Abortion Foes Stall Liberal Maryland Bill

As he read without emotion from a legal text on the evils of abortion, Maryland state Sen. Tom Bromwell realized at mid-afternoon Friday that he was losing his audience.

Bromwell paused for a moment. He turned to two colleagues, the only ones sitting in the Senate chamber, and implored them to end their private conversation.

“This is an interesting case,” said Bromwell, a Democrat and majority whip of the Maryland Senate. “You should listen to this. I’m only on Page 5, and I’ve got to Page 71 to go. We should be finished about 8 or 9 p.m.”

On and on, since Thursday afternoon, Bromwell and about 20 like-minded senators had waged a desperate filibuster to block passage of a bill that would give Maryland the nation’s most liberal abortion law. The filibuster was expected to continue through the weekend, maybe longer.

The anti-abortion lawmakers have acknowledged that they lack the votes to kill the bill. Their goal is to hold off passage with a marathon debate and persuade pro-choice advocates to either withdraw the measure or accept weakening amendments.

Although last summer’s U.S. Supreme Court ruling upholding the right of states to regulate abortions had been expected to lead to a welter of laws across the country restricting the procedure, a mounting wave of popular support for the pro-choice position has clearly turned the tables in some areas.

The deadlock in Maryland, a politically diverse, heavily Catholic state right on the Mason-Dixon Line, offers a case study in the turmoil and shifting momentum of the issue.

After winning legislative approval of bills limiting abortions in Pennsylvania and South Carolina, anti-abortion activists have found themselves on the defensive in state capitals across the land. Abortion-rights activists, dormant politically during much of the 1980s, were stung by the Supreme Court decision and have rallied repeatedly to win their fight in the statehouses.

Although the territorial legislature in Guam passed a highly restrictive measure this week and a similar bill is under consideration in Idaho, efforts to impose new restrictions on abortion have stalled in a number of states initially targeted by anti-abortion forces. The showdown in Maryland is being watched closely across the country to determine just how much headway pro-choice forces have made since the Supreme Court ruling.

If passed, the bill before the Maryland Legislature would be the most permissive in the nation. It would allow unrestricted abortions up to the point that a fetus is capable of living outside the womb, as determined by a doctor. Even beyond that point, it would allow abortions in cases in which the health of the mother or child is in danger.

Bebe Verdery, director of public affairs for Planned Parenthood of Maryland and the acknowledged leader of dozens of pro-choice advocates monitoring the Capitol filibuster, said that the debate in Maryland is no different from the struggles going on in other states.

“There is a split among the politicians in the country over abortion, despite the overall public opinion that supports a woman’s right to choose,” she said. “What’s happening here is an effort to debate the issue fully. (Anti-abortion senators) know what’s going to happen when it comes to a vote. But they feel they have to debate it fully even if it’s delaying the inevitable.”

Despite the widespread attention focused on Annapolis, the scene at the Maryland Statehouse Friday was anything but dramatic.

As anti-abortion lawmakers argued to empty chairs, pro-choice senators were forced to wait for an opportunity to take up their measure. One pair of senators played Trivial Pursuit with Senate pages between meetings with lobbyists and constituents.

In a corner office, 10 cots were lined against a wall for the benefit of any senator who wanted to use them. Food and beverages were abundant, courtesy of pro-choice and anti-abortion activists eager to keep favored lawmakers comfortable and willing to wait out the filibuster.

Before bringing the issue to a vote, pro-choice forces needed 32 votes in the 47-member Senate to end the filibuster. A simple majority would be needed to pass the bill.

Although she would not name them, Verdery said she knew that certain filibustering senators were willing to break ranks at some point and vote to bring the issue to the floor, where a 28-senator majority has signaled its intention to vote for the bill.

“We know where the 32 votes are, and when they will kick in,” Verdery said, predicting that the filibuster would end no sooner than Sunday and perhaps as late as Tuesday.

Bromwell, in an interview after his turn as designated floor speaker for the anti-abortion side had ended, said the issue is fraught with election year politics.

“I think this is the wrong time to debate this,” he said. “I know that many of the pro-choice people have made a big issue of this because it’s an election year.”

He acknowledged that sentiment among the state’s voters is running 2 to 1 in favor of the pro-choice position. But he said he is willing to buck public opinion as well as the Senate leadership, of which he is a part, to support the anti-abortion cause. If his stand costs him his seat, then “I don’t want to be in the Senate,” he said.

But Sen. Clarence W. Blount, a Democrat and Senate majority leader, said the filibuster is a way for the outgunned anti-abortion advocates to send a message to their constituents--and the nation--that they would not just “roll over on the issue.”

Blount, who is black, said that the Senate’s six black members are supportive of the bill, but they were reluctant to vote against limiting debate on the issue.

“A civil rights bill may come up one day, and, though we may not have the votes, we would want to be heard,” he said. “It’s a healthy part of the political process to let a filibuster go on so everyone can air their opinion.”

However, opponents of the measure said in floor speeches and private interviews that their use of the tactic goes beyond politics.

“We who believe in life are going to do all we can to save that life, even if it’s unborn,” Sen. Thomas P. O’Reilly said during an impassioned speech on the Senate floor.

THE MARYLAND ABORTION BILL

The Maryland Senate is engaged in a bitter battle over an omnibus abortion law that would be the most liberal in the nation. Here are highlights concerning the proposed legislation: KEY ELEMENTS: The bill would allow unrestricted abortions until a fetus is determined to be viable by a physician. After that time, abortions would be allowed in cases in which the health of the mother or the child were in danger. An amendment offered by opponents, which was passed before the Senate became locked in a filibuster, would prohibit abortions solely because of the sex of the fetus.

HISTORY: Abortion rights legislators introduced the bill following an opinion from Maryland Atty. Gen. J. Joseph Curran Jr. saying that a 1968 state law would again become enforceable should the Roe vs. Wade decision be overturned by the U.S. Supreme Court. The 1968 law allowed abortions during the first trimester of pregnancy only in cases of rape, incest or where the mother’s life was in danger. It also provided that abortions must be performed in accredited hospitals, and a medical board would have to approve all abortions.

FUTURE: The Senate’s action is only the first step in making the legislation law, since the bill, which has not yet come up in the House of Delegates, must pass both chambers in identical form prior to the session’s scheduled April 9 adjournment. Should the legislation pass and be signed by Gov. William Donald Schaefer, who has not revealed his position on the issue, abortion opponents have vowed to seek to put a referendum on the measure on the November general election ballot.

Source: United Press International