| What's Up? |
A weekly
report on |
Volume XIV, Number 44 / May 28, 1999
CONTACT MEMBERS OF THE SENATE
Urge them to co-sponsor the Equity in Prescription Insurance and Contraceptive Equity (EPICC) bill.
CONTACT MEMBERS OF THE HOUSE
Urge them to support contraceptive equity for federal workers. Also ask them to support military women and dependants, assuring that they have the same rights and access to services available to their counterparts in civilian life.
Important Dates
May 27-June 7
Congressional Memorial Day recess
June 8-10
PPFA Political Academy and Lobby Day in Washington, D.C.
Early June
Full House action on DOD Authorization & Agriculture Appropriations
House committee action on Treasury/Postal Service Appropriations
Senate committee action on medical records privacy
July 3-11
Congressional Fourth of July recess
Legislative Highlights of the Week
Moving Toward the Responsible Choices Agenda
Goal: Increase services that prevent unintended pregnancy by guaranteeing equity in insurance coverage for family planning.
* Nevada Approves Contraceptive Equity
Senate Rejects Access For Self-Funded Abortions For Military Personnel And Dependents Stationed Overseas
On May 26th, the Senate voted 51-49 to table an amendment to the Department of Defense Authorization bill offered by Sens. Patty Murray (D-WA) and Olympia Snowe (R-ME). The amendment would have lifted the ban on privately funded abortions for servicewomen and military dependents stationed overseas.
By tabling the amendment, the Senate effectively killed it. This vote was close and the anti-choice victory on this procedural issue required a great deal of arm-twisting by the Senate leadership. If the vote had been an up-and-down vote on the amendment itself, both the pro- and anti-choice sides had predicted a 50-50 tie. Newly elected Sens. Evan Bayh (D-IN), John Edwards (D-NC), Blanche Lincoln (D-AR) and Chuck Schumer (D-NY) voted against the motion to table (a pro-choice vote), while newly elected Sens. Jim Bunning (R-KY), Michael Crapo (R-ID), Peter Fitzgerald (R-IL) and George Voinovich (R-OH) voted to kill the amendment.
Those members who voted for the amendment should be thanked. Sens. Murray, Snowe, Barbara Boxer (D-CA), Dick Durbin (D-IL), Mary Landrieu (D-LA) and Arlen Specter (R-PA), spoke in favor of the amendment and should be given special thanks for their leadership.
The vote on the amendment can be found on page four of this newsletter.
Senate Vote On Motion to Table Murray-Snowe Amendment
to
Department of Defense Authorization Bill
May 26, 1999
No (PRO) - 49
| Akaka Baucus Bayh Biden Bingaman Boxer Bryan Byrd Chafee Cleland Collins Conrad Daschle Dodd Dorgan Durbin Edwards |
Feingold Feinstein Gorton Graham Harkin Hollings Inouye Jeffords Johnson Kennedy Kerrey Kerry Kohl Landrieu Lautenberg Leahy Levin |
Lieberman Lincoln Mikulski Moynihan Murray Reed Robb Rockefeller Sarbanes Schumer Snowe Specter Torricelli Wellstone Wyden |
| Abraham Allard Ashcroft Bennett Bond Breaux Bunning Burns Campbell Cochran Coverdell Craig Crapo DeWine Domenici Enzi |
Fitzgerald Frist Gramm Grams Grassley Gregg Hatch Helms Hutchinson Hutchison Inhofe Kyl Lott Lugar Mack McCain |
McConnell Murkowski Nickles Reid Roberts Santorum Sessions Shelby Smith (NH) Smith (OR) Stevens Thomas Thompson Thurmond Voinovich Warner |
After failing on May 26th to pass either the Agriculture or Legislative Branch appropriations bills, the House turned to the Department of Defense Authorization bill on May 27th and began considering the rule for debate on the bill. However, bipartisan displeasure with the proposed rules for debate delayed consideration of this bill until after the Memorial Day recess. When debate on the bill begins, Rep. Loretta Sanchez (D-CA) will offer an amendment to allow military personnel and dependents stationed overseas to use their own funds to obtain abortions at military medical facilities.
This delay provides additional time to contact House members to urge them to support the Sanchez amendment.
