Week of May 27, 2013

• There has been no change on Senate Bill 3 since last update.
• There has been no change on Senate Bill 77 since last update.
• There has been no change on Senate Bill 105 since last update.
• There has been no change to Senate Bill 141 since last update.
• Senate Bill 142 has been enrolled and law will be effective July 1, 2013.
• There has been no change to Senate Bill 185 since last update.
• There has been no change on House Bill 2188 since last update.
• House Bill 2217 has been enrolled and law will be effective July 1, 2013.
• House Bill 2253 has been enrolled and law will be effective July 1, 2013.
• There has been no change to House Bill 2324 since last update.

Week of May 6, 2013

• There has been no change on Senate Bill 3 since last update.
• There has been no change on Senate Bill 77 since last update.
• There has been no change on Senate Bill 105 since last update.
• There has been no change to Senate Bill 141 since last update.
• Senate Bill 142 has been enrolled and law will be effective July 1, 2013.
• There has been no change to Senate Bill 185 since last update.
• There has been no change on House Bill 2188 since last update.
• House Bill 2217 has been enrolled and law will be effective July 1, 2013.
• House Bill 2253 has been enrolled and law will be effective July 1, 2013.
• There has been no change to House Bill 2324 since last update.

Week of April 29, 2013

• There has been no change on Senate Bill 3 since last update.
• There has been no change on Senate Bill 77 since last update.
• There has been no change on Senate Bill 105 since last update.
• There has been no change to Senate Bill 141 since last update.
• There has been no change to Senate Bill 142 since last update.
• There has been no change to Senate Bill 185 since last update.
• There has been no change on House Bill 2188 since last update.
• House Bill 2217 has been enrolled and law will be effective July 1, 2013.
• House Bill 2253 has been enrolled and law will be effective July 1, 2013.
• There has been no change to House Bill 2324 since last update.

Week of April 22, 2013

Kansas Legislation: Week of April 29, 2013

• There has been no change on Senate Bill 3 since last update.
• There has been no change on Senate Bill 77 since last update.
• There has been no change on Senate Bill 105 since last update.
• There has been no change to Senate Bill 141 since last update.
• There has been no change to Senate Bill 142 since last update.
• There has been no change to Senate Bill 185 since last update.
• There has been no change on House Bill 2188 since last update.
• There has been no change to House Bill 2217 since last update.
• House Bill 2253 was approved by Governor Brownback on Friday, April 19, 2013.
• There has been no change to House Bill 2324 since last update.

Week of April 15, 2013

Kansas Legislation: Week of April 22, 2013

• There has been no change on Senate Bill 3 since last update.
• There has been no change on Senate Bill 77 since last update.
• There has been no change on Senate Bill 105 since last update.
• There has been no change to Senate Bill 141 since last update.
• There has been no change to Senate Bill 142 since last update.
• There has been no change to Senate Bill 185 since last update.
• There has been no change on House Bill 2188 since last update.
• There has been no change to House Bill 2217 since last update.
• There has been no change to House Bill 2253 since last update.
• There has been no change to House Bill 2324 since last update.

Week of April 8, 2013

• There has been no change on Senate Bill 3 since last update.
• There has been no change on Senate Bill 77 since last update.
• There has been no change on Senate Bill 105 since last update.
• There has been no change to Senate Bill 141 since last update.
• On Wednesday, April 10, 2013 Senate Bill 142 was approved by Governor Sam Brownback.
• There has been no change to Senate Bill 185 since last update.
• There has been no change on House Bill 2188 since last update.
• On Wednesday, April 5, 2013 House Bill 2217 was approved by Governor Sam Brownback.
• On Wednesday, April 10, 2013 a motion to amend House Bill 2253 was enrolled and presented to Governor Brownback.
• There has been no change to House Bill 2324 since last update.

