 James, we're going to start with the anti-list, Ronald, and then we will go to, and Dr. Willem, I understand, is neither for nor against. Yes, but, and that's, yeah. James, I'm going to start and say a few names. You're not a real loud voice, but it's up to you. And wait, I mean, haha. They were trying a wireless one, but it wouldn't work. I'm sorry. They say they only ever use two. I said, well, we use three. Don't you worry. Thank you. Good evening, and welcome to the Vermont State House. The House Human Services Committee is very excited to see all of you here and are here to listen to your feedback on Proposition 5. There are a lot of people in the room and a lot of people who want to talk and provide feedback, so I think it's important to set some ground rules. Some of you may have been here before and may have heard this before. This is the well of the House. This is the Vermont State House, and we ask that you respect where you are and understand that where you are is not a sporting event. So we're not jumping up. We're not hooding and hollering. We're not waving and being all excited. We're also not at a play, and so when you like what someone says or at the end, you're not clapping. We're listening carefully and silently so that everyone has a chance to talk and the time goes on smoothly. I have to say that I will, I have a gavel, and if the ground rules are not followed, I will be using the gavel. And I don't want to because if people were here last time, I broke the glass, and I don't want to do that again. So please respect that. Thank you. We are here. The question for this public hearing is really to solicit your feedback on Proposition 5. Proposition 5 is to the Constitution, and just to clarify a couple of things. If the committee and the House passed Proposition 5 as it has come over from the Senate for the process to continue in the next biennium, it would have to go through the House and the Senate again. And if at that time it went through the House and the Senate again, it would be brought to the voters in November of 2022. So what is Proposition 5? I'm going to read it to you and then ask to begin hearing feedback from voters from all of you who are here. And we will be taking them first from people who have concerns and go back and forth like that. And we will hear as many people as we can given the time, and you have two minutes as you know. So Proposition 5 would add an Article 22, Personal Reproductive Liberty to the Vermont Constitution. And it would say that an individual's right to personal reproductive autonomy is central to the liberty and dignity to determine one's own life course, and shall not be denied or infringed unless justified by a compelling state interest achieved by the least restrictive means. And now we look forward to hearing your feedback. All right, I'll call two names at a time. The first one is the testifier. The second is on deck. Roland Laverde Essex is first. Dr. William Spina from Guildhall is on deck. My name is Roland Laverde. I'm from Founders Memorial School in Essex. I'm 11 years old. I am in first grade. And my teachers are all saying I should stand up for what I think is right. Well, today I'm doing it. I think no one should be aborted. I'm standing up because my mom didn't abort me. I'm younger than you all, so I may not know the things you do about the matter. But I watched the movie unplanned. And when I saw the kid being aborted, it creeped me out. I could have been that kid that got aborted a week later on my birthday. My mom showed me the black and white photos when I was in her belly. I had a hard time looking at them because it made me think about all the babies that didn't get a chance to be born. As a boy, I'll never be able to give birth, and it's hard for me to show how abortion honors women because they can do that amazing thing. Not only have my teachers told me to stand up for what I believe, they tell me the words you choose matter. Sometimes people call babies that are in their mom's bellies, fetuses. But they're still babies. The word baby makes you think about a warm, snugly infant. The word fetus makes me think of a body part or something medical. A baby has life. A fetus is part of a body. Which word you choose changes your view. I see only babies in pregnant bellies. I would never kill a baby, and I don't think you would either. Thank you. Roland, thank you. And thank you for standing up for what you believe. Dr. Spina here. That's the second thing. So when you're on deck, just come down and sit in one of these red chairs in the front. So the next person is after Dr. Spina's Lisa Leverty from Essex. My name is William John Spina from Gil Hall, Vermont. I'm a semi-retired orthopedic surgeon who graduated U of M undergrad 74 in med school in 78 and trained up at McGill. I practiced up in the kingdom in northern New Hampshire for 40 years. During my undergrad years at UVM, I worked one summer at Brandon Training School and was assigned to work with children with Down syndrome. As well as interacting on a daily basis with these warm and charming people, I also coached their softball team for the first Special Olympics held in Burlington that summer. Down's people can and do lead a rewarding life and provide love and affection to their parents or caregivers. I also trained at the Shriners Hospital in Montreal at McGill and saw the same miracles. Why do I mention this? Because handicapped people can and do lead rewarding lives. They deserve to live. I specifically oppose Proposition 5 because of its wide open lack of specificity, open to interpretation. I'd be in favor of a law like this and I'll comment that in my last paragraph on what I think parameters should be added to make it passable. Two incidents in medical school speak to this issue. While doing my OBGYN rotation, I was called to the ER to care for a young woman having a miscarriage at about 12 weeks of gestation. We were required to collect tissue for laboratory analysis. What I saw broke my heart. A little human about an inch and a half long, perfectly formed with web fingers and toes fighting to survive outside the safety and security of the womb. At UVM, we chose majors during the last 18 months of med school and mine was pediatrics. During a two-month stint in the neonatal ICU for premature infants, I started many an intravenous on premature infants. Believe me, they feel pain. What are some of the realities of abortion? One is race. According to the CDC, there have been 45.7 million abortions performed in the U.S. from 1970 until 2015. 19 million have been performed on black babies, 40% of the total. You'll have to- Can I jump to my last paragraph? You can, for two seconds. Extending the right to terminate a pregnancy to the second and third trimesters or even after birth is moral and wrong. Unless they're extenuating circumstances such as danger to the life of the mother or an unviable baby. It should not be done for convenience or a slightly less than perfect child. Late term abortions are often requiring dismembering infant in utero. Children are viable after 20 months. I'm sorry, Dr. Spina. We were given two minutes. Please give your comments and we will post them. Okay. Thank you. Connie has them. So we just had two against when that was supposed to be from the in favor list. So we're going to do two in a row after in favor to catch back up. So Lisa, you're testifying and Michelle Fay of St. Jay is on deck. She didn't say you can kill your baby if you want. If it's too hard, too scary, if you think this child growing inside you may make you bitter, drain your bank account, bring you to the brink of divorce, you still have time to kill it. No. She only had to say the earlier you find out the better so you have more choices. I was at my 13 week ultrasound pregnant with my sixth son. He had water on the brain and the possibility of trisomy 13 or Down syndrome. The choice between a peanut butter and jelly sandwich and a tuna sandwich is a fairly balanced choice. This choice was anything but one moment my baby was valued the next worthless and I got to choose. I'd like to know who was there protecting my reproductive freedom. Seven years ago when the high risk obstetrician had me terrified and my government told me it was okay to take my baby's life. How was I free that day? You're not free to choose when you're afraid and confused when someone is offering you a quick solution to life's inevitable struggles. It honestly makes me want to throw up when I think what could have happened if I had been paralyzed by my fear that day. My doctor and my government had failed me by giving me a choice that was no choice. My six year old son has Down syndrome. His name is Gus. He is loving and funny and mischievous. He is a son, a grandson, a nephew, a friend, a younger brother to five and an older brother to one. He is one of a kind and perfect just as God made him. But we only know this because he lived beyond my fear. Please look at the other side of this legislators. There are more women and certain kids like mine than you know. Where are our rights and the rights of our children? Thank you. Thank you, Lisa. Hi, I'm Michelle Faye from St. Johnsbury and I'm here today as a lifelong advocate for women and a mother of two amazing daughters. Since 1973, with the passage of Roe v. Wade, the decision to have an abortion has been made by a woman and her medical provider. Abortion is a common, safe medical procedure. The decision whether to continue or terminate a pregnancy is complex and deeply personal, as we just heard. Women who are low income, rural, undocumented, or from non-dominant racial, ethnic or social groups are much more likely to bear the impact of restrictions on reproductive health. A variety of factors can interfere with reproductive autonomy. I spent 14 years as a director of a program that supported victims of domestic and sexual violence. Women who experience these forms of violence are often denied control of their reproductive health and bodily integrity by their abusers. Pregnancy is used as a tactic of control and abusive relationships and is a time of heightened risk. Financial control and abusive relationships can make it difficult for women to access adequate and informed prenatal care. I trust women and their health care providers to make the right decisions for them regarding their health and well-being. Today, a woman's right to have an abortion is under great threat. The Trump administration is waging war on reproductive health and women's rights. Gag rules around abortion services and policy measures denying birth control, STD testing, and cancer screenings to low income women are just some of the attacks we're seeing from the Trump administration. Perhaps most disturbing is the fact that our conservative Supreme Court could overturn row view aid as early as this year. Doing so would block millions of people from accessing health care they need. If the row decision is overturned, the ability to access safe legal abortion will be determined by the states. Vermont currently has no laws affirmatively protecting abortion rights. Given the threat to these rights at the federal level, it's important that the legislature makes its position on reproductive rights crystal clear. By taking these steps, Vermont can continue our state's long tradition of leading the nation at times to protect its civil rights. Thank you. Thank you, Michelle. Thomas Kelly Berry on deck. My name is Kaylyn Gregory Davis, and I'm a medical student at UVM. I support Proposition 5 because I've seen firsthand what happens when state laws don't safeguard a person's reproductive freedom. I moved to Texas in 2013 right after the passage of a bill enforcing restrictions that close the vast majority of abortion clinics in the state. Texas went from having 41 clinics to six with this one piece of legislation. As a student midwife, I knew women were obtaining abortions illegally and without provider support, and I saw many women who were becoming