2013: Schweikert Voted For Banning Abortion After 20 Weeks After Conception. In June 2013, Schweikert voted for a bill banning most abortion across the country twenty weeks after conception. According to Congressional Quarterly, "Passage of the bill that would create a nationwide ban on abortions performed at 20 weeks or later, except in cases where the life of the woman is in danger. It would provide exceptions to the ban in cases of pregnancy resulting from rape or incest against a minor, if it has been reported to law enforcement or a government agency authorized to act on reports of child abuse. It also would impose criminal penalties on physicians who violate the ban and subject violators to a maximum five-year jail sentence, fines or both." The House approved the bill by a vote of 228 to 196. The bill died in the Senate. [House Vote 251, 6/18/13; Congressional Quarterly, 6/18/13; Congressional Actions, H.R. 1797]
15,600 U.S. Abortions, 1.3 Percent, Occurred At 20 Weeks Or More After Conception. According to the Associated Press, "According to the Guttmacher Institute, a New York-based reproductive health research organization that supports abortion rights, in 2009, 1.3 percent of the 1.2 million abortions in the country, about 15,600, occurred 20 weeks after the fetus was conceived." [Associated Press, 6/18/13]
10 States Had Already Enacted Similar Bans, Part Of Broader Legal Strategy To Get Supreme Court To Reconsider Roe v. Wade. According to the Associated Press, "[The bill] mirrors 20-week abortion ban laws passed by some states, and lays further groundwork for the ongoing legal battle that abortion foes hope will eventually result in forcing the Supreme Court to reconsider the 1973 Supreme Court decision, Roe v. Wade, that made abortion legal. [. . .] Some 10 states have passed laws similar to the House bill, and several are facing court challenges. Last month a federal court struck down as unconstitutional Arizona's law, which differs slightly in banning abortion 20 weeks after pregnancy rather than conception." [Associated Press, 6/18/13]
Republican Abortion Opponents Sought To Harness Public Outrage Over Gosnell Murder Trial In Philadelphia. According to Politico, "Anti-abortion Republicans are hoping to capitalize on public outrage about Philadelphia abortion doctor Kermit Gosnell's murder trial, which captured national headlines. Franks's [sic] original bill was crafted to outlaw late term abortions in Washington, D.C., and it failed in the House last year under a procedure that needed a two-thirds vote for passage. But the Gosnell verdict sparked outrage and reinvigorated activists, and a few days after the conviction Franks broadened his legislation to apply nationwide." [Politico, 6/18/13]
Dr. Gosnell Convicted Of First Degree Murder For Death Of Three Babies Who Were Born Alive And Then Killed. According to Fox News, "Dr. Kermit Gosnell, 72, was convicted of first-degree murder and could face execution in the deaths of three babies who authorities say were delivered alive and then killed with scissors at his grimy clinic, in a case that became a flashpoint in the nation's debate over abortion. Gosnell was cleared in the death of a fourth baby, who prosecutors say let out a soft whimper before he snipped its neck. Gosnell was also found guilty of involuntary manslaughter in the drug-overdose death of a patient who had undergone an abortion." [Fox News, 5/13/13]
During Committee Hearing On Bill, Its Primary Author Claimed Rape Resulted In Few Pregnancies. According to Politico, "A House Republican pushing for a 20-week nationwide ban on abortions said Wednesday that the incidence of pregnancies resulting from rape is 'very low' --- then scrambled to clarify his comment after it went viral with comparisons to former GOP Senate candidate Todd Akin. 'The incidence of rape resulting in pregnancy are very low,' said Rep. Trent Franks (R-Ariz.) as the House Judiciary Committee debated his bill to ban abortions nationwide after 20 weeks including in cases of rape and incest. After the committee meeting, Franks told POLITICO: 'My bill does nothing to restrict abortion even before the first five months, so all issues related to rape are long since dealt with.' He said that Democrats are the ones who 'constantly want to inject' rape into the abortion debate and have done so ever since the original Roe v Wade case." [Politico, 6/12/13]
After Uproar Over Franks' Comments, Bill Revised To Include Exceptions For Rape And Incest And Assigned New Floor Manager. According to Politico, "Rep. Trent Franks's (R-Ariz.) bill to ban abortions after 20 weeks nationwide now includes an exception for rape and incest after his remarks about rape and pregnancy created an uproar. And it's not Franks's bill anymore --- or more precisely, he won't be managing his own bill when it goes to the House floor Tuesday. He's being replaced with a high-profile House GOP woman. A spokesman for Rep. Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.) confirmed Friday to POLITICO that she'll be managing the debate, and that the bill is being changed to include the new exception." [Politico, 6/14/13]
