Delays are fine in exercizing 2nd Ammendment rights, but not for abortions?
Abortion delay of 24 hours is vetoed
PHOENIX - The governor vetoed legislation Thursday that would have forced a 24-hour delay between a woman being told the risks of abortion and actually being able to terminate the pregnancy.
Gov. Janet Napolitano had the legislation on her desk only briefly before sending the five-paragraph veto letter. She cited various constitutional provisions, state laws and court rulings.
"SB 1077 represents undue government intrusion into the relationship between a woman and her doctor, her family, her religious counselor, or whomever else she wishes to consult in making this most difficult of personal and medical decisions," the Democratic governor wrote.
Napolitano said current case law already requires a doctor to obtain informed consent before performing any surgery. And she said written consent for abortion is required by state regulations.
Napolitano's action, which she had vowed to do during the 2002 gubernatorial campaign, kills the measure for at least this year. The 18-11 Senate vote and 32-27 margin in the House of Representatives both fall short of the necessary two-thirds vote for an override.
Kathi Herrod, lobbyist for the Center for Arizona Policy, said the veto shows "the governor put the profits of the abortion industry ahead of the health needs of women." She said the fact that the two Planned Parenthood organizations in the state - the major abortion providers - are nonprofit operations does not change that view.
The legislation said no abortion could be performed unless a woman were given certain information at least 24 hours beforehand.
That included the nature of the procedure and the risks and alternatives that a "reasonable patient would consider material" before deciding whether to go ahead. The legislation also would have required that women be told the probable age of the fetus and the medical risks of carrying the child to term.
That information could have been provided by phone so the woman wouldn't have had to make two trips to a clinic. Only in cases of emergency could the waiting period have been waived.
Rep. Steve Tully, R-Phoenix, one of the sponsors of the legislation, said the veto letter contradicts itself. He said the letter states the information is already provided but it goes on to say that requiring the information would be an undue burden. "It's got to be one or the other."
Napolitano said she believes the legislation violates state constitutional provisions, one that guarantees a right to privacy and one saying all privileges of law apply equally to all.
But Herrod, whose organization spent more than $50,000 on a media campaign to urge Napolitano to sign the bill, said 30 other states have similar laws, all withstanding constitutional challenges.
Napolitano, however, cited a 2002 Arizona Supreme Court ruling that said the state must pay for medically necessary abortions for women who cannot afford them. That decision was based on rights outlined in the state constitution, which in some cases are broader than the federal document.
The Governor's Office, which reported earlier this week that calls for signing were running ahead of requests for veto, said Thursday that it did not have a final tally. Napolitano made that unnecessary, saying Tuesday any action on the bill would be based on her own beliefs and not on public sentiment.
A belief in killing babies??? Weird.
Link: here
Reply With Quote
