The rocky road of defending civil liberties in Harrisburg

"Later, y'all! Y'inz! You guys!"

The last trickle of activity in the spring session of the Pennsylvania General Assembly carries on tomorrow, as the state Senate finishes some budget-related matters. The state House has already left town. And there's no truth to the rumor that they were run out of town on a rail. That's not even possible since they didn't invest anything in rail.

In the final weeks of June, all was largely quiet on the civil liberties front at the state capitol. That's a good thing. When the legislature starts screwing with civil liberties, it usually ends badly.

And it did end badly for women's access to reproductive healthcare. On June 17, Governor Corbett signed House Bill 818. This bill prohibits insurance companies from covering abortion care in policies in the insurance exchange, or marketplace, created by the federal healthcare reform law. Narrow exceptions exist only for rape, incest, and imminent death of the woman.

I've been trying to decide which is the most scandalous aspect of this story. Is it the state government meddling in a private transaction between a private company and a private customer, under the flimsy excuse that the exchange is administered by the government? (The federal government, mind you. The Corbett administration opted out of administering the exchange at the state level.) The supporters lamely claim that insurance coverage from Blue Cross is equivalent to Medicaid.

Is it the lack of a health exception that the Senate defeated, 24-26? Some women have serious complications in pregnancy that can lead to health problems but not death and that are best avoided via abortion. If a woman faces that crisis and has insurance through the exchange, sorry, she has to pay out of pocket. Here is how that vote went down.

Or is it the inability of the General Assembly to pass an infrastructure investment and repair bill (author's note: not a civil liberties issue) while finding the time to restrict women's access to comprehensive reproductive healthcare? Hey, a bridge might collapse, but at least they found time to restrict abortion!

Here at ACLU-PA HQ, Harrisburg, we're gearing up for summer work with legislators and staff on revising the child protective services law and revisions to the Right to Know law.

And here's something to look forward to in the fall: A storm is brewing over privacy and mass data collection, specifically in legislation to collect DNA from people who have not been convicted of a crime and to create a new database of Pennsylvanians' prescription drug use. These are issues where ACLU-PA gets to flex its nonpartisan cred by working with Republicans and Democrats who recognize that we do not want to go down the road of a Total Information Society.

So our legislators are (almost) out of here for the summer. They can enjoy their recess with the knowledge that their constituents will think of them everytime they bounce off a pothole in the middle of state route (fill in the blank). And we can rest assured that civil liberties are safe for the next two months. See you in September....

“Slap in the face” or constitutional obligation?

by Alexandra Morgan-Kurtz, ACLU-PA legal fellow

There are some mornings where you just have to wonder if government officials enjoy wasting taxpayer money and hurting their constituents. Today was one of those mornings.

“ACLU request for inmate abortion policy riles Westmoreland controller,” read the headline. The controller, Jeff Balzer, has issues with the county’s obligation to pay for abortions, which he sees it as “a slap in the face.” I respect his right to that opinion, and his right to express it as vehemently as he wishes. What I take issue with is strong-arming his personal moral beliefs onto the women incarcerated at Westmoreland County Prison. Mr. Balzer isn’t objecting to the added costs - abortions cost hundreds of dollars; prenatal care and delivery can cost thousands of dollars. He’s objecting to the principle. There is simply no room for a heckler’s veto in the arena of fundamental constitutional rights. The law is clear that “[p]rison walls do not form a barrier separating prison inmates from the protections of the Constitution.” (Turner v. Safley) Whether Mr. Balzer likes it or not, this includes a woman’s right to choose.

The government has no general obligation to pay for a citizen’s medical care. Everything changes, however, when the government chooses to incarcerate someone. At that point, it is legally and morally bound to ensure that person’s safety and physical and mental well-being. People have argued for decades that it’s unfair that prisoners “get” these things when people who have committed no crimes receive far less. I agree there’s unfairness in the system. It’s unfair that our government has decided to only pay attention to people when they absolutely have to. It’s unfair that rather than address the problems of poverty and racial inequality, our government embraces a policy of overincarceration that continues vicious cycles and costs taxpayers millions of dollars each year.

