Ultrasound bill is blow to women
Editorial, Tallahassee Democrat
Florida legislators have found some solid ground on which to build grandstanding bills this session.
Sen. Gary Siplin, D-Orlando, did it on the behinds of children, ushering through his "pull your pants up" bill without breaking a sweat. Then Rep. Trey Traviesa, R-Tampa, and Sen. Dan Webster, R-Winter Garden, stood on the backs of women in a flagrant appeal to conservative voters during an election year.
House Bill 257, adopted and under consideration now by the full Senate as SB 2400, require women in first-trimester pregnancies who are seeking an abortion to view an ultrasound of their pregnancies or to sign a waiver declining to view the procedure and have it explained. (Women with second- and third-trimester pregnancies seeking an abortion are already required by Florida law to undergo an ultrasound.)
Republican lawmakers are touting the bill's requirements with wide-eyed innocence, saying it will provide women with the best medical care. Supporters included Rep. Marti Coley, R-Marianna, who appeared rather disingenuous saying "I can't imagine any man having a surgical procedure without having all the tests," when she was criticized for standing against women's rights with her vote.
The 70-45 vote in the House provided sound-bite goodness for Mr. Traviesa, but it's a double blow for women's rights — for women, period — in Florida. The Senate should let this one fade with next week's sine die.
As an unfunded mandate, the measure would pass the costs of these expensive tests on to hospitals and doctors in the case of an uninsured woman — and public-health dollars are already being cut by $1 billion in the Senate budget. And it is clearly an intrusion into the privacy of a doctor-patient relationship.
Above all, however, this legislation is worrisome because it lightly chips away at the nation's law as it exists through Roe v. Wade, employing familiar strategies conservative Republican forces have launched for ending women's rights one state at a time. Moderate Republicans, lead by Senate Rules Chairman Jim King of Jacksonville, see this issue for what it is and are opposing the legislation, defending a woman's right to privacy.
As Mr. King said, this legislation is not only needlessly divisive in an election year but also political bloat — constipating the legislative process when dire economic matters are much more urgent, complex and meaningful to all Floridians.
If lawmakers supporting this legislation are legitimately concerned with women's health, they should be fighting to include in the state budget the $64 million Gov. Charlie Crist proposes to invest in public-health spending throughout the state.