House Status:
Senate Status:
Senate Status:
Minutes for HCR5019 - Committee on Federal and State Affairs
Short Title
Amending the bill of rights of the constitution of the state of Kansas to reserve to the people the right to regulate abortion through their elected state representatives and senators.
Minutes Content for Tue, Jan 21, 2020
Chairperson Barker opened the hearing on HCR5019. Jason Long, Revisor, provided an overview of HCR5019 (Attachment 1). Questions were asked by Representatives Carmichael and Humphries.
Jeff Chanay, Chief Deputy Attorney General, was recognized by the Chair as a proponent on HCR5019 (Attachment 2). He stated that passage of the proposed constitutional amendment does not present any legal or procedural concerns to the Office of the Attorney General. Representative Carmichael objected to this witness's testimony since no written testimony has been provided. Chairperson Barker overruled the objection stating he had given his approval for the deputy to testify with the understanding that the written testimony would be provided by the close of business. Questions were asked by Representatives Houser and Carmichael.
Elizabeth Kirk, J.D., testified as a proponent of HCR5019 (Attachment 3). She testified that the standard of judicial review adopted by the court in Hodes and Nauser v. Schmidt is so rigorous that it is likely to unsettle existing Kansas abortion law and result in extended, expensive litigation and a more permissive legal landscape for abortion than either the current federal standard or the standard established by Roe v. Wade. Representative Carmichael questioned the proponent.
Chairperson Barker stated that because of the number of proponents, oral testimony will be limited to five minutes.
Brittany Jones testified as a proponent on behalf of the Family Policy Alliance (Attachment 4). She stated that the strict scrutiny standard applied by the Hodes decision puts the following regulations at risk of being struck down: 1) The Women's Right to Know Act and waiting periods; 2) parental notification; 3) clinic licensing; and 4) funding restrictions on abortion. She urged the Committee to pass this amendment to ensure that these restrictions remain in Kansas law.
Dr. Jonathan Scrafford provided proponent testimony on HCR5019 (Attachment 5). Representative Carmichael objected that Dr. Scrafford would not be available to stay for questioning. Chairperson Barker overruled the objection. Dr. Scrafford stated that every human being should be treated with dignity, regardless of his or her stage of development and this constitutional amendment provides Kansans the chance to acknowledge the same rights and protections for all living human beings.
Chairperson Barker recognized Dr. Lisa Gilbert as a proponent of HCR5019 (Attachment 6). She stated this amendment allows the preservation of protections for women and children, such as informed consent counseling, parental consent for minors, safety protocols and clinic standards. This amendment allows voters and those they place in office to advance those protections deemed most important to Kansas citizens.
Jacqueline Pfeifer, Ph.D. was recognized as a proponent of HCR5019 (Attachment 7). She stated she is a licensed psychologist and she is passionate about the need for parental consent and notification regarding youth pursuing abortions. Minors are not prepared to make long-term decisions due to their lack of mental capacity to reflect, synthesize, integrate, and project their thinking into the future. Minors will change their minds frequently due to their lack of life experience. Whenever a child is faced with a major life decision, they need the support, guidance and input from adults who know them best -- their family.
Dr. Catherine Powers testified in support of HCR5019 (Attachment 8). She stated that the implication of the Kansas Supreme Court decision to allow young female adolescents to consent to a procedure such as an abortion, without parental or a guardian's consent, is not standard of care in any other area of healthcare and may have future consequences for a young woman's physical, emotional, and psychological health. She also stated research has shown that babies of 18 weeks gestation have developed pain pathways.
Ann Marie Alvey was recognized as a proponent of HCR5019 on behalf of Project Rachel and Project Joseph (Attachment 9). She stated she works in a ministry that helps people heal from a past abortion. The common denominator in all their stories is regret, guilt and shame, whether their choice was free or not. She believes women have a right to be well informed about what could happen to them if they choose to have an abortion.
Chairperson Barker recognized Danette (LNU) as a proponent of HCR5019 (Attachment 10). She testified concerning the lingering effects of having an abortion and asked that this amendment be put on the ballot to be voted on by the people of Kansas.
