eight miscarriages. I would never choose an abortion for me,” Brown-Powers said in an emotional speech during today’s committee meeting. “But I cannot choose for any of you what you would do because, quite frankly, it is none of my business.”

The bill is a merger of two proposals — the ban on abortions after a fetal heartbeat is detected along with a ban on the sale or donation of fetal tissue from a miscarriage or abortion. Representative Marti Anderson, a Democrat from Des Moines, suggested the bill’s abortion ban “intentionally goes too far.”

“The motivation is clear: to create a vehicle to legally challenge Roe v Wade,” Anderson said.

Representative Sandy Salmon, a Republican from Janesville, is among those arguing the ruling that legalized abortion should be overturned.

“Unfortunately a number of things that are legal are also destructive and this is among the worst,” Salmon said.

Representative Mary Mascher, a Democrat from Iowa City, pointed to similar laws in other states that have been ruled unconstitutional in federal courts.

“Iowans are watching…They are listening,” Mascher said. “Iowans will not forget and they will vote.”

Representative Shannon Lundgren, a Republican from Peosta, said supporters of the bill are fulfilling a campaign promise to seek abortion restrictions.

“The one important reason why we’re here today — there is another life at stake,” Lundgren said. “All lives matter. Absolutely all lives matter.”

Iowa’s current law bans abortions after the 20th week of pregnancy.

Merged abortion-related proposals to be considered by House panel

By

Rep. Shannon Lundgren

A proposed ban on abortions after the sixth week of pregnancy is scheduled for debate in a House committee today.

The abortion ban has been attached to another bill that would make it illegal in Iowa to sell or donate fetal tissue from abortions for use in medical research. Representative Shannon Lundgren, a Republican from Peosta, is guiding these merged measures through the House.

“This was not a bait and switch,” Lundgren said. “The senate sent us a bill over for us to debate. We just chose to add it on to this bill.”

In late February, Republicans and the lone independent in the state senate approved a bill that would make it a crime for doctors to perform an abortion after the sixth week of a pregnancy. The plan to be considered in a House committee today does not include criminal charges for doctors.

Leah Vanden Bosch was among those who testified yesterday during a hearing on the new abortion ban.

“Do not let us go back to back-alley abortions, because that is exactly where this bill will take us,” Vanden Bosch said. “I would have done absolutely anything to terminate my pregnancy.”

Tamara Scott, state director for Concerned Women for America and a lobbyist for the Iowa Faith and Freedom Coalition, spoke in favor of a six-week abortion ban.

“This is about the physical health and well-being of our fellow Iowans in the womb who don’t deserve to be discriminated against,” Scott said.

Iowa’s current law — enacted last year — bans abortions after the 20th week of pregnancy.

(Additional reporting by Iowa Public Radio’s Katarina Sostaric)

Iowa Senate passes bill banning abortions after six weeks of pregnancy

By

A bill that would ban nearly all abortions in Iowa after the sixth week of pregnancy has passed the Iowa Senate.

“Ultimately, Senate File 2281 gets at the very heart and soul of what it means to be an American, of what it means to be a person,” said Senator Amy Sinclair, a Republican from Allerton, who was the only bill supporter to speak during senate debate.

All 29 Republicans and the independent in the Iowa Senate supported the measure, which calls for charging doctors with a felony if they perform abortions after a fetal heartbeat can be detected. The only exception would be for abortions to save the life of the mother. Senate Democratic Leader Janet Petersen of Des Moines said the bill calls for “forcing motherhood on Iowa women.”

“I believe every Iowa woman should have the freedom to decide if and when she wants to become a parent,” Petersen said. “Unfortunately, that is becoming nearly impossible with Republicans in control of the Iowa Senate.”

Every Democrat in the Senate voted against the bill. The proposal now goes to the House. Republican leaders in the House have not publicly indicated whether it is a priority for passage.

Bill would ban so-called ‘wrongful birth’ lawsuits

By

Linda Upmeyer

House Republicans want Iowa to join a dozen states that bar lawsuits against doctors who do not provide pregnant women with information about abnormalities that might prompt some women to seek an abortion.

“We want to make sure we’re protecting physicians in those circumstances,” House Speaker Linda Upmeyer, a Republican from Clear Lake, said Thursday. “…If there was a legitimate medical malpractice claim or something, that’s separate from this issue.”

This fall, the Iowa Supreme Court ruled a Fort Madison woman had a right to sue her doctor after giving birth to a child with cerebral palsy. Representative Beth Wessel-Kroeschell, a Democrat from Ames, said the woman has argued she might have chosen to have an abortion if she’d known she’d give birth to a “severely disabled child that will never walk or talk.”

“Whether you disagree with what decision that woman will make or not, we certainly deserve to have the information to make our health care decisions,” Wessel-Kroeschell said.

