Week of Feb. 13 – Feb. 17

The Committee on Federal and State Affairs proposed a bill in the House, HB 2744, that would guarantee women who had been sexually assaulted access to accurate information on emergency contraception in the emergency room. This bill does not require hospitals or doctors to dispense emergency contraception, but just to make sure they provide medically accurate and relevant information to women who have been sexually assaulted. It would also encourage other entities like crisis lines to provide information on emergency contraception.

Week of Feb. 6 – Feb. 10, 2012

The “personhood” amendment, HB 2579, was blocked by anti-choice Representative Kinzer who said he would not schedule a hearing for the proposed bill because he didn’t think it would stand in court. This leaves more time for anti-choice legislators to focus on bills like HB 2598. HB 2598 would, among other things, require doctors to provide misleading information to women seeking an abortion and would prohibit organizations that provide abortions from distributing sex education materials. The hearing for HB 2598 was held on Feb. 8 and 9. The pharmacist refusal and medical personnel non-referral act, HB 2523 is also in the works with a hearing scheduled for February 15. This bill would allow any medical professional to deny any woman care or medication if s/he believed it would cause an abortion.

Week of Jan. 30 – Feb. 3, 2012

On January 31, 2012, the Committee on Federal and State Affairs proposed HB 2579, the “personhood” bill. The legislation, if passed, would declare that “personhood” starts at conception, making abortion illegal. It also has implications for certain kinds of contraceptives and fertility treatments, possibly rendering them illegal as well. The bill would endanger the rights of pregnant women and midwives or other people who professionally care for pregnant women.

On February 1, 2012, the Kansas State House proposed HB 2598, “No taxpayers funding for abortion” Act. The Hyde Amendment already makes taxpayer funding for abortion illegal, so the hefty 68-page bill is a redundant and clearly political anti-choice action. It creates additional complications for women seeking late term abortions by creating legal barriers for women and medical professionals. It also allows providers to be sued by a woman’s spouse or a minor’s parents for providing abortion care.

Week of January 23-27, 2012:

On Tuesday, January 24, 2011, House Committee on Federal and State Affairs proposed a pharmacist refusal and medical personnel non-referral bill regarding medical procedures or pharmaceuticals that are “believed” to cause the termination of a woman’s pregnancy. The HB 2523 says that a pharmacist could refuse to provide any medication that s/he would “reasonably” think could cause an abortion. Additionally, medical personnel, including, pharmacists, would not be bound to refer the woman to a medical facility or pharmacy that could provide care for her. This could ban women’s ability to obtain abortion services in a timely manner and to be denied contraception, as well as Plan B. This legislation could have far-reaching, negative implications for women if it were to pass.

Week of January 16-20, 2012:

HB 2337, introduced by the Committee on Federal and State Affairs, would create extra prejudicial regulations for private clinics that provide abortions with which to comply. This bill is often referred to as Targeted Regulations against Abortion Providers. The bill is on the House Calendar at this time.

H Sub for SB 34, introduced by the Committee on the Judiciary, would further regulate later termination of pregnancy, making them less accessible to women and harder for clinics to legally perform. This bill is on the House Calendar at this time.

Anti-choice lawmakers are also looking at proposing a “personhood amendment.” This could make certain forms of birth control illegal, interfere with those undergoing fertility treatment, ban abortion and restrict pregnant women’s rights who are going to term.

January 2012:

HB 2337 Prejudicially Regulates the Provision of Healthcare
Vote NO on HB 2337

▪ Men, women and children have a right to equitable, fair and gender neutral treatment in healthcare issues under the law.

▪ HB 2337 regulates issues of women’s reproductive healthcare services, facilities and providers in a prejudicial manner that is not supported by any evidence-based data.

▪ HB 2337 is intended to restrict abortion even further by eliminating small practitioners who safely do abortion procedures in their office-based practices.

▪ The Legislature should only concern itself with regulating healthcare in an evidence-based, non-gender specific, non-prejudicial fashion for the preservation of the public safety and welfare.

Supporting Facts against HB 2337

Nationally, abortion entails half the risk of tonsillectomy and one-hundredth the risk of an appendectomy, and, in the first trimester, is eleven times safer than childbirth.

Of women who have first trimester abortions, 97% report no complications, 2.5% have minor complications and less than 0.5% require additional surgical procedure or hospitalization.

BOHA reports that far more cosmetic surgeons are sued for medical malpractice than abortion providers.

KMS Guidelines would cover procedures including: sigmoidoscopy (short-distance colon scope), colonoscopy (long-distance colon scope), gastroscopy (esophagus/stomach scope), bronchoscopy (lung scope), laparoscopy (abdominal organ scope), intra-uterine biopsy
(endocervical and endometrial), breast biopsy, tubal ligation and vasectomy.