Jeanette Pryor testified as a proponent on HCR5019 on behalf of the Kansas Catholic Conference (Attachment 11). She stated she is most concerned about parental consent regulations. If Kansas legislators do not reverse the Court's ruling in the Hodes case, such regulations could be deemed unconstitutional. She asks the Committee to protect the parental consent laws by supporting this constitutional amendment.
The Chairperson recognized Jeanne Gawdun as a proponent on HCR5019 on behalf of Kansans for Life (Attachment 12). She stated that there are no federal requirements for abortion facility licensing and abortion damage incident collection It is incumbent upon the state to ensure that valuable safeguards exist for pregnant women.
Chairperson Barker recognized Daniel Coughlin, Ph.D., J.D., who testified as a proponent of HCR5019 (Attachment 13). He stated that Kansans should have the opportunity to protect unborn children from abortions. This amendment presents an opportunity to right a wrong.
Bob Corkins testified as a proponent of HCR5019 on behalf of the Liberty Alliance (Attachment 14). He stated that the Liberty Alliance believes the Kansas Supreme Court has misinterpreted fundamental rights in its decision in Hodes and Nauser v. Schmidt. They maintain that while respecting all persons' self-autonomy, family decisions and procreation decisions do not allow for any presumption that bringing an end to a human life is justified. He stated passage of this constitutional amendment is necessary.
Chairperson Barker asked if there were any further proponents. Seeing none, he stated that questions would be taken up at this time. Questions were asked by Representative Lusk of Dr. Catherine Powers and Jeanette Pryor. Representative Ruiz had a question for Dr. Lisa Gilbert. Representative Highberger had a question for Brittany Jones. Representative Awerkamp had a question for Dr. Catherine Powers.
A recess was taken at 10:50 a.m. Chairperson Barker stated that the hearing would reconvene at 12:00 noon.
Whereupon, the proceedings were reconvened at 12:00 noon. Representative Carmichael had questions for Brittany Jones, Dr. Lisa Gilbert, and Jeanne Gawdun. Representative Woodard had a question for Jeanne Gawdun; Representative Highberger had a question for Dr. Lisa Gilbert; Representative Carmichael had a question for Bob Corkins; Representative Humphries had questions for Dr. Lisa Gilbert; and Representative Clayton had a question for Jeanette Pryor.
Chairperson Barker stated that there was written proponent testimony from the following: Mel and JuLee Adams (Attachment 15); Kathleen Ahearn (Attachment 16); Angela Baalmann (Attachment 17); Linda Baker (Attachment 18); Sheryl Beard, MD, FAAFP (Attachment 19); Students of Benedictine College (Attachment 20); Charlee Bonczkowski, President of Washburn University College Republicans and Ichabods For Life (Attachment 21); Elijah Brian, Representative of The Lifeguard Initiative (Attachment) 22; Pro-Life Medical Students of Kansas City, Kansas (Attachment 23); Karin Capron (Attachment 24); Nate Clennan (Attachment 25); Zoe Cosgrove (Attachment 26); Connie Cragg (Attachment 27); Kathy and Rich Delaney (Attachment 28); Rebecca Gordon (Attachment 29); Gary Grimes (Attachment 30); Jared Harpt (Attachment 31); Patrick R. Herrick, MD, PhD (Attachment 32); Viola Heskett (Attachment 33); Timothy M. Jackson (Attachment 34); Jennifer Johnson, MD, FAAP (Attachment 35); Diane Macheers (Attachment 36); TerriLois Mashburn (Attachment 37); Amanda C. Mayfield (Attachment 38); Melissa McAllister (Attachment 39); Kerry Mian (Attachment 40); Angelica Nelson (Attachment 41); Jerome Nienaber (Attachment 42); Edward O'Brien (Attachment 43); Justin A. Panzer, The Lutheran Church -- Missouri Synod (LCMS) (Attachment 44); Patrick Andre Penn (Attachment 45); Benjamin J. Rogers (Attachment 46); Ashley Sherrow (Attachment 47); Julie Sipe (Attachment 48); Pastor Robert Spagnuolo and wife Delores Spagnuolo (Attachment 49); Ryan J.Strahler (Attachment 50); and Dr. Larry and Mary Wilkinson (Attachment 51).