A bill eligible for debate in the Iowa House would prohibit so-called “wrongful birth” lawsuits that seek money to cover the lifetime costs of caring for a child with profound disabilities.

(Reporting by Iowa Public Radio’s Joyce Russell)

Iowa Supreme Court hears arguments on abortion waiting period

By

Justices preparing to hear oral arguments.

The Iowa Supreme Court heard oral arguments today in Planned Parenthood’s lawsuit seeking to overturn a couple of the provisions the state abortion law.

Lawyer Alice Clapman of Planned Parenthood Federation of America in Washington, D.C. says requiring women to make a second clinic appointment and then wait 72 hours before getting an abortion places an undue burden on all women seeking to get an abortion. She was asked by a justice if a 24-hour waiting period would be better.

“We don’t believe so, because the evidence demonstrates that women take the time that they need to make these decisions and it is completely unnecessary for the state to impose a mandatory delay on women,” Clapman responded. “And it’s burdensome, especially when the state requires an extra trip.” The state argues the waiting period allows women to get more information and some change their minds about abortion.

Justice Brent Appel asked Clapman about that argument. “Do you acknowledge that at least some women — of approximately 4,000 who undergo

Alice Clapman

abortions in Iowa each year — might change their mind if they had access to additional information and a 72-hour time to reflect,” Appel asked. “We don’t acknowledge that your honor because the evidence is that women take time before they make their appointment and they don’t need a state-imposed mediatory delay.” Clapman was asked about a study in Utah where eight percent of the women said a waiting period changed their mind.

“That eight percent included women who were inclined to continue their pregnancy — it also included women who continued their pregnancy not because they changed their mind — but because they were prevented from having an abortion because of the cost or logistical burden,” Clapman says. “And so what that study showed is it’s really only two percent and that’s in the same range as the patients who change their minds without a waiting period.” Clapman was asked if there was any case in Iowa where abortions should be restricted. She says Federal Law dictates when restrictions are allowed.

“In RoeV. Wade the court recognized that abortion was a fundamental right and that the state’s interest in potential life does not become compelling until viability. So, there is certainly a distinction before viability and after viability. And here we are only talking about abortions before viability,” Clapman says. Planned Parenthood’s argument is based on what is known legally as a facial challenge — which says any restrictions are not allowed — as opposed to taking on each abortion case based on individual circumstances.

Jeffrey Thompson

Jeffrey Thompson, the attorney representing the state says the requirement is designed to give women more time to make an informed decision about getting an abortion. He says planned parenthood has not proven the Iowa law prevents women from getting an abortion.

“It’s a heavy burden as this court has said, as you have said that a party making a facial challenge bears a heavy burden, it must show no conceivable set of circumstances exist under which the statute would be valid,” Thompson argued. He cites the district court decision that the waiting period doesn’t take away a woman’s right to get an abortion.

“The court found and made a fact-finding that is entitled to deference here that this did not prevent women from exercising their right to choose. And it found that the evidence in this record supported that it could change minds,” Thompson says. Thompson also says the Utah survey shows the waiting period can make a woman change her mind. Justice Mark Cady questioned that.

“But there’s no evidence that the women changed their mind because they had 72 hours to think about it,” Cady asked. “Yeah, I think there is,,” Thompson says. “…you are trying to carve this evidence really thin your honor. That’s one reasonable interpretation from the Utah study. I mean we have a quote from somebody who says ‘after thinking about it I just couldn’t go through with it,’,” Thompson says.

Thompson was asked if there is a set percentage of women who believe the law is a burden that would make it unconstitutional. “I don’t think any of the evidence in this case gets close to a substantial fraction of women being denied the opportunity to make the choice. Because in no case are they being denied the choice, that’s the trick here,” Thompson says. The district court declined to issue an injunction against the two provisions of the law, but the Iowa Supreme Court put them on hold until they could hear the case. It is not known how long their decision may take.

 

Bill would ban most abortions in Iowa after pregnancy’s 6th week

By

Republicans on an Iowa Senate committee have approved a bill that would make it a crime for Iowa doctors to perform abortions after a fetal heartbeat can be detected. Doctors could face up to five years in prison for performing an abortion after the sixth week of a pregnancy if the bill becomes law.

“The goal of this is to protect the lives of all Iowans, especially those most vulnerable who can’t speak up for themselves,” said Senator Amy Sinclair, a Republican from Allerton who’s guiding the bill through the legislative process.

Sinclair mentioned her son as she delivered a brief speech tonight during the Senate Judiciary Committee’s meeting.

“In this room with me tonight is an 18 year old man whose beating heart I could have chosen to stop,” said Sinclair, the only supporter of the bill to make remarks. “I think it’s a horrific reflection and a barbaric practice that could have been my choice and that young man could not have been here today to be a contributing member of our society.”