Bill Included Exceptions For Rape, Incest, And The Life Of The Mother, But Not Other Health Exceptions. "According to the Associated Press, "Republicans quietly altered the bill to include an exception to the 20-week ban for instances of rape and incest. Democrats still balked, saying the exception would require a woman to prove that she had reported the rape to authorities. The bill has an exception when a physical condition threatens the life of the mother, but Democratic efforts to include other health exceptions were rebuffed. The legislation would ban abortions that take place 20 weeks after conception, which is equivalent to 22 weeks of pregnancy." [Associated Press, 6/18/13]
Rape Exception Required Women To Prove That They Had Reported Rape To Authorities, Which Is Not Required In Rape Exceptions In Other Federal Abortion Laws. According to Mother Jones, "But it does contain a provision that redefines rape exemptions, significantly limiting the number of women who would qualify. In order to obtain an abortion after 20 weeks under this law, a woman who was raped must be able to prove that she reported the rape to authorities---a requirement not present in other rape exceptions to federal abortion laws. [. . .] It is more restrictive than the Hyde Amendment, the law barring federal funds from being used to pay for abortions. Hyde specifically exempts cases of rape, incest, or when the life of the mother is at stake---with no requirement that women have documentation from police that they reported the crime." [Mother Jones, 6/18/13]
Less Than Half Of All Rapes Are Reported To Police Due To Fear Of Violence, Concerns About Legal System, And Shame. According to Mother Jones, "According to numbers from the Bureau of Justice Statistics, less than half of all rapes or sexual assaults are reported to the police (the bureau's latest report actually found that the percentage reported to police has declined in recent years---from 56 percent in 2003 to 35 percent in 2010). Democrats pointed out that fear of violence, concerns about dealing with the legal system, and shame may prevent many women from reporting rape. 'They leave out even Hyde exceptions for rape and incest, and then they try to shove it back in, but they do it with this crazy requirement that rape victims prove that they reported the rapes, only underscoring the point we've been making all this time which is that they really have no respect for women,' Rep. Diana DeGette (D-Colo.) told Mother Jones on Tuesday" [Mother Jones, 6/18/13]
Supporters Of Ban Argued That Fetuses Can Feel Pain At 20 Weeks Post-Conception And Abortion Should Therefore Be Banned From That Point On. According to The New York Times, "It is a new frontier of the anti-abortion movement: laws banning abortion at 20 weeks after conception, contending that fetuses can feel pain then. [. . .] The science of fetal pain is highly complex. Most scientists who have expressed views on the issue have said they believe that if fetuses can feel pain, the neurological wiring is not in place until later, after the time when nearly all abortions occur. Several scientists have done research that abortion opponents say shows that fetuses can feel pain at 20 weeks after conception. [. . .] Supporters of fetal-pain laws also say that surgeons' use of anesthesia and painkillers when operating on fetuses in the womb proves fetuses feel pain. 'If the child who is waiting for surgery can feel pain, the child who is waiting for abortion can also feel pain,' said Mary Spaulding Balch, the National Right to Life Committee's state policy director, who pioneered fetal-pain laws. She does not advocate performing abortions with anesthesia or painkillers 'to have a painless death,' but rather wants those abortions prevented because a 'member of the human family has reached a point where they are capable of feeling pain.'" [New York Times, 9/17/13]
Concerned Women For America President: Bill Is "The Most Important Pro-Life Bill" Considered By Congress In Past 10 Years. According to the Associated Press, "But it was a banner day for social conservatives who have generally seen their priorities overshadowed by economic and budgetary issues since Republicans recaptured the House in 2010. Penny Nance, president of Concerned Women for America, called it 'the most important pro-life bill to be considered by the U.S. Congress in the last 10 years.' Marjorie Dannenfeiser, president of the Susan B. Anthony List --- a group that seeks to eliminate abortion --- said the legislation differed significantly from past abortion measures in that it restricts, rather than merely controls, the abortion procedure." [Associated Press, 6/18/13]
Opponents Of Ban Argued That Women In Certain Situations Need Later Abortions To Protect Their Health. According to NARAL Pro-Choice America, "The reality is that while most women welcome pregnancy and can look forward to a safe childbirth, for some, pregnancy can be dangerous, and abortion restrictions that do not have adequate health exceptions endanger these women. The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, the nation's leading medical experts on women's health, has come out in strong opposition to 20-week bans, citing the threat these laws pose to women's health. [. . .] Every pregnancy is different. No politician can possibly decide what is best for a woman and her family in every circumstance." [NARAL Pro-Choice America, 2013]