mothers because there was no other option. As midwives, we weren't allowed to carry a life-saving anti-hemorrhagic drug because the state was concerned it would be used for abortions. Due to restrictive laws, substandard care was the only option. Early in my training, I was present for the delivery of a 16-year-old whose pregnancy was the result of rape. She labored bravely, but when the baby was born, I saw a look in her eyes that I will never forget. Disconnected and hollow, it spoke to the incredible trauma of not only having been raped, but then forced to carry the resultant pregnancy to term because there was no other option. She did not have reproductive freedom, and I saw how deeply dangerous this lack of choice can be. With the passage of one bill, Texas took reproductive freedom away from so many, and the consequences were devastating. I support an amendment to the Constitution so that this state doesn't fall prey to such a substandard provision of medical care. To support my community in parenting or not, in accessing birth control or not, in having an abortion this time, a baby next time, and adopting children, and giving a child a healthy adoptive home, this is why I'm becoming a doctor. I'm studying medicine in Vermont because I believe in this community. It's my home. I ask in return that the state legislation believe in me and my fellow students, providers, community members, and patients by entrusting us with reproductive freedom, the fundamental right to safe, legal, and accessible reproductive options. Thank you. Thank you, Kalin. Jennifer Wallingford on deck. Thomas. Thank you. With all humility, during this holy week, I urge you to reverse this effort to craft legislation, to create a statutory right to abortion, and to amend the Constitution of our state to enshrine a right to kill an unborn innocent human being. The human being's small size, its stage of development, and its location in the womb should not result in a deprivation of any legal protection. It is one thing to silently tolerate, as Vermont has done for nearly half a century, without any legislation or regulation, unlimited access to abortion, without any restrictions. And this toleration, despite the fact that the United States Supreme Court in Roe v. Wade held that states could regulate abortion and even prohibit abortion to preserve the potential life, as the court noted and your legislative council has summarized, at later stages of pregnancy. Vermont has persistently and steadfastly refused to regulate or limit abortion, apparently in the interest of the mother's autonomy. The mother's autonomy has been elevated above all other considerations. It's another thing to craft a statute beyond the silence and still another to amend our Constitution, our basic charter, without any consideration and create a right to kill the innocents, up to the point of birth, without any need for justification. Vermont will become a poster boy for the culture of death. The first date to craft such a constitutional amendment, as far as I know. John Paul II said, the responsibility falls on the legislator who has promoted and approved abortion laws to the extent that they have a say in the matter on the administrators of healthcare centers where abortions are performed. In this sense, abortion goes beyond the responsibility of individuals and beyond the harm done to them and takes on distinctly social dimension. Two seconds. You can turn it in. I'm just trying to be flexible. I appreciate that. I appreciate that. Laws which to legitimize the direct killing of innocent human beings through abortion or euthanasia are in complete opposition to the involvement right of life proper to every individual. They thus deny equality of law before every. Thank you. And if you'd like to submit that testimony, it would be fine. I will. And I have this for everyone. It's a copy of the Gosnell film. Thank you. There's one for each of you. Thank you. Thank you. Jennifer? Eileen Holt from Jericho on deck. Hi, I'm Jennifer Holt and I'm a Vermont voter. I've served as a prosecutor, children's lawyer, legal scholar, certified rape crisis counselor and certified family court and community mediator. As a rape survivor, I won several precedent setting federal lawsuits holding my father legally accountable for raping me repeatedly from age six to 18. I am a Christian and I support PR5. Rape, compelled pregnancy and compelled abortion were and remain hallmarks of American slavery. As a child, I lived the terror and denigration of sexual slavery. Before Roe, my father forced my mother to abort, which required that she, mother of four, who dearly wanted to bear a fifth child, be deemed a psychologically unfit mother. Deprivation of reproductive choice renders girls and women reproductive slaves. Jesus, my Christ grants me free will and reproductive choice. He invites our eternal souls into relationship. He does not enslave our corporeal bodies. He neither opposed abortion nor taught that ensolment occurs at conception. Jeremiah 1.5 refers to our souls, not our bodies. Matthew 7.13 to 14's narrow path calls us to eradicate unwanted pregnancy and human suffering, not to enslave. Biologically, fetuses our potential human life as our blood, livers, kidneys and DNA. Every moment we live, our bodies host potential life. Legal rights accrue only to living persons whose bodies carry potential life, not to the potential life in those bodies. We may not condone other people's use of their bodies, but our constitution protects them from enslavement to others' beliefs. We should work assiduously to reduce unwanted pregnancies. But we must never enslave our neighbors. In 1777, Vermont was a moral standard bearer when she outlawed adult male slavery. Let our great state morally lead today by constitutionally prohibiting reproductive slavery. Support PR5. Thank you. Thank you, Jennifer. Eileen. Katie Michael, South Burlington on deck. My name is Eileen Haupt. I'm from Jericho, and I ask you to reject proposal 15. Senators who champion proposal five, sorry, did I say proposal five. Senators who champion proposal five claim that it is not just about abortion. They say it is gender neutral and includes a man's right to a vasectomy, a woman's right to be pregnant, have an abortion, have sterilization procedure and use contraception. This claim is ludicrous. Nothing is threatening a man's right to have a vasectomy. Nor is anything threatening a woman's right to be pregnant to go through a sterilization procedure or to use contraception. So when we peel away the layers of the things the senators tell us are protected under the umbrella of proposal five and we examine what is actually an area of contention, we are left with only one, and that is the constitutional right that shall not be named. We are left with abortion and nothing else. For senators who are convinced that the fall of Roe v. Wade is imminent, it is very curious that their amendment doesn't even mention the word abortion. Perhaps if our mantras are fooled into thinking the amendment demonstrates that the right to privacy is not limited to just one issue, then we won't focus on abortion too much. Abortion 46 years after Roe v. Wade continues to be controversial because unlike the red herrings put before us by our senators, abortion takes the life of a separate and unique living human being. It is a violent act against a defenseless baby in the womb. That the unborn child is indeed a person is even more obvious now than in 1973. Because of more knowledge about prenatal development, crystal clear images of 3D and 4D ultrasound and even the ability to perform life saving surgeries on the unborn child while in utero, more and more Americans are coming to this realization and at the very minimum support restrictions to abortion. Pretending that vasectomies, pregnancy, sterilization and contraception need extra constitutional protection and omitting any mention of abortion which is really at the heart of Proposal 5 is cowardly cover and it's deceitful. If the aim is to enshrine abortion in the Vermont Constitution, the amendment language ought to explicitly express that. Please reject Proposal 5. Thank you. Thank you. Katie. Delia Warnickel, Polton. My name is Katie Michael and I'm here today from South Burlington to strongly urge you to vote in favor of Proposal 5. Some of you may recognize me as I have interned in this building for the last five years. I have sat in many committees and I have listened to many hours of testimony and committee discussion. So far, all I have done is listened, but this is the first issue on which I realized I could not stay quiet. To me, this proposal is about sending a message to Vermont women that we can make our own decisions about our own bodies. One thing that I have learned in my time at the State House is that it is easy to be forgotten if you're not at the table, even if you're in the room. Today I'm sitting at the table and I'm asking you to be heard and I'm asking for your respect and I'm asking for the same rights that many women before me have had. I want to be a mother someday, but I want that to be on my own time. And I want to make sure that my children and my children's children are guaranteed reproductive freedom. Thank you for your time and your hard work in forgiving the opportunity to speak. Thank you, Katie, for adding your voice as we thanked Roland. Delia. Hello, Waterbury Center. I'm back. My name is Delia Warnacky. I represent those Silent No More. Silent No More is an awareness campaign which educates the public that abortion is harmful emotionally, spiritually, and physically to women, men, and families. Lost and scared at 21 years of age, although I did not want to, I had allowed my first child to be killed through abortion. This is wrong at the very core of my humanity and my soul. My personal reproductive autonomy had nothing to do with the unique individual human being inside of me. I did not embrace our dignity and the reality of hope. My overwhelming sorrow is with me always. Hope, a feeling of expectation for a certain thing to happen. Our Governor, Phil Scott, on November 6th, 2018, said we treat others with dignity and respect. By this, does he mean only some of us or all of us? In hope, we can certainly agree he means all of us. Dear elected officials, to those who elected you into office, expect you to represent some of us or all of us. A U.S. state of integrity protects its citizens, especially its most vulnerable. Without argument, each of us began his or her journey as a tiny, unborn child. Let me ask you, would it have been okay if your mother aborted you? Proposal 5 defends a woman's personal reproductive autonomy, excluding abortion in its wording. Proposal 5 and age 57 preserve abortion at any stage of the unborn child's life. Let us not preserve Vermont as the state mothers can flee to to kill their children. Abortion is the antithesis of joy, as dark is to light, as denial is to reality, as fear is to hope. Let us provide the resources to help the mother in a crisis of pregnancy. Let us not turn our backs on her and on our future citizens. Thank you. Thank you, Joanna. And let's make sure that our cell phones are off. Check our cell phones. Thanks. Teresa Berg-Castleton on deck. Linda, welcome. My name is Linda Gravel. I am 67 years old. A lot has changed over my lifetime in reproductive liberty. When I was in college, I remember many stories in the news about women dying from abortions, coat hanger abortions. We must not go back to that era. I have two sons. They are the most precious gifts that I have. I have had three pregnancies. None of my pregnancies were easy. I was a mature mother when I was having my first child. I lost one pregnancy. There was something wrong with the fetus. I was carrying a dead child. For the sake of my own health, I had to have an abortion. Still, I was filled with intense sorrow, with intense guilt. Birth control allowed me to select when I would have my family and how many children I