Week of April 1, 2013

• There has been no change on Senate Bill 3 since last update.
• There has been no change on Senate Bill 77 since last update.
• There has been no change on Senate Bill 105 since last update.
• There has been no change to Senate Bill 141 since last update.
• On Tuesday, April 2, 2013 Senate Bill 142 was enrolled and presented to Governor Sam Brownback.
• There has been no change to Senate Bill 185 since last update.
• There has been no change on House Bill 2188 since last update.
• On Friday, April 5, 2013 House Bill 2217 was enrolled and presented to Governor Same Brownback.
• On Monday, April 1, 2013 a motion to amend House Bill 2253 was offered by Senator Haley.  The amendment was rejected 9-28.  Another motion to amend was offered by Senator Francisco.  That amendment was rejected 8-28.  Senator Francisco motioned to amend, once again, and it was adopted.  Senator Pettey motioned to amend and was rejected 10-28.  After, Senator Francisco motioned to amend and was rejected.  He motioned to amend, once more, and was rejected 8-28.  Senator Haley offered a motion to amend, and was reject 8-27.  A motion to withdraw from General Orders and be re-referred to Committee on Public Health and Welfare failed.  The Committee of the Whole passed the bill as amended.

On Tuesday, April 2, 2013 a final action pass the bill as amended 29-11.  Nonconcurred with amendments, Conference Committee requested and appointed Representative Siegfreid, Representative Brunk, and Representative Ruiz as conferees.  A motion to accede was adopted.  Senator Pilcher-Cook, Senator Bowers, and Senator Kelly were appointed as conferees.

On Wednesday, April 3 Senator Francisco replaced Senator Kelly on the Conference Committee.

On Thursday, April 4 the Conference Committee Report agree to disagree was adopted.  Senator Pilcher-Cook, Senator Bowers, and Senator Kelly were appointed as second conferees.  A motion to reconsider was adopted.  Another Conference Committee Report agree to disagree was adopted.  Senator Pilcher-Cook, Senator Bowers, and Senator Kelly were appointed as second conferees.  Senator Francisco replaced Senator Kelly on the Conference Committee.  Conference Committee Report agree to disagree was adopted.  Representative Siegfreid, Representative Brunk, and Representative Ruiz appointed as second conferees.  Conference Committee Report is now available.

• There has been no change to House Bill 2324 since last update.

Week of March 25, 2013

• There has been no change to Senate Bill 185 since last update.
• A hearing for House Bill 2324 was held on Tuesday, March 26 at 8:00am in Room 582-N.
• The Committee Report recommended that Senate Bill 141 be passed by Committee on Federal and State Affairs on March 25.
• There has been no change on Senate Bill 3 since last update.

• There has been no change on Senate Bill 77 since last update.

• There has been no change on Senate Bill 105 since last update.

• On Tuesday, March 26, Committeeof the Whole motioned to amend Senate Bill 142 was offered by Representative Clayton.  The amendment was then rejected 4-79.  Committee of the Whole passed the bill.  An Emergency Final Action passed the bill 89-33.
• On Monday, March 25, House Bill 2253 the Committee Report recommended that the bill be passed by Committee on Public Health and Welfare.

• There has been no change on House Bill 2188 since last update.

• The Committee of the Whole passed House Bill 2217 on Tuesday, March 26.  On Wednesday, March 27 it was passed in a final action, 40-0.

Week of March 18, 2013

• There has been no change on Senate Bill 185 since last update. This is a revision to prior legislature which includes that any time an abortion procedure is carried out, the physician or funeral home (if they choose to send the remains there) must fill out an unborn child death certificate. There are 21 days to do so. Along with the certificate, there must be a detailed investigation of the cause of death.
• There has been no change on House Bill 2324 since last update. Studies have found that detecting a fetal heartbeat is very useful in predicting whether or not the fetus will reach viability and live birth. So the absence of the fetal heartbeat must be determined and presented to the woman pursuing an abortion, in writing. If an abortion is performed before the woman knows whether or not the unborn child has a pulse, they physician is subject to disciplinary action and the woman can file wrongful death and sue the physician. The only time this does not apply is if the physician determines the woman’s health to be in immediate danger. If an abortion is carried out after the knowledge of the fetus having a heart beat, then the physician is subject to being charged with a level 8 felony.