I am all about fairness. If I had my way, we would quickly be following France’s lead and providing birth control and access to abortion at no cost. Regrettably, that isn’t going to happen in America any time soon. Fortunately, in Pennsylvania, New Jersey, and Delaware, incarcerated women aren’t left out in the cold. The Third Circuit has held that county prisons have an affirmative obligation to ensure that women receive timely access to abortions, and “[i]n the absence of alternative methods of funding, the County must assume the costs.” If the county doesn’t respect this right and a woman’s right to choose is obstructed or unreasonably delayed, the county could be faced with even more costly litigation. Incarcerated women are undoubtedly facing a crisis in their lives. The last thing they need is for the government to interfere in this very private matter.

Yes, Virginia, there is a state more demeaning to women than you

A mock letter to the people of Virginia.

Dear Virginia, (CC: outraged left wing media)

Your little legislature was wrong. There is a state more demeaning to women than you. Up here across the Mason Dixon line, we’ve managed to come up with a forced ultrasound bill more cruel and medically unnecessary than yours! (It was tough, I’ll be honest.)

If our bill becomes law, women will have to wait at least 24 hours after their ultrasound before an abortion, no matter how far away they live from the provider. And here in Pennsylvania, 113 of the 203 elected state Representatives have signed on to our ultrasound bill. That’s more than your twelve by a long shot!

Our bill FORCES the doctor to turn the ultrasound screen towards the woman’s face. Don’t worry – we avoided constitutional meddling by “allowing her” to look away. I heard you only give ‘the opportunity’ to view the ultrasound image. LAME!

LOVE the “free ultrasound providers” bit! We did that, too, so now we can funnel women to those so-called “crisis pregnancy centers” where they can be fed state-funded, unregulated misinformation. We don’t even require that ultrasound providers have any training!

Oh, and you’ll love the part about the printouts – listen to this. We’re going to make the woman take TWO prints with her – one for her scrapbook, and the other one SHE has to bring to the doctor performing the abortion (if she hasn’t been shamed out of it at this point! LOL).

And come on now, only civil penalties? Our bill includes civil and criminal penalties for doctors and patients who dare defy our legislating of medicine.

Nice try, Virginia. But you’ve got nothin’ on Pennsylvania.

Your partner in crime,

Pennsylvania

Virtue, Liberty and Independence (Unless you’re a woman)

You’ve probably heard about the Virginia ultrasound bill recently, but did you realize Pennsylvania has a bill pending that’s even worse? The Pennsylvania House of Representatives is poised to take up HB1077, the disingenuously titled “Women’s Right to Know Act”. Are you ready to stop the cruel, demeaning attacks on women in Pennsylvania? Sign the petition and urge your representative to vote NO on HB 1077 and stop this demeaning and unnecessary bill from becoming law in Pennsylvania.

You can also call your state representative right now. Find his or her phone number with our "find your legislator" tool.

When abortion was illegal....

Cross-posted at We've Had Enough.

I had the incredible privilege of speaking with Linn Duvall Harwell, one of the founders of the Clara Bell Duvall Reproductive Freedom Project at the ACLU about the recent legislative attacks on reproductive rights. During our conversation, Linn shared with me that her husband is in hospice care and doesn’t have long to live. The fact that she wanted to take time to speak with me during such a difficult moment points to her steadfast, lifelong commitment to the issue of reproductive freedom for women.

Linn Harwell’s mother, Clara Bell Duvall was the victim of an unsafe abortion in the 1920s, well before abortion was legalized under Roe V. Wade in 1973. This tragic event stayed with her and became the catalyst for her career and commitment to women’s reproductive rights activism.

During our conversation, she shared her disgust with proposed Senate Bill 732 and said, “I am appalledto witness the continuity of that effort from many years ago to reinstate those kinds of restrictions. For me, it all equals restrictions for women.”

She believes that supporters of the anti-abortion movement lack knowledge of the conditions that existed before Roe V. Wade and “do not know the history that preceded Roe v. Wade and why Roe v. Wade came to be.”

She urges Pennsylvanians to open their eyes to the gravity of the issue and reminds us of a time when things were not so easy, a time that could become a reality once again if we do not take action. “Please don’t take these things for granted. Call your representative and tell them where you are and what you need to prevent tragedies in the public health of our nation,” she said.

She stressed the importance of men’s participation in the effort and believes that educating men about reproductive health and preventative medicine would provide them with a basis to take action. “The relationship of the man who is relating to the woman in need is essential and we are neglecting educating men on this issue,” she said. She believes that her husband’s unwavering support has been a strong presence in her career as an activist and in her role as a mother.

Linn believes "We've Had Enough" could transform the movement:“All my life I have regretted the nature of my mother’s death and so I have worked for women I have never known and I would love to see Pennsylvania pick up and care about people that they don’t know.”

