Observations of the Senate Hearings

I listened to the live cast of the TX Senate hearings yesterday where I could. While I do not believe it will actually change any minds, I am glad that the Senate at least allowed all who signed up to speak, unlike the House proceedings last week. There was a variety of testimony on both sides, with some providing compelling, sometimes heart wrenching, testimony, while others left only confusion in their wake.

The supporters of the bill fell into three categories. The first essentially stated “These senators say this will bill will make the procedure more safe, so why not support that?”. These were the minority, but also appeared to be the least ideologically driven. The second, more prominent group included the folks stating “Women cannot be trusted to make their own decisions, so the government should make it for them”. The last group stated very plainly “abortion is against my religion and any bill that makes it more restrictive should be passed”. 

There is little you can say to the third group that will make a difference. I will, none the less, point out that if you make any religious argument for a secular law, you’re doing it wrong. I will also point out that if your ultimate goal is to lower the occurrence of abortion, then making it more restrictive will not do that. You can review my prior posts for reasons and ways of actually decreasing abortion rates, but I’ve found that “true believers” do not tend to be pragmatic. If they see something as “morally wrong” by their religion, they want it to have the force of the law against it regardless of the damage that would cause. Luckily these folks, while numerous and passionate, are not the majority anymore.

                It was slightly depressing to see just how many women fell into the second category. Over and over I heard testimony that stated “I had an abortion, and I regret my choice, so I want the law to ensure no one else has the right to make that choice”. I empathize with the women who went through traumatic experiences, especially those few who were forced by a parent or significant other into making a decision they didn’t truly want. That being said, taking away other people’s choice won’t fix that. There are people who regret having kids at the age they did. There are people who regret giving children up for adoption. There are people that regret nothing no matter their choice. It is up to each individual to decide what is best for them and no blanket answer can fit everyone’s needs. Everyone makes choices they regret at some point, but that is part of being human. We learn from those so that we do not make the same mistakes again ourselves, and share our experiences with others so that they can use it to make their own decisions. We should not take those choices away. After all, if you feel your fellow women are incapable of making that choice, what other choices should you give up? Should we do arranged marriages so that you do not have to regret your choice of spouses? It’s not unheard of, most commonly in societies where women are viewed as incapable of making decisions for themselves.

                The first group seems the most misled. These are the folks I hope will actually alter their views of the bill once they read it in its entirety. I heard many statements such as “all it takes is some money and these clinics can stay open. Surely as much money as the abortion industry makes, it will spend the money on these upgrades, right?” These folks mean well but haven’t actually read what is involved here. For starters, there has not been an abortion related death in Texas since 2008, and complications in abortions happen at a rate of 1/14^th the occurrence of natural child birth. With these well-established facts, why are we spending millions of dollars to push this bill through? With so many actual issues facing the Texas public, why are we adding regulations to an industry that for the past five years has failed to post one single mortality?

           “Yes,” some readers will say, “but they could still be even more safe, couldn’t they? Why fight that?” It is true that  abortion clinics can absolutely increase their hallway width, the size of the procedure room where they often just give a woman a pill, add a specific janitorial closet and even add a men’s locker room (though how this will help increase abortion safety is beyond me). But what it cannot control is whether or not a hospital will grant them admitting privileges. The bill requires that in order to stay open, a clinic’s doctor must have these privileges. It does not, however, require hospitals to grant them. As many hospitals are run by religious groups with their own bias against the procedure, those hospitals are not likely to grant these privileges. Even state run facilities have become very reticent to hand out privileges due to a variety of factors ranging from liability, local government restrictions, or even personal bias on behalf the hospital’s president. This one regulation, by many accounts, stands to shut down most of the currently operating clinics in the state, and short of opening up their own hospital there will be absolutely nothing these clinics can do to stop it. One needs only look at other states that have already implemented similar restrictions to see the aftermath. State after state has seen similar restrictions with most of their facilities closing. A recent report by Guttmacher Institute shows that in the past four years, over 1200 of the nation’s 3000 facilities have closed. Given that many of these facilities are also the only affordable option for women to obtain family planning, birth control, STD testing, and cancer screening, this is a huge loss that is growing worse. If even that fails to convince you of the true purpose of this bill, I would point you to the tweet by Lt. Governor David Dewhurst showing a map of the facilities expected to close with this bill along with a statement reading  "We fought to pass (Senate Bill 5) thru the Senate last night, & this is why!"