• The hearing for Senate Bill 141 took place on Thursday, March 21, 2013 at 9:00 AM in room 346-S. No person is allowed to perform an abortion with knowledge that the woman seeking an abortion is doing so only because of the sex of the unborn child. If such an act is performed, the person which performed the abortion can be brought up on charges and provide relief to the woman who received the abortion, the father of the unborn child, or the parents of the minor who received the abortion. Such relief includes: money damages for psychological and physical injuries, payment equal to three times the cost of the abortion, and ‘reasonable attorney fees’. This law does not justify having an abortion, nor does it apply if abortion is prohibited. The woman who chose to have an abortion is not subject to criminal persecution.

• There has been no change on Senate Bill 3 since last update. Current law regarding the licensure of physician assistants would be amended creating an exempt license, setting the maximum fee for the license It would also exempt the holder from being required to submit evidence that they completed a continuing education program if they are not practicing. The Board of Healing Arts would be held responsible for regulating and establishing rules appropriate for obtaining and maintaining an exempt license. They estimate that passage of the bill would increase expenditures from the Board of Healing Arts Fee Fund by $27,448. Other professions regulated by the board have a lower fee for exempt status than that of active status. It is likely that the same will apply in this case.

• There has been no change on Senate Bill 77 since last update. Under current law, the information and records concerning the Child Death Review Board are confidential unless disclosed to a member of legislation or legislative body as necessary to fulfill their official responsibility. This law would expand information to the public for research and public health purposes.

• There has been no change on Senate Bill 105 since last update. Cyber bullying is redefined much more in depth than before: bullying by use of any electronic devise through means of electronically transmitted communications. Additionally, regardless of whether the communication was actually transmitted on a school location, special actions will be taken. Harassment is added and defined as any sort of physical, verbal and nonverbal expressions, name calling, and taunting intended to frighten, challenge, provoke, threaten, coerce, intimidate, abuse, alarm, etc… of another student or employee by another student or employee. This means teachers are not allowed to ‘bully’ students, nor are students allowed to ‘bully’ teachers based on: (specifically mentioned in legislation) a person’s race, color, national origin, sex (including gender identity and expression), religion, disability or sexual orientation.

• A hearing for Senate Bill 142 was held on Wednesday, March 20, 2013 at 1:30 PM in room 152-S. No civil action can be taken upon a physician for wrongful birth. Wrongful birth means that the doctor did not properly prepare the mother or father of the risks associated with giving birth to a child, commonly one with congenital defects. No suit can be taken against a physician if the information provided would have resulted in the mother obtaining an abortion.

• House Bill 2253, on March 19, 2013, was debated in the House and then forwarded for passage with no amendments adopted. There were four amendments:  1 by Wilson (failed 31 to 90; and 3 by Bollier (all failed; there was a roll call vote on the amendment she offered to delete the unverified medical risks language (breast cancer, miscarriage, et al). The bill was engrossed on Tuesday, March 19, 2013 and then passed as amended with a 92-31 vote the next day.  It was then received and introduced to the Senate on Wednesday, March 20, 2013.

Before an abortion is preformed, the physician must determine the gestational age. The physician must inform the woman receiving an abortion, in writing, her rights and options, where to receive free counseling on other options, and the physician must inform the woman that by no later than 20 weeks from fertilization that the unborn child has the physical structures necessary to feel pain as well as evidence to back it up. The notice that already must be posted at every abortion clinic must also include pregnancy resource websites and contact information, in addition to rights regarding the father’s responsibilities to the unborn child.

The same portion about the unborn child’s ability to feel pain mentioned previously is to be included in writing along with the distribution of pictures of what the unborn child approximately looks like at its gestational age. There are certain texts that the physician is required to provide to any women receiving an abortion written in their own language, parts of which include scientific data and basic knowledge of genetics and anatomy, persuasive material which suggests adoption as an alternative to abortion, and a list of adoption agencies.  The only legal way a physician may provide an abortion on a woman without complying with all of the following is if the woman’s life if in permanent, immediate, and/or life threatening danger. Psychological danger is not included.