Katherine in Philly

As goes Kansas, so goes Pennsylvania?

Pro-big-government activists are implementing their strategy to rollback women's access to reproductive healthcare all over the country, not just in Pennsylvania. The strategy goes a little something like this: Alter the legal requirements for abortion clinics, under the guise of "patient safety" (because we're all supposed to believe they want women to have safe access to abortion), and then watch the clinics scramble to meet the requirements. Poof! No more access to safe abortion!

Note that I didn't say no more abortions. There will still be abortions. With less clinics able to offer care, though, women seeking abortions will potentially seek care via less safe methods, including self-induced abortions and from illegal providers like Kermit Gosnell.

Pennsylvania is facing that threat with Senate Bill 732 and House Bill 574, both of which have passed one chamber of the state legislature. WPSU-FM laid out the arguments in a story yesterday.

The pro-big-government activists have pursued a similar strategy in Kansas. The requirements were different, and the KS Department of Health only gave the clinics two weeks to react. But the strategy is the same.

Here in PA, we've predicted that the enactment of SB 732 or HB 574 could lead to clinics closing or no longer offering abortion services. It would also likely lead to costly litigation.

And that's exactly what has happened in Kansas. Two of the state's three clinics were unable to comply, and they filed suit. A federal judge ruled in their favor and imposed a temporary restraining order on the new legal requirements.

Some states have implemented ambulatory surgical facility regs on abortion clinics that offer abortion beyond a certain period of weeks gestation, but we are aware of no state that has implemented ASF regs for all abortion clinics like SB 732 and HB 574. If enacted, this law would make Pennsylvania the most extreme of the extreme. And like Kansas, Pennsylvania can expect a costly constitutional lawsuit on its hands.

Greetings from Harrisburg! Summer break edition

The legislature has left Harrisburg for the summer. Civil liberties are safe! Find out what went down in the mad legislative rush this week as the General Assembly finished the state budget.

Please note that by playing this clip YouTube and Google will place a long-term cookie on your computer. Please see YouTube's privacy statement on their website and Google's privacy statement on theirs to learn more. To view the ACLU of PA's privacy statement, click here.

55 hours out, abortion's on tap. Again.

It really is incredible. As I write this, the Pennsylvania General Assembly is 55 hours out from its deadline to pass its annual state budget. All of the bills are lining up for passage just in time to beat the deadline on Thursday, but it has been a mad rush here at the end, especially for those legislators who predicted that the budget would be done in May.

Even in the midst of all of this, the state House is inconceivably teeing up not one but two bills to rollback women's access to reproductive healthcare. Senate Bill 3, which cuts off insurance coverage of abortion in the exchanges created by healthcare reform, and Senate Bill 732, which alters the legal requirements abortion clinics must follow, have both bounced out of committee and are headed to the House floor for a vote. Because it was amended in the House Health Committee, SB 732 would have to go to back to the Senate for a vote on "concurrence," but without an amendment, SB 3 could head to the governor after passage in the House.

If anyone needs some help understanding the dangers of SB 732, check out this news from Kansas. Abortion clinics are struggling to meet new legal requirements there:

Kansas health regulators said today that the abortion clinics they’ve inspected so far have failed to meet the requirements to get a license under a law that takes effect Friday...

The new licensing law requires clinics to be inspected twice a year, including one unannounced review. It also spells out standards for operations, supplies, facilities and medical procedures.

The regulations total 36 pages. Among other things, they require any physician performing an abortion to have clinical privileges at a hospital within 30 miles of the clinic. They also require each facility to have drugs and equipment to deal with a medical crisis such as a heart attack or an allergic reaction to medication.

They also contain a number of requirements for the building including dressing rooms for staff that are equipped with a toilet, a sink and a place to store clothes. The procedure rooms are also required to be 150 square feet and the recovery area must be at least 80 square feet per patient.

The rules also set the temperature for the recovery rooms (between 70 and 75 degrees) and the procedure room (between 68 and 73 degrees).

The regulations were sent out to providers on June 17, only days before the inspections.

Sound familiar? The situations aren't totally analogous since the Kansas requirements are different, but the strategy is the same: Alter the legal mandates in a way that creates a burden for the clinics, thus potentially cutting off women's access to a legal right.

The supporters of HB 574 and SB 732 can wrap themselves in the language of patient safety all they wish, but the reality is that this legislation is straight out of the playbook of those who believe that the government should make medical decisions for women. And that is what puts patient safety at risk.

