Bill on Taxpayer-Funded Abortions Gets Public Hearing in House

Updated: Monday, February 5, 2018 at 3:44 p.m.

 

The House of Delegates held a public hearing Monday on a bill that would remove abortion from a list of Medicaid services.

The House Judiciary Committee heard comments on House Bill 4012, which would eliminate taxpayer funding for medically necessary abortions unless the mother’s life is in danger.

Opponents argued the bill is unconstitutional. The West Virginia Supreme Court struck down a similar law in 1993, saying that it was discriminatory against low-income women.

Supporters of the bill cited various religious reasons and argued the cost should not be on the burden of taxpayers.

 

Roughly four times as many people spoke in opposition to the bill as those who spoke in support.

 

According to the state Department of Health and Human Resources, 1,560 Medicaid-funded abortions were performed in West Virginia during fiscal year 2017 — coming in at a cost of nearly $330,000. Data from 2013 show 502 cases at a cost of nearly $280,000.

 

House Judiciary Chairman John Shott noted at the end of the hearing that the bill is likely to appear on his committee’s agenda by the end of this week.

 

Senate Joint Resolution 12, declaring that nothing in the state Constitution protects the right to an abortion or requires the funding of the procedure, unanimously passed the Senate Judiciary Committee on a voice vote Monday afternoon. The measure now heads to the Senate floor.

 

If adopted by a two-thirds majority in both chambers of the Legislature, SJR 12 would go to a vote of the general public to ratify it as a constitutional amendment on the November ballot.

Abortion in an Election Year: Constitutionality Central to the Debate Over Taxpayer-Funded Services

A bill that would remove Medicaid funding for medically necessary abortions has been drawing a lot of attention in the House since passing through that chamber’s Health Committee last week. While the issue is inherently divisive, many questions about House Bill 4012’s constitutionality have been raised — further drawing attention to the matter.

According to a recent Hart Research poll, nearly two-thirds of West Virginia voters support the state’s Medicaid program covering a range of reproductive health care services, including annual check-ups, prenatal and maternity care, birth control and abortion. House Bill 4012 would remove medically necessary abortions from a list of those services that Medicaid provides.

In 1993, the West Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals overturned a law signed by then-Governor Gaston Caperton that included a provision banning abortions for low-income women when medically necessary. The court determined that it was discriminatory to not provide such services to low-income women.

 

Republican Del. Kayla Kessinger is the lead sponsor of House Bill 4012. She said the bill takes a different approach to the one that was struck down in 1993.

 

“The way that we are going about this bill is to redefine the medical procedure and we are well within our rights as the Legislature to define and redefine words. We do it almost every day in the Legislative and the legislative process,” Kessinger said.

 

“So, I believe that this bill is constitutional. But as with every piece of legislation we pass the Supreme Court can and may have a final decision.”

 

Kessinger also argues that some taxpayers object to paying for abortions and that the number and cost of them has increased in recent years.

 

According to data from the West Virginia Department of Health & Human Resources’ Bureau for Medical Services, 1,506 abortions were provided by Medicaid in State Fiscal Year 2017 — coming in at a cost of more than $326,000. While the number of Medicaid funded abortion has more than doubled since 2008, the cost to the state has increased by about a third — an increase of just over $100,000.

 

The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists opposes House Bill 4012. As an OB-GYN, House Health Chairman Joe Ellington is a member of that organization. His committee advanced the bill last week, sending it on to its second reference in the House Judiciary Committee. An amendment to House Bill 4012 was shot down in the House Health Committee that would have kept Medicaid funding in place for abortions if the pregnancy occurred as a result of rape or incest.

 

Chairman Ellington acknowledged the controversial nature of the bill, but said he could not speak to any issues of constitutionality.

 

“One concern is that having taxpayer money that goes toward performing an abortion but on the other side in the position the West Virginia colleague has is that you want to make sure that our citizens can obtain safe and legal abortions if they so desire,” Ellington said.

 

“Paying for that is how you would go about that, though. So, whether taxpayer funds go to it — or contributions — from private organizations or nonprofit organization that may supplement the costs for individuals that are seeking abortions. So, as long as they do it under the code of West Virginia, it should still be legal,” he said.

 

Top House Democrats, though, argue that the bill should not be a priority for the Legislature. Minority Leader Tim Miley also said the legislation addresses an issue that doesn’t need attention and, furthermore, gets in the way of decision made between a woman and her doctor.  

 

“This is par for the course for this leadership team of raising issues that try to divide people instead of bringing people together. But, in this case, I understand the bill is to address pregnancy terminations that are paid for by Medicaid,” said, Miley, noting that the the only pregnancies that are terminated by using Medicaid are those that are medically necessary and certified by a doctor.