No state insurance will provide abortion services. Where nonprofit organizations were exempt from federal income taxes, now abortion clinics are excluded and must pay, regardless of whether or not they are a nonprofit organization. No person affiliated with an abortion clinic may teach a sexual education curriculum, nor can an organization that affiliates itself with abortion clinics (even only by referral) are allowed to provide sexual education curriculum material.

• There has been no change on House Bill 2188 since last update. Requires both non-profit organizations receiving public funds, and the issuing agency, to publish detailed expenditure transactions on their website. The expenditure detail would be required to be available in a searchable format and would include the following information: check number, expenditure date and amount, the payee, and a description of the expenditure. The organizations exempted under current law would continue to be exempt.

• For House Bill 2217, on Wednesday, March 20. 2013, the Committee Report recommended that the bill be passed by Committee on Judiciary. Female genital mutilation is defined as a crime committed in the form of circumcising, excising, or infibulating any part of a minor (under the age of 18) female’s vagina. Medical practice is excused in the case of necessity during birth. Religious custom or tradition is not excused, nor is the act excused if the parent gave consent for the act to be committed. Female genital mutilation is a severity level 3, person felony.

Week of March 11, 2013

• There has been no change on Senate Bill 185 since last update.

• There has been no change on Senate Bill 2324 since last update.
• Senate Bill 141 passed the Senate on 2/20/13.  It was received in the House and introduced on 2/22/13.  It was referred to the House Federal and State Affairs Committee on 2/25/13.  Since then, there has been no change.
• There has been no change on Senate Bill 3 since last update.
• There has been no change on Senate Bill 77 since last update.
• There has been no change on Senate Bill 105 since last update.
• Senate Bill 142 passed the Senate Judiciary Committee on 2/27/13.  The Senate passed the bill on 2/28/13.  It was introduced to the House on 3/1.  On 3/6/13, it was referred to the House Committee on Corrections and Juvenile Justice.
• There was a hearing scheduled on Senate Bill 1606 on 3/7/13.
• House Bill 2253 passed the House Federal and State Affairs Committee on 3/8/13.
• There was a hearing on House Bill 2188 on 2/12/13.
• There has been no change on House Bill 5010 since last update.
• There was a hearing on House Bill 2217 on 2/13/13.  It passed on 2/26/13.  On 2/28/13 the Committee resolution to pass the bill was adopted, and there was a movement to amend the bill by Representative Todd.  The amendment was passed on the same day.  The amended bill passed the House and was referred to the Senate on 3/1. On 3/7, it was referred to the Senate Committee on the Judiciary.

Week of February 18-22

Senate Bill No. 185 by Committee on Federal and State Affairs regarding Vital Stats on unborn child certificates

Status: Committee Referred to Public Health and Welfare on February 13, 2013 

            This is a revision is prior legislature to include that any time an abortion procedure is carried out, the physician or funeral home (if they choose to send the remains there) must fill out an unborn child death certificate.  There are 21 days to do so and along with the certificate, but be a detailed investigation of the cause of death.

Senate Bill No. 2324 by By Representatives DeGraaf, Alcala, Bideau, Bradford, Brunk, Campbell, Carpenter, Christmann, Crum, Dove, Edwards, Garber, Goico, Gonzalez, Hedke,

Hermanson, Hibbard, Houser, Howell, Huebert, Hutton, Kelley, Montgomery, O’Brien, Pauls, Peck, Read, Rhoades, Rothlisberg, Seiwert, Sutton and Thimesch Prohibiting abortion if a detectable fetal heartbeat is present.

Status: Committee Referred to Federal and State Affairs on February 14, 2013 

            Studies have found that detecting a fetal heartbeat is very useful in predicting whether or not the fetus will reach viability and live birth.  So, the presence of absence of the fetal heartbeat must be determined and presented to the woman pursuing an abortion in writing.  If an abortion is performed before the woman knows whether or not the unborn child has a pulse, they are subject to disciplinary action and the woman can file wrongful death and sue the physician.  The only time this does not apply, is if the physician determines the woman’s health to be in immediate danger.