24 hour victories

When defending civil liberties at a state legislature that is hostile to them, we have to hang our hat on all victories, no matter how small, even if they last just a few months, a few weeks, or even 24 hours.

Yesterday had the potential to be a rough day at the PA General Assembly, particularly in the House. Somehow we came out of it almost completely unscathed.

Voter ID, HB 934: We expected the House to vote on final passage. It never happened. The House adjourned abruptly just after 4pm without a vote on the bill. Also, more good news on this front yesterday. The AARP of Pennsylvania sent a letter to all House members expressing their opposition.

I still expect this bill to get a vote today or at least before the summer recess. But we'll take victories where we can get them. Rep. Mike Sturla of Lancaster had some insight on the two week delay of this bill earlier this month:

House GOP leaders delayed this bill as long as they could, but, needing budget votes from the Paranoid Delusional faction within the Republican Caucus, we now find ourselves devoting hours to debating a voter suppression bill, rather than, you know, discussing a state budget.

ID for aid, SB 9: More "papers, please" legislation. This bill denies public aid to anyone who is unable to produce government-issued ID. The House State Government Committee was expected to take up this bill but instead held it over. The bill will be part of a series of hearings the committee is going to hold over the summer on immigration issue. Mind you, without credible evidence of ineligible persons receiving benefits, it's not an immigration issue at all but is, instead, a poverty issue.

Publicly-funded private school vouchers, SB 1/HB 1708: There were some signs that a compromise on school vouchers might be jammed through before the legislature finishes the state budget, which is due June 30. On Tuesday, the House Education Committee posted notice of hearings scheduled for Wednesday and Thursday on this issue. But the Democratic chairman of the committee, Rep. James Roebuck of West Philly, objected because the notice did not follow House rules on sunshining a hearing. To his credit, the majority chairman, Rep. Paul Clymer of Bucks County, agreed and promptly cancelled both hearings.

There was some bad news...

Abortion coverage in the insurance exchanges created by healthcare reform, SB 3: We got crushed. This bill was voted out of the House Insurance Committee on a vote of 22-2. The legislature is struggling to finish the budget by the June 30 deadline (and completely missed their own goal of finishing it by the end of May) but has plenty of time to deal with abortion, apparently.

HB 574, the Mensch amendment, & the pro-government Trojan horse

We're going to keep beating the drum over what's happening on reproductive rights at the state capitol in Harrisburg. Let me be clear, yet again: Women's access to reproductive healthcare is in serious jeopardy due to several pieces of state legislation. House Bill 574 and the amended Senate Bill 732, amended and hijacked by Senator Bob Mensch of Easton, would alter the legal playing field for abortion clinics in ways that would be so onerous that clinics would have to spend hundreds of thousands, maybe over a million, dollars to comply.

Supporters of HB 574 and the Mensch amendment, including the Pennsylvania Catholic Conference and the Pennsylvania Family Institute, have wrapped themselves in the language of women's safety, as if we're all supposed to believe that suddenly they want women to have safe access to abortion care. Try wrapping your head around that one.

But yesterday the Pennsylvania Catholic Conference showed their true colors in an email sent to their listserv. The Conference made clear their true reasons for supporting the legislation and implied that they support the legislation because it will, indeed, cut off access to abortion care:

Today, the Senate voted 38 to 12 to pass Senate Bill 732, which, thanks to the Mensch Amendment added on Wednesday, June 8, would hold abortion facilities to the same fire and safety standards, personnel and equipment requirements, and quality assurance procedures as other freestanding ambulatory surgical facilities. The Mensch Amendment was a courageous stand for the pro-life cause. (emphasis added)

"A courageous stand for the pro-life," i.e. pro-government, "cause"? Need I say more? Only the American Family Association of Pennsylvania- the crazy Uncle Charlie of the pro-government, anti-gay crowd in PA- has been honest enough to admit that they're supporting the bills because they could close clinics. Diane Gramley of AFA of PA sent an email to their listserv on May 9 that said:

The passage of such legislation would significantly reduce the number of abortions, abortion facilities and abortionists in Pennsylvania.

The pro-government advocates can try to hide behind the language of "safety," but their motivations are obvious.

(Aside: I've been struggling with what framing to use to describe those who want women to have no access to reproductive healthcare. I'm not a fan of "pro-life" or "anti-choice." I've settled on "pro-government" for the moment because these are people who believe that the government should make private medical decisions for women. If you have any other ideas, let me know.)

