Senate sends bill to Rauner that would aid low-income women’s abortion access

May 10--Illinois Senate Democrats on Wednesday pushed through controversial legislation that would expand access to taxpayer-funded abortions, a proposal Republican Gov. Bruce Rauner has pledged to veto.

The bill would allow women to use Medicaid coverage and state employee health insurance to pay for abortions and has become an early issue in the 2018 race for governor after Rauner's veto vow. Supporters say the measure also would remove a so-called "trigger provision" in current law, which would help ensure abortion remains legal in Illinois if Roe v. Wade is overturned by the U.S. Supreme Court.

Opponents, including Rauner, contend the state shouldn't expand taxpayer funding of abortions. After a lengthy debate Wednesday, senators voted 33-22 in favor of sending the plan to the governor. The House approved the bill late last month.

State Sen. Toi Hutchinson, D-Olympia Fields, began her debate remarks by saying her "uterus has a question."

She said she "took exception" to opponents noting they are parents in an effort "to prove their pro-lifeness." She said many of those who are opposed to taxpayer-provided abortions would never need one because the bill was about providing care for poor women who have limited options. Hutchinson said she was sick of hearing Republicans, and men, talk about limiting government except when it comes to women making decisions in their doctor's office.

"News flash: We have every bit the ability to make our own health decisions as you do," Hutchinson said, noting that taxpayer dollars cover elective vasectomies.

On the other side, Sen. Dale Righter, R-Mattoon, said lawmakers are "scraping and clawing" a budget together. He said Illinois can't afford to spend money it doesn't have on providing abortions. Righter also contended removing language from Illinois law that says life begins at conception would create other problems, such as trying to prosecute someone who attacks a mother and kills a unborn child in the process.

State Sen. Jil Tracy, R-Quincy, said it was ironic legislators were considering the bill on a day when they were also honoring children who grew up in the state's foster care system. Many were on hand to shadow lawmakers for the day.

Tracy said she has long opposed abortion, saying she previously had worked as an attorney to place children with families, including those who were the result of incest. She said those children often went on to become productive citizens of society who brought great joy to the families they ended up with, later noting that one of her own daughters is adopted.

"I cannot imagine a world without her," Tracy said. "So yes, I am a strong advocate for life."'

Sen. Linda Holmes, D-Aurora, said it was not up to lawmakers to play "God, judge and jury" about what a woman should do with her body.

"If you find it a disgraceful practice you do not believe in, guess what? You have the choice to not to do it," she said. "But don't take choice away from somebody who may find themselves in the situation where it is an appropriate choice they need to make."

As for Rauner, his veto promise has won praise from socially conservative groups who have been angered by some of his other actions, including his approval last year of a law that requires doctors who oppose abortion to refer patients to providers who will perform the procedure. But the position could hurt Rauner next year with a key election voting demographic: suburban women who lean Republican but have socially moderate views.

Abortion rights groups were quick to accuse Rauner of betraying voters who supported him in 2014, noting he frequently declared he had "no social agenda" while on the campaign trail in 2014. Political action group Personal PAC took the rare step of releasing a previously confidential candidate questionnaire from that race in which Rauner expressed support for the ideas contained in the legislation he now opposes.

Rauner has declined to further explain his shifting position, saying that expanding taxpayer funding for abortions is a "very divisive issue."

If Rauner follows through on his veto pledge, lawmakers will be unlikely to override his veto in full. A veto override in the House would take 71 votes, but there are just 67 Democrats. It would take 36 votes in the Senate, but Wednesday's tally included just 33 votes in favor.

[email protected]

[email protected]

___

(c)2017 the Chicago Tribune

Visit the Chicago Tribune at www.chicagotribune.com

Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.