Majority in Iowa Senate want debate on late-term abortion

DES MOINES – In a rare move, a majority of Iowa senators have signed a withdrawal petition aimed at forcing a debate this session on a late-term abortion bill.

Two Democrats – Sens. Joe Seng, D-Davenport, and Tom Hancock, D-Epworth -- joined 24 GOP senators in signing a petition that would make House File 657 eligible for floor debate as early as Thursday – marking the first time in recent history that such a move has succeeded.

Sen. Roby Smith, R-Davenport, one of the leaders of the withdrawal effort that moved the issue from the Senate's Government Oversight Committee to the debate calendar, said he was hopeful that Senate Majority Leader Mike Gronstal, D-Council Bluffs, would allow the Senate to debate the issue that had stalled in a Senate committee

However, it remained unclear whether the latest strategy would achieve its desired affect based upon a statement Gronstal made Tuesday in response to questioning by Roby on the Senate floor.

Proponents say House File 657 -- , which would ban abortions after the 20th week of pregnancy and passed the House by a 60-39 margin on March 31 – is aimed it at stopping Nebraska Dr. LeRoy Carhart from opening a clinic in Council Bluffs, where he would support late-term abortions. Nebraska passed legislation last year making the practice illegal in that state and pro-life advocates warn that Iowa could become “the late-term abortion capital of the Midwest” if the General Assembly fails to enact the House-passed legislation this year.

“I share Mayor Tom Hanahan's opposition to making Council Bluffs the home for a new clinic that specializes in late-term abortions,” Gronstal told his fellow senators Tuesday. “I support efforts in my hometown to keep Dr. Carhart out of Council Bluffs,” Gronstal told his fellow senators. “Throughout my years at the Statehouse, I have focused my efforts on making abortion less necessary, not making them more dangerous and difficult. I don't like abortion.

“I also know that second trimester abortions are almost always a decision by a woman that desperately wants to be pregnant but something has gone tragically wrong with her pregnancy,” he added. “Making a decision about what to do at that point is a gut wrenching decision that should be made by a woman, her family and her doctor. I believe that a woman has a right to make her own personal, private decision about abortion without the interference of politicians.”

Roby noted that Gronstal had previously made statements that he would not block a debate on the late-term abortion issue and he said he was “taking him at his word on that.”

“I think it sends a strong message to Sen. Gronstal that he needs to act on it,” Smith said of the withdrawal petition.

“This bill is a bipartisan bill,” added Smith, who noted that Gov. Terry Branstad supports the bill and has indicated that he would sign it. “We need to vote on this bill.”

“According to rule 6 of the Senate rules, it is 100 percent his (Gronstal's) discretion to take it up. I think it's the right thing to do.”

Seng said he signed the petition because he is a right-to-life Democrat who campaigned for election supporting pro-life legislation when soliciting support from his constituents.

“They're expecting me to vote that way,” Seng said. “I maybe crossed lines. It's a tough call.”

Seng said issues like abortion transcend partisan politics. He said the issue was discussed within the 26-member Senate Democratic majority caucus and he described the response to his decision as “lukewarm at best.”

Hancock said he ran as a pro-life Democrat when he was first elected seven years ago and everybody in his caucus knows where he stands on abortion-related issues.

“In my district, I think it's what folks want me to do, but it's my personal belief as well with my Catholic religion,” he said.

Hancock said he has not detected any friction within the majority Democratic caucus over his position on H.F. 657 or his decision to sign the withdrawal petition. “Absolutely not. Not a bit,” he said.

Hancock said he had “no idea, none whatsoever,” whether the issue would get debated in the Senate yet this session. “We'll see.”

Sen. Tom Courtney, D-Burlington, chairman of the Senate Government Oversight Committee, said he was given the withdrawal petition by the Senate secretary on Tuesday and, in return, gave him House File 657 and the bill's jacket.

“This effectively moves it out of my committee,” said Courtney, who had indicated he did not intend to consider the issue this year because of the complex nature of the provisions that did not reach the Senate until April.

Sen. David Johnson, R-Ocheyedan, who supported the effort and tried unsuccessfully to use the withdrawal process to force a debate on a constitutional marriage amendment earlier this session, said the issue now “is in Gronstal's court.”

“It's just another strategy that before we adjourn this session that there is a Senate vote. I believe the votes are there,” Johnson said.

“The obstructionism continues,” said Sen. Merlin Bartz, R-Grafton.

Senate President Jack Kibbie, D-Emmetsburg, whose legislative career dates back to 1961, said he believed there was one other time during his tenure that a withdrawal petition garnered the 26 needed signatures but he added “it was way back.”

Rep. Mary Ann Hanusa, R-Council Bluffs, who served as floor manager for H.F. 657 in the House, said she was not surprised the withdrawal petition received the support of a majority of the 50-member Senate.

“I think it indicates there is widespread support for this not only from people in Council Bluffs, but across the state. I'm very pleased that it was filed with bipartisan support,” she said. “Sen. Gronstal has said in public forums, and been quoted in the paper several times, that he will not stand in the way, will not block debate on this bill. And yet, this morning when he was asked directly will he or will he not bring the bill to the floor, he would not answer the question. I would like to take Sen. Gronstal at his word that he would not block debate on this, but his answer this morning was very interesting.”