|
Infanticide
Alert
(3/4/03)
This
general report was provided by Daniel B. Newby on 3/4/03:
Note: This write-up is intended for your personal use and
to disseminate—either
in email or hard copy—to
your friends, colleagues, fellow citizens, media, and elected
officials. The bill discussed has been selected because it
either promotes freedom or it poses a significant risk to
freedom.
We have only two days left and House Bill 123, Substitute
6, by Rep. Morgan Philpot, is not progressing in the Senate!
This bill would end taxpayer funding of abortions except in
cases where it is necessary to save the life of the mother. In
order to maintain any Medicaid funding for the State of Utah,
the bill has been amended to include cases of reported incest
and rape.
In the house committee hearing on this bill, I learned that
last year over 3,000 babies were murdered under the category
of "therapeutic abortions." We
are talking about real lives here! Act now!
Topics:
1. TAKE ACTION!
2. Current State Statute is Trumped
by Federal Courts
3. What HB 123 S6 Will Do
4. HB 123 S6 Modeled After Colorado's
Successful Initiative
1. TAKE ACTION!
1. This bill is not progressing in the senate! Call (and,
if possible, fax) your senator at the capitol
and tell him to work to move HB 123 along and to publicly and
vehemently stand in support of unborn children. (You can also
call and fax other senators.)
Senate main number:
(801) 538-1035
Senate main fax:
(801) 538-1414
See our
Elected
Official Contact Information page.
Note: Make sure you identify yourself and your contact
information, the legislator you want to reach, and keep the
message succinct and relatively short. Because of the volume
of email messages that senators and representatives receive,
your email message may never be considered in time.
2. Forward this message to your family, friends, and any
activists you know. Tell them now is the time to act and to
rid our hands of the blood of innocent children.
Topics
2. Current State Statute is
Trumped by Federal Courts
Currently,
Utah State Statute 76-7-302
attempts to restrict abortion on demand. Unfortunately,
federal court decisions such as Roe v. Wade and Doe
v. Bolton have made most of this state statute entirely
meaningless and unenforceable. (Utah does successfully require
abortions to be performed by a licensed physician, and, if the
pregnancy is 90 days or more, in a licensed state hospital.)
Hence, though Planned Parenthood does not perform abortions
in Utah, licensed hospitals—on a regular basis—do
perform abortions on demand. Doctors prescribe the
abortion and the hospital carries out the sentence.
In the house committee hearing on this bill, I learned that
last year over 3,000 babies were murdered under the category
of "therapeutic abortions."
Topics
3. What HB 123 S6 Will Do
House Bill 123, Substitute 6, is short and sweet:
76-7-326. Public funding of abortion forbidden.
(1) Public funds of the state, its institutions, or its
political subdivisions may not be used to pay or otherwise
reimburse, either directly or indirectly, any person, agency,
or facility for the performance of any induced abortion
service, unless:
(a) in the professional judgment of the pregnant woman's
attending physician, the abortion is necessary to save the
pregnant woman's life;
(b) the pregnancy is the result of rape or incest reported
to law enforcement agencies, unless the woman was unable to
report the crime for physical reasons or fear of retaliation;
or
(c) in the professional judgment of the pregnant woman's
attending physician, the abortion is necessary to prevent
permanent, irreparable, and grave damage to a major bodily
function of the pregnant woman. This provision shall not be
construed to allow direct or indirect funds to be used for
conditions of mental, psychological, or emotional harm,
illness, or distress.
(2) If a state agency violates Subsection (1), the
Legislature may eliminate any or all of the public funds
provided to the state agency.
(3) Any person who knowingly authorizes the use of the
funds prohibited by this section may be criminally charged. If
the offender is an officer or employee of the state, he may be
dismissed from his office or position and his employment may
be terminated.
In other words, Utah will no longer force taxpayers to
directly or indirectly pay for abortion procedures performed
for any reason other than to save the life of the mother,
incest, rape, or permanent, irreparable, and grave damage to a
major bodily function of the pregnant woman.
Note: This last exception does include "mental,
psychological, or emotional harm, illness, or distress." If
this last exception is in any way manipulated by doctors or
hospitals, they will face potential criminal and other court
challenges and the loss of all direct and indirect state
subsidies. In addition, we will have all ammunition to be back
next year and further tighten the language.
Hospitals and other organizations that wish to perform
abortions for any other reasons must do so
without any direct or indirect taxpayer support to their
organization. The moral case is clear: It is not right to
expect public funding for a procedure that many taxpayers find
reprehensible. Abortions in all other cases should remain a
private, privately-funded matter.
Topics
4. HB 123 S6 Modeled After
Colorado's Successful Initiative
House Bill 123, Substitute 6, is modeled after Colorado's
successful 1984 statewide initiative, where voters
overwhelmingly passed a constitutional amendment to eliminate
any direct or indirect funding for abortion on demand.
Read the
Colorado initiative language.
Section 50. Public funding of abortion forbidden.
No public funds shall be used by the State of Colorado, its
agencies or political subdivisions to pay or otherwise
reimburse, either directly or indirectly, any person, agency
or facility for the performance of any induced abortion,
PROVIDED HOWEVER, that the General Assembly, by specific bill,
may authorize and appropriate funds to be used for those
medical services necessary to prevent the death of either a
pregnant woman or her unborn child under circumstances where
every reasonable effort is made to preserve the life of each.
Adopted by the People November 6, 1984
—
Effective upon proclamation of the Governor, January 14, 1985.
(For the text of the initiated measure and the votes cast
thereon, see L. 85, p. 1792.)
Colorado Governor Bill Owens has made certain through
comprehensive audits and investigations that this initiative
is enforced. I discovered that, contrary to my last message,
Colorado's constitutional amendment was challenged in
the early 1990's. In the case of Hern v. Beye, 57 F.3d
906 (10th Cir. 1995), Colorado's abortion funding restriction
was found to violate federal Medicaid law because it denies
funding to Medicaid-eligible women seeking abortions to end
pregnancies that are the result of rape or incest. The Tenth
Circuit Court of Appeals found that as long as Colorado
continues to participate in Medicaid, the state is enjoined
from denying Medicaid funding for abortions to qualified women
whose pregnancies are the result of incest or rape. The case
of Hern v. Beye, therefore, qualifies Colorado's
constitutional provision in order that the state may maintain
its standing as a participate in the medicaid program.
In summary, the HB 123 S6 does less than Colorado's
constitutional amendment and therefore should easily stand on
the same solid ground.
Daniel B. Newby
P.S. The preceeding message was my personal opinion. To
receive an alert on this subject directly, email me at
daniel.newby@velocitus.net.
If you have comments or suggestions, please
email us at info@accountabilityutah.org.
|
.jpg)