Senate gives Rauner more time to ponder choice
SPRINGFIELD – Saying the governor needs time to reconsider his pledge to veto House Bill 40, legislation that protects women’s reproductive rights in Illinois, Senator Don Harmon Wednesday night slowed the bill’s trek to the governor’s desk.
“This measure is too important to immediately put it in the hands of a governor whose public opinions about women’s access to safe, affordable reproductive health care have been inconsistent at best,” said Harmon, an Oak Park Democrat and president pro tempore of the Illinois Senate.
Harmon is the chief co-sponsor of House Bill 40. Senator Heather Steans, a Chicago Democrat, is the lead sponsor. Gov. Bruce Rauner has threatened to veto the measure, even though he pledged to support it when he was a candidate for governor.
“Wednesday night, in consultation with Senator Steans and the advocates, I filed a motion to reconsider the Senate’s vote to pass House Bill 40, which means we will temporarily hold the bill in the Senate,” Harmon said. “This motion merely allows the Senate to protect the bill from Gov. Rauner’s threatened veto until he comes to his senses. It does not jeopardize the bill’s ability to become law.”
Earlier Wednesday, the Senate voted along party lines to approve the measure, which would protect women’s rights in Illinois in the event the U.S. Supreme Court should strike down or alter the 1973 Roe v. Wade decision that legalized abortion in the United States. House Bill 40 also bars insurers from refusing to cover reproductive health care for women on Medicaid and state workers on the state’s health insurance plan.
Steans said she supports Harmon’s move to hold the bill and encourages Rauner to rethink his position.
“I want to give this legislation the best possible chance of becoming law. I know the governor has reservations and is feeling pressure from opponents to veto it,” she said. “But signing this bill into law is the right thing to do, and I urge Gov. Rauner to remain true to himself on this matter. Sen. Harmon’s motion generously gives the governor time to remember all the reasons why he originally supported it.”
Terry Cosgrove, president and CEO of Personal PAC, a reproductive rights advocacy group, said holding the legislation for now is preferable to an immediate veto, as promised by the governor.
“Illinois lawmakers sent a strong message of support for women’s reproductive rights by approving HB40. It would be careless to waste their votes by sending the bill to Gov. Rauner’s desk today only to watch him veto it,” Cosgrove said.
“In the meantime, I urge the men and women of Illinois to contact the governor to let him know why it’s important that he sign this bill into law and remind him that it will help to ensure generations of women have access to reproductive health care free of government interference.”
Holding the bill means they can send it to Rauner when doing so would have maximum impact. Perhaps when the Supreme Court gets an abortion case. Or during a particularly difficult election moment.
- Arsenal - Thursday, May 11, 17 @ 10:57 am:
And they can keep the issue alive longer.
We haven’t talked enough about all the ways the legislature can bedevil Rauner during the campaign.
- Texas Red - Thursday, May 11, 17 @ 11:00 am:
I personally find it disgraceful that the lives of the unborn would be used excursively as a leverage tool by politicians.
- 47th Ward - Thursday, May 11, 17 @ 11:02 am:
Just keep telling Rauner that he’ll get the bill soon. Tell him how close we are to sending it, that it’s almost ready. Soon, very soon. Lol.
- Hypocrisy - Thursday, May 11, 17 @ 11:02 am:
They’re really in this for all the right reasons. The women of Illinois thank you for playing politics.
- IRLJ - Thursday, May 11, 17 @ 11:02 am:
For how long can they hold the bill?
- Deft Wing - Thursday, May 11, 17 @ 11:03 am:
Thus it’s all about politics. Nice.
- Chicago Cynic - Thursday, May 11, 17 @ 11:05 am:
Don’t hold it long. You don’t want to lose the moral high ground.
- taxation = civilization - Thursday, May 11, 17 @ 11:05 am:
I like this strategic move on the Dems part. Gives them much needed leverage with a guy who will wreck the state
I wonder if they could also time the release of this bill in some way that affects budget negotiations?
- Liandro - Thursday, May 11, 17 @ 11:06 am:
All this talk over support for the little guy, yet the weakest and most innocent of us all are put to the knife.
There is no good time to present this bill to anyone, but trying to get maximum political timing out of a bill focused on ending human lives…
- AlfondoGonz - Thursday, May 11, 17 @ 11:07 am:
Hypocrisy-
Explain to me why sending a bill to a governor who says he will veto it immediately would be productive.
- Saluki - Thursday, May 11, 17 @ 11:07 am:
I am strongly pro life, and as failed as this Governor is, I would hope he stands firm and issues a veto on this legislation.
- Ron - Thursday, May 11, 17 @ 11:10 am:
I personally find it disgraceful that the lives of women would be used excursively as a leverage tool by politicians.
- Henry Francis - Thursday, May 11, 17 @ 11:11 am:
Texas Ted, what are your thoughts on the lives of born children being used as a leverage tool?