Opponents Of Ban Argued That 20-Week Post-Conception Abortion Bans Are Unconstitutional Because The Fetus Is Not Viable At That Point. According to NARAL Pro-Choice America, "The Supreme Court has long held that a woman has the unequivocal right to choose abortion care until the point of fetal viability. Under this standard, states may regulate abortion care, but not ban it before viability. However, by banning abortion at 20 weeks, laws like those first passed in Nebraska are clearly unconstitutional pre-viability abortion bans. Sponsors are trying to lure the court to discard the Roe framework entirely by moving away from the viability standard established in Roe." [NARAL Pro-Choice America, 2013]
Pro-Choice Democrats Said Unconstitutional Bill Was Part Of Broader Republican "War On Women." According to Politico, "Opposing it, Democrats supporting abortion rights are stoking liberal anger over the 'war on women' and chiding the GOP for spending its time on a divisive social agenda instead of focusing on jobs. They said the bill is unconstitutional and distracting. 'Now I thought we had established this last fall with the election. Americans are tired of Congress taking up extreme and divisive legislation targeted at women's health,' Rep. Diana DeGette (D-Colo.) said at a press conference. 'Unfortunately, many of our Republican colleagues didn't seem to have gotten that message last November.'" [Politico, 6/18/13]
2013: Schweikert Effectively Voted For Banning Abortion After 20 Weeks After Conception. In June 2013, Schweikert voted for a bill banning most abortion across the country twenty weeks after conception. According to Congressional Quarterly, "adoption of the rule that would provide for House floor consideration of a bill (HR 1797) that would create a nationwide ban on abortions performed at 20 weeks or later, with certain exceptions. It also would provide for general debate on the farm bill (HR 1947)." The House approved the bill by a vote of 232 to 193. [House Vote 249, 6/18/13; Congressional Quarterly, 6/18/13; Congressional Actions, H.Res. 266; Congressional Actions, H.R. 1797]
2015: Schweikert Effectively Voted Against Allowing An Exception To A 20-Week Abortion Ban If The Health Of The Woman Was In Danger. In May 2015, Schweikert effectively voted against an exception to a 20-week abortion ban for when the life of the pregnant woman was at risk. According to the Congressional Quarterly, the legislation was a motion to "recommit the bill to the House Judiciary Committee with instructions to report back immediately with an amendment that would add an exception to the 20-week abortion ban for abortions necessary to save the health of the pregnant woman." The larger legislation was HR 36, the Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act, which would have prohibited "an abortion from being performed if the probably post-fertilization age of the unborn child is 20 weeks or greater" except where it is necessary to save the life of the mother, or in the case of rape or incest if the woman had had counseling and had reported the incident. The vote was on a motion to recommit with instructions and the House rejected the motion 181 to 246. H.R. 36 passed the House on May 13, 2015 in a vote 242 to 184. The Senate took no substantive action on the legislation. [House Vote 222, 5/13/15; Congressional Quarterly, 5/13/15; Congress.gov, 5/13/15; Congressional Actions, H.R. 36]
Rep. Julia Brownley (D-CA): Legislation Added Language To Permit Abortions After 20 Weeks If The Health Of The Woman Was At Risk, Not Just If The Life Of Woman Was At Risk. Speaking while introducing her motion to recommit, Rep. Brownley said, "My amendment would ensure that nothing in the bill would prevent a woman from terminating her pregnancy after 20 weeks if her health were at risk. Only 1.1 percent of abortions performed in the United States occur after the 20-week mark. These rare procedures are often the most medically difficult and dangerous cases where women--many of whom want and have dreamed of being parents--are faced with impossible decisions. As it is written, H.R. 36 would force a doctor to wait until a condition becomes life threatening before performing an abortion. It shows no concern for the long-term health of the mother, her future ability to bear children, or her right to make her own medical decisions. It ignores that there are very real and very serious reasons why a woman may need an abortion later in pregnancy. For example, pregnant women with severe fetal anomalies or women whose amniotic sacs rupture prematurely and cannot support the fetus would be forced to give birth." [Congress.gov, 5/13/15]
Rep. McMorris Rogers (R-WA): Abortions Were Riskier To A Women's Health The Later They Occurred In A Woman's Pregnancy. Speaking on the House floor opposing this motion to recommit, Congresswoman McMorris Rogers said, "This bill recognizes that at the halfway point of a pregnancy, a baby who has developed 5 months, those circumstances are increasingly more unique. Research shows that abortion becomes riskier to a woman's health the later it occurs in pregnancy. We should not trivialize the decision to undertake an abortion at 20 weeks by suggesting that it should be made without additional medical or emotional support." [Congress.gov, 5/13/15]
2017: Schweikert Effectively Voted Against Allowing An Exception For The Health Of The Mother From A 20-Week Abortion Ban. In October 2017, Schweikert effectively voted against an amendment that would have, according to Congressional Quarterly, "add[ed] an exception to the 20-week abortion ban for abortions necessary to save the health of the pregnant woman." The underlying legislation was a 20-week abortion ban. The House rejected the motion to recommit by a vote of 187 to 238. [House Vote 548, 10/3/17; Congressional Quarterly, 10/3/17; Congressional Actions, H.R. 36]
