Madison — A Democratic state senator promised "all out hell" on Tuesday if Republicans stick to their plan to take up a controversial bill restricting abortion for public workers and limiting access to contraception for employees of religious organizations.


Sen. Jon Erpenbach (D-Middleton) said Tuesday's session could mirror one in June, when Senate President Mike Ellis (R-Neenah) broke the base of his gavel as he slammed it down to quiet Democrats upset over passing a different abortion bill. Footage of those raucous proceedings was featured in an ad targeting Ellis run by Planned Parenthood Advocates of Wisconsin.


Republicans who run the Senate are tentatively planning to approve two abortion bills on Tuesday.


One would ban any abortions that are sought because of the sex of the fetus. The other would prevent public employees' health plans from covering most abortions, and would also strictly limit the ability of employees of religious organizations to get contraception through their insurance plans.


The Assembly passed both measures in June, and Senate action would send them on to Republican Gov. Scott Walker.


Erpenbach opposes both bills, and he objected Thursday to taking up the bill next week because the Senate never held a public hearing on the Assembly version of the bill dealing with contraceptions. That version has an amendment that allows employees of religious organizations to get contraception through their insurers if the contraception is prescribed for some reason other than preventing pregnancies.


Erpenbach said that was a major change that demanded a vetting in a public hearing. He questioned whether employers would scrutinize the reason workers were getting contraception to determine whether they had to pay for it.


Public hearings have been waived in the past only when Republicans and Democrats have agreed to do so, Erpenbach said.


The Senate Health Committee approved the bills Thursday on party-line, 3-2 votes, advancing them to the full Senate. Before they did, Erpenbach pleaded with the committee chairwoman, Sen. Leah Vukmir (R-Wauwatosa), to hold a hearing to get public input on changes to the contraception provisions.


"You don't want this headline," Erpenbach told her. "You really don't. You don't want this headline, you don't want the story, you don't want the hassle that's about to happen."


Julaine Appling, executive director of Wisconsin Family Action, called Erpenbach's demands for a public hearing a "stalling tactic." His promises of "all out hell" on the floor are reminiscent of massive protests that erupted at the Capitol over restrictions on collective bargaining shortly after Walker took office in January 2011, she said.


"That has been their philosophy since January 2011," Appling said. "This is just yet another page out of their playbook."


The expected abortion debate comes fives months after Walker and GOP lawmakers approved a bill requiring women seeking abortions to get ultrasounds and mandating that doctors who provide them have admitting privileges at nearby hospitals.


The debate the Senate was tense, with Democrats shouting through the vote that debate was unfairly cut off and Ellis slamming down his gavel in an attempt to silence them. Planned Parenthood soon after launched its ad against Ellis, who faces Rep. Penny Bernard Schaber (D-Appleton) in next year's election.


Planned Parenthood and another provider sued the state over the requirement that doctors have hospital admitting privileges, saying two of the state's four clinics would have to stop providing abortions. U.S. District Judge William Conley blocked the provision before it went into effect while he considers whether it is constitutional.


Attorney General J.B. Van Hollen has appealed Conley's initial ruling to the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals in Chicago. A panel of the court will hear arguments Dec. 3 and will likely decide later whether to allow the admitting privileges requirement to go into place in the short term.


The case would then return to Conley for a trial, likely sometime next year. Litigation is ongoing in other states that have passed similar provisions, as well.


The clinics contend requiring admitting privileges violates the constitution's due process guarantee, puts an undue burden on the right to abortion and unconstitutionally treats doctors who perform abortions differently from doctors who perform other procedures. The state argues the requirement is a reasonable means of regulating a medical procedure.


The clinics in Wisconsin did not challenge the ultrasound provision of the law and that requirement remains in effect.


Twitter: twitter.com/patrickdmarley


0 comments:

Post a Comment

 
Top