20-week Abortion Ban Bill Becomes Law after Arkansas Senate Overrides Beebe Veto
By: KARK 4 News
Updated: February 28, 2013
Update (February 28):
A 20-week abortion ban bill has become law after the Arkansas Senate voted this morning to override Governor Beebe's veto of the measure.
The action followed on the heels of a veto override yesterday by the Arkansas House in a 53-28 vote.
The Senate's vote this morning was 19-14.
The Senate also voted to send a 12-week abortion ban bill to Governor Beebe's desk.
Update (February 27):
The Arkansas House has voted to override Governor Mike Beebe's Tuesday veto of the 20-week abortion ban bill.
The legislative body voted 53-28 this afternoon.
Original story (February 26):
Governor Mike Beebe has decided to veto a 20-week abortion bill sent to his desk from the legislature.
The bill sought to ban abortions in Arkansas after 20 weeks of pregnancy.
The Arkansas House passed the bill 80-10 on Friday, sending it to Mike Beebe's office.
Bill sponsor Representative Andy Mayberry (R-Hensley) cited data that less than 2 percent of abortions occur that late, before he added exceptions for the health or life of the mother, rape and incest.
Earlier this month, Beebe said he had serious constitutional concerns about the bill.
Meanwhile, the 12-week "fetal heartbeat" bill banning abortions once a heartbeat is detected, is expected to reach the governor's desk later this week.
The bill's sponsor, Jason Rapert, says it's constitutional, while Governor Beebe maintains the proposal is unconstitutional.
In regards to today's veto, Beebe's letter on his decision stated the following:
...because it would impose a ban on a woman's right to choose an elective, nontherapeutic abortion before viability, House Bill 1037, if it became law, would squarely contradict Supreme Court precedent. When I was sworn in as Governor I took an oath to preserve, protect, and defend both the Arkansas Constitution and the Constitution of the United States. I take that oath seriously.
Second, the adoption of unconstitutional laws can be very costly to the taxpayers of our State. It has been suggested that outside groups or others might represent the State for free in any litigation challenging the constitutionality of House Bill 1037, but even if that were to happen, that would only lessen the State's own litigation costs. Lawsuits challenging unconstitutional laws also result in the losing party - in this case, the State - having to pay the costs and attorneys' fees incurred by the litigants who successfully challenge the law. Those costs and fees can be significant. In the last case in which the constitutionality of an Arkansas abortion statute was challenged, Little Rock Family Planning Services v. Jegley, the State was ordered to pay the prevailing plaintiffs and their attorneys nearly $119,000 for work in the trial court, and an additional $28,900 for work on the State's unsuccessful appeal. Those fee awards were entered in 1999, and litigation fees and costs have increased extensively since then. The taxpayers' exposure, should HB 1037 become law, will be significantly greater.
While I must therefore veto HB 1037, I wish to express my appreciation to its principal sponsor, Representative Mayberry, for his candor and for his respect for the Governor's role in the legislative process.
A 20-week abortion ban bill has become law after the Arkansas Senate voted this morning to override Governor Beebe's veto of the measure.
The action followed on the heels of a veto override yesterday by the Arkansas House in a 53-28 vote.
The Senate's vote this morning was 19-14.
The Senate also voted to send a 12-week abortion ban bill to Governor Beebe's desk.
Update (February 27):
The Arkansas House has voted to override Governor Mike Beebe's Tuesday veto of the 20-week abortion ban bill.
The legislative body voted 53-28 this afternoon.
Original story (February 26):
Governor Mike Beebe has decided to veto a 20-week abortion bill sent to his desk from the legislature.
The bill sought to ban abortions in Arkansas after 20 weeks of pregnancy.
The Arkansas House passed the bill 80-10 on Friday, sending it to Mike Beebe's office.
Bill sponsor Representative Andy Mayberry (R-Hensley) cited data that less than 2 percent of abortions occur that late, before he added exceptions for the health or life of the mother, rape and incest.
Earlier this month, Beebe said he had serious constitutional concerns about the bill.
