Latest Headlines
- FDOT Updates Status Of Century Highway 29 Construction Work
- Tate Grad, UWF Standout Darrien McDowell Selected In 2024 MLB Draft
- Suspect, 19, Indicted For Fatal Drive-By Shooting Of 70-Year-Old
- Blue Angels Select Officers for 2025 Show Season
- ECSO: McDavid Woman Claims Crockpot ‘Magically Makes Meth”, Charged With Child Neglect
- Driver’s License, Tag, Tax Collector Services This Week In Walnut Hill, Century
- Florida Gas Prices Hold Steady Over Last Week
- Register Now For Northview Chiefs Football Camp
- Wahoos Drop Back-and-Forth Road Finale
- Walnut Hill Man Was The Boss Of The Pensacola Beach Air Show. Here’s A Behind The Scenes Look.
Lawmakers Send Abortion Bills To Scott
May 6, 2011
After an emotional debate that touched on the role of government and personal values, the Florida Senate on Thursday gave final approval to a bill that will require ultrasounds before women can have abortions.
Senators also approved a bill to tighten the state’s parental-notification law, which deals with minors seeking abortions. In all, the Republican-controlled Legislature has passed four measures this week aimed at making it less likely that women or girls will get abortions.
The Senate voted 24-15 for the ultrasound bill (HB 1127), which is similar to a measure that former Gov. Charlie Crist vetoed last year. Supporters said mandating ultrasounds will give women more information — and could lead some to forgo abortions.
“This is not telling them what to do with their body,” said Sen. Thad Altman, R-Melbourne. “This is just giving them more information to make an informed decision.”
But Sen. Evelyn Lynn, R-Ormond Beach, criticized the Legislature’s focus on abortion bills when many Floridians are unemployed and losing homes in foreclosure. She said she would not vote to make a decision about “your personal values, your personal religion, your personal body.”
“This is not the issue that is the most-important issue in this state,” Lynn said.
Senate bill sponsor Ronda Storms, however, defended focusing on abortion, saying lawmakers make value decisions on numerous types of issues.
“The great questions of life are why we’re here,” the Valrico Republican said.
The measure, which now goes to Gov. Rick Scott, would require ultrasounds before women can have first-trimester abortions, a requirement that already is in place for later-term abortions. Women would have to sign forms if they do not want to see the fetal images or hear descriptions.
Democrats blasted what they described as government interfering in the relationship between doctors and patients. They also said Republican support for the ultrasound bill contradicted the GOP’s stance that last year’s federal health-care overhaul was a government intrusion into personal medical issues.
“I think women can make an informed decision on their own without the government interfering,” said Senate Minority Leader Nan Rich, D-Weston.
But Sen. Jack Latvala, R-St. Petersburg, said a recent change in the bill led him to support it. That change eliminated a requirement that women hear descriptions of the ultrasound images.
With Republicans dominating both chambers of the Legislature — and the conservative Scott in the governor’s office — abortion opponents have moved forward with a series of bills during this year’s session.
On Wednesday, lawmakers gave final approval to a proposed constitutional amendment that would make clear public money cannot be used for abortions. Also, they approved a bill that would ban abortion coverage in policies sold through a state health-insurance exchange, which is expected to start operating in 2014 because of the federal health overhaul.
Before passing the ultrasound bill Thursday, Senators voted 26-12 to approve the parental notice measure (HB 1127), which also is ready to go to Scott.
Florida law already requires that parents be notified before minors can have abortions. But the bill seeks to tighten restrictions on what is known as a judicial “bypass” — a process that allows minors to seek court approval for abortions without their parents being told.
As an example, the bill will require minors to go to courts in the judicial circuits where they live. Currently, they are able to go before judges anywhere in their appellate districts — a far-larger number of courts in some regions of the state.
Critics said that could threaten the confidentiality of minors seeking abortions, particularly in rural areas where judges or courthouse workers might know their families. The critics said some teens would be in danger of violence if family members find out they are pregnant or seeking abortions.
Sen. Chris Smith, D-Fort Lauderdale, said the current judicial-bypass system works.
“It seems we’re tinkering with the law for no reason,” Smith said.
But bill sponsor Alan Hays, R-Umatilla, said minors now can be driven hundreds of miles across North Florida to seek approval for abortions. He said the bill will maintain confidentiality for the minors, because judicial circuits often include numerous counties.