Update, 12:50pm: The Lancaster Intelligencer Journal has called out the supporters of HB 574 and the amended SB 732 for the same reason.

Forcing clinics to enlarge room sizes, which already are covered by building codes, or replace existing elevators with hospital-grade elevators has nothing to do with protecting a woman's health.

Pennsylvania has strict abortion laws. That's as it should be.

But the Gosnell situation is being exploited to make it even more difficult for women in the state to obtain an abortion.

Greetings from Harrisburg! The ongoing abortion saga

The state Senate passed the amended Senate Bill 732, requiring abortion clinics to follow the ambulatory surgical facilities regulations. Plus, Senate committees moved bills on prison reform and blocking the implementation of Real ID. Learn more with this update, and check out our legislative webpage.

Please note that by playing this clip YouTube and Google will place a long-term cookie on your computer. Please see YouTube's privacy statement on their website and Google's privacy statement on theirs to learn more. To view the ACLU of PA's privacy statement, click here.

Greetings from Harrisburg! Reproductive rights in crisis in PA

The state Senate passed an amendment today (June 8) to require freestanding abortion clinics to follow the same regulations as ambulatory surgical facilities. Learn more about this and the latest on an attempt to require all voters at every election to show photo ID.

Please note that by playing this clip YouTube and Google will place a long-term cookie on your computer. Please see YouTube's privacy statement on their website and Google's privacy statement on theirs to learn more. To view the ACLU of PA's privacy statement, click here.

This week at the state capitol: Voter ID, Abortion, HIV, Oh, my!

Another week of session at the state capitol is upon us. And the attempts to erode your rights continue.

We expect House Bill 934, Rep. Daryl Metcalfe's voter ID bill, to get a vote in the state House this week. The bill would require all voters at every election to show unexpired, government-issued photo ID, effectively disenfranchising a large swath of U.S. citizens who do not have such ID. Supporters are chasing the ghosts of voter fraud while providing no credible evidence of fraud. And my personal favorite, they equate voting with driving a car, getting a library card, and renting a movie at your local Blockbuster store (if you still have one). So the cornerstone of our democratic experiment, the vote, is equal to your ability to go down the street and pick up a copy of Fast Times at Ridgemont High. Gnarly.

The New York Times published a story on this vast right wing conspiracy last week.

On the Senate calendar, two abortion bills, SB 732 and SB 3, continue to linger menacingly, and there's a good chance that the Senate takes up one or both of these bills this week. SB 732 beefs up the inspection process for abortion clinics. While there are some minor problems with that bill, the real issue is with an amendment by Senator Mensch of Easton that alters the legal requirements for clinics in such a way that the clinics would have to spends hundreds of thousands and maybe more than a million dollars in building renovations and staff increases.

SB 3, meanwhile, prohibits insurance companies from offering coverage of abortion care when they participate in the insurance exchanges, or marketplaces, created by federal healthcare reform. That includes policies that are purchased with private money. Sounds like a government takeover of healthcare....

Finally, on Tuesday, the House Human Services Committee is scheduled to consider Senate Bill 260. This bill erodes the privacy protections currently in state law on HIV testing. It replaces a requirement of written informed consent with "documented" informed consent, meaning the doctor could sign off on the test instead of the patient; allows doctors to force patients to opt out of an HIV test, rather signing into the test; and eliminates the requirement in law for pre-test counseling. The ACLU of PA opposes this bill for privacy reasons. Unfortunately, HIV still carries a stigma that can lead to discrimination, and it is important that patients not feel forced into a test. I'm also not clear on why withholding information from patients is a good thing, and the supporters of this bill have yet to respond to that point.

As always, you can find more details about our positions on these and other bills at our legislative webpage.

Greetings from Harrisburg! Win (temporarily) on reproductive rights

The Pennsylvania Senate delayed votes on legislation that would adversely affect women's access to reproductive healthcare in the commonwealth. Learn more with this video update from legislative director Andy Hoover, and find memos, press releases, and other statements at our legislative webpage.



Please note that by playing this clip YouTube and Google will place a long-term cookie on your computer. Please see YouTube's privacy statement on their website and Google's privacy statement on theirs to learn more. To view the ACLU of PA's privacy statement, click here.