If an abortion is carried out after the knowledge of the fetus having a heart beat then the physician is subject to being charged with a level 8 felony!

Senate Bill No. 141 by Senators Pilcher-Cook, Abrams, Apple, Arpke, Donovan, Fitzgerald, Holmes, Kerschen, Knox, LaTurner, Love, Lynn, Masterson, O’Donnell, Olson, Ostmeyer, Petersen, Powell, Pyle, Smith and Tyson regarding local health department prohibition of accreditation requirements

Status: Committee Referred to Federal and State Affairs on February 25, 2013 

            No person is allowed to perform an abortion with the knowledge that the woman seeking an abortion is doing so only because of the sex of the unborn child.  If such an act is performed the person which performed the abortion can be brought up on charges and provide relief to the woman who received the abortion, the father of the unborn child, or the parents of the minor who received the abortion.  Such relief includes: money damages for psychological and physical injuries, payment equal to three times the cost of the abortion, and ‘reasonable attorney fees’.

This law does not justify having an abortion, nor does it apply if abortion is prohibited.  The woman who chose to have an abortion is not subject to criminal persecution.

Week of February 4 -8, 2013

Senate Bill No. 3 by Senator Faust-Goudeau on Board of Healing Arts’ regulation and establishment of Exempt Licensing for physician assistants

Status: Pending

Current law regarding the licensure of physician assistants would be amended creating an exempt license, setting the maximum fee for the license, and exempt the holder from being required to submit evidence that they completed a continuing education program if they are not practicing. The Board of Healing Arts would be held responsible for regulating and establishing rules appropriate for obtaining and maintaining an exempt license.

The Board of Healing Arts estimates that passage of the bill would increase expenditures from the Board of Healing Arts Fee Fund by $27,448. Other professions regulated by the board have a lower fee for exempt status than that of active status. It is likely that the same will apply in this case.

Senate Bill No. 77 by Committee on Judiciary relating to the state Child Death Review Board

Status: Scheduled Hearing in Judiciary 2/12/2013

Under current law, the information and records concerning the Child Death Review Board are confidential unless disclosed to a member of legislation or legislative body as necessary to fulfill their official responsibility. This law would expand information to the public
for research and public health purposes.

Senate Bill No. 105 by Committee on Education regarding School Districts Bullying Policies

Status: Referred to Education as of February 1, 2013

Cyber bullying is redefined much more in depth than before: bullying by use of any electronic devise through means of electronically transmitted communications. Additionally, regardless of whether the communication was actually transmitted on a school location, special actions will be taken. Harassment is added and defined as any sort of physical, verbal and nonverbal expressions, name calling, and taunting intended to frighten, challenge, provoke, threaten, coerce, intimidate, abuse, alarm, etc… of another student or employee by another student or employee. This means teachers are not allowed to ‘bully’ students, nor are students allowed to ‘bully’ teachers based on: (specifically mentioned in legislation) a person’s race, color, national origin, sex (including gender identity and expression), religion, disability or sexual orientation.

Senate Bill No. 141 by Senators Pilcher-Cook, Abrams, Apple, Arpke, Donovan, Fitzgerald, Holmes, Kerschen, Knox, LaTurner, Love, Lynn, Masterson, O’Donnell, Olson, Ostmeyer, Petersen, Powell, Pyle, Smith and Tyson regarding of accreditation requirements

Status: Referred Scheduled Hearing February 11, 2013

No person is allowed to perform an abortion with the knowledge that the woman seeking an abortion is doing so only because of the sex of the unborn child. If such an act is performed the person which performed the abortion can be brought up on charges and provide relief to the woman who received the abortion, the father of the unborn child, or the parents of the minor who received the abortion. Such relief includes: money damages for psychological and physical injuries, payment equal to three times the cost of the abortion, and ‘reasonable attorney fees’. This law does not justify having an abortion, nor does it apply if abortion is prohibited. The woman who chose to have an abortion is not subject to criminal persecution.