Meanwhile, the 12-week "fetal heartbeat" bill banning abortions once a heartbeat is detected, is expected to reach the governor's desk later this week.
The bill's sponsor, Jason Rapert, says it's constitutional, while Governor Beebe maintains the proposal is unconstitutional.
In regards to today's veto, Beebe's letter on his decision stated the following:
...because it would impose a ban on a woman's right to choose an elective, nontherapeutic abortion before viability, House Bill 1037, if it became law, would squarely contradict Supreme Court precedent. When I was sworn in as Governor I took an oath to preserve, protect, and defend both the Arkansas Constitution and the Constitution of the United States. I take that oath seriously.
Second, the adoption of unconstitutional laws can be very costly to the taxpayers of our State. It has been suggested that outside groups or others might represent the State for free in any litigation challenging the constitutionality of House Bill 1037, but even if that were to happen, that would only lessen the State's own litigation costs. Lawsuits challenging unconstitutional laws also result in the losing party - in this case, the State - having to pay the costs and attorneys' fees incurred by the litigants who successfully challenge the law. Those costs and fees can be significant. In the last case in which the constitutionality of an Arkansas abortion statute was challenged, Little Rock Family Planning Services v. Jegley, the State was ordered to pay the prevailing plaintiffs and their attorneys nearly $119,000 for work in the trial court, and an additional $28,900 for work on the State's unsuccessful appeal. Those fee awards were entered in 1999, and litigation fees and costs have increased extensively since then. The taxpayers' exposure, should HB 1037 become law, will be significantly greater.
While I must therefore veto HB 1037, I wish to express my appreciation to its principal sponsor, Representative Mayberry, for his candor and for his respect for the Governor's role in the legislative process.
Comments
It is a start. Yes, the killing of unborn children is "legal" but it will never be right and it is not the mother's body at all. It is a separate person. We all know this. It is murder; it is a holocaust. It damages women too because they are not wired to kill their children, it is against their nature.
Magdalene P.
March 1, 2013 at 2:17 pm
I can't believe that "intelligent?" elected officials would even consider either of these abortion bills. It doesn't matter what you think about abortion. It is LEGAL in this country. What makes me so angry is the fact that my tax dollars have been wasted getting these bills through the legislature, while we have so many needs, i.e. jobs, economy, education, etc. Instead the legislature spends its time dealing with FEDERAL constituional issues like abortion. Contesting these bills will cost the state (and ME, as a taxpayer) a lot of money that could be used for the essential things.
Amelia J.
February 28, 2013 at 1:07 pm
Unbelievable! Why do our legislators continue to work under the assumption that they are in anyway qualified to tell anyone else what they can or cannot do with their bodies. While this late abortion type is rare, I fear for the outcome of the intended push through of the 12 week fetal heartbeat bill. That bill will effectively remove a woman's ability to have an abortion if she she so chooses. Many women do not even realize they are pregnant until the heartbeat is present, but this does not mean they should be held hostage to someone else's morality. It doesn't matter how the pregnancy occurred, if that woman feels she can not allow it to progress, she should be able to have an abortion legally-which translates to the most important thing, SAFELY. It baffles me that this country was founded by people fleeing oppression, only to have it still being relentlessly applied to their descendants today.
Holly M.
February 28, 2013 at 9:45 am
Unbelievable! Why do our legislators continue to work under teh assumption that they are in anyway qualified to tell anyone else what they can or cannot do with their bodies. While this late abortion type is rare, I fear for the outcome of the intended push through of the 12 week fetal heartbeat bill. That bill will effectively remove a woman's ability to have an abortion if she she so chooses. Many women do not even realize they are pregnant until the heartbeat is present, but this does not mean they should be held hostage to someone else's morality. It doesn't matter how the pregnancy occurred, if that woman feels she can not allow it to progress, she should be able to have an abortion legally-which translates to the most important thing, SAFELY. It baffles me that this country was founded by people fleeing oppression, only to have it still being relentlessly applied to their descendants today.
Holly M.
February 28, 2013 at 9:43 am