2017: Schweikert Voted For The Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act, Which Banned Abortion After 20-Weeks. In October 2017, Schweikert voted for legislation banning abortion after the fetus is 20-weeks old. According to Congressional Quarterly, "Passage of the bill that would prohibit abortions in cases where the probable age of the fetus is 20 weeks or later and would impose criminal penalties on doctors who violate the ban. It would provide exceptions for cases in which the woman's life is in danger as well as for pregnancies that are a result of rape for pregnancies that are a result of rape against an adult woman, if the woman received counseling or medical treatment for the rape at least 48 hours prior to the abortion. An exception would be provided for pregnancies resulting from rape or incest against a minor if the rape or incest had been previously reported to law enforcement or another government agency authorized to act on reports of child abuse. The bill would require a second doctor trained in neonatal resuscitation to be present for abortions where the fetus has the 'potential' to survive outside the womb." The vote was on passage. The House passed the bill by a vote of 237 to 189. The Senate took no substantive action on the legislation. [House Vote 549, 10/3/17; Congressional Quarterly, 10/3/17; Congressional Actions, H.R. 36]
2015: Schweikert Voted For A Bill That Would Prohibit Abortions After 20-Weeks Gestation. In May 2015, Schweikert voted for a bill that would prohibit abortions after 20 weeks of gestation and would impose criminal penalties on doctors that violated the ban. According to Congressional Quarterly, the amendment would, "prohibit abortions in cases where the probable age of the fetus is 20 weeks or later and would impose criminal penalties on doctors who violate the ban. It would provide exceptions for cases in which the woman's life is in danger as well as for pregnancies that are a result of rape if, as amended, for pregnancies that are a result of rape against an adult woman, the woman received counseling or medical treatment for the rape at least 48 hours prior to the abortion. An exception would be provided for pregnancies resulting from rape or incest against a minor if the rape or incest had been previously reported to law enforcement or another government agency authorized to act on reports of child abuse. As amended, the bill would require a second doctor trained in neonatal resuscitation to be present for abortions where the fetus has the 'potential' to survive outside the womb, and, if the fetus is born alive, the bill would require that the infant be provided medical care and immediately be transported and admitted to a hospital. As amended, women wishing to have abortions under the bill's exceptions would need to sign (along with the doctor and a witness) an informed consent authorization form detailing the age of the fetus and stating that, if born alive, would be given medical assistance and transported to a hospital." The vote was on passage and the House passed the bill 242 to 184. Cloture on the motion to proceed on the bill was blocked in the Senate. [House Vote 223, 5/13/15; Congressional Quarterly, 5/13/15; Congressional Quarterly, 5/12/15; Congressional Actions, H.R. 36]
Bill Would Sentence Doctors To Up To Five Years In Jail For Violating The Ban. According to Congressional Quarterly, "The bill imposes criminal penalties on physicians who violate the ban, with violations subject to a maximum five-year jail sentence, fines or both. It prohibits the prosecution of the woman obtaining the abortion, however, either as the perpetrator or as a conspirator to violate the ban." [Congressional Quarterly, 5/12/15]
Statement Of Administration Policy: Bill "Is An Assault On A Woman's Right To Choose." According to a Statement of Administration Policy, "The Administration strongly opposes H.R. 36, which would unacceptably restrict women's health and reproductive rights and is an assault on a woman's right to choose. Women should be able to make their own choices about their bodies and their health care, and Government should not inject itself into decisions best made between a woman and her doctor. [...] If the President were presented with this legislation, his senior advisors would recommend that he veto this bill." [Statement of Administration Policy, 1/20/15]
Opponents Of The Bill Said The Exceptions For Health Of The Mother Were Inadequate. According to Congressional Quarterly, "They also say the bill lacks adequate health exceptions for the mother, as a doctor would have to wait until a condition was life-threatening before performing an abortion. Serious but non-life-threatening conditions couldn't be treated under this ban, they say, which could result in permanent health issues such as infertility." [Congressional Quarterly, 5/12/15]
Bill Creates Barriers For Exceptions In The Case Of Rape Or Incest. According to Congressional Quarterly, "And while the original bill's rape and incest provisions were onerous, they say the new language erects new barriers, including requiring rape victims to document that they received prior medical treatment or counseling, and that a second doctor be present for the abortion." [Congressional Quarterly, 5/12/15]