Senate Bill No. 142 by Senators Pilcher-Cook, Abrams, Apple, Arpke, Donovan, Fitzgerald, Holmes, Kerschen, Knox, LaTurner, Love, Lynn, Masterson, ODonnell, Olson, Ostmeyer, Powell, Pyle and Smith

Status: Referred to Judiciary as of February 7, 2013

No civil action can be taken upon a physician for wrongful birth. Wrongful birth means that the doctor did not properly prepare the mother or father of the risks associated with giving birth to a child, commonly one with congenital defects. No suit can be taken against a physician if the information provided would have resulted in the mother obtaining an abortion.

Senate Bill No. 1606 by Senator Pilcher-Cook Honoring Pregnancy Maintenance Resource Centers

Status: Referred to Health and Human Services as of January 24, 2013

Pilcher-Cook has introduced this bill in attempt to honor pregnancy maintenance resource centers in Kansas and across the United States that work do both inside and outside of the clinic to teach prevention plans in schools by adhering to, and the bill specifically states using abstinence.

House Bill No. 2253 by Committee on Federal and State Affairs Prohibiting funding for abortion and amending women’s right-to-know status

Status: Referred to Federal and State Affairs as of February 7, 2013

Before an abortion is preformed, the physician must determine the gestational age. The physician must inform the woman receiving an abortion, in writing, her rights and options, where to receive free counseling on other options, and the physician must inform the woman that by no later than 20 weeks from fertilization that the unborn child has the physical structures necessary to feel pain as well as evidence to back it up. The notice that already must be posted at every abortion clinic must also include pregnancy resource websites and contact information, in addition to rights regarding the father’s responsibilities to the unborn child.

The same portion about the unborn child’s ability to feel pain mentioned previously is to be included in writing along with the distribution of pictures of what the unborn child approximately looks like at its gestational age. There are certain texts that the physician is required to provide to any women receiving an abortion written in their own language, parts of which include scientific data and basic knowledge of genetics and anatomy, persuasive material which suggests adoption as an alternative to abortion, and a list of adoption agencies.  The only legal way a physician may provide an abortion on a woman without complying with all of the following is if the woman’s life if in permanent, immediate, and/or life threatening danger. Psychological danger is not included.

No state insurance will provide abortion services. Where nonprofit organizations were exempt from federal income taxes, now abortion clinics are excluded and must pay, regardless of whether or not they are a nonprofit organization. No person affiliated with an abortion clinic may teach a sexual education curriculum, nor can an organization that affiliates itself with abortion clinics (even only by referral) are allowed to provide sexual education curriculum material.

House Bill No. 2188 by Committee on Federal and State Affairs concerning the open records act

Status: Scheduled Hearing in Judiciary on February 12, 2013

Requires both non-profit organizations receiving public funds, and the issuing agency, to publish detailed expenditure transactions on their website. The expenditure detail would be required to be available in a searchable format and would include the following information: check number, expenditure date and amount, the payee, and a description of the expenditure. The organizations exempted under current law would continue to be exempt.

House Bill No. 5010 by Representatives Garber, Carpenter, Christmann, Crum, DeGraaf, Ewy, Goico, Hedke, Hoffman, Howell, Huebert, Montgomery, O’Brien, Peck, Rothlisberg, Seiwert and Thimesch concerning the human life amendment

Status: Referred to Federal and State Affairs on February 6, 2013

This “equal rights” legislation has been revised to include the unborn. The unborn are to possess the same equal, unalienable, natural rights, including: life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

House Bill No. 2217 by Committee on Corrections and Juvenile Justice Creating the crime of female genital mutilation

Status: Referred to Corrections and Juvenile Justice on February 6, 2013

Female genital mutilation is defined as a crime committed in the form of circumcising, excising, or infibulating any part of a minor (under the age of 18) female’s vagina. Medical practice is excused in the case of necessity during birth. Religious custom or tradition is not excused, nor is the act excused if the parent gave consent for the act to be committed. Female genital mutilation is a severity level 3, person felony.

