House passes three apparently doomed bills: one on redistricting, two on abortion
Minnesota House members spent four hours today passing three bills — a redistricting bill and two abortion bills — that ultimately appear to be doomed.
Although the debates over the bills — especially the abortion-related bills — were passionate, the voting tallies were predictable.
Passage of the legislative redistricting map was along party lines, 69-58. It will head to the Senate where a Republican majority will almost certainly pass the same bill.
But the redistricting proposal is all but certain to be vetoed by Gov. Mark Dayton, who said from the beginning of the redistricting process that he would sign off on a map only if it had “broad bipartisan support.’’
Although both of the abortion bills drew some support from pro-life DFLers, they would appear to be doubly doomed. Dayton almost certainly will veto them. And even if the governor didn’t veto them, both seem to violate federal law.
The first of the Republican-inspired measures would make it a felony for any doctor in Minnesota to perform an abortion after 20 weeks. The only exception to that requirement would be in cases where carrying the fetus to full term would cause irreversible physical impairment of the mother.
This bill goes considerably beyond federal law, which not only allows abortions to be performed up to 24 weeks but also allows for many other exceptions for pregnancies beyond 24 weeks.
Still, it passed on an 82-46 vote. Even an effort by Rep. Phyllis Kahn, DFL-Minneapolis, to add an amendment that would allow for abortions after 24 weeks in cases in which the fetus was discovered to have profound, life-limiting disabilities was defeated by the solidly pro-life majority.
The second abortion-related bill that passed the House but faces almost certain failure and also would seem to violate federal law would prohibit any public dollars from being spent on abortion.
Rep. Peggy Scott, R-Andover, said the Legislature shouldn’t be concerned about whether her bill is legal under federal law.
“We’re here to represent the voice of the people,’’ she said.
More like this
- Mark Dayton vetoes two abortion bills
- Bill would create 'Choose Life' license plates
- Legislative group that oversees Met Council meets for first time in three years
- Political recrimination: Republican Tingelstad on her override vote and its fallout
- Are GOP legislators counting on a 'miracle finish'?
Recent Stories
Most Commented
-
30 comments
-
27 comments
-
27 comments
-
26 comments
-
23 comments
Comments (1)
Rep. Peggy Scott, R-Andover, said the Legislature shouldn’t be concerned about whether her bill is legal under federal law. “We’re here to represent the voice of the people."
Of course. Why should legislators concern themselves with over such trivialities? If the people want to smoke marijuana, get a government paid abortion, and increase taxation on the rich to balance the budget, we should give them that, too.
Voice of the people. Right, Scott?