“It’s not like these young ladies have to go to their hometown courthouse,” Hays said.
By Jim Saunders
The News Service Florida
Comments
9 Responses to “Lawmakers Send Abortion Bills To Scott”
Your body, your choice, but the unborn child in a mother’s belly does not belong to her. I mean, unless our view has become that children are slave property of their parents until such time as the parents decide otherwise.
My body, my choice is liberal mantra that liberals use to get people all fired up and chanting so that they are supporting a cause rather than thinking for themselves. Don’t get my wrong, “conservatives” do the same thing, but it doesn’t constitute a position because the truth is that we are not talking about your body.
It reminds me very much of a liberal battle call that I once swallowed and that is, “you can’t legislate morality.” Supporting a moral system of governing does not necessitate that state and church function together. What absolute garbage!
Why don’t we all call our representatives and start pushing for them to take rape laws and laws against stealing off the books. Aren’t those moral directives? The sad truth is many are so psyched up for the cause that they could easily be persuaded to support such a notion…until they were the one getting raped or stolen from.
REGARDING:
“Let’s get real! It’s all about DOLLARS ”
Some supporters get no dollars out of it, therefore it can’t be ALL about dollars
Of course, you did say “to politicians” but again I doubt all the supporters of the bill who are politicians expect to get dollars out of their votes–right or wrong, wise or unwise. And as you pointed out, some of them even lose votes. Votes are things which successful politicians covet even more than conscience.
David considering motives
Oh! Let’s get real! It’s all about DOLLARS to most politicians. Do you really feel most politicians care about our children and their baby? Think about it. Who is going to profit? Hospitals (Ultrasound), State – (Court system). Now who do you think is going to pay the cost for all these expenses? Mom and Dad because insurance is not going to pay! There are many others ways to help our children and young adults make the right decision without spending this kind of money. Another quick & clever move by government to take from the poor and middle class and give to big business. See you at the next election.
therefore you are in the” tissue” camp
My body, my choice !!!! Roe vs. Wade – Separation of state and religion.
REGARDING:
” it goes against whoever first stated that “only God can take a life”. – - – it would naturally mean fewer welfare recipients”
I don’t believe the idea that taking a life is forbidden is generally considered conservative. Most conservatives tend to favor killing killers. It’s the folks usually called liberals who believe killing killers–or even punishing them–is a bad thing.
It’s the killing of non killers which most people–liberal and conservative–oppose. If you look at people as individuals, you don’t think, “Well, she’ll probably be bad so it’s best to kill her before she has a chance to be good or bad.” In fact, the entire disagreement hinges on the question of when you are considering a person versus just some unwanted tissue.
Religious conservatives often consider a fetus a person at any stage of development. Social liberals tend to consider a fetus just tissue until after it has taken the first breath and the only reason they consider it human then is because the Constitution says anyone born in the United States is a citizen. Citizens are people, therefore once born the tissue is legally a person. (Naturally, some go beyond that and decide all animals are people too or at least have rights but so far most people recognize them as just being squirrelly.)
Regarding the concept of people just being born “welfare recipients,” fiscal conservatives don’t consider perpetual welfare an automatic thing. They consider it a creation of short-sighted liberal policies which trap people in the system, unable to get out without losing benefits.
Only a few believe genocide’s the cure to fifth generation welfare recipients.
David for honesty
“In all, the Republican-controlled Legislature has passed four measures this week aimed at making it less likely that women or girls will get abortions.”
Has it not occurred to anyone in the legislature that if a woman is seeking abortion, maybe it’s best she not have that child?! I say LEAVE IT ALL ALONE! Let women have abortions if they’d like. Remove your religious stink off of this issue and LET IT BE! If you happen to be religious, then follow your religions if you’d like, but don’t try to control someone else because of your beliefs!
This sickens me to no end. There are more important matters in the world for government to worry over. Women having abortions shouldn’t be one of them!
I know I’ll get slammed by a lot of people, but I think that it’s legislative misconduct to force people to pay for procedures they don’t elect to have.
I’m against abortions in principle, but stand firmly with those that believe it is, and should be, a woman’s choice, especially in cases of rape/incest/health of the mother/malformed fetuses.
I thought we were against being forced into medical choices? Its funny how Republicans hate Obamas health care plan because its forced, yet want to force women to have an ultrasound before an abortion.