Chairperson Barker closed the proponent portion and opened the hearing for testimony from the opponents. He stated that because of the large number of conferees they would each have a time limit of four minutes and questions will be allowed after all opponents have testified.
Chairperson Barker recognized Representative Nancy Lusk as an opponent on HCR5019 (Attachment 52). Representative Lusk stated that she is here to provide the Christian pro-choice perspective. She is concerned that the proposed abortion amendment in HR5019 will open the door to every abortion restriction possible, even a complete ban. Her biggest concern is women who suffer a serious pregnancy complication and must have an abortion procedure to survive or avoid grievous physical harm will not be able to get the help they need.
Joy Koesten, Ph.D., was recognized as an opponent on HCR5019 (Attachment 53). She appears before the Committee as a Jewish citizen who values human life. This bill would render the Hodes and Nauser v. Schmidt decision moot and strip the rights of self-determination and autonomy from half the population. If the members of the Committee truly want to support pro-life policies and reduce the number of abortions, they should focus on policies that will help women prevent unwanted pregnancies and that ensure that a woman and her fertilized egg will have only the best of care from conception to old age.
Rachel Sweet of Planned Parenthood provided testimony in opposition to HCR5019 (Attachment 54). She stated that Planned Parenthood is strongly opposed to this constitutional amendment. Abortion is a safe and common medical procedure and should be regulated as such. No constitutional change is necessary. What this constitutional amendment will do is make it possible for the State to set even more restrictions on the right to abortion with no regard for a woman's health, whether she has been raped or been a victim of incest.
The Chair recognized Nigel Morton as an opponent of HCR5019 on behalf of Unite for Reproductive and Gender Equity (URGE) (Attachment 55). He stated that using the state constitution to take basic protections and healthcare away from people is a betrayal of the values and purpose of the constitution. Abortion must remain legal in Kansas. Abortion is a personal decision and it is not for politicians to create barriers and restrictions against it. URGE strongly opposes HCR5019.
Gavriela Geller testified in opposition to HCR5019 on behalf of the Jewish Community Relations Bureau/American Jewish Committee (JCRB/AJC) (Attachment 56). She stated that the JCRB/AJC strongly opposes HCR5019 on the grounds that it would allow the state to prohibit members of the Jewish and other faith communities from making reproductive health decisions in accordance with their faith's tenets, and violation of the principle of separation of church and state. Jewish law is very clear that the fetus in the womb is not equivalent to the life of the mother. It is only when the baby is halfway out of the womb that its life is equivalent to the life of the mother.
The Chair recognized Kara Motley to testify in opposition of HCR5019 on behalf of Medical Students for Choice (Attachment 57). She stated that the State should not create barriers to healthcare, but should make it easier for all Kansans to have access to comprehensive medical care. Kansas is in the midst of a physician shortage. The need for young new physicians is more crucial than ever before. This constitutional amendment will drive away young new physicians because it would prevent them from providing adequate, compassionate care to their patients.
Sandy Brown of the Kansas Abortion Fund testified in opposition to HCR5019 (Attachment 58). She stated the Kansas Abortion Fund is a nonprofit organization that supports Kansans in need of financial support to obtain abortion services and is here to urge the Committee to vote no on HCR5019. The people they serve will be the first and hardest hit by this legislation because low income people frequently cannot afford what is theoretically a right guaranteed to all. Decisions about whether to end a pregnancy are deeply personal and should be left to a woman in consultation with her healthcare provider.
The Chair recognized Julie Burkhart, who testified as an opponent to HCR5019 on behalf of Trust Women (Attachment 59). They are the only provider of procedural and medication abortion services outside the Kansas City area. She stated this amendment would put the health of Kansas women in danger. It is the first step in passing an all-out ban on abortion in Kansas. The Kansas Legislature could affirm the right to life for everyone in Kansas by expanding Medicaid, working to eradicate maternal and infant mortality, and working to ensure that all forms of contraception are widely available, especially for people with limited resources.
