Pennsylvania House Votes Heavily for Abortion Curbs

The Pennsylvania House on Tuesday overwhelmingly approved a set of far-reaching abortion restrictions--the first legislative victory for abortion foes in the months since the U.S. Supreme Court gave states more power to regulate the procedure.

The measure, which sailed through on a 143-58 vote, is expected to easily clear the Senate next month and be signed by Democratic Gov. Robert P. Casey.

Its key provisions would generally impose a 24-hour waiting period for those seeking abortions, require married women to notify their husbands before aborting a fetus they had conceived together and ban abortion after 24 weeks of gestation.

The strong measure would also prohibit abortions as a means of gender selection. Although such a restriction would affect a small fraction of abortions, it would be the first time that a state could block an abortion simply because it has deemed unacceptable a woman’s reason for seeking it.

The vote offered encouragement to abortion foes, who had been dealt a setback in the first legislative confrontation over the issue earlier this month in Florida. The legislature there, meeting in special session, refused to consider new abortion restrictions.

Legislators in Michigan and Wisconsin are expected to vote soon on bills that would make it difficult for minors to get an abortion without their parents’ knowledge and consent.

After approving the basic legislation, Pennsylvania lawmakers offered dozens of amendments and debated them into the night. As the amendments were offered, the legislators established a pattern of defeating all proposed changes that were meant to weaken the bill.

The bill’s provisions go far beyond restrictions imposed anywhere else in the country, and its backers expect vigorous court challenges. However, they hope that the U.S. Supreme Court’s new conservative majority will allow the measure to stand, as it did in upholding a narrower set of Missouri regulations last July 3.

Ultimately, abortion foes want the court to overturn the landmark 1973 Roe vs. Wade decision that protects abortion as a national right. The Pennsylvania measure, if enacted, could give the court that opportunity, said Republican state Rep. Stephen F. Freind, the Pennsylvania House’s leading abortion opponent.

Freind described the legislation as “a moderate, common-sense approach to this issue.”

The huge margin of approval was not a surprise in this state. Pennsylvania’s Democratic House and Republican Senate have consistently enacted tough anti-abortion laws in the years since Roe vs. Wade, only to see them overturned in the courts.

“For too long, many of my colleagues have been comfortable in voting against a woman’s right to choose, because they always thought the court would be there to (stop them from going too far). That may not be the case any more, and we will all have to live with the repercussions of what we do here today,” said Democratic Rep. Karen A. Ritter, the House’s leading proponent of abortion rights.

Polls--a hard-to-interpret and easily manipulated gauge of public sentiment on abortion--indicate that Pennsylvanians are closely divided on the issue. In a recent statewide telephone survey sponsored by three Pennsylvania newspapers, 52% of 546 registered voters indicated that they want the legislature to make it harder to get an abortion. The survey had a 5-percentage-point margin of error.

A poll by the National Abortion Rights Action League indicated that three-quarters of the state believes that abortion is a private matter between a woman and her doctor and that the state should not interfere.

“Pennsylvania’s legislators, led by extremist Stephen Freind, defied the pro-choice majority they are supposed to represent, and they will pay the political price,” said Kate Michelman, the league’s executive director.

But Nancy Myers, spokeswoman for the National Right to Life Committee, the country’s largest anti-abortion organization, said: “We’re thrilled. It shows that the people of Pennsylvania, through their lawmakers, have spoken. They want protection of unborn children.”

With the national media descending on the state Capitol, the House for the first time allowed television cameras to cover the entire debate, which abortion opponents punctuated with gruesome descriptions of the abortion procedure.

Others described their own experiences with childbirth and complications that may arise.

Rep. Lois Sherman Hagarty, a Republican, recounted her pain at giving birth to a stillborn infant several years ago and argued that other women should not be forced to have that experience.

Some of the most vigorous debate centered on the bill’s spousal notification provision. “I would ask all the males here who have the specific parts they were born with to stand up and be counted,” said GOP Rep. Dennis E. Leh, one of those who supported the provision giving men a role in the abortion decision.

Women would not be required to notify their husbands if someone else had fathered the fetus, the husband could not be found or she could show that he might physically harm her if he knew.

A tabulation of the votes showed how the abortion issue crosses party lines in some states. Although their national party supports abortion rights, Pennsylvania’s Democratic House members voted by a better than 2-1 ratio to restrict them.

Republicans, on the other hand, conformed with the GOP’s national anti-abortion stance, voting 3 to 1 in favor of the bill.