Minnesota Abortion Stalemate.

The Minnesota Abortion Stalemate.

We look at several Pro-life and pro-choice bills going forward in our legislature this year. Four identical republican bills, that would prevent state funding for any abortions, and they would likely not get past Governor Mark Dayton, and may not have enough votes to override his veto. If they did they would like face A supreme court challenge for they conflict with an earlier ruling, 1995's Doe vs. Gomez.

Representative Peggy Scott is Principle Author of the HF 201 "Abortion funding limited for state-sponsored health programs." (https://www.revisor.mn.gov/revisor/pages/search_status/status_detail.php?b=Hous­e&f=HF0201&ssn=0&y=2011)




Rep. Scott details that $1.5 Million in 2008, and $15,000 a year of state funds have been spent since 1995, when a key Minnesota Supreme Court decision allows for the poor that access state funds to use them on all forms of reproductive care including abortion. Since then we have a different Supreme Court--a "Pawlenty Supreme Court"--would they decide differently?

(R) Representative Stever Drazkowski, helps us with the math a bit, on HF 201, are 5 Democrat Co-Authors Representatives : "Patty Fritz (DFL) 26B; Larry Hosch (DFL)14B; Mary Murphy (DFL) 06B; John Ward (DFL) 12A; Lyle Koenen (DFL) 20B. Rep. Drazkowski figures all 72 Republican would be on board, and 18 Democrats would have to come along.

Finally (DFL) Scott Dibble, explains his "Reproductive Privacy Act" probably doesn't even have a chance of a hearing in a Republican controlled house and senate. He does want to codify though, the right of women to decide.

Questions come up left and right from all of this :

Wouldn't Governor Mark Dayton, veto the Republican abortion funding limitation bill? And the answer is a rather certain "yes". Would the Republicans be ready to override--would they get enough Democrats, and many say http://www.soc.umn.edu/~samaha/cases/women%20of%20mn%20v%20gomez.htm at the Capitol "no". We don't know, but that is uphill...

If Dayton was overridden, we almost immediately face an earlier Minnesota Supreme Court Decision : Doe vs. Gomez (who was Minnesota's Heath Commissioner.) It affirms the right of the poor to choose any reproductive care with their Minnesota Health Care dollars including abortion. Cited by other states, called "Minnesota's Roe v. Wade". At the same time, there are currently 12 states that forbid what Minnesota sees as a "right".

Would it allow poor women to access state money if they had a life threatening pregnancy, say an ectopic one? This is where a fertilized egg settles into the wall of the fallopian tube, this will kill mother and child if not.. but, I asked Representative Scott, what then, and the answer is vague : "...except to the extent necessary for continued participation in a federal program." There are still details to be worked out. Here's the current bill : https://www.revisor.mn.gov/bin/bldbill.php?bill=S0103.0.html&session=ls87

If Dayton will veto, and they can override, and they can win in a different from 1995 Pawlenty appointed-Supreme Court, would we get a different result?

Both sides fear the other--and maybe both sides--are in many of us?

Life verses Freedom of Choice.

And they've played themselves into a stalemate across America, and Minnesota for so many years.

Both sides are invited to join us in a Capitol Conversation.

Craig Stellmacher

Category:

News & Politics

Tags:

• Abortion
• Prolife
• Prochoice
• Peggy Scott
• Steve Drazkowski
• Scott Dibble
• Craig Stellmacher