Updated as of 4.20.2021
On 4.19.2021 the Senate help a conference committee on SB1457. This committee was held to amend the bill and fix some of the known issues that could be problematic if the bill passed without the changes. See my post on 4.15.2021 for the changes I was seeking to be made.
https://www.azleg.gov/videoplayer/?eventID=2021041043
In the Video posted you can watch the full conference committee hearing. Current Senate rules don't allow public testimony in conference as this is not a traditional committee, similar committee of the whole does not have public testimony.
https://www.azleg.gov/videoplayer/?eventID=2021041043
In the Video posted you can watch the full conference committee hearing. Current Senate rules don't allow public testimony in conference as this is not a traditional committee, similar committee of the whole does not have public testimony.
A few serious questions to the bill were brought up in committee and I'll address some of them here, If you would like to hear all my responses please watch the above video.
#1: Does this bill criminalize the woman? More specifically does this bill make it a felony when a woman takes an abortifacient medication or performs a abortion on themselves.
This is NOT true.
The bill says:
F. A woman on whom a sex-selection or race-selection abortion OR AN ABORTION BECAUSE OF A CHILD'S GENETIC ABNORMALITY is performed is not subject to criminal prosecution or civil liability for any violation 18 of this section or for a conspiracy to violate this section.
#2: Does this bill allow a Jury to play board of Medicine and determine medical judgement?
No, This is NOT True.
The previous section of the bill that used the language "Reasonable Medical Judgement" has been replaced by the definition of Lethal Fetal Condition that uses the "Reasonable Certainty" to which would not require the Jury to determine the reasonableness of the judgement but rather the certainty of the physician.
#1: Does this bill criminalize the woman? More specifically does this bill make it a felony when a woman takes an abortifacient medication or performs a abortion on themselves.
This is NOT true.
The bill says:
F. A woman on whom a sex-selection or race-selection abortion OR AN ABORTION BECAUSE OF A CHILD'S GENETIC ABNORMALITY is performed is not subject to criminal prosecution or civil liability for any violation 18 of this section or for a conspiracy to violate this section.
#2: Does this bill allow a Jury to play board of Medicine and determine medical judgement?
No, This is NOT True.
The previous section of the bill that used the language "Reasonable Medical Judgement" has been replaced by the definition of Lethal Fetal Condition that uses the "Reasonable Certainty" to which would not require the Jury to determine the reasonableness of the judgement but rather the certainty of the physician.
Below was previously posted 4.15.2021
SB1457
|
|
A lot of news was generated by my NO vote on SB1457 during Final Read. Included in these news articles, FB posts, emails, door hangers, and robo callers was some misinformation.
I have included a brief 15min video explaining why I voted NO, why I wanted to fix the bill, and where the bill is going now. |
|
History of SB1457
Senate: Judiciary Committee Passed
Senate: Committee of the Whole Passed
Senate: 3rd Read Passed
I voted yes on the condition that the bill be amended to address the issues with contractual prohibitions on Affiliates of Abortion Providers and research.
Transmitted to the House
House: Judiciary Committee Passed as Amended
The Bill was amended as promised by Senator Barto, it removed the entire section on the Affiliates which was more than I asked but was a suitable solution, and the clarification of fetal remains was added.
House: Committee of the Whole
The bill was amended by Rep. Cobb to clarify the exemption for Severe Fetal Abnormalities.
House: 3rd Read Passed as Amended
Senate: Caucus
When the bill returned to the house, I noticed that there were new issues with the bill particularly with the new amendment that Rep. Cobb had added. I expressed these concerns to the Sponsor during Caucus. Following Caucus, I contacted staff to draft an amendment and I also spoke with Cathi Herod (CAP) and explained what I had discovered. We agreed the bill should be amended again in a conference committee and then sent back to the house for a Final Read. Additionally, I reached out to Rep. Cobb and explained what I discovered in her amendment and she supported my changes and the request to send the bill to Conference Committee.
The next morning, I met with Sen Barto. She acknowledged the issues I discovered and agreed they should/could be changed. However, Sen. Barto did not want to fix the changes through conference committee, she did not feel the issues I discovered were worth the hassle and could be hopefully fixed another day. She wanted to put the changes on a different bill and then pass it after SB1457 passed. Out of respect for her, I agreed to consider it and “Mull it over”.
Senate: Concurrence
Senate: Final Read
I asked for the bill to go to conference committee but was denied. I asked the bill to be held at least another day for me to build a full game plan on how to make my changes. That was Denied. Staff was scrambling to find viable bills that could handle my amendment language, and everything continued to move forward. However, there was no guarantee that my changes would even be adopted. I was not comfortable with a maybe.