House Bill No. 2203 by Representatives Kinzer, Alford, Boldra, Bradford, Brunk, Christmann, DeGraaf, Dove, Edwards, Esau, Ewy, Garber, Goico, Gonzalez, Grosserode, Hedke, Henry, Hermanson, Hildabrand, Howell, Huebert, Kahrs, Kelley, Macheers, Mast, McPherson, Meigs, Montgomery, O’Brien, Osterman, Pauls, Peck, Petty, Powell, Rhoades, Rubin, Ryckman Jr., Ryckman Sr., Schwab, Siegfreid and Sutton relating to exercise of religion

Status: Referred to Judiciary on February 4, 2013

States that the government may not burden, or deny the exercise of religion, a person of Kansas unless the government find that it is compelled to do so in order to protect governmental interests, which is not limited to protection of a child. Any individual that feels their civil liberty to exercise religion has been violated have the right to take it up with the courts. If the courts rule in the favor of the individual whose rights have been infringed, then they may be provided with: court costs, protective order, damages, and attorney fees.

Week of January 21 – January 25, 2013

The American Civil Liberties Union dropped its challenge to the Kansas state law passed in 2012 that restricts general private insurance coverage of abortions to life-threatening situations, following a judge’s ruling on January 7th that the ACLU failed to provide evidence that the legislature was intentionally restricting abortion access.  Though the ACLU dropped the challenge, ACLU attorney Bridget Amri commented:  “We are disappointed that the court’s decision will stand, despite the fact that the American public believes that politicians have no place interfering with a woman’s personal and private medical decisions.  A woman should have the peace of mind of knowing that her insurance will cover her medical needs no matter what happens during her pregnancy.  Although we are not able to continue with this case, we will continue to stand up for a woman’s right to make the best choice for herself and her family.”
According to Kansas law, women must purchase an insurance rider or pay out of pocket if they seek to terminate their pregnancy.

Week of April 30 – May 4, 2012

H Sub SB 62, the pharmacist refusal and medical non-referral act, passed the Senate on Wednesday and is headed to the Governor’s desk. This bill, if signed by Governor Brownback, will allow medical professionals and institutions to deny patients healthcare and medication based on their belief that such medication or treatment would terminate a pregnancy. This means pharmacists could refuse women birth control and hospitals could deny their patients referrals – which most women depend on to get second opinions. H Sub SB 313, the “No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion Act,” passed the House and is heading to the Senate. Among its 70 pages are: a requirement for doctors to lie to their patients about the effects of abortion – telling them it causes breast cancer, provisions that threaten the accredidation of the medical school at the University of Kansas and protection for physicians who withhold information from pregnant women about severe fetal anomalies because they believe disclosing such information might result in the termination of the pregnancy. The bill also limits sexual education and changes much of the tax code – even though it the bill has never been through a tax committee.

Week of April 23 – 27, 2012

Trust Women is following two anti-choice, anti-family-planning bills in Kansas closely. H Sub SB 62, a pharmacist refusal and medical non-referral bill, is currently in conference. This bill would allow pharmacists and healthcare providers to refuse to provide medication or medical care based on an objection of their conscience if they believe such medication or treatment would result in the termination of a pregnancy; this bill would allow pharmacists to refuse to provide birth control pills and would also allow physicians to refuse to provide care to a woman even if her life was at risk. The medical non-referral aspect of the bill would enable hospitals and doctors to deny their patients referrals to other hospitals that would provide necessary care – making it impossible for some women to seek the care on their own depending on their insurance provider. The other bill we are watching, H Sub SB 313, an abortion omnibus bill, is receiving less attention. It is still below the line on the House side. We are watching though, because, this bill would require doctors lie to their patients about the side-effects of abortion, limit reproductive health education and threaten the ability of abortion providers to provide care.

