Budget debate turns into fight over taxpayer-funded abortions

DES MOINES – The Iowa Senate on Thursday authorized nearly $2.86 billion in state funding for human services and education programs next fiscal year after turning back an effort to end taxpayer funding of abortions for low-income women.

Majority Democrats provided the 26 votes needed to approve $1.89 billion to fund health and human services provided by state government and $964.2 million for higher education, workforce development and education reforms for the 12-month period that begins July 1.

A total of 22 GOP senators present Thursday opposed both Senate File 446 and a revised House File 604 that likely will end up in House-Senate conference committees as part of the fiscal 2014 negotiations that will be needed to close the gap between GOP and Democratic spending targets as the split-control Legislature works toward adjournment.

Thursday's floor debate on the two major budget pieces included an emotionally charged abortion debate in which Sen. Kent Sorenson, R-Milo, called on his Senate colleagues to end taxpayer-funded “slaughter” of the unborn while Sen. Joe Bolkcom, D-Iowa City, countered that the public funding is needed for tragic but rare circumstances where pregnancies “go terribly wrong.”

“This does nothing to change our laws regarding abortion. That is not the intent of this amendment,” said Sen. Amy Sinclair, R-Allerton, lead sponsor of an amendment supported by 22 Republicans and Sen. Joe Seng, D-Davenport but opposed by 24 Democrats.

“What this does is removes the requirement for every taxpayer to support it,” she said. “As a taxpayer in the state of Iowa, as a woman in the state of Iowa, as a mother -- I don't believe that I or anyone else feels that taxpayers ought to be funding abortion.”

Sen. Jack Hatch, D-Des Moines, said current law allows publicly funded abortions in cases of rape, incent, fetal abnormality and when the mother's life is in danger. He said there were 12 procedures performed at University of Iowa Hospitals & Clinics last fiscal year and seven so far this year. He called it a “tough issue for everybody” but one of fairness.

“It's legal in America; it's legal in this state, and just because you're poor doesn't mean you can't have the same services of other women in our communities,” he said. “This amendment would take all of that away. It would give no choice to the woman. If the woman is raped, she has to have the baby. If the mother's life is in danger, it's a crap shoot. That's unfair to women just because they're poor.”

Sorenson objected to using a “sanitary term like abortion” during Thursday's debate, saying “I call that slaughter and that's what I'm going to continue to call that because that's exactly what it is.” He added that he was disgusted that the Senate was having what he considered was an “absurd” discussion.

“How many babies do we have to kill a year?” he asked. “It's disgusting and the fact that we're asking people to take their tax dollars and spend it on slaughtering an unborn baby is disgusting.”

The bills now go to the GOP-led House, where Democratic minority leader Kevin McCarthy of Des Moines predicted Republicans would have “significant difficulty” getting consensus on Medicaid-funded abortions – an issue which could become an impediment to adjournment again this year.

“That could be the major stumbling block for adjournment this year,” he said. “We will work in good faith and provide votes if needed. That may occur. If it occurs, I suspect that it will be the so-called last train out of Dodge.”

However, House Speaker Kraig Paulsen, R-Hiawatha, said the main obstacle to adjournment was the fact that legislative Democrats want to spend too much money in fiscal 2014.