would have. It allowed me to pursue my education and my career. All which improved my standard of living prior to having a family. I have a bachelor's degree from Northeastern University, a master's degree from Rensselaer in computer science and management. I became a single mom when my sons were in high school. Having these higher degrees gave me independence to make my own choices. I put my two sons through college because of my economic freedom that I had. The three of us have a much better life. I implore the legislature to pass the reproductive freedom amendment. Women must be able to control their bodies and thus control their lives. Let's protect this freedom of choice for our future generations. We must not go back. Thank you. Thank you, Linda and Teresa. And those of you who are standing in the back, there are some seats over here if you would like to sit. Elizabeth Deutsch-Heinzberg on deck. The term all the people, all people, is used in proposed PR five. Saying it supports, quote, the core value that all people should be afforded all benefits and protections bestowed by government. And that the government should not confer special advantages upon the privileged. All people. Does that include pre-born people, thereby protecting them from harm? On the Federal Health and Human Services website, its purpose is stated as, quote, protecting the health of all Americans. Especially for those who are least able to help themselves, serving and protecting Americans at every stage of life from conception. PR five states, the right to reproductive liberty is central to the exercise of personal autonomy. But to have self-control over our bodies raises us above our hormones. Giving the ability to do what's best for others instead of ourselves. Promoting self-control over a legalized sexual free for all is of great value to any society. Reproductive liberty, what exactly does that entail if pre-born children aren't included in the all the people? Opportunities for profiting for women's pain and from human fetal tissue markets increase for the abortion providers. Will PR five increase opportunities for pimps in profiting from the exploitation of desperate people? Will pedophiles more easily have access to children? Will sex with animals be marketed for profit? Will pharmaceutical companies profit from the increased health problems? Are political campaigns expecting money in exchange for support? Will it increase tax resources? It's a sad day for the state when true freedom is deemed enslavement and enslavement is deceptively promoted as freedom. Thank you. Thank you. Elizabeth. Kathleen Grange, Graniteville, on deck. Good evening. My name is Elizabeth Deutsch. And as a mother and a nurse, I am able to say that every pregnancy is unique and every person's circumstance is different. We all deserve access to health care based on our medical needs and to health care providers best judgment and no one else. Reproductive rights are health care. This is not a philosophical discussion or a religious one. This is about access to safe health care. The United States has the worst maternal death rate in the developed world. Every other nation in the developed world has seen the maternal death rates decline, but not here in the U.S. Here my daughter and stepdaughters have a greater chance of dying in pregnancy than I did. Here people would allow them to die rather than allow them access to accurate information and safe health care. A woman must have the freedom to manage her own health. And the right to personal reproductive autonomy is central to the ability to determine one's own health in all stages of her life. We must ensure that all people are allowed to make their own health care choices free from religious or governmental interference. Vermont is on its way to becoming the first state in the U.S. to explicitly protect reproductive rights in its state constitution. And for that I applaud the efforts of the Vermont legislature to pass both the abortion rights bill age 57 and the constitutional amendment prop 5 to ensure reproductive liberty in Vermont. Vermonters have the right to safe legal abortion care without red tape or government interference. And the majority of our representatives understand this. Additionally, the proposed constitutional amendment upholds the will of Vermonters that an individual's right to personal reproductive autonomy is central to the liberty and dignity to determine one's own life course. The Supreme Court could overturn Roe v. Wade as soon as this year, which would block millions of people from the health care they need. If Roe is overturned, abortion rights will be determined by the laws of each state. I applaud elected officials in Vermont who are taking an affirmative position by working to pass age 57 and prop 5 to send a clear message to all Vermonters that they stand for the protection and preservation of reproductive rights and health care. Thank you. Kathleen. Chloe White. Burlington on deck. My name is Kathleen Grange and I am speaking out against the passage of prop 5 constitutional amendment. I have read and reread the proposed language to be added to the Vermont Constitution. And I don't know what it means. Somewhere, somehow, after the house passed age 57 for unrestricted abortions, the Senate now proposes a constitutional amendment for, quote, an individual's right to personal reproductive autonomy, close quote. Others have commented that prop 5 protects women's right to have an abortion. And others say it protects men's rights to have a vasectomy. But how many other rights are hidden in this proposal? Are there age limits to the rights? And whose right is the right right? Conventional science has taught us that women are born with all of the eggs they will ever have. In 16 and 20 weeks of pregnancy, the ovaries of a female baby contain 6 to 7 million eggs cells, but most gradually waste away, leaving about 1 to 2 million immature eggs present at birth. So does the female baby in the womb have a right to personal reproductive autonomy? Or does her mother's rights trump the baby's rights? Or does the father's right trump anyone's rights? If a woman is pregnant and wants to deliver her baby, but the man doesn't want the child to be born, whose individual right to personal reproductive autonomy prevails, as they both have personally reproduced the child? Or is prop 5 really meant to be about unrestricted abortion through all 9 months of pregnancy? I read an article the other day how a professor tells his students about Greek oracles and their tricks. He says, quote, you can't be proved wrong if nobody can figure out what you mean. Close, quote, man's words are slippery, but an abortion is forever. A baby is murdered in the womb and the moral threat of society is forever severed. I urge you to vote no on Proposition 5. Thank you, Kathleen. Chloe. Anissa Lamberton, Middleton Springs. Good evening. My name is Chloe White. I am the policy director at the ACLU of Vermont. The ACLU supports Proposal 5 and we urge you to pass this critical measure so that the voters can make the voices heard on this critical issue. The right to decide if, when, and how to have children is absolutely essential and critical to an individual's autonomy, equality, and ability to participate in the social, economic, and political life of the state and the nation. The right to reproductive liberty, and particularly the right to abortion, remains for the time being a fundamental right at the national level. And it should be recognized as such here in Vermont as well. But this right is under attack at the federal level as well as in other states. Justice Kavanaugh's dissent in the recent Louisiana abortion clinic case, which could have closed nearly all the clinics in the state and essentially dismantled row, highlights the very real danger to this fundamental right. The lack of Vermont Supreme Court jurisprudence and the legal cloud around these rights at the federal level demonstrate the need for this amendment. This amendment will protect reproductive liberty and safeguard Vermont's personal bodily integrity. So for all these reasons, the ACLU supports proposal five. Vermont should give voters the opportunity to stand up to a tax and affirm their commitment to reproductive liberty by enshrining this fundamental right to reproductive autonomy in our constitution. This right deserves the highest level of legal protection, and we urge you to pass this proposal. Thank you. Thank you, Chloe. Anisa, did I pronounce that right? Dottie Kyle Warren on deck. We are living Vermont history. We're making Vermont history today. This is not Vermont values. This proposal is not what Vermonters are about. At 22 weeks, my son was misdiagnosed with Down syndrome, and doctors wanted to inject his heart and have him decay inside of me. His body decaying, putting me at risk and also putting his twin sister at risk. So when we're talking about autonomy, what this bill will do, it will enshrine the ethos, the ethic of death over life. And what doctors would not do is they would not perform the surgery that he needed to help him survive outside the womb because it would put her at risk. But they wanted to end his life knowing that it would put her at risk and it would put me at risk as well. That's the ethos in a world where this is already something that we're living with, is people supporting abortion. What I hear near and far is that people are not wanting this in Vermont. From my local general store this morning with the liberal owner who was a past pink supporter said, this is ridiculous. Nobody wants this. Everyone who comes in here and talks about this doesn't want it. To the neonatal nurses in Philadelphia where my daughter is doing her clinical rotation and they're saying they're talking about killing our patients. So what I need to let you know is at a time when people are tearing down statues and renaming buildings at UVM, the legacy of this proposal will haunt your names. I ask you to think about the idea that you are enshrining this law that will forever attach your family to promoting death and eugenics over life and love. Please love our children and the women who bear them. Thank you. Dottie. Lynn Caulfield-Charlotte. My name is Dottie Kyle. Proposition 5 was introduced on the Senate floor two weeks ago. Senator Ginny Lyons remarked, when approved by the voters, Prop 5 will provide a fundamental right, ensuring personal reproductive autonomy for Vermonters. Without the freedom to decide for oneself about when to have a family, many women and men become stuck in a lifelong struggle for success. Access to reproductive health care to contraceptive, contraception and family planning has resulted in an increase in women's wages, participation in the labor force and in completion rates of college. Now that's a statement I can relate to having had an abortion at age 17, 20 years before Roe v. Wade, when abortion was illegal. Money and influence, then as now, can override restrictions. I was fortunate enough to have caring parents, the money and the connections to get a doctor and OBGYN who performed abortions after hours in his office in New York City. I was able to finish high school and college, marry that boy and have three wonderful daughters and a successful career. What haunted me then, as it does to this day, is the question, what happens to those women without the money and the connections? Since 2018-37 states have introduced over 300 abortion restrictions. All these have one thing in common, they impact the least able physically, emotionally and financially to nurture and successfully raise children. These restrictions are designed to keep poor people in their place. The Vermont I know and love is way better than that. Prop 5 is sensible, sensible and humane and very much pro-family. Thank you, daddy. Lynn. Carol Crossman, Warren. I'm Lynn Caulfield from Charlotte. I'm a registered nurse and a certified registered nurse of infusions. What is it about the cry of a forlorn