 

“I’m not really sure what the issue is and why they’re trying to make it an issue other than having government inject itself into the lives of a woman and the advice she’s getting from her doctor,” he added.

 

House Minority Whip Mike Caputo echoed Miley’s concerns as far as legislative priorities. And with House Bill 4012’s constitutionality in question, Caputo says the Republican majority may be using the measure as a barometer for support for a joint resolution that could find its way onto a ballot as a constitutional amendment. But, if it comes to that, Caputo said the issue should stand on its own and away from election of state officials.

 

“If this Republican leadership team really believes that’s an issue that should be on the ballot — and if it’s about policy — then let’s have a special election and let’s do it prior to the general election,” Caputo said.

 

Caputo and other Democrats believe that putting a constitutional amendment on the ballot could be a way for Republicans to try to retain the majority in the Legislature.

 

“The only point I want to make is, if this is really about policy —  if this is something they think is good for West Virginia — then we should have it on a special election with no other candidates on there and just these issues. And let’s find out what people really want,” Caputo said.

 

While not yet on the agenda, the House Judiciary Committee is expected to take up House Bill 4012. As for the larger issue of abortion, lawmakers from either chamber have yet to introduce a joint resolution that would address the matter.  

Constitutional Amendments Widely Discussed Early in Legislative Session

House and Senate lawmakers introduced 28 joint resolutions in just the first week of the legislative session each calling for amendments to the state constitution. Some around the Capitol say such a number feels like a lot, while others say it’s rather normal. What is agreed upon, though, is that it is rare to have so many proposed constitutional amendments gaining traction this early in the session.

Long before the Legislature convened for the 2018 Regular Session, discussions surrounding a constitutional amendment that could repeal the state’s business inventory tax had already begun among House and Senate leaders, as well as Governor Jim Justice’s office. That tax — which has brought in, on average, about $140 million in revenue annually over the past 10 years — provides money that helps fund counties, particularly public education.

Republicans argue the tax makes it harder to attract businesses to the state and cite studies done by previous administrations that have called for its repeal. Some Democrats have questioned the measures as far as the long-term fiscal shape of the state, but are open to the idea — as long as county funding remains intact.

“I think there will be several people who will support that as long as the counties are made whole and don’t lose money as a result of that. And, you know, that money goes to education,” said Senate Minority Whip Corey Palumbo. “We don’t want to defund public education. The question is whether there’s going to be enough money to to make sure the counties are still okay.”

Following reports last year of the West Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals’ lavish spending on furniture and other office decorations, lawmakers are also considering various resolutions that could place the judicial branch’s budget under the Legislature’s review. This also would take a vote from the public to ratify an amendment to the state’s constitution.

“There’s been a lot of rumblings around that for years but nobody wanted step on the Supreme Court’s toes. But we’re the only state that doesn’t have some type of oversight of their budget — of the supreme court’s budget,” said Del. Michael Folk, who introduced one of many measures that would address the matter.

During budget hearings in front of the House and Senate Finance committees, Supreme Court Chief Justice Allen Loughry referred to the reports of high-dollar spending as “isolated” and promises, moving forward, he’ll make sure it doesn’t happen again.  

“The Chief Justice’s remarks as far as not being aware of the overspending is not a good argument, because — you know, obviously, if he’s not aware of it and they have full authority over their budget — then maybe we should have oversight and we should let the citizens decide at the ballot box and whether this constitution amendment should pass,” Folk said.

Another issue gaining traction would call for the a restructuring of the state Board of Education. A resolution in the Senate would allow the Legislature to pass laws to control the structure of the board. Over in the House, HJR 103 — a resolution with more specific language — would give the Legislature oversight of the Board of Education’s rule-making process. It also calls for the board to be reduced to nine members — six of whom would be elected and three appointed by the governor.

Currently, the governor appoints nine of the boards 12 members — with the remaining three non-voting ex-officio members who respectively serve in the role of state superintendent of schools, chancellor of the West Virginia Higher Education Policy Commission, and chancellor of Community and Technical College Education.

 

Del. Paul Espinosa is sponsoring the resolution that could bring about these changes.

“My preference would be to establish a relatively small districts around the state so that you have equal representation around the state. I know in the Eastern Panhandle, for example — which is the area the state that I represent — we’ve had representatives on the state school board from time to time but it hasn’t been very consistent,” Espinosa said.

“It would be my hope that, by electing six of those state school board members, you can ensure that you have representation from around the state,” he added.

Those opposed to the measure, including the West Virginia chapter of the American Federation of Teachers, argue that the influence of money could give educators a lesser chance of serving and muddy the functions of the board with politics.