Week of March 26 – 30, 2012

On Wednesday the House approved H Sub for SB 62, a bill that would allow medical professionals and institutions to deny care, medication and referrals if they thought it would result in the termination of a pregnancy. It was passed via deceptive legislative measures in which the language from the pharmacist refusal and medical non-referral act was put into a bill that had previously been passed in the Senate, but had nothing to do with abortion. This process is known as a “gut and go,” and it was used to pass this bill through quickly. The same process was implemented with an anti-abortion omnibus bill, now H Sub for SB 313, which, among other things, would require doctors lie to their patients seeking abortion by telling them that abortion causes breast cancer.

Week of March 19 – 23, 2012

Two anti-choice bills are beginning to move quickly through the House. The language from the “Woman’s Right to Know,” and “No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion” bill, HB 2598, has been placed into a Senate bill that was originally drafted as legislation concerning the consumption of alcohol, H Sub for SB 313. And, the language from the pharmacist refusal and medical non-referral act, HB 2523, was put into an act that was written originally about property seizure, H Sub for SB 62. This strategy, referred to as a “gut and go”, is used to pass controversial bills quickly and without much debate. Both bills will now only have to go through a concurrent/non-concurrent vote – meaning they would be denied the full legislative process of thorough debate and vetting. Both H Sub SB 313 and H Sub SB 62 will likely face this vote later in the week, and if voted through, will go straight to the Governor’s desk to be signed.

Week of March 12 – 16, 2012

Last week, at the county level, the Miami County Commission voted 3-2 to disallow funding for contraception distribution via the county’s family planning program making it the first county in Kansas to exclude contraception funds from its grant application. At the state level, HB 2598, the bill would require doctors to provide their patients misinformation to dissuade them from procuring an abortion.  This bill would threaten the accreditation of the University of Kansas’ medical school.

Week of March 5 – 9, 2012  

No new reproductive health related bills were introduced in the past week but HB 2523, a bill which would allow for medical professionals to deny referrals and medication and care based on their conscience, passed through the House Committee on Judiciary and will be up for debate in the House soon.

 

Week of Feb. 27 – March 2, 2012 

The Kansas House worked HB 2523, the “pharmacist refusal and medical non-referral act” and HB 2598, the “no-taxpayer funding/mother’s right to know act” this past week. An amendment to HB 2598 was added, requiring doctors to document the amount of women who change their minds about getting an abortion after hearing the fetal heartbeat.

 

Week of Feb. 20 – Feb. 24, 2012

No new bills directly pertaining to reproductive rights were proposed in the Kansas Legislature this week. But, two bills will be worked in the upcoming week. HB 2523, which would extend the pharmacist refusal act to allow institutions and medical professionals to not only refuse to provide regular birth control pills and emergency contraception and abortion care, but to also refuse to refer patients to a healthcare provider who would provide the care or medication. HB 2523 will be worked on Feb. 29. HB 2598, the “No Taxpayer Funding for Abortions” omnibus bill would, among other things, require doctors to tell women seeking abortions false information about abortions and would disallow certain organizations from providing students with sex-education material. HB 2598 will be worked on March 1.

Week of Feb. 13 – Feb. 17, 2012

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:

• H.B. 2035 (the parental consent bill) has cleared committee and will be heard on the floor of the House.
• H.B. 2218 (the pre-viability ban) has been withdrawn from the Committee on Judiciary and reassigned to the Committee on Federal and State Affairs.

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.

No new bills directly pertaining to reproductive rights were proposed in the Kansas Legislature this week. But, two bills will be worked in the upcoming week. HB 2523, which would extend the pharmacist refusal act to allow institutions and medical professionals to not only refuse to provide regular birth control pills and emergency contraception and abortion care, but to also refuse to refer patients to a healthcare provider who would provide the care or medication. HB 2523 will be worked on Feb. 29. HB 2598, the “No Taxpayer Funding for Abortions” omnibus bill would, among other things, require doctors to tell women seeking abortions false information about abortions and would disallow certain organizations from providing students with sex-education material. HB 2598 will be worked on March 1.