A few Texas Republican representatives apparently don’t feel that HB2 was enough embarrassment and grief for our state, so they’ve decided to expend more taxpayer money to pursue even more egregiously unconstitutional restrictions on abortion rights (h/t Evin).
The text of HB59, introduced today in the Texas House of Representatives, is not yet available online. The bill’s caption is “Relating to a prohibition on abortion after detection of a fetal heartbeat; providing penalties.”
According to the Mayo Clinic, the heart may begin beating as early as six weeks. It is not clear if HB59 would prohibit abortion after a specific number of weeks, or if it would prohibit doctors from performing an abortion if they can detect a heartbeat. Regardless, the law is just a bad idea.
North Dakota’s six-week abortion ban, signed into law in March, is based on the idea of a fetal heartbeat. That law did not give a specific time frame either, but it has been interpreted to ban abortion at around the six-week mark. That law has also been ruled unconstitutional, which of course is the goal for proponents of these bills, who know they’ll be struck down but keep hoping they can get a case before the Supreme Court in order to reverse Roe v. Wade. A Kansas anti-choice advocate admitted as much earlier this year, according to Huffington Post:
Mark Gietzen, the head of the Kansas Coalition for Life, told HuffPost that the hearing was “excellent,” and that he and his allies were able to make their case for the bill. He said he is confident the bill could go further this year, since originally he was told there would not be a hearing.
In an email to supporters earlier this month, Gietzen noted that the bill was designed to appeal to Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy, considered the court’s swing vote on abortion, to force the court to overturn Roe v. Wade.
So who are the architects of the latest waste of Texas taxpayer money? Rep. Phil King (R-Weatherfod), Rep. Dan Flynn (R-Canton), and Rep. Geanie W. Morrison (R-Victoria). Unfortunately, they all seem pretty secure in their seats. I presume we can thank ten years of gerrymandering for that. King received 88.89% of the vote in 2012. Flynn received 100% of the vote, which I assume means he ran unopposed. Democrats should get on that. In his last opposed election, 2008, Flynn got 85.04%, but he only got 58.49% in 2006 (still a “landslide” by most metrics, but not as much of one). Morrison won her seat in 2012 with “only” 68.33% of the vote, but she captured 100% in 2010, 2008, and 2006, 2002, and 2000.
The issue now, of course, is how the state is going to pay for the inevitable litigation. Going to court isn’t cheap, and if we learned anything from the Supreme Court’s Prop 8 decision, state governments have to defend their own bills. North Dakota, whose economy is doing rather well, sought to set aside $400,000 to cover the costs of defending its abortion ban in court. The ostensibly-fiscally-conservative Republican governor suddenly found an area where unpredictable government spending was acceptable, as he told the AP:
He said he didn’t know how much the likely court fight would cost. But, he said money wasn’t the issue.
As it turns out, a private organization, Liberty Counsel, may have offered to cover North Dakota’s costs. Maybe that’s fair, in the sense that private organizations already have to cover the entire cost of fighting against these laws, but there is something to be said for keeping the costs of defending the laws on the taxpayers who keep electing these people. Voters may not learn their lesson that way, but they definitely won’t learn it if someone else is picking up the tab.
Texas isn’t booming in quite the way North Dakota apparently is, so it will be interesting to see how Texas Republicans will justify the expenditures.
Just kidding. Texas Republicans never feel the need to justify themselves to anybody.
Photo credit: grietgriet from morguefile.com.