These guidelines, which would be universally applied, would treat men, women and children equitably; and not prejudicially or  moralistically.

Here are the two bills that are already up in the Kansas House, they are on the House Calendar and could come up for a House Floor vote at  anytime:

H Sub for SB 34 2012 Session

HB 2337 2012 Session

Week of April 4-9, 2011:

HB 2218 is waiting to be signed by Governor Brownback – scheduled to happen April 12. This bill is a pre-viability ban on abortions after 22 weeks.

HB 2035 is waiting to be signed by Governor Brownback – scheduled to happen April 12. This bill adds further restrictions to abortion, including the creation of two-parent consent for minors seeking abortion care.

H Sub for SB 36, which is an egregious clinic regulations bill, is in the Judiciary Conference Committee at this time.

Week of March 13-19, 2011:

Under the Dome: Update from Topeka

Last Thursday, March 17th, the Senate Committee on Judiciary held hearings for the Omnibus Abortion Restriction Bill,  HB 2035 and its Senate version, SB 146, the Pre-Viability Ban Bill, HB 2218 and Targeted Regulations against Abortion Providers (TRAP) bill, SB 165.

Mr. Phil Wood, a psychology professor from Columbia, MO, testified in opposition to HB 2218, the Pre-Viability Ban.

Mr. Wood spoke about his experience as the father of twins diagnosed in utero with Twin to Twin Transfusion Syndrome and how HB 2218 does not recognize the different situations with which people are faced.  He informed the committee that people like he and his wife do exist and that legislation ought to be written to include the various circumstances that women may face during pregnancy.  HB 2218 and HB 2035 will most likely be on Senate General Orders the week of March 21st.

The Abortion Coverage Insurance Ban, SB 65 and House version of this year’s TRAP bill, HB 2337, were both sent back to the House but have not come up for a vote yet.  SB 65 and HB 2337 will mostly likely come up for a vote on the House floor the week of March 21st.

Week of February 21-25, 2011:

  • H.B. 2035 (parental consent) and 2218 (pre-viability abortion ban) are set to be debated on the floor of the House this week.

Week of February 14-18, 2011:

  • H.B. 2035 is scheduled is be heard on the floor of the House.
  • H.B. 2337 has been introduced.  The legislation is a Targeted Regulation of Abortion Provider (TRAP) bill that singles out abortion clinics for unnecessary, politically motivated, and restrictive regulations.  The mirror Senate Bill 165 was referred to the Judiciary Committee last week.
  • Hearing on H.B. 2218 (pre-viability ban): 1:30 p.m. Wednesday and Thursday (2.16 and 17),  before House Federal and State Affairs Committee, Room 346-South, Capitol.
  • Testimony was heard this week on H.B. 2218 (pre-viability abortion ban) and H.B 2219 (prohibiting insurance policies from including abortion coverage as part of its general health coverage and requiring women to buy an additional additional insurance rider, if they would like abortion care coverage).
  • H.B. 22118 has passed through committee.

Week of February 7-11, 2011:

Week of January 31-February 4, 2011:

  • H.B.2035–the parental consent bill–is in committee (Committee on Federal and State Affairs).  The estimated cost of implementation is $290,000.
  • H.B.2007–the no exception for mental health bill–is also in committee (Committee on Federal and State Affairs).  The estimated cost of implementation is $5,000 in fiscal year 2012.

Week of January 24-28, 2011:

  • The new Department of Health and Environment Secretary Robert Moser (the new Sam Brownback appointee) said Monday, Jan. 24th, that his office will require abortion providers to give the state more details about late-term procedures they perform.  The new intent of the law is to require doctors to spell out exactly what irreversible harm a woman faces if the pregnancy continues and how the diagnosis is made.  Essentially, the new Department of Health and Environment office will be able “determine” the legality of abortions performed after 21 weeks based on their interpretation of the doctor’s explanation.  Under the previous Democratic governors Sebelius and Parkinson, doctors were allowed to repeat the exact “substantial and irreversible impairment” phrase in the law in their reports, without a more detailed medical diagnosis, arguing it was the only thing legally required.

Week of January 17-21, 2011:

  • Rep. Lance Kinzer, Olathe Republican, has introduced legislation that would require parental consent for teenagers seeking an abortion.  It would also allow law enforcement officers access to state abortion records (HB2035).

Week of January 10-14, 2011:

  • Rep. Steve Huebert of Valley Center has introduced a bill to prevent the use of mental health as a reason for a late-term abortion in Kansas.  Critics charge that mental health and physical health are one in the same (HB2007).
  • Governor Brownback’s contradictory State of the State Address promises more restrictions on abortion but less government.