baby that elicits the deepest emotion from the human heart? There was the recording gone viral of crying children, allegedly separated from their parents at the border. There was public outcry. Suppose we could play a recording of the 4,000 unborn babies whose lives are mercilessly snuffed out every day in the USA. Would there be an outcry? Would there be any legislative leader who would give voice to those cries which have been silenced? When a baby dies, the world mourns, but when 60 million unborn lives are exterminated since Roe v. Wade, those in power want to enshrine the so-called women's right to abortion. What is it about the photo of a newborn baby that elicits the deepest affection from the human heart? The technologies of in-utrophotography and sonography have become the window to the womb. But those who want to terminate this life in you or your daughter or your granddaughter aren't looking and they don't want you to look either. How can people cheer when laws are passed lying in the destruction of the unborn child right up until the time of birth? Poor abortion for mothers already celebrate this law, which allows for abortion right up until the time of birth. And yes, she is a baby, and yes, she can feel pain. Planned Parenthood made $244 million in profits last year, up 150% from the previous year. Their new CEO, Dr. Leanna Wen, has made it clear that Planned Parenthood's most critical service they provide is abortion, the leading cause of death in America. We're a society that has lost its conscience, and this legislation is the manifestation. We nurses have sworn an oath to do no harm. We will not and cannot participate in procedures that will kill our fellow human beings, even if it puts our jobs in jeopardy. A nation without a conscience is destined for destruction. We must preserve our heritage by welcoming the next generation, not aborting it. Please carry this legislation forever. Thank you. Thank you, Lynn. Carol? Mark Fay, South Burlington. My name is Carol Crossman. One of your main functions as a legislator is to provide for the safety and well-being of your constituents. Making and passing laws for the benefit of citizens. In this case, it means safe access to reproductive care, whether it be access to contraceptives or abortion. There is no reason for us to move backwards to the 1950s, 1960s when contraceptives were new and denied unless you were married and you had a doctor to prescribe them. At that time, there were no allowances for abortion, unless via the back alley, leaving many women to suffer the physical consequences of an abotched abortion. I suffered in those times, giving an infant up to a New York City adoption agency three days after birth. I spent 52 years in misery, and so did the child who is now a woman and who also has been searching for years to find me. It seems the courts these days are so busy passing laws to control a woman's body. Maybe it's time to pass laws to control a man's body. A case in point is the Hobby Lobby case 2014 Supreme Court ruling that decided a for-profit company could deny a woman access to contraception based on religious beliefs. Yet this company provides insurance coverage for the male employees, erectile dysfunction drugs such as Viagra and vasectomies. To me, this is a total double standard. It is 2019. Let's move forward. Prop 5. Thank you. Thank you, Carol. Mark. Sam Ledwicky, Burlington. Good evening. Thank you for here as well. Monday's Monk's Day. In the past 20 years, I've been a volunteer women's prison chaplain in Vermont prisons. I've spent thousands of hours trying to help others pick up the broken pieces in their lives. A big percentage of those people have views of lice much differently now than when they came in. If they can change, then we can change. I say that to say this. I genuinely care about the dignity of all lice for all Vermonters, not just one sect of them. Not for a paycheck, but for a better, to better our society and for our culture. Now the question is, are these babies human? Pro-choices argument has been for the years that a baby in a mother's womb was a blob of tissue and nobody really knows when life begins. That argument collapses under the weight of science. At the moment when a human sperm penetrates a human egg in a fallopian tube, a new entity becomes in existence. It's as I got in the name of this first cell that is formed. It is human, is undeniably alive, is composed of human DNA, so it is not just a blob of tissue. The DNA includes a complete design, and it's very clear scientifically it is not only alive, but has established a separate biological human form in its mother's womb. So it is not the mother killing a blob, it is the mother killing a human being. It is filled for criteria to establish biological life, metabolism, growth, reaction to stimuli, and reproduction. A woman has never in human history ever delivered anything but a human, so it is indefinitely human. The cardiovascular system is functioning at 22 days and babies not a blob, the blood begins to circulate, his or her blood, unique to his mother's, and the baby's heartbeat can be heard. I just want to say that 61% of Americans say abortion should be illegal, and after the fetal heartbeat. 72% of Americans say abortion should be outlawed after three months. 86% of Americans say abortion should be illegal after six months. We need an emergency of America. Please. Look like you have more to say. If you want to leave your written testimony, we can post that. Thank you very much. I appreciate it. Sam. Steve Pratt, Northfield. Hi, good evening. My name is Samantha Lednicki. I was born and raised in Vermont. I lived here pretty much all my life except for going to law school in Massachusetts. I'm a practicing attorney, and I know that you're hearing today a lot of personal stories and a lot of social and political sides of this debate. But I'm here just to offer my two cents on the actual language of the statute. I also come here because I think it's really important for this such a critical issue where there are two powerful stories behind each side to be put to a statewide vote. So I ask you today to pass this amendment as drafted. A few points. So this term, personal reproductive autonomy, has come up a lot. And that term actually comes from our Supreme Court precedent. So it comes from Roe v. Wade. When it was first put into our case law and it's been cited in numerous amicus briefs since. And what that really is, is it's actually a negative right. So it provides both the right to prevent access to reproductive, or it ensures that the state can't prevent access to reproductive health care, as well as that the state can't prevent forced sterilization. So it is somewhat of a neutral term, and it encompasses our Supreme Court precedent. The second part is of how the language is drafted right now, is that it really flips the burden onto the state. So it imposes a burden on the state for any future legislation that comes after this amendment to put the burden on the state. They must have a compelling interest in restricting access to reproductive autonomy, and it has to be in the least restrictive means possible. I think, you know, we already have the bill that passed in the House, but this constitutional amendment is equally as important, if not more important, because in Vermont we have very little case law. So all us as attorneys have to do when we're litigating cases is read the plain language of the Constitution and the plain language of statutes. As a civil liberties advocate, I also think it's very important to have more expansive state constitution to rely on when the federal constitution is in. So thank you so much. I just wanted to say that this right, the right to reproductive access to health insurance, excuse me, health care, has been a right that everyone with means has, but not the poor. So thank you. Hunter Headingberg, Burlington. I know you're here. Yes, I would like to speak on the statistics of the nation. The current statistics is 70, 75% of the U.S. public is against late term abortion, and only 20 to 30% is for. And I look around the room, I see more people against than for. But also I'd like to mention that why are we trying to kill off our next generation? They could be our next great president, you know, Reagan, Lincoln, Eisenhower, whatever, because we don't know what our future holds, but if we're killing them off, what's the sense of all this? And Thomas Edison, he was a man with disabilities. I have disabilities, but I'm glad to be alive. I can do the best I can in our society to contribute to. And also, you know, the next person could be our next Dr. Dvorakian. We don't know, but why are we killing all these people? You know, these are obviously human beings that we're trying to dispose of in late term abortion. It's just murder. It's just plain out senseless murder. It doesn't make no sense. I can understand the women that have issues with giving birth that could cause, you know, death or whatever. But because they're disabled, like me or some of these other great people in our society, that doesn't make sense. It just don't make no sense at all. So why are we murdering our future? Give them a chance. What's wrong with birth control if we're going to do this? Or abstinence? I mean, there's nothing wrong with that. And it's totally safe as far as abstinence. And some of your birth control is a lot better choice than murder. And that's all I have to say about it. Thank you, Steve. Yes. Hunter? I want to butcher this. Howard Jenschik-Wilson. My name is Hunter Heidenberg. I am from Burlington, Vermont. I am neither a mother nor a medical professional, but I am a born and raised Vermonter. And I am a young professional who works with adaptive and disabled athletes. I'm also a grad student going back to school to become a public school teacher. And by all accounts, and from everything I've heard, I'm exactly the person that the state of Vermont is trying to keep here. Looking around the room, I think I'm actually the future generation of Vermont. I'm also a very real human being who would potentially be affected by this proposition. I'm also, unfortunately, not a woman who has been forced to carry a pregnancy to term unwillingly, which is a human rights violation as defined by the United Nations. I love this state, and I am willing to do the work to stay here because it's not easy for people in my demographic. But I'm not willing to live in a state that doesn't value my health and safety as a young woman. Passing Prop 5 would show me and other people in my demographic that Vermont does rely on that we're not working so hard to stay in this state for nothing. Thank you. Thank you, Hunter. Howard? Judy Daly? Or Daly Mortown? Yes, hi, good evening. I did not bring a piece of paper. That's okay. You can just speak. One question I had from my friend that we carpooled today coming here is that I asked him in the car if you are ever the representative going to make this choice, ever been in an abortion clinic. I asked him and he says, maybe not. They don't know. And how you feel every time you pass in front of an abortion clinic. Now, I want to tell you a personal experience. I've been in an abortion clinic. I raised a baby from an abortion clinic. That baby today has 17 years. The most precious human being. I mean, she lights up my world. She lights, I mean, she could be anything now. A beautiful little baby could have been killed 17 years ago. I mean, you know, I don't think I was telling my wife or trying to control her when I was in that clinic. I was saying, please, please don't kill this baby. And I don't know if what I'm saying here going to make any difference in your choice. But I know it made a difference 17 years ago. I was not in there to speak for that child that could not say any words. Today, she would not be part of this beautiful world. She's so beautiful, but almost, almost, if it wasn't for my heart, loving people and loving babies. Today, I will have