Next week at the state capitol: When it rains, it pours

I'll try not to be overly dramatic. But the s**t is hitting the fan at the state capitol. Here's what could be/will be on tap for next week.

House Bill 574, re: altering legal guidelines for abortion clinics. This bill could cost freestanding abortion clinics to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars in building renovations and staffing increases and could put those clinics out of business or at least increase dramatically the cost of abortion care. Supporters of the bill include the Pennsylvania Family Institute and Pennsylvania Catholic Conference, organizations that oppose women's access to abortion care. That says plenty.

Interestingly, while supporters of the bill have claimed that Philadelphia DA Seth Williams supports the bill, after the indictment of West Philly "Doctor" Kermit Gosnell, DA Williams has said, no, I don't.

HB 574 has been moved from the House Tabled Calendar to the House Calendar, and the word is that it is going to get a vote next week. We have an action alert posted on it. Take action now!

House Bill 934, re: voter suppression by ID. The House State Government Committee will vote on Monday on this bill to mandate photo ID at the polls. The problem? Approximately 11 percent of US citizens do not have government-issued ID, and they are disproportionately the elderly, the working poor, and African-Americans. In other words, this is an ol' fashioned voter suppression tactic that harkens back to the darkest corners of American history. Our friends at Project H.O.M.E. have posted an action on HB 934.

This just in! Late word has come in this afternoon that the Senate may take up Senate Bill 9, re: mandatory government-issued ID for public aid, and SB 637, re: forcing state contractors to use the federal E-Verify database program. We oppose both bills.

Hearings! Hearings! It's not all bad news. On Wednesday, the Senate Communications & Technology Committee will hold a hearing on SB 354, which would prohibit Pennsylvania's participation in the federal Real ID Act, and on other privacy issues. I'm testifying at that hearing and at a joint hearing of the Senate and House State Government committees on redistricting on Thursday. The latter is an open discussion about redistricting.

The hits just keep on comin'!

The Update, 4:15pm: I just got the Senate Appropriations Committee agenda for Monday. It includes SB 637 and SB 9...and SB 3, which prohibits insurance companies that participate in the insurance exchange created by healthcare reform from covering abortion care. I wasn't kidding when I said that the hits just keep on comin'.

This week at the state capitol

Day One of this session week at the state capitol has passed, but the real fun begins tomorrow.

On Tuesday at 10am, the House Judiciary Committee will consider House Bill 815, to create a new crime of "sexting." This bill creates criminals out of dumb teenagers being dumb teenagers. In the shadow of the Luzerne County juvenile court scandal, one would assume that the legislature would tread lightly when it comes to criminalizing our kids, but this bill is like killing a gnat with a sledgehammer.

Fortunately, there is an alternative proposal in the Senate, SB 850, which criminalizes sexting when one person harms another. SB 850 is already out of the Senate Judiciary Committee. The ACLU of PA doesn't support SB 850...but we also don't oppose it. We oppose HB 815, and the ACLU-PA memo submitted to the House Judiciary Committee is available at our legislative webpage.

It must be the week for dueling House-Senate proposals on civil liberties. On Wednesday, the Senate Public Health and Welfare Committee will consider Senate Bill 732, which makes alterations to the inspection process for abortion clinics. SB 732 has some minor problems, including patient and employee privacy issues, but we're putting all of our energy into stopping HB 574, which would impose a complete rewrite of the legal playing field for clinics, potentially putting them out of business. In fact, we just posted this action alert against HB 574. Please take action!

Our friends in the immigration advocacy community will hold a press conference to answer some of the anti-immigrant vitriol out there on Wednesday. And SB 1, the school vouchers bill, continues to hang out there after being re-referred to the Senate Education Committee. Senator Piccola says that he has an agreement with the Corbett administration on revisions, but no one knows if he has the votes to pass the bill in the Senate. Time will tell.

Anti-choice advocates want safe access to abortion. Wait, what?

This is rich. Anti-choice advocates are supporting House Bill 574- a bill to alter the legal requirements for abortion clinics- and they're framing their support by saying they want safe conditions in Pennsylvania's abortion clinics. The Pennsylvania Family Institute made this point in a Patriot News op-ed, and the Pennsylvania Catholic Conference repeated the same message in an action alert last week.

Reality check. These organizations want women to have no access to abortion care. Do they really expect us to buy this idea that they want women to have safe access to abortion?