Ultimately, I decided that the bill could be fixed now, we didn’t have to find out alternative paths. We already had a viable path and that was to send the bill to conference to be amended. Staff informed me we could make a motion to reconsider and push the bill to conference. So I voted NO.
Senate: Reconsideration
Sen. Barto moved to reconsider and we as a legislature voted to send the bill to conference (My original request)
Senate: Conference Committee
The conference committee is scheduled for the week of April 19th 2021. We have agreed on Amendment language and the bill will be back to the Senate body by the end of the week.
Current Issues needing to be fixed in SB1457
Issue #1
A. THE LAWS OF THIS STATE SHALL BE INTERPRETED AND CONSTRUED TO ACKNOWLEDGE, ON BEHALF OF AN UNBORN CHILD AT EVERY STAGE OF DEVELOPMENT, ALL RIGHTS, PRIVILEGES AND IMMUNITIES AVAILABLE TO OTHER PERSONS, CITIZENS AND RESIDENTS OF THIS STATE, SUBJECT ONLY TO THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES AND DECISIONAL INTERPRETATIONS THEREOF BY THE UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT.
B. THIS SECTION DOES NOT CREATE A CAUSE OF ACTION AGAINST
1) A WOMAN FOR INDIRECTLY HARMING HER UNBORN CHILD BY FAILING TO PROPERLY CARE FOR HERSELF OR BY FAILING TO FOLLOW ANY PARTICULAR PROGRAM OF PRENATAL CARE.
2) A PERSON WHO PERFORMS IN VITRO FERTILIZATION PROCEDURES AS AUTHORIZED UNDER THE LAWS OF THIS STATE.
C. FOR THE PURPOSES OF THIS SECTION, "UNBORN CHILD" HAS THE SAME 15 MEANING PRESCRIBED IN SECTION 36-2151.
The second bullet point needs to be added. If it is not added Dr's and Mothers could face jail time for participating in In Vitro procedures.
Issue #2
2. PERFORMS AN ABORTION KNOWING THAT THE ABORTION IS SOLELY SOUGHT BECAUSE OF A GENETIC ABNORMALITY OF THE CHILD.
Without the word Solely the knowingly portion of this bill becomes too vague and could result in "Don't ask Don't tell situations". Best to be clear.
Issue #3
(b) DOES NOT INCLUDE A SEVERE FETAL ABNORMALITY. FOR THE PURPOSES OF THIS SUBDIVISION, "SEVERE FETAL ABNORMALITY" MEANS A LIFE-THREATENING PHYSICAL CONDITION THAT, IN REASONABLE MEDICAL JUDGMENT, REGARDLESS OF THE PROVISION OF LIFE-SAVING MEDICAL TREATMENT, IS INCOMPATIBLE WITH LIFE.
Replace with
(b) DOES NOT INCLUDE A LETHAL FETAL CONDITION. FOR THE PURPOSES OF THIS SUBDIVISION, “LETHAL FETAL CONDITION" HAS THE SAME MEANING AS DEFINED IN SECTION 36-2158.
Definition in 36-2158
"Lethal fetal condition" means a fetal condition that is diagnosed before birth and that will result, with reasonable certainty, in the death of the unborn child within three months after birth.
We don't use definitions such as "Reasonable medical judgment" we typically use good faith clinical judgement. So it was necessary to remove this section and replace with an already defined phase "Lethal Fetal Condition" this would remove all issues. Left unchanged would give juries the power to determine medical judgment which is left to the medical boards. (Which has never been done)
Senate: Judiciary Committee Passed
Senate: Committee of the Whole Passed
Senate: 3rd Read Passed
I voted yes on the condition that the bill be amended to address the issues with contractual prohibitions on Affiliates of Abortion Providers and research.
Transmitted to the House
House: Judiciary Committee Passed as Amended
The Bill was amended as promised by Senator Barto, it removed the entire section on the Affiliates which was more than I asked but was a suitable solution, and the clarification of fetal remains was added.
House: Committee of the Whole
The bill was amended by Rep. Cobb to clarify the exemption for Severe Fetal Abnormalities.
House: 3rd Read Passed as Amended
Senate: Caucus
When the bill returned to the house, I noticed that there were new issues with the bill particularly with the new amendment that Rep. Cobb had added. I expressed these concerns to the Sponsor during Caucus. Following Caucus, I contacted staff to draft an amendment and I also spoke with Cathi Herod (CAP) and explained what I had discovered. We agreed the bill should be amended again in a conference committee and then sent back to the house for a Final Read. Additionally, I reached out to Rep. Cobb and explained what I discovered in her amendment and she supported my changes and the request to send the bill to Conference Committee.
