HARTFORD, Conn. — With a major U.S. Supreme Court ruling months away, Gov. Ned Lamont pledged Tuesday to sign a key abortion bill that would be the most consequential in Connecticut in the last 32 years.
After a two-hour debate, the state House of Representatives voted 87-60 for a bipartisan bill that would increase the number of medical professionals allowed to perform abortions and expand abortion-related protections regarding lawsuits. Overall, 14 Democrats voted against the measure, including three deputy House Speakers, while seven Republicans broke with the majority of their party and voted in favor at about 9:20 p.m. Tuesday.
Rep. Matthew Blumenthal, the son of the U.S. senator, said the legislature was making the move due to concerns about the upcoming ruling by the Supreme Court and abortion restrictions in other states on an emotional issue on the legal right to abortion access that has been upheld nationwide by the courts for decades.
“That right is under threat like never before,” Blumenthal told his colleagues on the House floor.
Lawmakers debated the detailed, seven-page bill in a rare discussion at the Capitol as the state’s abortion law from 1990 has not been changed in any major way.
In an early test vote on an amendment, the measure passed by 93-54 on mostly party lines with four members absent. The only Democrat who voted with the Republicans was Rep. Trenee McGee of West Haven, who won a special election in December to join the legislature and spoke later against the bill on the floor.
One of the major provisions in the bill would expand the medical specialists who are allowed to perform abortion services — allowing advanced practice registered nurses, physician assistants and nurse-midwives to provide medication and aspiration abortions in the first trimester.
Amanda Skinner, a nurse-midwife who serves as chief executive officer of Planned Parenthood of Southern New England, said that some women currently wait more than two weeks for a first-trimester abortion because there is a shortage of medical providers. Connecticut would become the 15th state to allow a wider range of medical professionals, including New York, Massachusetts, Vermont, New Hampshire and Maine.
But Christopher C. Healy, a spokesman for the conference that represents the state’s Roman Catholic bishops, said additional medical providers should not be involved.
“A midwife is supposed to bring children into the world, not exterminate them,” Healy said in an interview outside the House chamber. “We can only pray for these people. Why do we need more people in the abortion business? It has to be done with trained people.”
Healy said he sees no need for expansion at a time of contraction for the industry.
“Since 2008, eight abortion clinics have closed in our state,” Healy said. “Why is this legislation needed so urgently if the number of clinics is shrinking — more than likely due to shrinking demand?
“Around 75% of abortions are performed on low-income women covered by HUSKY, based on information from the Department of Public Health and the Department of Social Services for 2018. This group, which already may be facing inequality in health care due to racial issues, would likely feel the most impact of allowing less qualified providers to perform abortions.”
Abortion rights advocates are highly concerned that the U.S. Supreme Court this year might overrule the 1973 landmark Roe vs. Wade ruling — meaning that all 50 states would individually decide the abortion rules in their jurisdiction. “Abortion access is on the line,” Skinner told reporters in Hartford. “Connecticut must be a state where abortion care is acceptable without shame, stigma or fear.
“The urgency of this moment is clear. ... Planned Parenthood won’t give up. We’re in this fight today, tomorrow and for the next 100 years to protect every person’s right to safe, legal abortion because abortion is health care and health care is a human right.”
Lamont agreed during a news conference at The Lyceum in Hartford.
“We’re going to keep coming back, too,” Lamont said as he stepped to the podium. “We thought that women had the full range of reproductive choice, going back to Roe v. Wade, going back 50 years when I was young. And it’s incredible that it’s back on the front burner. It’s incredible that the Supreme Court will make the decision that could fundamentally change a woman’s right to choose. A majority of the states across the country already have bills passed or about to be passed that would virtually outlaw a woman’s right to choose — and we’re not going to let that happen in Connecticut.”
Despite saying that he would sign the two proposed bills, Lamont said that he had not discussed the details with his chief legal counsel, former federal prosecutor Nora Dannehy.
“Some people say, ‘Don’t worry. This is Connecticut. This can’t happen here,’” Lamont said. “I see there’s a PAC with over $1 million in it that seems to have a strong anti-choice, anti-gay agenda to it, and the culture wars are lapping up across our shores here in Connecticut.”
Another key provision would allow Connecticut to protect the medical records of women who travel here from states like Texas or Louisiana. The information would also be protected from subpoenas in other states.
Rep. Jillian Gilchrest, a West Hartford Democrat, said that some patients from Texas have already traveled to Planned Parenthood in Hartford’s North End, but she said she could not say how many out-of-state patients have arrived.
“It’s already been happening,” said Blumenthal, a Stamford Democrat who is a chief author of the bill.
In addition, if a Connecticut resident is sued under a Texas-style abortion law, the bill would give them the right for a counter-suit in order to recover reimbursement, attorney’s fees and costs.
House Republican leader Vincent Candelora of North Branford said he was concerned that the state’s public health commissioner and other members of the Lamont administration have not provided testimony regarding the bill. He is also concerned about the constitutionality of the measure.
“It essentially imposes Connecticut laws on all 50 states,” Candelora said. “If you’re in Louisiana and they have a parental consent provision for an abortion, and a 13-year-old gets an abortion without parental consent, that 13-year-old sues the doctor and gets a money judgment against the doctor for violating her rights. The doctor can come to Connecticut and sue the 13-year-old in Connecticut to recoup the money that he lost out because Connecticut doesn’t have parental consent.
“We honor each other’s laws. We’re the United States of America.”
But Blumenthal said he does not have concerns that the bill is unconstitutional. “This bill has been vetted by a number of Constitutional law experts,” he said.
Besides the Catholic Conference, one of the leaders in the lobbying against the issue is the Family Institute of Connecticut. The institute was pushing against a constitutional amendment in favor of abortion rights, but insiders said the amendment is not expected to come up for a vote.
“Abortion is the most sacred of their unholy sacraments,” the institute told supporters in an email. “And please pray. Whatever victories we may have, should God grant them to us, belong ultimately to Him. Please pray for the defeat of all ... of these bills.”
———