Kathleen Marker testified in opposition to HCR5019 on behalf of the YWCA Northeast Kansas (Attachment 60). She stated that the YWCA opposes all efforts to limit the ability of women to access comprehensive reproductive health services, including contraception and abortion. This amendment takes away rights from women in the Kansas Constitution. Abortion is a personal, private medical decision made by a woman in consultation with her family, her faith and her doctor.
Mary Reynolds testified on behalf of Catholics for Choice in opposition to HCR5019 (Attachment 61). Catholics for Choice opposes this legislation because it interferes with a woman's ability to exercise her conscience and thus undercuts her moral agency.
The Chair recognized Karen Wiederaenders who testified as an opponent of HCR5019 (Attachment 62). She stated that her research has shown that fetuses do not feel pain until the third trimester. 98.5 percent of abortions occur in the first trimester. She stated an abortion can be a life-saving procedure for a woman. It is vitally important that her ability to receive this medical procedure not be hindered or prohibited by the overreach of state government. An article is attached to her testimony entitled "Personhood: A Legal and Bioethical Synthesis" which she believes the Committee will find helpful.
Nadine Johnson testified on behalf of the ACLU Kansas as an opponent (Attachment 63). She stated this proposed constitutional amendment is an unacceptable infringement on a woman's personal autonomy and ability to make deeply personal medical decisions. It puts politics above the safeguarding of a woman's health.
Megan McQuinn was recognized as an opponent of HCR5019 (Attachment 64). She told her story of having an abortion. She stated that none of her successes since that time would have been possible if she hadn't been able to exercise her right to decide what happens to her body. She urged the Committee to oppose HCR5019.
The Chair recognized Selina Sandoval, MD as an opponent of HCR5019 (Attachment 65). She stated she is an obstetrician and gynecologist. She stated having an abortion is always a serious decision and women do not make it lightly. She stated abortion does not end by making it illegal; it simply becomes less safe. If abortion becomes illegal in Kansas, women will take abortion care into their own hands.
Valerie French testified in opposition to HCR5019 (Attachment 66). She stated that abortion is healthcare and is one of the safest medical procedures performed in the United States. She testified laws like this raise costs, delay procedures for women who have to travel out of state and, ultimately, put women's health at risk. She stated women can and must be trusted to make the best decisions for themselves and their families.
The Chair recognized Margaret Kramar who testified in opposition to HCR5019 (Attachment 67). She stated that the question of when life begins is not a medical question, but a religious matter. She testified that throughout history, other cultures and religions have had differing opinions on religious questions such as when the soul enters the body and under the First Amendment, no one has the right to force their religious beliefs on others.
Helena Buchmann testified as an opponent to HCR5019 (Attachment 68). She stated that Kansans deserve the right to make their medical decisions in consultation with their physicians. She is asking the Committee members to vote no on this bill.
The Chair recognized Wendy Budetti as an opponent to HCR5019 (Attachment 69). She stated that medical decisions regarding pregnancy belong between a woman and her doctor. Basic human rights should not be put to a vote. She stated this proposed amendment puts the control of a woman's body into the hands of voters, half of whom are biologically prohibited from experiencing pregnancy.
Dr. Angela Martin was recognized as an opponent to HCR5019 (Attachment) 70. She stated she is a high-risk obstetrician. She related stories of some of her patients. She stated the decision to terminate a pregnancy in the late second trimester is very difficult. She asked the Committee to please protect access to abortion as a fundamental right for all women.
Dr. Emily Martinelli is an OB/GYN who testified as an opponent to HCR5019 (Attachment 71). She stated her patients need safe access to abortion care and without this fundamental human right of medical care, women are at increased risk of death simply by being pregnant. She stated safe abortions are an integral part of healthcare and protecting the right to safe abortion care is vital to the health and safety of pregnant patients.