The next morning, I met with Sen Barto. She acknowledged the issues I discovered and agreed they should/could be changed. However, Sen. Barto did not want to fix the changes through conference committee, she did not feel the issues I discovered were worth the hassle and could be hopefully fixed another day. She wanted to put the changes on a different bill and then pass it after SB1457 passed. Out of respect for her, I agreed to consider it and “Mull it over”.
Senate: Concurrence
Senate: Final Read
I asked for the bill to go to conference committee but was denied. I asked the bill to be held at least another day for me to build a full game plan on how to make my changes. That was Denied. Staff was scrambling to find viable bills that could handle my amendment language, and everything continued to move forward. However, there was no guarantee that my changes would even be adopted. I was not comfortable with a maybe.
Ultimately, I decided that the bill could be fixed now, we didn’t have to find out alternative paths. We already had a viable path and that was to send the bill to conference to be amended. Staff informed me we could make a motion to reconsider and push the bill to conference. So I voted NO.
Senate: Reconsideration
Sen. Barto moved to reconsider and we as a legislature voted to send the bill to conference (My original request)
Senate: Conference Committee
The conference committee is scheduled for the week of April 19th 2021. We have agreed on Amendment language and the bill will be back to the Senate body by the end of the week.
Current Issues needing to be fixed in SB1457
Issue #1
A. THE LAWS OF THIS STATE SHALL BE INTERPRETED AND CONSTRUED TO ACKNOWLEDGE, ON BEHALF OF AN UNBORN CHILD AT EVERY STAGE OF DEVELOPMENT, ALL RIGHTS, PRIVILEGES AND IMMUNITIES AVAILABLE TO OTHER PERSONS, CITIZENS AND RESIDENTS OF THIS STATE, SUBJECT ONLY TO THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES AND DECISIONAL INTERPRETATIONS THEREOF BY THE UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT.
B. THIS SECTION DOES NOT CREATE A CAUSE OF ACTION AGAINST
1) A WOMAN FOR INDIRECTLY HARMING HER UNBORN CHILD BY FAILING TO PROPERLY CARE FOR HERSELF OR BY FAILING TO FOLLOW ANY PARTICULAR PROGRAM OF PRENATAL CARE.
2) A PERSON WHO PERFORMS IN VITRO FERTILIZATION PROCEDURES AS AUTHORIZED UNDER THE LAWS OF THIS STATE.
C. FOR THE PURPOSES OF THIS SECTION, "UNBORN CHILD" HAS THE SAME 15 MEANING PRESCRIBED IN SECTION 36-2151.
The second bullet point needs to be added. If it is not added Dr's and Mothers could face jail time for participating in In Vitro procedures.
Issue #2
2. PERFORMS AN ABORTION KNOWING THAT THE ABORTION IS SOLELY SOUGHT BECAUSE OF A GENETIC ABNORMALITY OF THE CHILD.
Without the word Solely the knowingly portion of this bill becomes too vague and could result in "Don't ask Don't tell situations". Best to be clear.
Issue #3
(b) DOES NOT INCLUDE A SEVERE FETAL ABNORMALITY. FOR THE PURPOSES OF THIS SUBDIVISION, "SEVERE FETAL ABNORMALITY" MEANS A LIFE-THREATENING PHYSICAL CONDITION THAT, IN REASONABLE MEDICAL JUDGMENT, REGARDLESS OF THE PROVISION OF LIFE-SAVING MEDICAL TREATMENT, IS INCOMPATIBLE WITH LIFE.
Replace with
(b) DOES NOT INCLUDE A LETHAL FETAL CONDITION. FOR THE PURPOSES OF THIS SUBDIVISION, “LETHAL FETAL CONDITION" HAS THE SAME MEANING AS DEFINED IN SECTION 36-2158.
Definition in 36-2158
"Lethal fetal condition" means a fetal condition that is diagnosed before birth and that will result, with reasonable certainty, in the death of the unborn child within three months after birth.
We don't use definitions such as "Reasonable medical judgment" we typically use good faith clinical judgement. So it was necessary to remove this section and replace with an already defined phase "Lethal Fetal Condition" this would remove all issues. Left unchanged would give juries the power to determine medical judgment which is left to the medical boards. (Which has never been done)