Battle Over Budget Delays Agriculture Appropriations Bill
The full House was scheduled to consider the Agriculture Appropriations bill this week. It was expected that during the debate, Rep. Tom Coburn (R-OK) would offer an amendment to bar the federal Food and Drug Administration from spending any funds to test, develop, or approve "any drug for the chemical inducement of abortion." Coburn and other right-wing Republican members decided to use the Agriculture bill as a vehicle to protest against what the May 27th edition of the CQ Daily Monitor describes as a perceived "lack of resolve by GOP leaders to avoid breaking the statutory cap on discretionary spending."
The method used to protest this lack of resolve could best be described as a filibuster by amendment. Coburn and his cohorts had 115 amendments, to offer to the bill. The House spent two days debating the measure before the leadership pulled the bill until after the Memorial Day recess. The Coburn amendment on mifepristone is expected at that time.
Medical Records Privacy Legislation Also Delayed
As of May 27th, four comprehensive health privacy bills have been introduced in the 106th Congress. Three bills have been introduced in the Senate: S. 573 (Leahy, D-VT-Kennedy, D-MA), S. 578 (Jeffords, R-VT-Dodd, D-CT), and S. 881 (Bennett, R-UT) and a companion bill to S. 573 in the House: H.R. 1057 (Markey, D-MA). In addition, patients' rights bills introduced in both the House and Senate include provisions related to confidentiality of identifiable health information and the right of individuals to access their personal health information.
The Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee was scheduled to mark-up S. 578 on May 25th, however, mark up was rescheduled for June 9. There are several unresolved issues that have caused this delay. At issue are:
Current drafts of S. 578 include a "carve out" for laws related to mental health records so that states could enact stronger laws in that area, however, a "carve out" for communicable diseases, including HIV, is not included.
The bill contains language that, in essence, fails to guarantee that minors who can legally obtain health care services on their own would be entitled to exercise the important new rights created by this bill. Under the proposed legislation, it is unclear whether minors would be able to exercise their rights as they currently exist, or whether parents are given the right exclusively and over current existing state laws.
It is critical that all members of the Senate Health, Education, Labor and pensions Committee hear from concerned constituents on these issues.
Hearing Held On Child Custody Protection Act
On May 27th, a hearing on H.R. 1218, the so-called "Child Custody Protection Act," was held in the House Judiciary Subcommittee on the Constitution, chaired by Rep. Charles Canady (R-FL). In his opening remarks, Canady insisted that "girls" are coerced by adults into having abortions that are not in the young women’s best interests; that they are coerced in an effort to destroy the evidence of statutory rape in order to avoid criminal liability.
Rep. Maxine Waters (D-CA) disagreed, saying in her opening statement that the real aim of this bill was to further impede minors’ constitutional right to abortion.
The witnesses included "Grandma" Billie Lominick, who told the story of a young woman she helped, whose parents became physically abusive when she told them she was pregnant. "Grandma" was overcome with emotion at the thought of what would have happened to the young woman if she could not have helped her obtain an abortion, and the thought that she could have been sentenced to prison for helping her to obtain an abortion.
Eileen Roberts of Mothers Against Minors’ Abortions, told of the abortion her 14-year-old daughter obtained without her knowledge and the additional medical expenses incurred because of the daughter’s depression and physical problems.
Dr. Jonathan Klein testified "as a representative of the American Academy of Pediatrics, a pediatrician and a parent." He pointed out to the subcommittee that minors do not need parental consent to obtain pre-natal care or pregnancy services, which, he noted, are more medically significant events than an abortion. He said that enactment of H.R. 1218 probably would result in the further isolation of the minor from her parents. He also said he felt the bill would endanger the quality of care provided to patients, especially in areas such as the northeast and mid-Atlantic where multi-state clientele is not unusual.
Two law professors testified in support of the Legislation. Professor Lino Graglia from the University of Texas - Austin, testified that the law was an attempt to overturn Roe v. Wade, which, in his opinion was wrongly decided. He urged Congress to do everything in its power to restore power to the states. He also expressed the opinion that the current Supreme Court would find that H.R. 1218 is consistent with the holdings in Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey. John Harrison of the University of Virginia told the subcommittee that the law was constitutional based on the powers granted to Congress under the U.S. Constitution’s Commerce Clause.