- @misterjayem - Thursday, May 11, 17 @ 11:12 am:
Because the Democrats are clearly the only ones playing politics with this issue, the obvious move for Rauner is to make repeated, public demands that he be allowed to veto HB40, rite?
– MrJM
- A Jack - Thursday, May 11, 17 @ 11:13 am:
I would suppose they could hold it to the end of the 100th GA or January of 2019.
As far as playing politics, it only comes into play if the Supreme Court overrules Roe v Wade, so there is no rush as far as women’s rights go. And certainly Rauner could change his mind as stubborn as he is.
- Ron - Thursday, May 11, 17 @ 11:13 am:
Once born, pro lifers don’t care about life. But many believe in fairy tales of gods that commit suicide in order to save mankind.
- Mike Cirrincione - Thursday, May 11, 17 @ 11:14 am:
I personally find it disgraceful that an Individuals Constitutional Right to Privacy from the Government would be used excursively as a leverage tool by judges or politicians.
- Grand Avenue - Thursday, May 11, 17 @ 11:15 am:
Also, are the funding provisions considered appropriations? Could he amendatory veto so he effectively signs the trigger repeal but vetos the state funding?
- Your Name Here - Thursday, May 11, 17 @ 11:16 am:
Thank you Senator Harmon for exposing the real reason for HB40
- Liandro - Thursday, May 11, 17 @ 11:23 am:
“Once born, pro lifers don’t care about life. But many believe in fairy tales of gods that commit suicide in order to save mankind.”
Yes, I did my two tours in Iraq out of concern for my OWN safety.
- Secret Square - Thursday, May 11, 17 @ 11:27 am:
Is there any time limit on this type of “hold”? Could it (ahem) conceivably be held until the end of the current GA?
- taxation = civilization - Thursday, May 11, 17 @ 11:29 am:
It would be naive to assume policy making is ever not about politics. And when people use the phrase “playing politics” it’s an act meant to hide the accusers’ expressly political motives-shaming the opposition.
- cdog - Thursday, May 11, 17 @ 11:32 am:
That blob of cells, that all the politicians want to leverage, isn’t a human life so why are taxpayers expected to pay for aborting it?
- Ron - Thursday, May 11, 17 @ 11:39 am:
Simple economics cdog. A one time $300 medical procedure or a lifetime of societal problems.
- RUG - Thursday, May 11, 17 @ 11:42 am:
== They’re really in this for all the right reasons. The women of Illinois thank you for playing politics. ==
If holding it now and releasing it when you have maximum leverage is a path to getting it signed instead of vetoed, then the bill’s supporters should be happy with this move.
- @misterjayem - Thursday, May 11, 17 @ 11:45 am:
“That blob of cells, that all the politicians want to leverage, isn’t a human life so why are taxpayers expected to pay for aborting it?”
Do you ever ask yourself, “How would someone with a modicum of intelligence respond to this comment?” (Hint: It involves tumors)
Doing so might improve the quality of your rhetoric.
– MrJM
- Liandro - Thursday, May 11, 17 @ 11:46 am:
“isn’t a human life”
Scientifically false. Explain to me to genetic/DNA difference between an unborn baby at 15 weeks, and a newborn child, if you can?
This isn’t the 1970’s anymore. Science has moved on from what the then-Supremes called a “point in the development of man’s knowledge” that wasn’t sufficient.
- Anonymous - Thursday, May 11, 17 @ 11:54 am:
Ron, does masochism run in your family?
- Captain Obvious - Thursday, May 11, 17 @ 12:06 pm:
The state is broke, but the majority can always find money to pay for abortions, even late-term abortions. Let the baby daddies pay, they’re motivated to erase child support obligations. Why make the rest of us pay to be murderers?
- Mad Brown - Thursday, May 11, 17 @ 12:08 pm:
Unless you have personal experience with terminating a pregnancy, it’s all posturing, and even then your opinion is limited to that experience.
Fun fact– 1 in 6 men over the age of 35 have had a vasectomy, an (almost) completely elective procedure, that insurance always pays for.
Yet, women, faced with the actual carrying of the child, the woman whose body is affected FOREVER are vilified, for consulting medical professionals to make the best decision for all involved.
But all the keyboard cowboys, get to sit in judgment, mostly whom can never really know what it’s like to carry and birth a child. (read: men)
No one can accurately say what ‘taxes’ pay for this procedure nationwide. It’s just propaganda for those ‘pro-lifers.’
- Ron - Thursday, May 11, 17 @ 12:37 pm:
Liandro, get over yourself, without its host those cells would die.
- Liandro - Thursday, May 11, 17 @ 12:59 pm:
@Ron:
You didn’t answer the question, obviously. What is the genetic/DNA difference between a 15 week old unborn child, and a newborn child?
I’d follow your straw man, but what’s the point of arguing over which humans deserve to die for their inability to survive on their own…when you won’t even acknowledge that it’s a human life?
