Senate expected to vote on ultrasound abortion bill Wednesday

TALLAHASSEE (FBW) – The Florida Senate revisited its discussion of an ultrasound abortion bill April 29 and with opponents’ decision to withdraw hostile amendments the body is now poised to engage in a final debate and vote on the legislation April 30.

For related coverage, click image.

The Senate initially discussed SB 2400 on April 24 before tabling the measure after an hour of intense questions to the sponsor, Sen. Daniel Webster (R-Winter Garden).

According to several news accounts, the vote count on the legislation is expected to be very close, perhaps decided by one or two senators.

The bill would require pregnant women and girls seeking an abortion to have an ultrasound, although they may decline to view the image. Current law already requires an ultrasound before an abortion in the second and third trimester of pregnancy.

Two amendments that Webster said on April 24 would “gut” his bill offered by seven senators – Mike Bennett (R-Bradenton), Nan Rich (D-Sunrise), Ted Deutch (D-Delray Beach), Gwen Margolis (D-Bay Harbor Island), Paula Dockery (R-Lakeland), Arthenia Joyner (D-Tampa), and Jim King (R-Jacksonville) – were withdrawn by Bennett during the April 29 debate.

During the April 29 discussion, Webster, a longtime member of First Baptist Church of Central Florida in Orlando, was questioned about his bill by senators for about 45 minutes with many of the questions revisiting issues raised in the April 24 floor discussion.

Asked if his ultimate goal was to deter abortions in Florida, Webster admitted, “I’m pro-life. So, I want to see as many people at least think as long as they can about it.”

Noting that abortion is legal, Webster said: “I’d like to at least give the very best information we can and this is good information, I think…. And, if they choose to keep that unborn child ‘til birth, I’d be happy.”

An emotional Sen. Frederica Wilson (D-Miami Gardens) asked Webster about the purpose of the bill, asserting, “Why, why are we forcing our philosophies and values on people who are so different from us?”

Introducing her question, Wilson suggested senators do not understand the lives of poor people, those “who live in places you wouldn’t be caught dead in. These are people who move and breathe but have no being.”

Wilson made very similar comments April 15 during committee consideration of the bill.

“Well, first of all, to say that I haven’t been to where you’re talking about … may be true,” Webster replied. “However, I do know that I have been to some pretty poor neighborhoods. I use to go every week for 15 years on Saturday all around those neighborhoods asking, begging the adults in those houses to let me take them to Sunday School on a bus. And then I’d come by and I’d pick them up. I also would take them food and clothes and whatever else we needed to give them. So, maybe I have, maybe I haven’t, but I’ve got a feeling I’ve been where you’re talking about. So, I care for those folks.”

Webster said the purpose of the bill was to provide the best, most technologically advanced information available to women considering an abortion. He repeatedly noted that virtually all abortion clinics in Florida already require ultrasounds in the first trimester.

“All this does is say, turn around the [ultrasound] screen, if she wants to. If she doesn’t, you don’t have to,” he said.

Sen. Nan Rich (D-Sunrise) said since 95 percent of abortions in Florida are done in the first trimester, Webster’s bill represented a “major change in public policy.”

Webster responded: “I guess it’s all in the way you see it. We already have in law – it’s a policy of this state – to have information given. It’s written information. This is some information that’s available. Why would it be withheld?”

Sen. Burt Sanders (R-Naples), revisiting comments he made April 24, noted he voted for the bill in committee “because I thought it was important to have this debate.”

Saunders said there were “some questions that needed to be answered” regarding whether the bill would allow physicians to decline to do an ultrasound if it was not in the best interest of the patient.

Webster responded by noting abortion clinics already require the procedure, “They don’t offer exceptions. So, they’re going to do the ultrasound…. Whether someone looks at it or not is the only thing we’re talking about.”

Sen. Ronda Storms (R-Brandon), a member of First Baptist Church in Brandon, said she did a Google search for Florida abortion providers and cited as one example an abortion clinic in Lakeland which lists various required tests, including anemia, urine, blood and ultrasounds.

Webster said several times during the discussion that abortion clinics must perform ultrasounds to determine the age of the fetus in order to calculate the price of the abortion.

Sen. Ted Deutch (D-Delray Beach) pressed Webster about forcing women whose unborn child has a severe birth defect, such as anencephaly in which the babies “look like frogs” on ultrasounds, asking, “Why are we subjecting that woman to a description of what she already knows is a horrific condition that has led her to the point in the first place?”

Webster replied that such a woman could invoke the opt-out provision of the bill.

“No one in this bill is required to see an ultrasound. None,” he said.

The Florida House of Representatives adopted on April 2 a similar bill, HB 257, although the measure also addresses parental notice and twenty-four hour waiting period abortion provisions. The House bill is also pending on the Senate calendar.

If Webster has enough votes to pass his bill, the Senate will be asked to substitute his bill for the House version, with the House likely to agree to accept the Senate version, Webster has indicated in several news accounts.

The 60-day legislative session will adjourn Fri., May 2.