04/25/1997 08:30 AM House JUD

 HB 234 - ABORTIONS UNDER GENERAL RELIEF PROGRAM                             
                                                                               
 Number 1064                                                                   
                                                                               
 CHAIRMAN GREEN announced the next item on the agenda was HB 234,              
 "An Act relating to assistance for abortions under the general                
 relief program; and relating to financial responsibility for the              
 costs of abortions."                                                          
                                                                               
 REPRESENTATIVE TERRY MARTIN, sponsor of HB 234, asked for another             
 opportunity when there was more time to hear the bill.                        
                                                                               
 CHAIRMAN GREEN noted that a couple of people needed to testify.  He           
 asked whether Representative Martin wished to make a statement                
 prior to that.                                                                
                                                                               
 REPRESENTATIVE MARTIN said this is a new approach concerning state            
 funding for an abortion.  Federal and state laws have been                    
 formulated to make the male responsible for the child that is born;           
 earnings can be attached, for example.  In the same way, this                 
 legislation would make the male responsible for the abortion.  He             
 referred to two proposed amendments and said he believes those                
 would add to the bill, if the committee wished to prepare a                   
 committee substitute.                                                         
                                                                               
 CHAIRMAN GREEN advised that the committee would meet again later              
 that day.                                                                     
                                                                               
 Number 1172                                                                   
                                                                               
 THEDA PITTMAN, Interim Executive Director, Alaska Civil Liberties             
 Union (ACLU), testified via teleconference from Anchorage.  She               
 said she had submitted a letter on behalf of the ACLU in opposition           
 to the bill; she would make a couple of additional comments.                  
                                                                               
 MS. PITTMAN noted that the sponsor statement pools abortions and              
 elective procedures.  She pointed out that the medical community              
 uses the word "elective" for procedures that can be scheduled, as             
 opposed to emergency procedures.  While an abortion may be                    
 considered elective as far as the doctor is concerned because it              
 can be scheduled, it is not elective for the woman in many                    
 instances.  She commented that discussions about the difference               
 between preserving one's health and one's life were rather                    
 disappointing.                                                                
                                                                               
 MS. PITTMAN reported that in 1994, the ACLU successfully brought              
 suit against the Hickel Administration for a regulation that would            
 have prevented general relief medical funding for abortions; the              
 state is currently operating under a settlement agreement reached             
 as a result of that suit.  She expressed disappointment in an                 
 amendment before the committee, which only mentions rape and                  
 incest, not taking into account the many other reasons why women              
 seek abortions, such as the woman's health, failed birth control or           
 other reasons.                                                                
                                                                               
 MS. PITTMAN stated that some feel that promoting childbirth while             
 denying abortions is pro-family.  But frankly, it is not their                
 families who will be affected, and it should not be their decision.           
 It is a disservice to Alaskan women who are poor to tell them the             
 state will not allow them to decide what kind of medical procedures           
 they need.                                                                    
                                                                               
 Number 1301                                                                   
                                                                               
 PAULINE UTTER, Chair, Abortion Rights Project, testified next via             
 teleconference from Anchorage.  She said all women should have the            
 right to choose.  However, HB 234 will place an undue burden on               
 poor women.  Abortion has always been available to the rich, even             
 when it was illegal.  One of the functions of government should be            
 to keep abortion safe and legal for all women.  A yes vote on HB
 will be considered an anti-choice vote.  She encouraged the               
 committee to help keep abortion safe and legal by voting no.                  
                                                                               
 CHAIRMAN GREEN announced that HB 234 would be heard again that                
 afternoon.