Knowles Vetoes Bill Restricting Publicly Funded Abortions
REASONS: Governor says the measure violates womens' right to privacy, constrains physicians.
By Ben Spiess
Originally published in the Anchorage Daily News, June 6, 2002
JUNEAU — Gov. Tony Knowles vetoed legislation Wednesday that would have imposed narrow restrictions on publicly funded abortions.
"We're here for a very fundamental purpose: to preserve and protect a woman's constitutional right to make her own decisions about her own body in consultation with her doctor," said Knowles in a press conference at the governor's office in Juneau.
State regulation allows for public funding of abortions in cases in which the patient's health is in jeopardy. But the bill's supporters contend the regulation is too broad, allowing doctors to be reimbursed for abortions if the patient's physical or psychological health is at risk.
The legislation, Senate Bill 364, would have narrowed the doctor's discretion in performing state funded abortions to cases of rape, incest or when an abortion is necessary to avoid seriously endangering the physical health of the woman or, in cases of psychological health, if a medication poses a risk to the fetus.
The administration opposed the legislation on three points:
First, the governor contends that by defining specific medical conditions under which an abortion would be paid for, the state would be violating a woman's right to privacy. In particular, the legislation would violate the right of privacy between a patient and doctor and the right of the woman to make decisions about what procedures to undergo, the administration believes.
Second, the administration holds that the law would violate the Alaska Constitution's right of equal protection. Under that right, if the state is going to provide pre-natal medical care, it must provide all aspects of that care, including abortion if the doctor finds the procedure necessary. Attorney General Bruce Botelho said that the proposed law creates a separate standard of care for a particular procedure—abortion—that is unconstitutional.
Third, the administration holds that the medical standards outlined in the legislation would constrain physicians' ability to make decisions.
The intent of the measure was to stop the state from paying what abortion opponents believe are a large number of elective abortions, according to a key backer, Sen. Pete Kelly, R-Fairbanks.
The Legislature could try to override the veto when it reconvenes for its special session on the Regulatory Commission of Alaska June 24. But an override seems doubtful. In the votes during the session, the Senate passed the bill 12 to 8. The House vote was closer, 23 to 17.
Overriding a veto requires 14 votes in the Senate and 27 votes in the House.
Of a potential veto override, Kelly said: "If it's not going to be successful, it's not coming to the floor."
"We've got a regulation with loopholes you can drive a truck through," Kelly said. In particular Kelly pointed to language in state regulations that allows a doctor to perform an abortion if a patient's psychological health is at risk.
"You go into a doctor and say 'Gee, I'm feeling stressed out about this baby' and bingo -- you have elective abortions," Kelly said.
Under the proposed bill, the costs of an abortion would only have been reimbursed if the abortion was needed to "treat a serious adverse physical condition" or if not performing the abortion "would seriously endanger the physical health of the woman."
Abortions would only be allowed for a psychological condition if the patient were taking medication "highly dangerous to the fetus" or "the health of the woman would be endangered if the medication was not taken during the pregnancy."
Under the bill, a physician would have to submit a payment claim certifying the abortion was necessary.
Kelly is anti-abortion but he said he does not oppose using public funds for medically necessary abortions. He said the bill had nothing to do with a woman's right to choose to have an abortion.
"None of this has anything to do with a woman's right to abortion. I just don't have to pay for it unless medically necessary," he said.
Some doctors opposed the bill because it binds their decisions.
The language of the bill stipulates a doctor can only perform abortions if not acting "would seriously endanger the physical health of the woman."
Jay Livey, commissioner of the state Department of Health and Social Services, disputed Kelly's assertion that the state is paying for elective abortions.
"We're paying for abortions that physicians feel are medically necessary," he said "The whole point is we leave that decision to the doctor and the patient."
Lt. Gov. Fran Ulmer, who is running for governor as a Democrat, appeared with Knowles Wednesday and spoke out against the bill.
"The Alaska Legislature is playing doctor and claiming their moral position is somehow more important than the practice of medicine and the right to privacy under Alaska's constitution," Ulmer said.
U.S. Sen. Frank Murkowski, the leading Republican candidate for governor, is anti-abortion. Campaign spokesman Dan Saddler declined to comment on whether Murkowski would have vetoed the bill.
Murkowski's daughter and state Rep. Lisa Murkowski, R-Anchorage, voted against the measure.