The Chair recognized Elise Higgins, MA, as an opponent of HCR5019 (Attachment 72). She is asking the Committee to vote no on HCR5019 as it denies the right to reproductive freedom. She stated abortion is normal and common, and restrictions on it disproportionately impact marginalized groups. In addition, she objected to the process by which the legislation is moving through the legislature.
Coree Unruh testified in opposition to HCR5019 (Attachment 73). She stated that women should not be forced to carry a pregnancy to term and a ban on legal abortions will not stop abortions and will endanger Kansas families medically and economically.
The Chair recognized Inas Younis who testified in opposition to HCR5019 (Attachment 74). She stated she is a Muslim, and Islamic tradition states that ensoulment takes place 120 days from conception. Aborting a pregnancy after that point is considered wrong unless a physician determines that continuing the pregnancy endangers the mother's life. She urges them to vote against this bill.
Diane Bellquist appeared on behalf of the Center for Reproductive Rights as an opponent to HCR5019 (Attachment 75). This organization urges the Committee to vote no on HCR5019 because the legislation causes negative consequences for Kansas women and families. A no vote is critical to the health and well-being of all Kansas citizens.
The Chair recognized Bob Eye as an opponent of HCR5019 on behalf of the National Women's Law Center (Attachment 76). He stated he was one of the lawyers who represented the plaintiffs in the Hodes and Nauser v. Schmidt case, both at the district court level and before the Kansas Supreme Court. He stated that the role of a constitution is to protect our rights from infringement and this proposed constitutional amendment does the opposite by taking away the right to abortion. This constitutional amendment would pave the way for lawmakers to pass medically unnecessary and inappropriate abortion restrictions, including bans that would prevent many from seeking the abortion care they need.
At 2:10 p.m., a recess was taken until 3:00 p.m.
Chairperson Barker reconvened the hearing on HCR5019 at 3:00 p.m.
The Chair recognized Alicen Fleming as an opponent to HCR5019 (Attachment 77). She stated that it is her constitutional right to decide when, why, and under what circumstances she would become a mother. When women are not given a choice, they risk their own health and the health of their families.
Phil Wood testified in opposition to HCR5019 (Attachment 78). He told the Committee of he and his wife's pregnancy with twins and subsequent abortion. He stated abortion is a very difficult decision, and he feels that it should be up to the physicians and their patient to make such decisions whether to have an abortion or continue a pregnancy.
The Chair recognized Lindsey Mills who testified on behalf of Lynn Paltrow and the National Advocates for Pregnant Women in opposition to HCR5019 (Attachment 79). She stated that this measure degrades and devalues women. It disregards the people who get pregnant, give birth and provide the majority of care for children in this country. She urges them to vote no on this amendment.
Chairperson Barker then opened the floor for questions from the Committee to the opponents. Questions were asked by Representatives Erickson, Carpenter, Highberger, Arnberger, Eplee, Carmichael, and Thomas. Representative Clayton had a question for the Revisor concerning personhood bills.
Chairperson Barker closed the oral opponent testimony portion of the hearing. He noted that 183 pieces of testimony has been submitted and the testimony will be posted on the official website as soon as practicable. Chairperson Barker thanked the conferees and those in the audience for being here.