- Colby jack - Thursday, May 11, 17 @ 1:06 pm:
## Fun fact– 1 in 6 men over the age of 35 have had a vasectomy, an (almost) completely elective procedure, that insurance always pays for.##
Another fun fact, birth control for women is free under Obamacare, see how that works?
- think - Thursday, May 11, 17 @ 1:42 pm:
The federal gov’t doesn’t pay for abortions. For those that oppose terminating abortions, I have a question for you. Do you support providing for a lifetime of services for unwanted children - that means cradle to grave services. Consider the cost of feeding, educating, housing, and caring for unwanted individuals over a lifetime vs the cost of an abortion.
- Ron - Thursday, May 11, 17 @ 1:43 pm:
Liandro, I don’t care is the answer. It can’t live without its host. You should be forced to carry all abortions to term. Or shush it.
- Uncle Sam - Thursday, May 11, 17 @ 1:43 pm:
I would like to know how we can late term abort Illinois Democrats? This should be legal.
- Mad Brown - Thursday, May 11, 17 @ 1:48 pm:
And erectile dysfunction drugs are also covered. Missing the point there, Cheesy.
I can be on BC, decide to go off BC, and with my spouse/partner can choose to have a child, and should anything be amiss with that child, why does anyone get to ‘help’ me decide how to proceed with my pregnancy?
- VanillaMan - Thursday, May 11, 17 @ 3:02 pm:
Pre-natal human life is still a human life.
It’s been 50 years of scientific breakthroughs in pre-natal health. We even perform surgeries on humans before they are born.
It is time we stop pretending that pre-natal human life is a clump of cells. We are all much more than that, even before our birth.
Stop being anti-science, human life deniers.
- Demoralized - Thursday, May 11, 17 @ 3:24 pm:
Abortion conversations always bring out the best in people /s/
We’ve got Ron dismissing human life altogether, Vanilla calling some of us human life deniers and Uncle Sam advocating I don’t know what.
Abortion brings out the looney in everyone.
- Liandro - Thursday, May 11, 17 @ 3:31 pm:
“I don’t care is the answer.”
I assumed; de-humanizing our victims and ignoring moral implications is generally part of any mass loss of human life. Exploring the scientific facts, and the moral implications thereof, of abortion in our society is long overdue.
It is a nearly impossible moral “ask” on for our society to come to terms what science has been telling us about our abortion history–but we must.
- here we go again... - Thursday, May 11, 17 @ 3:51 pm:
I wish we would stop debating the “merits” of abortion. Whether we like it or not - legal or not - women will continue to find ways to “abort” an unwanted pregnancy. That’s it. The end.
We, as a developed society, should regulate the practice (because it will happen regardless!) and make sure that it is safe.
I don’t know why people, including here, are going to continue to debate something that is not going anywhere. Just because you don’t like it, does not mean it’s not going to happen.
To the post and the strategy. I’m not sure if I agree or like it. I get it. But I wish it did not have to be about politics and an election. But I get it.
- Liandro - Thursday, May 11, 17 @ 3:58 pm:
“I wish we would stop debating the “merits” of abortion. Whether we like it or not - legal or not - women will continue to find ways to “abort” an unwanted pregnancy. That’s it. The end.”
The exact same is true of any crime on the books–robbery, fraud, violent crimes…correct? So, genuine question–why is your argument valid for abortion, but not valid (I assume) theft/murder/fraud, etc?
And at the risk of distracting from my core question…you realize an abortion will, by definition, never be “safe” for the human life it is ending?
- Demoralized - Thursday, May 11, 17 @ 4:15 pm:
We’re getting way away from the point of the post, but I’ll add my two cents.
I’m not sure I can tell the victim of a rape, of incest, or someone who’s life could be endangered by a pregnancy that I’m more qualified than them to make a decision on what to do.
My point? There is nothing easy or absolute about the abortion debate.
- ste_with_av_en - Thursday, May 11, 17 @ 4:18 pm:
So with the bill being held, we can all admit this is more political than a matter of protecting women. Meanwhile domestic. Violence shelters continue without funding
- Liandro - Thursday, May 11, 17 @ 4:41 pm:
“There is nothing easy or absolute about the abortion debate.”
Absolutely agree. By the time abortion comes into the picture, often the great/good/decent options are all long gone–only hard choices remain.
- here we go again - Thursday, May 11, 17 @ 5:20 pm:
@Liandro -
Not sure I would compare a single person’s decision (like an abortion) that does not affect another person to issues like “robbery, fraud, violent crimes,” which are public safety concerns. In those cases there is a perpetrator and victim(s).
If you claim that abortion affects an “unborn child” then we have a fundamental difference in our definition and understanding of when life and constitutional protections begin. In which case - we wont agree.
- cdog - Thursday, May 11, 17 @ 6:38 pm:
My sarcastic argument about a “blob of cells” is just another way of stating there is obviously a baby, and not a tumor or a blob of cells.
An abortion is unnecessary if that blob is just a tumor.