HB 574 would rewrite the legal landscape for clinics in such a way that many clinics in Pennsylvania could close. Abortion clinics already follow a long list of laws and regulations, including required equipment and medical supplies, hospital transfer agreements for emergency services, equipment required for anesthesia, clinical staff licensing requirements, laboratory and pathology requirements, required blood tests specific to abortion care, extensive reporting requirements for each abortion, abortion facility requirements, and complications reporting. Abortion is the only medical procedure in the crimes code, for crying out loud.

By changing the legal playing field for abortion clinics, HB 574 would force clinics to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars to alter their operations to comply with the law.

And that's really why these anti-choice advocates support the bill. They know it could further limit women's access to abortion care in Pennsylvania. But that could lead to a public health crisis in Pennsylvania of significant proportions. Pennsylvania women won't stop needing abortion care but will be forced to go out of state or to go to disreputable providers. This will particularly impact poor women and rural women.

Dr. Gosnell allegedly committed some terrible crimes. But abortion providers in Pennsylvania who give safe, legal care don't deserve to be punished for his crimes. That would be the tragedy of HB 574.

Greetings from Harrisburg, reproductive rights edition

The health committees in both the state House and the state Senate were busy this week with abortion. Learn more in our latest edition of Greetings from Harrisburg, our video updates from the state capitol. And here's our press release in reaction to the week's activities.

Please note that by playing this clip You Tube and Google will place a long-term cookie on your computer. Please see YouTube's privacy statement on their website and Google's privacy statement on theirs to learn more. To view the ACLU of PA's privacy statement, click here.

Next week at the state capitol: The one about abortion

Photo courtesy of the ACLU and yesterday's rally for women's health in Washington.

Well, here we go. The abortion wars aren't just for DC anymore. Next week reproductive rights take center stage at the state capitol.

On Monday, the House Health Committee will consider House Bill 574. This bill will require abortion clinics to follow the same regulations as ambulatory surgical facilities, which are clinics where patients can go for outpatient procedures. Why is that an issue? If abortion clinics had to follow these requirements, they would be forced to alter their buildings and their staffing in ways that would cost them hundreds of thousands of dollars. As just two of numerous examples, abortion clinics would have to increase the size of their operating rooms and would have to hire a full-time nurse. (Right now, clinics have a nurse on duty on days that they perform abortions but not on days that they are doing routine OB-GYN and family planning services.)

In reality, HB 574 would close most and maybe all of the freestanding abortion clinics in Pennsylvania. As it stands now, abortion services are only available in a small number of counties. One of our allies said recently that HB 574 would be the greatest rollback of reproductive healthcare in Pennsylvania since the Roe decision. And that's saying something since we are the state with the Abortion Control Act and the state of Planned Parenthood of Southeastern PA v. Casey.

Our friends at Pennsylvania NOW have created a petition at change.org that will be sent to members of the House Health Committee.

On Tuesday, we get a break, but on Wednesday, it's right back at it. The Senate Public Health and Welfare Committee will hold a hearing on numerous pieces of legislation that have been introduced in the Senate in response to the indictment of Dr. Kermit Gosnell in Philadelphia. The good news is that none of those bills move abortion clinics under the ASF standards like HB 574. The bad news is that at least two of the bills have some privacy issues, including exposing patient records- with names- to Department of Health inspectors, but we are hopeful that we can work through those issues with the Senate. The most important thing the Senate can do is reject the ASF provisions of HB 574, and so far, senators are doing that.

If you're interested in attending or watching on PCN (on cable or online), that hearing is at 2pm on Wednesday in Hearing Room 1 of the North Office Building.

In other news, we expect that the Senate Appropriations Committee will vote on SB 1, the taxpayer-funded private school vouchers bill. I know I said that last week, but this week I really mean it.

Also, there is some good legislation moving. On Tuesday, the Senate Judiciary Committee will consider several bills that stem from the Luzerne County juvenile court scandal. SB 815 prohibits juveniles from waiving counsel, which was a huge problem in Luzerne. SB 817 prohibits the shackling of juveniles in court.

Finally, the Senate Judiciary Committee will also consider SB 850, which addresses sexting by minors. We have no position on this bill, and that's significant because the bill does not have the problems of House Bill 815, which we oppose. SB 850 creates a misdemeanor offense when one minor harms another via cyberbullying, including sexting. HB 815, on the other hand, has problems because it over-criminalizes kids and has First Amendment issues by criminalizing images that involve nudity (and not sex acts) and that are consensual. We're grateful that Senator Greenleaf has introduced and is moving SB 850 because it provides a counter to what the House has been trying to do for the last year.

