Anti-abortion groups and the Vermont Republican Party had urged members to attend the hearing and speak out against H.57, a bill that would establish reproductive rights in state law. “This is a watershed moment,” VTGOP chair Deb Billado said. “We wanted to urge people to be there and express their opinions.”
Opponents say the bill would go beyond current legal protections and create an absolute right to abortion — including late-term abortion. “The bill implies that at eight months and 30 days, you can abort a baby,” Billado said. “I find this to be a horrific thing.”
Supporters say that federal law supersedes state law and would prevent any expansion of abortion rights beyond current practice.
“I don’t know what floodgates the bill opens,” House Human Services chair Ann Pugh (D-South Burlington) said. “Their concerns about what they think will happen haven’t happened in the last 40 years.” Pugh was referring to a 1972 Vermont Supreme Court ruling that threw out the state’s existing abortion law. Since then, there have been no restrictions on abortion in Vermont. The only limits on abortion have been those in federal law.
Many abortion opponents spoke from a frankly religious perspective; one speaker recited the “Hail Mary” during her two minutes. Greg Darling of Littleton, N.H., called abortion an “abomination” and predicted the wrath of God would descend on Vermont if the bill passes.
“God will not be mocked,” he said. “God will cover the Statehouse in blood.”
Another told lawmakers to repent or face divine judgment. Multiple opponents cited Jeremiah 1:5, in which God tells the prophet, “Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, and before you were born, I consecrated you.”
Dotty Kyle of Warren spoke of getting pregnant as a “dopey teenager” in 1953, “20 years before Roe v. Wade.” She and her parents agreed on abortion, and they found a doctor who performed the procedure illegally after hours. The abortion, she said, “allowed me to graduate high school, go to college, marry and have three lovely children. Without access to abortion, I would have struggled to support a child as a single mother.”
Despite the highly charged nature of the testimony, the hearing was marked by civility. Speakers rarely tried to exceed their time limits. House rules forbade verbal reactions or the display of signs, and audience members kept their peace.
“I don’t think so,” Billado said when asked if there was a split between the party and its top elected official. “There are pro-abortion people who say this bill goes too far. I can’t speak for the governor, but I suspect he feels that way.”
Scott’s spokesperson, Rebecca Kelley, reiterated the governor’s support for abortion rights — and his support for a vigorous debate. “This is an issue where people are going to weigh-in from all sides,” Kelley said. “The governor believes that all voices should be heard.”
A flood of anti-H.57 emails and calls caused some lawmakers to take a step back. According to House Clerk Bill MaGill, some Republican representatives who had signed on as cosponsors had subsequently asked for their names to be removed.
Though his chamber isn’t yet considering the bill, Sen. Corey Parent (R-Franklin) said that he wouldn’t support the measure as currently written.
“I consider myself a pro-choice Republican,” he said. “The late-term aspect has fired up a lot of constituents … I hope the bill will be rewritten to address the concerns that have been expressed.”
The uproar may inspire changes in the bill to make its intent clearer. “Of course there will be amendments,” Pugh said. “Bills don’t just fly through the legislature.”
Pugh’s committee is scheduled to vote on H.57 Thursday morning. “We’re going to see if we can do it,” Pugh said. “Whether we’ll be able to vote Thursday or Friday will be up to the committee.”
Related Stories
Got something to say?
Send a letter to the editor and we'll publish your feedback in print!
If men got pregnant, there would be drop-in abortion kiosks on every corner. These Christian extremists are free to practice their religious beliefs but they are not free to impose their beliefs on the rest of us.
Sadly, too many women are desperate because of restrictions passed by republicans to impose excessive government regulations, forcing women to undergo unnecessary procedures to violate their bodies and terrorize them into compliance. The GOP advocates for fewer government regulations except when it comes to controlling women’s bodies.
Many of us volunteer to drive hundreds of miles to a clinic and give desperate girls a place to stay while they cope with unnecessary hurdles created by majority male republican legislatures. We will never allow these religious terrorists to take away the free will of American women and we’re thankful for sensible Vermont legislation and living in a state where women have full rights over our own bodies.
They should have late term abortions only if the mother’s health is a problem
I would assume that Greg Darling and the other “religious” speakers there will now be investigated, as they should be. Talk about hurting your own cause!
Ms. Billado, there is no such thing as a pro-abortion group. Nobody wants to impose abortion on any woman. The idea is to allow individual choice in the matter which be of no concern to anybody but the woman.
Mr. Walters writes, “Despite the highly charged nature of the testimony, the hearing was marked by civility. Speakers rarely tried to exceed their time limits. House rules forbade verbal reactions or the display of signs, and audience members kept their peace.” This was generally true, but it should be noted that there was an orchestrated effort by some of the anti bill folks to outright lie about their affiliation and claim to be bill supporters in order to steal testimony time from people supporting the bill. In addition, many of the anti bill backers prayed loudly in groups in the overflow-filled lobby where I was trying hard to listen to the testimonies. I don’t consider this civil behavior and, in my own opinion, should be reported in press coverage.
I was also disappointed that the interlopers were allowed to speak even after acknowledging this bald face lie, when instead, their mikes should have been shut off and they should have been politely escorted from the House Chambers by security. That would have been civil and sent a message that the behavior was wrong and unacceptable.