a beautiful daughter. Thank you so much. Thank you, Howard. Judy. Maurice Dunbar Essex. Thank you. I'm here today in support of Proposition 5 to raise my voice so that Nova Monter will ever again be in the position of being forced to bring a pregnancy to term or to subject herself to an illegal abortion with potential devastating or fatal consequences. And the key in that is being forced to do something. Our country and our state have at their cores the right of freedom. I'm grateful for everyone who actively protects freedom. I'm here to contribute to the pursuit of freedom for women's reproductive health decisions. Living in a freedom based country and state, we get to have different opinions. We are related to live with, work with, and are in communities with others of different opinions. We don't have to live in fear of government retribution for our different opinions. I expect our government to protect not only a woman's right to her opinion, but her right to act on it. Proposition 5 does not restrict anyone's choice. A woman who would never access an abortion will not have to. Nothing in this proposition forces a woman to do anything she doesn't want to do. It does not erode her right to carry a pregnancy to term. What it does is codify every woman's ability to control her body and make her own choice. I ask our legislators to pass proposition 5 to protect freedom in the form of a woman's right to choose what happens to her body. Even if you are uncomfortable with it, I hope that you let this proposition progress and ultimately get to a state referendum so the people of this state can vote on it. Thank you for bringing this to the floor and for the work you do on a daily basis. Thank you, Judy. Maurice? I bow to you guys. Okay, we've all heard so many pro and con arguments and I totally understand, honestly. I spoke recently with a legislator who told me that the vote had to go to this person's constituents. And I just want to bring up the fact that there were 700 people opposing this bill that showed up here at the state house in February. And there was a stack about this deep with 10 names on each sheet of petitions that were opposing it. And since then it seems as though I keep running into people that said, I wish I could assign the petition, blah, blah, blah. So my point is there's a lot of good reasons. But we're all here because we're afraid that Roe v. Wade will be overturned nationally. And I just want, I'm looking at all of you, there's perhaps parents, grandparents here. And I'm asking all of you to just separate yourself from any peer pressure, any constituent pressure. And just my point I guess beyond that is you've been given an awesome responsibility here. You were voted by the people in Vermont and your vote is recorded up there. Can you just separate yourself from everybody's opinions and wonder what life would be like without your own children? Or if you were in a difficult spot that some of these ladies are in and you ended up aborting these children, these precious people. And so do you deep within yourself ask yourself, do you want to live with the blood of these babies on your hands? I don't mean to make anyone feel guilty, but this is logically what it is. It's murder. And we need to keep abstinence a little bit more rather than freedom. Thank you so much for listening. Thank you very much. Murrell. Heather Shepard. Jericho. Hi. I'm here to support Proposition 5. I'm 63 years old. I'm a mother. And I'm shocked that in 2019, we are still debating whether or not to 100% guarantee a woman's right to reproductive freedom. I ask you to support Prop 5. And then let's get to work supporting families with their many needs. Thank you. Thank you very much. Heather. Kate Logan Burlington. Thank you first for your service and for representing us. I really appreciate that you take so much time out to do that. It really matters to Vermont. And I'll step back so I don't blow out the mic. So my story basically, and you guys know all the details, you know the statistics, you know a lot. So I just figured I just share my story because I like to talk a lot. And my story is that my mom was 15 in 1973 and found out that I was coming. And my grandmother, a mother of seven, there was economic hardship. There was a lot of trouble. There was a lot of abuse and terrible things that were happening. I encouraged my mom to abort as Roe v. Wade was passed nine months prior to my conception. And my mom as a scared, poor, not making good choices girl said I couldn't do it. And she didn't. And I'm really glad she didn't because I kind of like being here. But also, I like that it gave me a mission. It gave me a point to share with others. And unfortunately, my grandmother did end up raising me. My mom died when I was three and it was in a car accident. It was out of her control and nobody could ever know what my future was. So the statistics of me was a bastard child socioeconomically challenged. There are risk factors in my life and my life wasn't easy, but it was still okay. And the bad things were bad, but they don't merit me not being here. And so I'm challenged by the concept that we would consider, that we would judge that somebody else should be here or not be here based on these things. I went to the movie unplanned last week twice. The first ten minutes didn't realize what I missed. The second time went with a pro-Joyce friend who was moved unbelievably and saw the whole thing and it changed her life and she messaged me afterwards. And she said, when I see what this is, I have to change my mind. And that for me just compelled me to come here and share. But the monitors don't want this. And I just compel you to consider humanity. So I would ask you to consider saying no and maybe finding a better way. And thanks for your time, guys. Thank you very much. Kate? Lynn? Pike? Bristol? Hi. I'm Kate Logan. I'm director of programming and policy for rights and democracy. We're a grassroots member-led organization founded in order to defend human rights, protect our democracy and ensure that our communities are places where everyone has the freedom to thrive. We believe that our rights are interdependent and interconnected and denial of one right impacts all other rights. Rights and democracy unequivocally supports a woman's right to freedom from carrying an unwanted pregnancy to term and supports Prop 5. I'm going to use the rest of my time to read comments from my friend Brenda Siegel from New Fane who couldn't be here today. Brenda writes, at the age of 24, I became pregnant while in an abusive relationship. Many of the choices that I had leading up to this pregnancy were not mine. While I made the choice to have my baby, my experience in the clinics was nourishing and supported fully the choice that I did eventually make. I was extremely grateful to have that choice. The choice to parent a child or not is personal and should always be personal and should be protected. All of us need to stand up and protect women from ever experiencing a forced birth. Having a baby is a beautiful thing, but only when you want to. Women's ability to choose is directly linked to their economic freedom, their ability to be safe in their bodies and in their homes. In fact, the most common reason women give for seeking an abortion is that they aren't able to afford the cost of supporting a child. Proposition 5 merely puts into the Constitution the practice that women that already exist in our state. Women's reproductive freedom is under attack at the national level, and to take that freedom away would put women in dangerous situations, would eliminate their economic freedom and would importantly take away a woman's ultimate ability to control her own body and when they want to start a family and that choice is between the pregnant person and their doctor. I support enshrining Vermont's Proposition 5 in our Constitution giving women agency over their own bodies. Thank you for your leadership and diligence to protect the freedom of women and families in our state. Thank you. Thank you, Kate. And Lynn. Bailey Grebin, South Royalton. Could you get me some water? I am a nurse, a registered nurse, and at a recent legislative breakfast, I asked the legislators what the words personal reproductive autonomy actually meant, and I did not get a clear answer. The word abortion is not in here, and I believe rightfully so. I don't think it should be. Reproductive liberty means that you can choose to reproduce or not. You, whether male or female, can prevent it. The choice should be made before you have sex and not after the woman becomes pregnant. If you have not done what's necessary to prevent pregnancy and you don't want to be pregnant, you should not have sex pretty much. Once an embryo is conceived, this becomes another matter. For a woman to become pregnant, it takes two people, a male and a female. In this article, I do not see any rights for the male, nor do I see any responsibility. I see the total weight resting on the female. This is an easy out for a man. I do not wish to take away anybody's right, but with abortion, there are no do-overs and no rights for the unborn. The consequences are too many to take lightly. And my final thought is, just because it's legal does not mean it's right. Thank you, Lynn. Bailey. Kathleen Lynch, Burlington. Hi, my name is Bailey and I live in South Royalton. Sorry, that was really loud. So as a young woman, my reproductive rights have always been protected by Roe v. Wade. No one in my generation has ever had to watch our friends suffer through dangerous back alley abortions and we're not about to start now. Ending legal abortions won't stop abortions. It'll just make accessing reproductive health riskier and harder, especially for low income people and young people. I support Prop 5 because we must protect everyone's reproductive health and individual liberty. And I know that Vermont can lead the nation in doing so. Thank you, Bailey. Kathleen. Randall Perkins, Manchester. Thank you for the opportunity to speak today. I've been a UVM surgical nurse 35 of my 42 years as a nurse. I may have had the privilege of caring for some of you here today. I feel it is my duty as a Vermont Catholic and a voter to give my testimony in opposition of Prop 5. I respect and acknowledge that human life begins at conception. This reality guides me as a nurse and in raising our seven beautiful children, all living here in Vermont. Every shift I have the proud responsibility to be my patient's advocate to collaborate with the surgical team and thoroughly document all aspects of care provided. If my patient is pregnant, I am also an advocate for the unborn baby. Abortion training was not in my nursing education and not included in my national nursing board exam. The last one and a half years have been the most troubling for me professionally. Elective abortion cases began to arrive in our suite two months before the free press released the news on the front page. Babies with Trisomy 21 or Down syndrome are included among those who have been selected for termination. I have a son, Patrick, aged 26 who has Down syndrome. Why is my workplace expected to accommodate death as a goal? I feel the addition of this moral dilemma into our level one trauma center's daily surgical schedule is inconsiderate. These cases cause disruption in patient care throughout the operating room, reassignment of specialty RNs, and the unprecedented invisible judgment among coworkers toward those of us who opt out. Amid our severe staffing shortage, many RNs with a career and surgical nursing experience have left with elective abortion as one factor in their decision. How do nurses reconcile being expected to care for one of our most vulnerable premature infants in one operating room while a pre-born baby a few weeks younger is being dismembered in the adjacent suite? This happened to me last week. I suspect if you go past under your watch, late term fetal demise and extrication will be far more gruesome. I