Another action-packed week is shaping up at the state capitol.

Update from last week: SB 260 passed out of the Senate Public Health and Welfare Committee. This bill removes the current requirement that patients receive pre-test counseling for HIV tests and allows doctors to require patients to opt-out of HIV testing, rather than opting in via written informed consent. Why it's a good idea to take information away from patients is beyond me.

SB 637 passed out of the Senate State Government. This bill requires state contractors and sub-contractors to use the federal E-Verify program, an online database program with more than 500 million records of personal information on us. We oppose.

HB 934, the voter ID bill, was debated in the House State Government Committee but not voted yet. We expect a committee vote soon on this awful bill.

We'll keep working on these bills, of course. But as I told an ally recently, what do we do with legislators who refuse to listen?

Next week at the state capitol

Next week will be a big week at the state capitol as Governor Corbett gives his first budget address, a proposal that his budget secretary has suggested would be a "day of reckoning."

But on the civil liberties front, it appears all should be relatively quiet, for a change. Several bills in which we have an interest have been re-referred to the Senate Appropriations Committee, including Senate Bill 3, banning insurance coverage for abortion in the insurance exchanges created by healthcare reform, and Senate Bill 9, requiring government-issued ID for public aid. Bills expanding the controlled substances law are currently on the tabled calendar, and SB 1, the school vouchers bill, is expected to go to the Senate Appropriations Committee.

Though the legislature is always full of surprises, no committees are scheduled to vote on civil liberties-related bills.

The biggest potential threat this week is House Bill 317, which adds two new aggravating circumstances for capital cases. It would bring the total number of aggravating circumstances, i.e. circumstances in a homicide that could lead to the death penalty, to 20. At a time when Illinois and Montana are considering repeal of the death penalty, followed on the heels of repeal by New York, New Jersey, and New Mexico, this bill actually expands the death penalty here in PA.

It's possible that HB 317 could get a vote next week. One would think it would go to the House Appropriations Committee before getting a floor vote since the death penalty has proven to be a very expensive government program. But one never knows at the capitol.

After next week, the legislature breaks for several weeks for budget hearings. (Yes, I'm already thinking about the days off I'll be taking this month.) Ah, but civil liberties will still be on the docket this month, as the House Democratic Policy Committee will hold several hearings on school vouchers and the House State Government Committee will hold hearings on ID to vote (on March 21) and on a resolution asking the federal government to address concerns raised over TSA airport searches (on March 30).

In between, I'll be getting some rest. It will really crank up in April.

Next week at the state capitol

Two weeks ago, little did we know that the fun was only beginning at the state capitol.

The death penalty is a failure...so let's expand it. Huh?
On Tuesday, the House Judiciary Committee will vote on House Bill 317. This bill will add a new aggravating circumstance for capital cases. A person could get the death penalty if the homicide also involves a sex offense and the defendant was required to register under Megan's Law at the time. There are already 19 aggravating circumstances that could lead to the death penalty, and one of those is committing homicide in the course of committing another felony. But with HB 317, we want to be very, very, extra special sure that the person gets death.

The Everyone an ICE Agent Act of 2011
On Monday, the House Labor and Industry Committee will vote on House Bill 439. This bill would penalize any licensed employer in PA who hires a person without papers by taking the employer's license. Of course, the bill doesn't explain how the licensing board or commission is supposed to determine that the business did hire an undocumented immigrant. Does this bill only kick in if the employer is cited by the federal government? Does the licensing board have to conduct its own investigations and train its members as ICE agents?

Can't we just put them on double secret probation?

State Constitution? We don't need no stinkin' state constitution
It hasn't been posted yet, but the word is that the Senate Education Committee will vote on Tuesday on Senate Bill 1, the school vouchers bill. We contend- convincingly, of course- that SB 1 violates not one, not two, but three different provisions of the state constitution. Our legal analysis and our testimony on SB 1 are both available on our legislative webpage.

Meanwhile, back on the floor....
We don't expect floor votes this week on any bills on which the ACLU of PA has a position, but SB 3- prohibiting insurance coverage for abortion in the insurance exchanges- and SB 9- requiring government-issued ID for public aid- both continue to linger on the Senate calendar. Both bills are expected to detour to the Senate Appropriations Committee, but I also expect them to get a floor vote at some point soon.

You see what I have to deal with on a daily basis? Truth is, though, that I love it.