Senate ultrasound bill clears second committee 3-2

For related coverage, click image.

TALLAHASSEE (FBW)—The Senate Health and Human Services Appropriations Committee approved narrowly April 15 a bill requiring an ultrasound before an abortion during the first trimester. The party-line, 3-2 vote clears the bill for consideration by the entire Senate.

Sponsored by Sen. Daniel Webster (R-Winter Garden), SB 2400 amends current law that already requires the procedure during the last six months of pregnancy.

The bill “is an opportunity to use the best technology possible to help make the very best decision possible on something that’s extremely serious,” said Webster, majority leader in the Senate and a member of First Baptist Church of Central Florida in Orlando.

Speaking against the bill were representatives of Florida ACLU, Florida Alliance of Planned Parenthood Affiliates and Florida National Organization for Women.

Sen. Don Gaetz (R-Fort Walton Beach), noting a Senate staff non-partisan analysis of the bill found 82 percent of Florida’s abortion clinics already require ultrasounds be performed, challenged Courtney Strickland of Florida ACLU, asking whether the organization in light of its opposition to the bill’s ultrasound requirement has ever “objected or filed any complaints against these abortion clinics for making an ultrasound a required pre-condition of an abortion.”

Strickland answered the group has not, but that it does not typically get involved in private organizations, focusing its efforts on state interference in privacy rights.

Disputing that answer, Gaetz pressed further, “… given the fact that the ACLU does take that sort of action against non-governmental entities, non-state entities, why have you not taken any action against abortion clinics in Florida who require, not offer, who require women to take these diagnostic procedures as a mandated pre-condition prior to an abortion?”

Strickland conceded the ACLU has taken action against private organizations. But rather than responding to Gaetz’s follow-up question, she instead questioned the validity of the statistic, while granting she could not offer evidence against the statistic.

In his closing comments on the bill, Webster answered Strickland’s claim, noting that of the other 18 percent of abortion clinics, half were not available when surveyed and the rest performed ultrasounds, but did not require them, with one using an outside provider.

“But every single clinic that could answer the question that was open for business said, ‘we do an ultrasound.’ So, there’s no real invasion here of privacy, of doing a test that supposedly the doctor would decide. No, the clinic has already decided. It’s required. You have to do it,” Webster said.

Webster said the reason the abortion clinics already perform the ultrasounds is to set the price of the abortion.

“The age of the fetus inside the womb is how they determine the price; the older, the higher the price—starts at $350 and goes up,” he said.

Webster also noted that the bill permits women to decline to view the required ultrasound image.

Both of the committee’s women members, who are Democrats, voted and spoke passionately against the bill.

Calling the bill “morally wrong,” Sen. Frederica Wilson (D-Miami Gardens) said the Legislature should focus instead on pregnancy prevention.

“I am opposed to this bill because I see it as an invasion in the privacy of women, especially young, poor women who probably cannot afford to have an ultrasound,” she said.

Wilson went on to assert “… these are situations that we create for people who we do not understand because we do not have to walk in their shoes. These are people who live, but have no being. These are people whose situations that—they, they can’t handle it. And what we’re doing is we’re setting up another burden for the state.”

The “true purpose” of the bill, according to Wilson, “is to play on the consciousness of a mother who looks at a sonogram of a child and has to say, ‘go ahead, have it. Who’s going to help me through this prenatal care?’”

Wilson added, “We’re going to make a law that’s going to put so much burden on people who already have enough to carry. Their backs are bent because they have so much to carry. And that’s all this bill is going to do. And I think it’s morally wrong.”

Sen. Nan Rich (D-Sunrise) said the bill places an “undue burden” on women seeking abortions in violation of the 1992 Supreme Court decision in Planned Parenthood v. Casey.

“This bill is about, I believe, blatant government interference,” Rich said. “It’s also insulting to women who should be the one’s responsible for making decisions about their lives and their bodies with the professional judgment of their doctors or caregiver. The state should not be the one telling a woman what she needs to do to make an informed choice. I think women can make informed choices on their own.”

Voting in favor of the bill was committee chairman Sen. Durrell Peaden Jr. (R-Crestview), Sen. Burt Saunders (R-Naples), and Gaetz.

Having been approved by a second and final committee, the bill is now ready for consideration on the Senate floor. The Florida House of Representatives approved a similar bill, HB 257, on April 2.

As of April 21 when this article went to press, it was not known when Webster’s bill will be considered in the Senate, but some observers believe the may vote come as early as April 23. (Editor’s note: SB 2400 has been scheduled for consideration in the Florida Senate on April 24.)

For legislative updates, check-out the Witness Web site: www.FloridaBaptistWitness.com.

The Legislature is scheduled to adjourn May 2.