The following written opponent testimony was submitted to the Committee: Linda Aldridge, Ed.D. (Attachment 80); Andrew Tyler Allen (Attachment 81); Grace Altenhofen (Attachment 82); Dr. Stephanie Amaya (Attachment 83); Glen and Marty Armbruster (Attachment 84); Christina Becker (Attachment 85); Emily Boevers, M.D. (Attachment 86); David Buchmann (Attachment 87); Mischa Buckler (Attachment 88); Christie Burkhart (Attachment 89); S.L. Caro (Attachment 90); Tara Chettiar, M.D. (Attachment 91); Mandy Stark Culbertson (Attachment 92); Alexi Dejulio (Attachment 93; Heather Edvenson (Attachment 94); Elizabeth Ekis (Attachment 95); Shelby Ellis (Attachment 96); Lin Fennell, FN (Attachment 97); Aneliese Apala Flaherty (Attachment 98); Willie Apala Flaherty (Attachment 99); Solana Flora (Attachment 100); Erin Fraise (Attachment 101); Leena Fry (Attachment 102); Ximena Garcia, M.D. (Attachment 103); Melissa Gard (Attachment 104); Bruce Garren (Attachment 105); Sandra Geduldig (Attachment 106); Lauren Gernon, MPH (Attachment 107); Rabbi David Glickman (Attachment 108); Pat Goodson (Attachment 109); David Graham (Attachment 110); Jeri Graham (Attachment 111); Jane Cohen Greene (Attachment 112); Rev. Laura Guy (Attachment 113); Brittany Hackerott (Attachment 114); Danyale Hankerson (Attachment 115); Kelly Hansen, M.Div. (Attachment 116); Logan Heley (Attachment 117); Brett Hoedl (Attachment 118); Margaret Hogarty (Attachment 119); Heidi Holliday (Attachment 120); Barbara Holzmark (Attachment 121); W. Kay Hopkins (Attachment 122); Lynne Kallenbach, M.D. (Attachment 123); Teresa Kelly (Attachment 124); Traci Klein (Attachment 125); Rabbi Monica Kleinman (Attachment 126); Rabbi Judah Kogen (Attachment 127); Margaret Kowalski-Reynolds (Attachment 128); Pam Kroll (Attachment 129); Renee Kuhl (Attachment 130); Grace Lallement (Attachment 131); Catherine Leslie (Attachment 132); Ann Lintecum (Attachment 133); Kathryn Lorenzen (Attachment 134); Janice Manlove (Attachment 135); Leslie Mark (Attachment 136); Lauren Martin (Attachment 137); Grant Mayfield (Attachment 138); Nikki McDonald (Attachment 139); Ann Michael (Attachment 140); Deann Mitchell (Attachment) 141; Autumn Colbeth and Shawn Moore (Attachment 142); Shelly Moore (Attachment 143); Jae Moyer (Attachment 144); Lindsey Newman (Attachment 145); Tam and Dennis O'Rourke (Attachment 146); Heather Ousley (Attachment 147); Jennifer Patel (Attachment 148); Samuel Peterson (Attachment 149); Rev. Laura Ann Phillips (Attachment 150); Becky Plate (Attachment 151); Michael Poppa (Attachment 152); Mary Louise Poquette (Attachment 153); Joshua Potratz (Attachment 154); Lauren Praechter (Attachment 155); Claire Reagan (Attachment 156); Sheryl Rice (Attachment 157); Pamelyn Richardson (Attachment 158); Barbara Rogoff, The National Council of Jewish Women, Kansas City Section (Attachment 159); Riley Sanford (Attachment 160); Eiran Saucedo-Rodarte (Attachment 161); Julie Sayers (Attachment 162); Maranda Scheller (Attachment 163); Carol Longenecker Schmidt (Attachment 164); Elizabeth Scholten (Attachment 165); Wyatt Segrist (Attachment 166); Annie Sgroi (Attachment 167); Shanna Shafer (Attachment 168); Carol Shimeall (Attachment 169); Prafulla Shintri (Attachment 170); Haley Shores (Attachment 171); Shannon Skoglund (Attachment 172); Leslie Dorrough Smith, Ph.D. (Attachment 173); Rabbi Debbie Stiel, Temple Beth Sholom (Attachment 174); Shawnee Stoner (Attachment 175); Kelly Stromberg (Attachment 176); Amber Versola (Attachment 177); Amy Voelker, M.D. (Attachment 178); Robert Warren (Attachment 179); Julie Wellner (Attachment 180); Jessica Wilkus (Attachment 181); Dr. Mae Winchester (Attachment 182); Teresa Woody (Attachment 183); Cassandra Woolworth (Attachment 184); and Whitney Yadrich (Attachment 185).
Chairperson Barker closed the hearing on HCR5019. There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 4:10 p.m.