Another issue gaining early traction is abortion. While not yet formally introduced this session, many rumblings around the Capitol indicate a resolution is coming that could limit or possibly end taxpayer-funded abortions through Medicaid.

Some Democrats are already voicing concerns about the motivation for a such a measure.

“I just worry that, you know, one of the ideas that’s floating around it’s being done for electioneering purposes to draw out the ballot. These are things that they think would excite the base of the majority party,” said Del. Barbara Fleischauer.

“So, I worry about that. But, you know we’re going to deal with things on a topic-by-topic basis and try to be objective.”

With so many constitutional amendments being discussed and garnering so much attention, many lawmakers point out that citizens should be reminded that they would have the final say on any of these issues under the Legislature’s consideration.

Senate Judiciary Chair Charlie Trump said they’re keeping this in mind, particularly the language used that would inevitably translate to the ballot.

“You know for some constitutional amendments it’s impossible to print the entire text of the amendment on a ballot,” Trump said. “So, it is important that the ballot is worded in such a fashion that the people do understand what the effect of its ratification would be.”

As for the number of resolutions currently being discussed, Trump said he has full faith that the voting public will be able to make sense of each measure.

“I don’t worry about the voters being confused. I think we make a mistake any time we underestimate the citizens of the state. It is after all their constitution and we are all bound by whatever it says and the citizens have the right retain the right to direct what the constitution will say and provide,” said Trump.

Resolutions calling for constitutional amendments require a two-thirds majority of both chambers of the Legislature and the governor’s signature before going to a vote of ratification by the general public via a ballot measure.

Telemedicine Bill Restricting Abortion Practices Approved in Senate

Senators have approved a House bill that clarifies the state’s telemedicine laws, but also creates a new restriction for certain treatments.

House Bill 2509 makes it clear that doctors can treat certain diseases in minors or adults who are still enrolled in public school. 

Those diseases include psychiatric disorders, attention deficit disorder, and intellectual and developmental disabilities.

“That was apparently something that had been going on before we passed the bill last year,” senate Judiciary Chair Charles Trump said Tuesday, “and our bill threw the continuation of some of those programs into jeopardy, so this will fix that.”

The bill, however, was also amended in the Senate to exclude another healthcare practice.

“It says a physician or healthcare provider may not prescribe any drug with the intent of causing an abortion,” Trump explained to his fellow Senators during a floor sesison.

The two step abortion pill is becoming a more common way to end pregnancies in the first ten weeks.

The bill was approved on a 34 to zero vote. 

How Does Women's Health Fare Under Trumpcare?

The House Republican health care proposal to replace the Affordable Care Act could have a profound impact on women’s health care coverage.

The ACA reformed several insurance provisions that affect women, including requiring coverage of no-cost birth control, not allowing insurance companies to charge women more than men and expanding coverage of pre-pregnancy care. Changes to these provisions would impact all women, but especially low-income women.

According to the Kaiser Family Foundation, one in three low-income women receives birth control from family planning clinics like Planned Parenthood while three quarters of higher-income women receive birth control from a doctor’s office.

President Trump has proposed major cuts to federal funding that support family planning clinics – a move that could disproportionately affect low-income women’s access to family planning services. Anti-abortion advocates have long supported defunding Planned Parenthood due to its role as an abortion provider. House Speaker Paul Ryan has said he supports redirecting women’s health resources from Planned Parenthood to federally qualified health centers, which, he said, will allow women to get the services they need without the controversy.

Appalachia Health News is a project of West Virginia Public Broadcasting, with support from the Benedum Foundation, Charleston Area Medical Center and WVU Medicine.

Group Advocates for Destigmatizing Abortion

A national reproductive health advocacy group is stopping in Charleston today to increase local conversation about abortion.

One in three women have an abortion in their lifetime, according to the group Advocates for Youth who is hosting a campaign by the same name.

Charleston its sixth stop on the 1 in 3 Campaign is nationwide tour. The tour includes stops in states with some of the strictest abortion laws in the country.

West Virginia advocates will gather tonight at the union building at 9 and at the Capitol at 10 after Live at the Levee to host a lightshow.

“West Virginians want to increase access to care and education rather than take itaway,” said WV FREE Executive Director, Margaret Chapman Pomponio in a press release about the initiative. “We want quality, affordable health care, maternity care, access to family planning, responsible sex education and options for unintended pregnancies.”

The tour will culminate Saturday, June 18, at the U.S. Supreme Court in Washington.

Appalachia Health News is a project of West Virginia Public Broadcasting, with support from the Benedum Foundation.

Exit mobile version