Read on Twitter
Thread on House floor hearings re abortion, anti-trans legislation. It's gonna be a busy one.
First up HB 136, which largely bars abortions after 20 weeks, carried by Rep. Lola Sheldon-Galloway of Great Falls.
It would make these procedures a felony for the provider unless a patient's life is at risk. The bill says a fetus can feel pain at 20 weeks, which is disputed.
"This bill is about the child in the womb... not so much" the interests of the mother or father, said the sponsor.
"This bill is about the child in the womb... not so much" the interests of the mother or father, said the sponsor.
Rep. Bishop rises in opposition. Says this bill jeopardizes the safety of women in a variety of ways, including their privacy if a legal case is brought.
"These are intensely private circumstances," she said.
"These are intensely private circumstances," she said.
Rep. Farris-Olsen also speaks up in opposition, says this bill violates the constitution and is a politicization of a safe, legal medical procedure. "The point is not health care, but rather politics."
Rep. Nave says this bill is about protecting and respecting life. "Who is the most vulnerable among us? Is it not an unborn child who has no other advocate?"
Rep. Gillette is up next — challenges the Democrats' claims that government shouldn't interfere in private circumstances. Also says that science has evolved and that fetuses are capable of feeling pain. More on that science from ACOG: https://www.acog.org/advocacy/facts-are-important/fetal-pain
There's been a lot of back and forth since Gillette's comments — I won't be able to paraphrase everyone. Rep. Skees is saying this is about the ability to feel pain. "Do not hurt a creature that can feel pain." Scattered applause.
Voting begins.
It passes (didn't catch the margin). Next: HB 171.
This is a looong one, but the short version is that it would add a lot of processes and requirements for patients seeking a medical abortion, which are usually for pregnancies less than 10 weeks along.
Part of this has to do with the legal case about whether or not abortion pills can be mailed to patients (which was temporarily allowed because of the pandemic). This bill would explicitly make that illegal. https://www.npr.org/2021/01/13/956279232/supreme-court-oks-white-house-request-to-limit-abortion-pill-access-during-pande
Sponsor, Rep. Greef, says abortion inducing drugs are dangerous. That is not the scientific consensus. More here: https://www.kff.org/womens-health-policy/fact-sheet/the-availability-and-use-of-medication-abortion/
Another proponent referencing danger of medical abortions.
Rep. Novak sharing a personal story, saying bills can have wide-ranging, unintended consequences. Cautions the legislature from restricting medical care in any way.
Rep. Sheldon-Galloway says harsh penalties in this bill are meant to protect women who may be forced to have an abortion they don't want — references victims of trafficking (a circumstance which I don't have immediate stats for).
HB 171 passes along the same margin.
HB 140 is now up for debate. Another "informed consent" bill which would require medical providers to offer patients an active ultrasound (image + sound) and require that the patient sign a form that she was offered the ultrasound and answer whether or not she chose to view it.
Tuning back in after a small break. Rep. Kerr-Carpenter saying this bill is problematic for a number of reasons, including that it has no provisions for victims of rape or incest. Also that it invades the relationship between medical providers and patients.
Now Rep. Seekins-Crowe reiterating the importance of ultrasounds and how impactful they can be. Says they can help women choose their best medical outcomes.
HB 140 passes on the same margin, 67-33.
Now: HB 167, which would create a ballot referendum to penalize providers for failing to provide life-sustaining care to a newborn. Opponents say this is already in Montana code and attempts to politicize an issue during an election year (2022).
Rep. Sue Vinton says these bills in general are not "anti-abortion" but are actually "pro-life." On HB 167, she says "what are we afraid of" to codify a requirement for providers to give life-saving care to newborn infants (would be very curious to hear from providers on this).
It passes, 67-33.
NEW TOPIC: First of the two bills restricting trans youth and athletes. Up now, HB 112, which would prohibit trans women and girls from participating on women's interscholastic sports teams. Sponsor says this is not a partisan issue.
Note: Rep. John Fuller (in all interviews and previous comments on this bill that I've heard) does not refer to trans women as trans women — only will say "men" or "biological males."
"Men hurt women enough, they shouldn't hurt their athletic opportunities."
"Men hurt women enough, they shouldn't hurt their athletic opportunities."
Proposed amendment from Rep. Vinton to strike all the "whereas" clauses. https://leg.mt.gov/bills/2021/AmdPublicWeb/HB0112.002.003.pdf
Amendment passes 67-33.
Interestingly, this removes all the background evidence for this bill that the sponsor originally included.
Rep. Beard says she's received a lot of emails about this, but notes that a lot of these were "form" emails that followed a script. Says she supports the integrity of girls sports in schools.
Rep. Kerns says he speaks in favor of this bill on behalf of UM athletes. Rep. Buckley speaks next, in opposition, saying this bill puts trans and nonbinary kids more at risk and is not representative of Montana values.
Other Dems speak in opposition, saying this bill is unconstitutional and puts schools at risk of losing federal funding because it violates Title IX by discriminating on the basis of sex.
Rep. Custer (Republican) speaks up, saying she played a bunch of sports in high school, including co-ed sports. She says this is a bill in search of problem and violates local control. Says this will "probably die" by fiscal note or by the courts and will be voting no.
Rep. Mitchell says he supports this bill because it protects fairness of competition for (cis)women. Also tries to explain the concept of "gender fluid" to his colleagues which he says is "fine" but is essentially detrimental to traditional gender divisions.
Rep. Farris-Olsen says this bill is also unconstitutional and was blocked in Idaho. Also brings up the Biden administration's executive order again, saying it would put Montana schools at risk if they discriminate against trans students.
We are now moving on to HB 113. This bill would stop transgender and nonbinary youth from receiving medical care (including puberty suppressants and hormone treatments) for gender dysphoria. It would also prohibit medical providers from referring patients to treatment elsewhere.
Rep. Fuller speaks again to introduce this bill, says kids deserve a "natural" childhood free of this kind of medical intervention. He also said a lot of inaccurate things about gender-affirming care that I won't be paraphrasing.
Rep. Farris-Olsen speaks up again, saying this bill will cause economic and political harm to Montana. Rep. Custer also speaks again, saying HB113 infringes on the role of medical providers and the "personal freedom" of parents to parent their children.