predict Vermont workforce will lose more high-list nurses who choose to follow their conscience elsewhere. Thank you. Thank you, Kathleen. And if you have more remarks, you can leave them with us. Bob Warlick, Randolph. Good evening. My name is Randall Perkins. Reproductive liberty, as described in Proposition 5, protects a woman's right to have an abortion. I'm sorry, I'm just having a little technical confusion. Take your time. Thank you. Protects a woman's right to have an abortion, the same right she's had in Vermont for 46 years. And I strongly support this amendment because all people of Vermont should be able to be in charge of decisions about their bodies. And that includes access to safe and legal abortion. I'm encouraged that the proposition received overwhelming support in the Senate. And now I'm asking you to send a clear message to all Vermonters that you stand for protection and preservation of reproductive rights. Why is this necessary? Why now? Because the U.S. Supreme Court will likely overturn Roe v. Wade this year. And when that happens, if and when that happens, abortion rights will be determined by laws of each state. I respect an individual's right to his or her own opinion regarding abortion. However, at different stages in a pregnancy, a woman's health, not the political agenda of others, should inform important healthcare decisions. Politicians are not medical experts. While none of us should have to justify our personal healthcare decisions, abortion later in pregnancy is rare and most often occurs under complex circumstances where in a woman and her doctor need every medical option available. Abortions later in pregnancy most commonly involve severe fetal anomalies and serious risks to a woman's health. A woman must remain free to weigh all options relevant to her unique and specific condition while in consultation with the people she trusts. Including medical providers, relevant transfers, and religious leaders. Please support Proposition 5. Thank you for the welcome. Bob. Annabelle Hill, Burlington. My comments are solely directed to those House members who will vote yes for this amendment. Those who have turned their backs on the unborn. Allowing a few of us two minutes for a meaningful input into your relentless five month attack on our values starting on January of each year is so generous. That I say meaningful, that I say generous, that's a joke. And yes, I am angry. Each year our chosen life has become more mocked as you move towards this dystopian society that you seem to lust for. But which is our nightmare. Each year so many of us consider leaving the state we love because of you are misguided representatives whose only interests appear to be control and staying in power. You were elected on the promise to represent us, but instead you bow to the altar of death to the gods of Planned Parenthood as you move to embed the evil court ruled Vermont abortion practice first in statute and now in the Constitution in your reckless desire to make abortion. Even of a full term child just seconds from delivery on a saleable. Your followers are given equal time to defend your wicked work and during the public hearing on age 57. All we heard from them was the right of the woman to control her body totally ignoring the other life about to be snuffed. The Senate spokesperson Jenny Lyons described the amendment as a narrowly crafted proposal that will affirm the right to abortion as it currently exists in our state. Tonight gives your blind followers another opportunity to try to justify third trimester radical abortion baby killing law. But none of them will even try because it can't be justified. Even if the pregnancy is a threat to the life of the mother, the best and safest solution is an induced live delivery or a C section. This is not a woman's rights constitutional amendment is an unrestricted abortion amendment. And it was a car. And will those of pro amendment speakers that follow me speak about the other human life this time. Don't hold your breath. Thank you Bob. Annabelle. Michael Robbuchar. Rutland. Hi, my name is Annabelle Hill. I'm here today to urge the members of the committee to support Proposition 5. As a young woman living in Vermont, this proposition means so much to me and my peers. There's a lot to be worried about when you're 20. I have a midterm tomorrow for instance that I should probably be studying for. But I think being here is more important. I'm here so that other people my age can go back to worrying about midterms. And not about how they're going to access things they need to lead the lives they want. Every day there's a new attack on our rights as women and as people in general. It is becoming harder and harder throughout our country to access the services we need. By supporting this proposition, a precedent would be set. Vermont is committed to its citizens and other states should follow suit. I can't say what I'll be doing in five or ten years. I'm offering assurance that I'll be able to access the services I need to be in control of my body. It means that my options remain open. This is what Proposition 5 means to me. Control and options. Control over my life and the options to do whatever I want with it. Thank you very much. Thank you, Annabelle. Michael. Mary Kuhn, Waterbury. Much of what you will hear today is a lie or based upon lies. I've come here to speak truth. I know your hearts are hard. I pray that they may yet be softened and your consciences may yet be prepped. The truth is that you are not self-created created by your parents or the byproduct of a random biological process. God made you. God gave you life. He formed you in your mother's womb. Hence, you are a unique person with inherent value, as are the unborn. Sadly, it has often been the prerogative of the strong and powerful for their own personal pleasure or prosperity to oppress and even put to death the weak and powerless. To justify our actions, we deem these groups of people less than human and therefore unworthy of any rights. It continues today in the extermination of nearly one million children a year who are deemed subbed human. We must repent of this horrific act or reap the consequences. The blood of the approximately 60 million unborn children cries out to their father who is also the just and righteous judge to whom we will all give an account. As men and women of authority, you will be held to a stricter judgment. May it not be said of you that in the face of evil, you did nothing, but encouraged and allowed it to flourish. Perhaps even now, we are beginning to reap God's judgment in allowing these things to come to pass. The Roman Catholic non-mother Teresa said, and I quote, If we accept that a mother can kill even her own child, how can we tell other people not to kill one another? Any country that accepts abortion is not teaching love, rather, to use any violence to get what they want, end quote. I implore you to educate yourself on the actual process of abortion and its effects. Look at post-abortive photos, lest you continue in blindness because you refuse to see. I leave you with these words modified from Psalm 2. Therefore, you senators, act wisely. Be warned, you rulers of the earth. Serve the Lord with reverent fear and celebrate his rule with trembling. Submit to his royal son or he will be angry and your way will lead to your destruction. For his anger flares up in an instant. But what joy for all who take refuge in him? Thank you. Thank you, Michael. Richard Morton, Brattleboro. Good afternoon. I came here to the hearing, not expecting to speak, but I would appreciate the opportunity to do so. I am 69 years old and I feel I've been fighting for women's reproductive rights my entire life. I feel fortunate that my reproductive decisions were never in jeopardy of being illegal, as Roe v. Wade was the law of the land during most of my reproductive years. I am saddened by recent legislative and judicial decisions that have begun to erode the rights of women to make safe and healthy decisions for themselves and their families. I remember the years of unsafe abortions and I have seen the tragedy of women's lives lost or ruined because they were forced to continue an unwanted or unsafe pregnancy. I've retired from a 40-year career as an educator fighting for the rights of all children to a free and appropriate public education. I value the lives of all children. I have worked in the Department of Corrections and know how important personal liberty is. I have been here listening to testimony supporting gun rights. I have been here in this chamber to fight for my right to marry the person I love. The right to control my body is no less than any other civil right, privilege, or liberty that I enjoy as a citizen of this state. Since 1973, no provision of Roe v. Wade has forced a woman against her will to terminate a pregnancy. Prop 5 will not force anyone to do so either. I applaud the legislature's effort to ensure that women's and men's reproductive rights are enshrined in our constitution and I urge you to go forward with this constitutional process. Thank you. Thank you, Mary. Richard. Christine L. Montpelier. Thank you. As a pastor, chaplain, husband and father of three, I urge you to vote against proposal 5. Recent embryology shows the unborn are distinct living whole human beings from conception on small but growing. Aborted children struggle against the instruments that destroy them. Seeing an ultrasound image of that struggle changed Abby Johnson from a Planned Parenthood director to an ardent pro-life advocate. She has spoken here, as did Ryan Bomberger, a child of rape, and Ann McKelleny, producer of the movie, Gosnell. You may never have heard of them because you had the choice of staying away. An unborn child has virtually no legal protection, choice or voice in their future. This proposal removes the small legal protections that currently remain. It is a sin. Yes, you could find ministers to say that it is not, but it is a sin. Here are some issues unaddressed in proposal 5. What about a baby girl's right to life, liberty, and her body? Are there any legal protections to stop her from being killed if she's born alive? Will this proposal become a blanket legal protection for abortion providers? Or will women have legal protections against malpractice, sexual assault, or abuse? What standards will assure properly trained, licensed, and supervised staff? Will safety inspections be done? Will sanitary standards be enforced? Can conscientious objectors on hospital staffs decline to participate and still have a job? Will there be any prohibitions on the sale of body parts? Isn't a potential conflict of interest for a clinic, isn't it a potential conflict of interest for a clinic to sell body parts and also counsel women on their best choices? Do you see no potential problems here? What about protections from deception and manipulation by unscrupulous providers? If there is no... It's possible that Vermont's proposal 5 will offend a divine moral standard. If that's the case... You can seek repentance. That is not the unforgivable sin. As bad as it, I think it is. Thank you, Richard. If you have more comments, you can leave them with us. Christine. Brzoza? Our legislators are currently faced with the responsibility of protecting Vermont's rights to reproductive liberty and safe medical procedures. We cannot stress enough the importance of this decision amidst the current movement to overturn Roe vs. Wade. Barring reactivity to this looming policy volatility at the federal level and in other states, the protection of bodily autonomy via the Vermont State Constitution is a palpable act of solidarity with all women, especially those left most vulnerable without these protections, minorities, individuals living in poverty, individuals without health insurance, et cetera. To paraphrase Erica Hart, master of education, writer and sex educator, the movement to ban safe abortions reinforces class disparity is an echo of the