IN THE STATES - Legislative Update
Nevada Approves Contraceptive Equity Law
The Nevada legislature has passed a contraceptive equity bill that requires insurers in the state to cover contraceptive drugs and devices in the same manner that they cover other prescription drugs and devices. Allison Goulden of PP of Mar Monte notes that it was very challenging to get the job done in a 120 day session, but it was accomplished because of a very good collaborative effort by PP of Mar Monte, PP of Southern Nevada and the Nevada Women’s Lobby. The bill passed the state House by an overwhelming majority, with a closer vote occurring in the Senate. The bill is on Gov. Kenny Guinn’s (D) desk awaiting his signature.
Goulden also noted that of the seven health insurance issues before the legislature this year, only contraceptive equity and a bill requiring insurers to allow women direct access to obstetricians and gynecologists were approved.
Texas Legislature Approves Parental Notice, Other Anti-Choice Measures
The Texas legislature has approved a bill that would require that a parent be notified at least 48 hours before a minor could obtain an abortion. It requires that the physician who is to perform the abortion be the one to notify the parent "in person or by telephone." The doctor may provide notice by certified mail if she or he cannot notify the parent in person or by phone "after reasonable effort." The law does provide for a judicial by-pass.
In other actions, the legislature approved a change in clinic regulations that requires any physician who performs more than 300 abortions during the year to have his office licensed as an abortion clinic and subject to the physical plant and staffing requirements for clinics. Violation of these licensing and regulation requirements now would result in a jail sentence and increased fines.
The legislature also decided to remove family planning services from the state’s Child Health Improvement Plan (CHIP) program. According to Rosemarie Merriam of the Texas Family Planning Association, only Pennsylvania and now Texas refuse to provide contraceptive services as part of this program.
So-Called "Partial Birth" Abortion Ban Fails In New Hampshire
On May 20th, the New Hampshire Senate struck another blow for reproductive rights when, by a 2-1 margin, it rejected a bill that would have banned so-called "partial birth" abortions. The bill would have provided an exception only to save the woman’s life and subjected the doctor to up to two years in prison and up to $100,000 in fines. The bill also declared that the terms "fetus" and "infant" were interchangeable.
After the bill was defeated, a motion was made to have the bill "indefinitely postponed." According to an article in the May 21st edition of the Nashua Telegraph, this will prevent any bill on the "subject matter" from coming before the legislature until 2001. The Telegraph article also says the action on the bill and the 2-1 pro-choice majority in the New Hampshire Senate "virtually assures a lock on any anti-abortion bill" being considered in the next session.
Louisiana Senate Defines Age Of Viability
By a vote of 31-3, the Louisiana Senate defined fetal viability to be 22 weeks. Current state law does not give a gestational age for viability, but according to the May 26th issue of the Baton Rouge Advocate, doctors usually use 28 weeks as the time at which a fetus can survive outside the womb. During a hearing on the bill, Dr. Sheila Gottschalk, a neonatologist at the Louisiana State Medical Center, claimed that medical advancements now provide 22-week-old fetuses with a good chance of survival. According to the Advocate, the bill requires that abortions performed after 22 weeks gestation be done only in cases of life endangerment or "if there’s a medical emergency." They must be done in a hospital and only with a procedure "that allows the baby to be born unless a physician is certain the baby would not survive outside the womb." According to Sen. Tom Greene (R), the bill’s sponsor, "The physician has to justify this. If you are wrong, you have to be in a setting to save both lives, mainly in a hospital."
Congress is taking next week off for an extended Memorial Day recess. Many issues of concern to supporters of family planning and reproductive choice have been delayed because of extraneous issues in Congress.
Use this time to meet with members to discuss issues of importance such as the EPICC, contraceptive coverage for federal employees, abortions for military personnel and FDA research.
Washington Office
1120 Connecticut Avenue NW
Suite
461
Washington, D.C. 20036
202/785-3351
New York Office
810 Seventh Avenue
New York, New York
10019
212/541-7800
| What's Up With You?
If you have questions, suggestions, or news to share, call your regional public affairs coordinator, the Action fund staff, or the editor of this publication.
|
return to What's Up? index
| 1120 Connecticut Avenue NW, Suite 461 Washington, D.C. 20036 202/785-3351 810 Seventh Avenue |
What's Up? |
A weekly report on public policy issues in Washington, the states, and the world Published by
the © 1998 PPFA, Inc. |
PPFA Web Site © 1999, Planned
Parenthood® Federation of America, Inc.
Use of this site
signifies your agreement to Terms of
Use