The bill passed the Senate Judiciary Committee with the support of all eight Republicans. All five Democrats voted against it. Senate Democratic Leader Janet Petersen of Des Moines was the only opponent to speak during the committee meeting.

“If your goal with this legislation is to jeopardize maternal health care for every woman across this state and especially women in rural Iowa, your bill will go just that,” Petersen said. “This bill is dangerous. This bill is unconstitutional.”

If the bill becomes law, there would be no exceptions for abortions in cases of rape or incest. The only way a doctor could perform an abortion after the sixth week of pregnancy in Iowa would be to save the life of the mother.

“It takes away a woman’s ability to get health care that is in her best medical interest,” Petersen said.

A new state Iowa law that took effect in May of last year bans nearly all abortions after the 20th week of pregnancy. The 72-hour waiting period for all abortions that was included in that law is under judicial review.

Public hearing held on bill banning abortion after fetal heartbeat detected

By

People lined up to speak at the hearing.

A bill that would ban abortions in Iowa after a fetal heartbeat can be detected cleared a senate subcommittee this morning after emotional and pointed testimony at a public hearing.

“‘The Golden Rule’ is to treat others the way we want to be treated. Is there anybody in this room who honest to God wishes that they’d been aborted?” asked Chuck Hurley, vice president of The Family Leader, an evangelical Christian group.

Some in the crowd reacted angrily.

“That’s what we’re talking about,” Hurley said.

A doctor told lawmakers a fetal heartbeat may be detected as early as four weeks into a pregnancy. The Iowa Medical Society warned lawmakers the state’s only training program for OB/GYN doctors will be shut down if the bill becomes law. Scott Valencia, chairman of the Iowa Coalition of Pro Life Leaders, responded.

“If a heartbeat exists, there is life…if all of them are going to leave because we stop finding better ways to take lives, we have a bigger problems to be looking at here,” Valencia said.

Jamie Burch of Planned Parenthood of the Heartland said the bill “intentionally goes too far.”

“The motivation behind this bill is clear: to create a vehicle to challenge Roe v Wade,” Burch said. “If this bill passes and is signed into law by our governor, it will open the door to endless litigation.”

Iowa Catholic Conference executive director Tom Chapman told lawmakers the church believes life begins at conception, but is “neutral” on the bill because it is “likely unconstitutional.”

“We should consider the unintended, long-term consequences that could result from our court finding a robust right to an abortion in our state constitution,” Chapman said. “which could result in the elimination of some of the limitations we already have in Iowa.”

A senator told Chapman to go back to the state’s four Catholic bishops and rethink their stance on the bill.

Leah Vanden Bosch wore a pink t-shirt to signal her support of Planned Parenthood. Vanden Bosch told legislators she would have killed herself if she hadn’t had an abortion.

“I don’t want to be sharing my story…but I feel like I have to stick up and represent these women,” Vanden Bosch said. “I’m praying to the same God that you are right now this morning and he’s pushing me here to speak to you and show you a different side.”

At the conclusion of the public hearing, half dozen senators spoke about the bill — giving a preview of the debate to come in a senate committee next week.

If the bill becomes law, doctors found guilty of performing an abortion after the sixth week of pregnancy could be charged with a felony and face up to five years in prison.

King holds hearing on his ‘Heartbeat Protection Act of 2017’

By

Congressman Steve King makes a statement during the hearing.

Republican Congressman Steve King is holding a congressional hearing today on a bill he’s sponsoring that would ban abortions if a fetal heartbeat is detected.

“At what instant does life begin? Science cannot precisely pinpoint the instant of conception,” King said, “but the ultrasound proves beyond any doubt that life is present every time there is a heartbeat.”

King’s bill would ban all abortions after the sixth week of a pregnancy. During an opening statement at the hearing, King said it is “decades past” the time to overturn Roe v Wade, the Supreme Court decision that legalized abortion.

“It is important that congress passes such a strong pro-life bill now because President Trump will hopefully appoint one or two more justices to the Supreme Court, making this a profound moment in the pro-life movement,” King said. “President Trump is actively changing the make-up of our judicial system with strong conservative nominees who would hear arguments about this bill while it is being challenged on the way to the Supreme Court.”

A Democratic congressman who spoke at the hearing called the bill a “direct attack” on a “woman’s constitutional right to choose.” Last year the U.S. Supreme Court refused to review a lower court’s ruling that overturned the North Dakota law that sought to ban abortions after detection of a fetal heartbeat. The federal courts have also blocked an Arkansas law that would have banned abortions after 12 weeks of a pregnancy.

Current Iowa law — enacted this past May — bans most abortions after the 20th week of a pregnancy.