eugenics movement that preceded it. To clarify any confusion about that statement, the parallel lies in the erosion of human rights and reproductive liberties, which serves to perpetuate patriarchal institutions and white supremacy. This is a stark oversimplification of the pervasive effects these infringements have upon society. It is irresponsible and obtuse to legislate to the appeal of certain religious ideologies with disregard to the physical evidence and medical, racial, social and ethical discourse surrounding this very corporeal subject. Here in the State House is a plaque quoting Dorothy Canfield Fisher, proudly displayed it reads, The Vermont tradition grapples energetically with the basic problem of human conduct, how to reconcile the needs of the group of which every man or woman is a member, with the craving for individual freedom to be what he really is. To not pass this amendment or to veto it would not only fail to reconcile the needs of the many, but it leaves the door open for every woman and countless non-binary and trans people to be stripped of their individual freedom. The women's march on Montpelier in January of 2017 had a record-setting turnout of 15,000 to 20,000 people. Thousands have poured into the streets several times since then in similar demonstrations. My rhetorical question is, what length does the women of Vermont and the U.S. have to go to in order to be heard and heeded? How can we appeal to the morality of our legislators? Thank you. Thank you, Christine. Anne. Ashley Hill, Montpelier. Three things come to mind when I think of the proposed amendment to the Constitution of the State of Vermont. Number one, from honors, knowing that pure liberty is chaotic anarchy believed in a constitution and liberties with restrictions and that no individual or group could be allowed to harm the life, liberty or property of others. This amendment is liberty to abort without restriction. It harms the life of the mother and is death to the unborn baby. Number two, Vermont has always been known for its natural beauty in its lakes, mountains, and animals and has drawn people to this beauty. Babies are part of nature. The early feminists believed in the protection of nature in all its forms and said, do no harm or violence to nature. Babies will have no protection under this constitutional amendment and the violence of abortion kills the baby. I want to end with a part of a quote by Calvin Coolidge, President Calvin Coolidge. He said, Vermont is a state I love and he loves Vermont because of her hills and valleys, her scenery and invigorating climate, but most of all because of her indomitable people. They are a race of pioneers who have almost beggared themselves to serve others. He ends by speaking of the people of this brave little state of Vermont. But does abortion actually serve women or is this a false good? What does abortion do then to the woman's spirit? Studies show that it increases suicide and depression. Let's be brave and defend our women and the unborn from the violence of abortion. Thank you. Thank you, Anne. Ashley. Donna Scott, North Farrisburg. I am not Ashley Hill. I'm Natalie Guerin from Colchester, sharing Ashley Hill's testimony because she had to leave. At 33, I had a partial hysterectomy because of severe stage four endometriosis. For over a decade, I'd been asking my care providers about the possibility of a hysterectomy. For a decade, I was told that I was too young to make such a permanent decision about ending my ability to bear children. What became apparent to me early on in my reproductive healthcare journey is that many people valued the potential that existed in my uterus more than they valued my potential as a person. Healthcare decisions are thankfully not decisions entrusted to elected government officials, nor are they decisions that legally require extensive consultation and debate with friends, neighbors, and perfect strangers. Over the years, I've made numerous difficult reproductive health decisions in consultation with my partners, my doctor, and my family. I distinctly recall walking into Planned Parenthood in Boston through a mob of angry people who told me I was a monster but I was a murderer and that I should be ashamed for seeking medical care at Planned Parenthood. I walked in with my head hung in shame. I remember that walk as I read Roe v. Wade and KCV Planned Parenthood in graduate school and then again in law school. I still felt shame, though my shame at that point focused more on my silence than anything those people had said or done to me. The shame I felt all those years ago is the same shame that for decades forced people into back alleys and building tables. That same shame is what led people to agree to medical procedures performed by unlicensed individuals with dirty instruments in unsanitary environments. That same shame resulted in infertility, serious life-threatening infections, and even death as a result of conditions akin to a filthy public restroom than a medical treatment facility. As I sit here in this House chamber, one of the chambers that belongs to all Vermonters, I do not bow your head in feelings of shame and silence as myself and so many other people have. I encourage you to put your heads up and hands high as you vote in favor of Prop 5. Thank you. Donna. Willow O'Farrell, Brattleboro. Donna Scott, North Ferrisburg, Vermont. Since mid and late term prime master abortions are dangerous for women and the state is unwilling to protect the health and safety of women having abortions with any type of regulatory process or supervision, and modern science has proven that unborn babies can feel pain after 20 weeks of gestation, I'm wondering why a constitutional amendment that would allow abortion right up through birth is even being considered by this state. Who has the most to gain? Surely, it's not the unborn children or the vulnerable women. Follow the money trail, and it's clear that it is the abortion providers who will benefit from increased abortions. Their concern, their main concern is profitability. The later the abortion is done, the more it costs. Plus, if the organs and other tissues are more developed, the more money they will bring. Right now, the National Institute of Health using over $13 million of federal tax money has created a demand for late term aborted babies to make at least two types of humanized mice to use in experiments dealing with HIV therapies, and I have documentation for that. According to the Washington Post-AVC news survey, 60% of respondents support banning abortion after 20 weeks except in cases of rape and incest. Based on the scientific evidence that the unborn baby can feel pain at that point, the Gutmacher Institute reports that 17 states have now enacted the Pain Capable Child Protection Act. Planned Parenthood's 2016 annual report showed a record income of $1.46 billion. Planned Parenthood is creating its own demand for unrestricted abortion while exploiting innocent unborn human life, putting extreme pressure on Vermont legislators and it will not serve the needs of the people of Vermont. Thank you, Donna. If you have more, just leave the comments. I do, thank you. Willa. Willow. Michelle Moran Burlington. Hello, thanks for holding this hearing today and for Prop 5. My name's Willow and I'm from Brattleboro and I'm a documentary filmmaker. I wasn't planning on speaking today and I'm uncomfortable being on the other side of the camera as it were but I just wanted to say I'm so grateful that Vermont is taking this courageous step to affirm women's reproductive freedoms and rights over their own body and really grateful to see the intergenerational faces in wearing pink today and especially the few men that are also showing up today. You don't have any idea how attractive you look in pink and I just, I wanted to say, I was thinking of a poem by Morgan Parker. She said, my body is an argument, I did not start. We need to end that argument. Thank you. Thank you, Willow. Rebecca Petrie, Waterville. Personal reproductive autonomy. What meaning can personal and autonomy have when a reproductive act involves at least two individuals? When they don't agree, whose personal autonomy takes precedence? This proposed language has not undergone the rigorous review and debate required by the seriousness of abortion and of reproductive decision making. Some years ago, the Vermont legislature created an adoption reform task force of adult adoptees, adoptive parents, birth mothers, birth fathers, and legal experts in adoption. That task force worked for three years to draft revision of our state's adoption law. To accomplish that goal, we had to work together to consider all viewpoints to reach consensus. On my subcommittee, we strove to find a balance of rights between the mother and the father. For example, when a mother might want to place a child for adoption, but the father might not. We had to consider the rights of not only the man whom the mother names as the father, but also a man who claims to be the father, one identified by a paternity test, one who is legally apparent through being married to the mother, and a father who was never named but still has parental rights and must be notified through newspaper advertisements than an adoption plan with being considered for his child. We even had to consider the legal parental rights of a father who was imprisoned for violent crime. What a mess, right? But as complicated as all this can be after a child has been born, are you seriously contemplating guaranteeing equal personal reproductive autonomy before birth? Thank you, Michelle, and if you'd like to hand your comments in. Susan, this is Rebecca, you're Rebecca, right? Yeah, Rebecca, yeah. Susan for Irish, Shelburne. Nature's beauty here surrounds us. How could such a horror grow? Pondering, who among us worthy, who should live and who should go? What is this horror that I speak about? It's an evil, supremist ideology that has plagued the world since the fall of mankind. It's eugenics, and it's growing again here in Vermont. The mantra of many eugenics in Nazi Germany was life unworthy of life. I feel certain that we all would agree that such a pompous, revolting idea has no place in our Constitution. Proposition five, in my opinion, has the potential to feed and encourage that same mindset with ramifications that could lead to heinous, heinous abuses that none of us intended, so that life unworthy of life never becomes the mantra of Vermont. It is your duty as elected government officials to treat the unborn of our society in a civilized manner, acknowledging their full humaneness as science already has and addressing their needs in once, along with the rest of the population that you serve. Proposition five, with its clever little wordage, is eugenics in disguise, and it's pompous and revolting. I made a mistake, so I'm not number one. Terri McGarron Burlington. I'm Suzanne Furry Irish. Recently, I had my 65th birthday, and I'm here rather spontaneously to say to you one question. Do you remember? Do you remember before there was the pill? Do you remember before there was legal abortion? Do you remember whispers in junior high school about girls who were pregnant and had to leave school, or about girls who became pregnant and were trying to self-abort by throwing themselves down the stairs or jumping up and down on the bed? Do you remember the phrase, a woman, the statement, I guess, a woman should be barefoot and pregnant? I do remember these things. I do remember when abortion became legal, and I have a friend who had an abortion in the backseat of a car in an alley. I have a friend who lost his wife and baby daughter and his two sons lost their mother because they were at a Catholic hospital which refused to save the life of the mother because they considered it to be abortion. These things are not all right, and we're looking here to save everyone's reproductive rights and everyone's opportunities in life to progress, to have financial