Reaction As PA Senate Advances Abortion Constitutional Amendment Prohibition

HARRISBURG — Reaction is pouring in from both sides of the politically charged abortion issue after a late-night move Thursday to advance a constitutional amendment proposal that would declare there is no constitutional right to an abortion in Pennsylvania.

Pennsylvania Senate Republicans moved forward a constitutional amendment package sometime after 11 p.m. Thursday, which includes the abortion language as well as other measures, such as allow Pennsylvania gubernatorial candidates to select their own running mates for lieutenant governor, according to media reports.

The Senate Rules Committee gave approval to the measure late-night Thursday, and then the full Senate passed the constitutional amendment bill on Friday, according to a report in the Philadelphia Inquirer.

The measure, Senate Bill 106, would have to pass the General Assembly in two consecutive sessions and then be publicly advertised, after which it would have to be OK'd by voters.

The constitutional amendment proposal has gained the ire of opponents who say that the process is being undertaken to purposefully circumvent the legislative process.

"The constitutional amendment process is sacred and meant to be an exception, not the rule," State Sen. Maria Collett, a Montgomery County Democrat, said in a statement. "But it has become clear that this is the only way for Republicans to get wildly unpopular initiatives passed."

Collett said while it seems like the most democratic means of assessing the will of the people, "the reality is that voter participation in the amendment process is lower than in that of nearly all other elections because the majority continues to place amendments on the ballot in primary elections, which have lower turnout, particularly among Independent and third-party voters, young voters and voters of color."

While the process itself is being questioned, the meat of the proposed amendment is garnering mixed reviews.

"This Constitutional Amendment would represent a major win for all those who do not want their hard-earned tax dollars to pay for abortion, which is the taking of an innocent, unrepeatable human life," Maria Gallagher, legislative director of the Pennsylvania Pro-Life Federation, the local affiliate of National Right to Life, said in remarks included in an article on LifeNews.com.

Organizations like the Pennsylvania Pro-Life Federation question other states, which have done the opposite, and made abortion rights as part of their state constitutions, saying that such a move essentially forces taxpayers to fund abortions and restricts legislatures in those states from passing what they call minor, common sense abortion restrictions.

In the LifeNews.com article, supporters of the proposed constitutional amendment in Pennsylvania say that if it passes in the commonwealth, the amendment would add language to the state constitution declaring that there would be no right for taxpayer funding for abortion.

The article says that Pennsylvania pro-life organizations expressed an urgent need to move on the amendment because of a lawsuit playing out in Pennsylvania courts that was filed by abortion rights groups in the state, a court ruling that Pennsylvania Family Institute President for Policy Tom Shaheen was quoted as saying would be disastrous for the unborn in Pennsylvania.

"To put it bluntly, Pennsylvania is at risk of becoming a state like New York that allows abortions up until birth — and paid for by taxpayers," Shaheen was quoted as saying.

The Pennsylvania Pro-Life Federation, which supports the proposed amendment, stated that without it, the court case currently before Pennsylvania judges could force taxpayers to pay for abortions and also possibly strike down Pennsylvania's parental consent law, which requires underage girls to obtain parental permission to get an abortion.

Meanwhile, the abortion constitutional amendment has been decried by those who consider themselves to be pro-choice.

"This is a DISGRACE. It is 11:45 p.m., we have not finished passing a state budget, but the Senate R's forced a Committee vote on an abortion ban," State Sen. Katie Muth, D-44, posted to Twitter. "Women and our allies will not stand for this. This is an attack on reproductive justice, on OUR RIGHTS and on OUR BODIES."

In remarks during debate Thursday that were included in a video Muth posted online, the senator said that, "I don't need a single person in this room to tell me what to do with my body. I don't."

"This is a disgrace, and it is a ban on abortion. It is attacking women's freedom, women's reproductive rights," she said. "It is a ban on our rights."

Collett, Muth's colleague from Montgomery County, stressed in a news release that the only way to counter the amendment process is to elect a new majority of Democrats in the General Assembly in Pennsylvania, which would work against measures such as these.

Collett noted legislation that she, Muth and others are cosponsoring that would codify Roe v. Wade in Pennsylvania, thereby guaranteeing individuals the right to an abortion in the state.

Abortion is already legal in the commonwealth up to 24 weeks.

Others also reacted to Thursday's news.

"This is extremely dangerous to women and people who can get pregnant across the commonwealth," the Pennsylvania Commission for Women posted to Facebook. "Abortion bans lead to worse health outcomes for pregnant people and babies, increased rates of maternal mortality, and financial hardship that hurts families."

The group stressed that a governor cannot veto a constitutional amendment, so if it ends up passing in two consecutive legislative sessions and is approved by voters, the change would be immediate.