The state house committee hearing testimony on the abortion bill is being called into order. 1600 people have signed in to testify, and many many more are here. Follow me below the squiggle.
I'll attempt to give live updates as the wifi allows. But when I was here for the filibuster, wifi was overwelmed. If anyone is watching it online, please chime in with updates. Here goes-
The Capitol is packed. The pro-choice people (opposed to the bill) are wearing orange. Anti-abortion people (in favor of the bill) are wearing blue. I arrived at 11:30 am when they opened registration for people wanting to testify. At that time, the crowd was mostly blues. Lots of crosses, religious t-shirts, a few men in cassocks. Plenty of orange now, at 4pm CST. Maybe 50-50? Hard to estimate. People are spread out over 10 overflow rooms on two floors. They have mostly sorted themselves by color. The committee is meeting in a very tiny room. Only media and the handful of people up next to testify can fit in the room.
The bill's sponsor is Jodie Lauerberg. She is the one who claimed no exemption was necessary for rape because emergency rooms have "rape kits" that "clean the woman now". She has presented the four components of the bill. A bill opponent is questioning her now.
2:11 PM PT: I do not know the names of the committee members, but the ones opposing the bill are trying to add amendments that would soften it. Everyone is pretending to accept that this bill is about protecting women. No matter what the question, the bill sponsor just comes back with "this bill is about the health and safety of women". She has probably said it 50 times. The total number of people registered to testify is now over 1900.
2:13 PM PT: 1900 people are now signed up to testify. Other committee members are asking questions of the sponsor. The chairman has proposed several amendments that would soften the bill, and she just says "I wish to submit this bill without amendments". Every other question gets stonewalled with "this bill is about the health and safety of the woman".
2:40 PM PT: The dems are dong an excellent job. So far all of the questions have been from people who clearly oppose the bill. A woman committee member just gave a lengthy statement on a study that indicated that liposuction and plastic surgery were the most dangerous office-based procedures, and that there was no evidence that he complications would be lessened by forcing those procedures to be done in the hospital.
3:03 PM PT: An expert from Dept of Health Services is up. That's the licensing agency for various types of outpatient medical facilities, including abortion clinics and ASCs (amb surg centers). She is testifying about regulations which are more onerous for abortion clinics than for amb surg centers, and number of deaths and enforcement proceedings. She is being carefully neutral, but overall what she is saying supports the idea that stricter regulation is not needed.
3:07 PM PT: Next witness is an ultrasound tech speaking for the bill. She has 9 children and 16 grandchildren. She falsely claims hat abortion clinics receive state and federal funds. Doesn't really make any other particular points.
3:10 PM PT: A speaker against the bill on "less government" and poverty grounds.
3:12 PM PT: For the bill because an abortion invades the home of the unborn. Babies, life, motherhood.
3:16 PM PT: Opposed to bill. "We don't have a problem". Price would triple. Not about sanctity of life because it does not outlaw capital punishment. Bill is about controlling women and girls.
3:20 PM PT: Law prof from Notre Dame addressing constitutionality of the 20 week fetal pain part of bill. For the bill, which he describes as "modest restrictions". Speeding through remarks. Trying to cram a closing argument into three minutes.
3:26 PM PT: For the bill. Rural women should not be taking abortion med at home. Confusing FDA requirements with doctor's instructions on prescription bottles. Getting questions, which is interesting. Admits she wasn't paying attention during earlier testimony. Clearly doesn't understand what FDA approval means.
3:28 PM PT: Labor and delivery nurse from rural community in favor of bill. No real point.
3:30 PM PT: Against bill. Legislators should not make medical decisions. Those most affected by the bill are younger people, underrepresented in legislative process.
3:35 PM PT: Social worker against the bill. Child welfare specialist. Child of two teen parents bullied into putting child up for adoption. Bill reduces options, without reducing illegal abortions. Targets poor, unaware, naive.
3:38 PM PT: Good ole boy for the bill. Opens with a prayer. Fathers, uncles, brothers should have right to get to know child.
3:54 PM PT: Assoc General Counsel of Texas Hospital Association against bill. Very good background on admitting privileges. Excellent witness! Patients w problems should appropriately go to ER. Hospitals unlikely to grant privileges because abortions are not done in hospitals. Lots of good questions reinforcing association's objections to bill. Admits that if bill passes and hospitals will not grant privileges, abortion is effectively outlawed. Hospitals cannot be required to grant privileges, and cannot be held responsible for procedures done outside the hospital.
4:32 PM PT: An OB-gyn speaking against the bill. He is wearing scrubs and white coat,many came directly from 3 deliveries. In practice since just after Roe. Bill would interfere w doctor patient relationship, decrease access, and is based in ideology. Talking about pre-Roe illegal abortions, and bill decreasing safety of abortion, bill is not coming from professional organization of OB-gyn, but from politicians. Abortion much safer than taking a pregnancy to term. Zero benefit to taking abortion drugs in front of doctor. Late term abortions are almost all for severe anomolies. If we are concerned about fetal pain at 20 weeks, what about at 40 weeks? How painful is delivery? Committee members are trying to get him to agree to graphic description of late term abortion. "I'm not privy to those grisly details". Committee member is trying to get him to agree to increasing risks to later abortions. He is bringing testimony back to rarity of late abortions, and overall safety. Now talking about research after FDA approval of a drug frequently shows usefulness for other indications or effectiveness in other doses. Very effective witness.
4:34 PM PT: Some pastor in favor of the bill.