The Missouri House held a hearing April 9 about House Joint Resolution 73, the bill proposing an amendment to reinstate the abortion ban in Missouri.
The event was very contentious.
Testimony was limited to five people in support and five opposed, although there were more than 55 people there to testify in opposition. They were outraged and were removed from the hearing room by Capitol security.
The bill passed the state House and was sent to the state Senate.
I attended the Senate hearing for the legislation on April 30 and was appalled at the way it was conducted — and what it represents to the residents of Missouri.
It is estimated that six people were there to testify in support of the bill and approximately 150 to oppose it, coming from all over the state after getting just a 24-hour notice.
The word “hearing” implies time allotted for voters to make their voice heard by legislators. The Missouri House provides a means to submit testimony online, but the state Senate requires people to come to the Capitol to submit testimony, which is already a burden.
Until now, I thought the point of giving testimony was for our legislators to hear both sides of an issue. One expects courtesy and respect for the people who have come to the Capitol. I was surprised at some of the senators’ lack of respect for the people testifying.
Most hearings provide alternate testimony by one who is in favor, followed by a person in opposition. That is fair.
At this hearing, those in favor of the bill were allowed to testify first for a full hour, leaving only 45 minutes for those against it to speak. This was unbalanced, based on the supermajority of Missourians who had attended to oppose the bill.
Even though testimony was limited to two minutes, senators spent the majority of time asking questions, which used up time and limited the number of people who could share their points of view.
It was clear that the senators did not want to hear from their constituents. When people in opposition were finally allowed to testify (including board certified physicians), the questions posed by some of the senators were more like cross examinations.
Questions such as, “Have you been involved in assisting or helping a patient obtain an abortion by crossing state lines?” And when they did not get the answer they wanted, the question was repeated.
Senators also repeatedly asked those testifying, “Did you inform voters that Amendment 3 absolved providers from all liability?“
This is not true, and spreading this lie is a disservice to Missouri voters.
Abortion providers, along with all other medical providers, are not exempt from medical malpractice.