independence, and until we have quality child care and other opportunities for women, the best thing we can do is save independence over our bodies, and that will help to reduce abortion. Thank you, Suzanne Terrami. Martha Trudeau, Danville. Hi, my name is Terrami Guerin. I am a UVM social work student, and I'm here today to testify in support of Prop 5. About 10 states have already passed laws and enacted the legislation that would criminalize abortion immediately if Roe v. Wade was overturned, and more than 15 states have introduced legislation that would ban abortion at six weeks, which is before most people know that they're pregnant. It's absolutely critical that states like Vermont stand with women across the country who will be barred from accessing the reproductive health care that they need by becoming a safe haven for folks to come to have their needs honored and respected. Reproductive freedom goes so much further than any individual reproductive health care service. Reproductive freedom is the right of all people to choose if, when, and how they have children. Reproductive freedom includes increasing access to contraception, comprehensive sex education, family planning services, abortion, prenatal care, adoption, emergency contraception, and so much more. I'm always proud to stand behind every individual and their reproductive health care choices, whichever and whatever they may be, and I'll be even prouder of this brave little state for choosing to stand with folks in such a historic way by being the first state to ever codify reproductive rights and reproductive freedom in its constitution. I'm somewhat appalled to sit in the state house in the chamber to hear the scare tactics being utilized to try to convince you to vote otherwise and to vote against women and against people who need health care, but I think that those who wish to restrict human rights are few and we who believe that everyone is the expert of their own experience and trust us to make the best choices for ourselves are many. Thank you. Thank you, Terri. Martha is next, and I guess I want to say ahead there's about 12 minutes left, and I know when people signed up, as they got down on the list, they were not promised the opportunity. If you have your comments in writing, you can give it or you can send them then online. Martha. I have an idea. That pregnancy includes three persons with a stake in that new life, not only the woman. I have a problem with this idea of a woman's autonomy with respect to abortion. I'm all for women's rights and freedom. I think Vermont is a great place to live for reproductive freedom, but person one, I'm saying that there's three people involved, not just the woman. Person one is the developing fetus, a newly created and unique individual who once conceived is thereby right as a native and natural citizen of the mother's womb. Persons two and three are the biological father and mother whose DNA make them equally related to and responsible for the care and safety of this new person. I think there is no basis that there is basis in science and in nature to suggest a woman does not have an autonomous ineligible right to terminate the life of a native citizen of the womb who exists there by right and who wants to live. You can tell by the ultrasounds they want to live, however tiny and defenseless they are. And I'd say perhaps Vermont can become a leader as a society that welcomes them. Death is not the right solution. Thank you. Thank you, Martha. Jane. David Bean, Burlington. Thank you. I support Proposition 5 and I'm Jane Pankas. I'm a co-author of the Women's Health Book, Our Bodies, Ourselves. Our book has reached millions of women throughout the world and I just support all of those who said so much in favor of Proposition 5. I wish it could all be said all at once together. We have to respect the right of women, the reproductive rights, the right to choose. It's a matter of health. It's a matter of sanity. It's a matter of how do we nourish our own children, the children that we choose to have if we have too many children for instance. The society also just has to support us. We have to have family support. We just have to be supported in all ways but above all women must have the right to choose. Myself, I think my mother had an abortion in the 1935. Before I was born, so here I am, but she wasn't wanted and her mom tried to get rid of her. All of women's stories are incredibly powerful. I respect the stories of every woman here but we have to pay attention to what we need, what we need. I myself had an abortion and I was moved to tears when I was talking with the women in a little group who were describing why they were at this particular clinic. It was just before Roe vs. Wade when abortions had become legal in New York. Their stories were thoughtful, heart-rending, and very important and they did not really want to be there but they had to because of the lives they were living. So we have to respect the stories of women and respect the stories they want to know. Thank you, Jane. David. Sandy Nguyen, Burlington. My name is David Bean. I'm Burlington, a retired middle school teacher and for pro-life. I was against Roe vs. Wade but accepted it. Concerns about perceived right to life, first trimester abortions, accepted. Second trimester abortions, accepted with reluctance. Third trimester full-term abortions, unacceptable. When polls are tied with 47% for pro-life and 47% for pro-abortion, now is the time to take and make a stand. If you watched the movie unplanned, you understand. If you haven't watched it, you should. Please. I won't rehash the argument of Roe vs. Wade. That's the law. However, you, the legislators, have an opportunity to stand up by saying no to late-term, full-term abortions. Why? This is tougher. The language in the proposal does not recognize the unborn, quote, unquote, as a human being. Yet a fetus in the third semester can survive. Our son was a preemie at seven months, born at eight months. As a college graduate and now a middle school teacher, as an aside, he and his wife adopt two boys, eight and five, three saved from abortion. Add two unplanned pregnancies in our family, carried to full-term, that's five saved from abortion. As a fetal heartbeat is detectable at six weeks and a being, quote, unquote, is survivable at seven months, what is supportable to have late-term, full-term abortions? When a being, quote, unquote, is carried for nine months, what is the justification for ending the life, quote, unquote, of the unborn? Adoption at this point is certainly an option. Please do not vote for passage of Prop. 5 or 857 in their current forms. As stated by the chief sponsor of Prop. 5, putting abortion in our constitution is like carving into granite, the preliminary created equal. Who speaks for the viable and the survivable unborn? You're respectfully submitted. I have a copy for the committee. Thank you, David, and do leave and Sandy. Sarah Nevin, Northfield. Quiero decir a estas personas aquí en esta casa, muchísimas gracias para lo que ustedes hacen para los derechos de las mujeres. Sus acciones aquí son importantes para las mujeres en estado, en todos los estados y en el mundo. Ustedes son la esperanza y la luz. Thank you in Spanish because there may be people listening where English is not their primary language. I want to thank you for putting in law the right of a woman to make her decision about her own destiny. People are watching you, not just here in Vermont, not just here in the United States, but around the world. The politicians who support that right give life and hope to women around the world. You have only to look in countries like El Salvador where there is no right and therefore women who are suspected of an abortion are sentenced to 30 years in prison. Or you can look to the Dominican Republic where teenagers mostly are pregnant due to incest and they have no right to decide whether they want to become a mother or not. I thank you in this state for giving me the right to terminate a pregnancy when I did not want to be pregnant. And I appreciate the fact on the bottom of my heart that you are willing to put this in law for future generations. Thank you so much. Thank you, Sandy. Sarah. Pamela Kerr, Shelburne. Thank you. I'm against proposal five because it does not reveal all of the particulars of its intent, which is to erase any barriers to abortion throughout all nine months of pregnancy. I am against the proposal because it does not equally consider the rights of an unborn child as a separate and unique human being with fingerprints like none other in this world. And finally, I am against proposal five because it dismisses the hard work being done by Vermont women and men to encourage a more tolerant state of Vermont to always opt for life, to make hard long-term choices we can be proud of. We counsel women after an abortion, many of whom are grieving after more than 50 years. It is not in your proposal to help with this abortion counseling. The common thread of regret expressed by these women we counsel is that they were never told by the abortion facilities of any options available to them. That the facilities did know of the options such as adoption to a relative or to one of the millions of infertile couples awaiting a child but never told them. This information rightfully belonged to them but was withheld. Your proposal five does not include these options so you are withholding from women a key element that could prevent them from suffering a lifetime of grief. I know firsthand the benefits of giving women the options other than abortion from an unplanned pregnancy as three of my five sons are adopted all grateful for their good fortune that they were spared. One of them noted that he loved growing up in our family to graduate from college as an engineer obtained a good job purchased a home and contributed to his community as he does each week. These are the values he and his brothers who also went to college cherish with us. So I am suggesting that you read word reword proposal five to reflect that since 62 million abortions have taken place so far that our legislators work equally aggressively to eliminate abortion altogether not encourage it because women deserve better than abortion to solve their problems. Thank you. And given the time this will be the last speaker. Thank you for listening to all of us today I'm Pam Kerr from Shelburne I'm 65 and I remember like many of other people that have spoken today what it was like before it was legal to have an abortion and I'm actually flabbergasted that we are here still with the same argument but rather than to rehash that because I've got exactly a minute and 39 seconds I just wanted to tell you how proud I am to be of this state that supports and endorses women's reproductive autonomy and has shown the courage to protect this freedom not just for this generation but for generations to come I encourage this House to continue to pursue the constitutional amendment to Prop 5 and I thank you for your service. Thank you. And on behalf of the House Human Services Committee I want to thank each and every one of you each of you who came and had the courage to speak in a public hearing and each of you who listened with respect and to what everyone had to say that the members of the committee listened intently and your comments will in fact be part of what we think about. Thank you very much. A piece of information if our committee chooses to move this forward it goes to the House calendar and it sits there for four days. We can neither change the language we can only affirm it nor not. And if the House were to agree another legislative session another election has to come and it needs to go through both bodies again and if it were to go through both bodies again in 2022 2022 it would go before the voters but there are multiple steps to consider what everyone had to say today. Thank you very much and you all make me proud in the way we spoke today. Thank you.