May
2
Written by:
Mark Lavergne
5/2/2011 2:46 PM
Today the Texas Senate again preliminarily passed legislation requiring that the doctor who would abort a woman's unborn child meet with her at least 24 hours in advance. At that meeting, under Patrick's bill, the aborting doctor must give the woman the option of viewing an ultrasound image of that baby at least 24 hours in advance.
House Bill 15 will require all women, however, to hear an explanation from the abortion provider of the size and dimensions of the fetus, the fact that it has a heartbeat, etc.
Exemptions from the bill's requirements that the aborting doctor inform the woman of her option to view the sonogram, and that she hear an explanation on the unborn child's development, include circumstances where the pregnancy was caused by rape or incest, and when the woman can document that she lives 100 or more miles away from any abortion provider.
Patrick said on the floor that the 100-mile exception affects only three percent of the women in Texas.
"This is the fourth version of the bill this session, which I believe is the strongest version of all ... and one of the strongest in the nation," Sen. Dan Patrick (R-Houston) told LSR following passage to third reading. Third reading will likely happen tomorrow. He said he hopes the House will concur with the Senate amendments.
Patrick struck the language in HB 15 as passed by the House and substituted in new language, but it contains elements of HB 15 and SB 16. The biggest issue to resolve was the timeframe, which Patrick said was handled "masterfully" with Sen. Carlos Uresti's (D-San Antonio) help, on the 100-mile exception.
HB 15 was originally authored by Sid Miller (R-Stephenville). Earlier this session the Senate passed SB 16, at which point it went to the House. Although the House received SB 16 from the Senate on Feb. 21, it was not referred to State Affairs until April 29. No hearing has been set for it. The House instead passed its own version March 3.
Patrick got the 21 votes needed to suspend the Senate floor rules from 18 Republicans including himself, and three Democrats: Eddie Lucio, Jr. (D-Brownsville), Judith Zaffirini (D-Laredo), and Uresti. He told LSR upon passage that it was not difficult to get his colleagues to be willing to hear the issue again because he, the 17 other Republicans, and the three Democratic yes votes all wanted to see the bill become law.
John Whitmire (D-Houston) said that the bill was government "encroachment" on the doctor-patient relationship. Patrick argued that the bill enhances that relationship by ensuring that the doctor actually informs the woman on the nature of the procedure and the ramifications of her decision.
Wendy Davis (D-Fort Worth) pressed Patrick at length regarding the bill's stated intent, which was to protect the physical and psychological health and wellbeing of women. She suggested that the bill might further endanger the psychological wellbeing of a woman who has made her mind up and yet must sit through an explanation of the fetus' development.
Robert Deuell (R-Greenville), a physician, responded that the abortion can perforate and puncture the uterus causing life-threatening bleeding. He and Patrick also cited testimony from women who said they regretted their past abortions and wished that they had seen a sonogram beforehand.
Davis argued that the purpose of the bill was to "traumatize women" out of choosing to abort.
"You kow me better than that," Patrick replied.
Jose Rodriguez (D-El Paso), Leticia Van de Putte (D-San Antonio) and Davis each offered amendments to the bill, but none went on. The bill passed to third reading 21-10.
The big question now is whether the House will concur with the amendments or if it will go to conference.