By PAULA TRACY, InDepthNH.org
CONCORD – The issue of abortion is square in the face of lawmakers in Concord now as Democrats introduced a suite of bills and a Constitutional Amendment Thursday that would ask voters to enshrine reproductive freedom in the New Hampshire Constitution.
It was heard before the Senate Judiciary Committee before a packed audience along with three other Democratic-sponsored bills.
Since the fall of Roe v. Wade, which provided abortion rights in the nation for 50 years, it is now up to the states to decide what is allowed in their borders in terms of abortion. This came following the Supreme Court’s Dobbs decision last year.
The New Hampshire legislature in 2022 passed abortion limits just prior to Dobbs, which limits abortion to up to 24 weeks of pregnancy. Prior to that vote of the Republican-controlled legislature and signed by Republican Gov. Chris Sununu there were no limitations.
In addition to the Constitutional Amendment, the Judiciary Committee heard three Democratic-backed bills, Senate Bill 575 relative to legal protections to abortion care for residents from other jurisdictions, Senate Bill 567-FN relative to expanding access to abortion medications like Mifepristone and Senate Bill 461 repealing a “confusing” line in the new Fetal Life Protection Act.
Republicans have filed HB 1248 which would drastically restrict abortion access in the state to 15 days from conception. In all, 11 bills have been filed this year with “abortion” in the title which can be viewed here https://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/bill_status/results.aspx?adv=2&txttext=abort.
The proposed Constitutional amendment CACR 24 faces the highest hurdle.
If passed by a three-fifth vote in both chambers it would ask the voters to decide at the polls whether individual reproductive freedom should be enshrined in the Constitution. And it requires a two-thirds vote of the voters to be enacted.
It reads that “an individual’s right to personal reproductive autonomy is central to the liberty and dignity to determine one’s own life.”
Republican members of the Senate Judiciary, particularly state Sen. William Gannon, R-Sandown, peppered supporters of CACR 24 with questions about whose rights were at stake, the mothers or the unborn. And when.
State Sen. Debra Altschiller, D-Stratham, sponsor of the constitutional amendment and SB 575, said CACR 24 is about rights that should not be removed “when someone is pregnant” and takes the matter out of public debate.
CACR 24, she said, is simply about asking the voters their position on whether or not abortion should be allowed as a right to all in New Hampshire and cannot be taken away.
Several states have banned the practice of abortion since the Dobbs decision, and some believe that an effort is underway here to further limit rights. Meanwhile, those who believe the state has not gone far enough are also filing legislation.
Bob Dunn, on behalf of the Catholic Diocese, opposed CACR 24 calling it “an incredibly divisive question.”
He asked if the Constitution should designate some as “expendable and “disposable,” referring to the rights of the unborn.
The current law criminalizes doctors, who violate the 24-week ban, said Dr. Oglesby Young, a retired obstetrician and gynecologist who spoke in support of CACR 24, noted it has become politicized, placing a lot of criminal unknowns in the relationship between a doctor and patient.
Gannon asked if he was OK with allowing “an abortion after 24 weeks?”
“I really object to you using the word ‘abortion’ at that stage of pregnancy,” Young snapped.
State Sen. Sharon Carson, R-Londonderry, chair of the Senate Judiciary, halted a back-and- forth between the two and urged the crowded room with raw emotions on the subject, “Let’s get through this hearing.”
Carson said fatal fetal anomalies are an exception allowed for abortion in New Hampshire under the new law.
Dr. Melissa Martinez-Adorno, came to support CACR 24 and upon question from Republicans, noted that less than 1 percent of abortions were carried out in the last trimester.
While many medical providers supported the amendment and bills, noting it is difficult for providers to know if they are going to be prosecuted, some like Robert Lacoste of Stratham, a retired nurse anesthetist, opposed the CACR measure. He said the government has to protect a baby after conception.
“The government has a role,” he said.
Dr. Richard Johnson of Dunbarton opposed the Constitutional amendment, saying the focus should be on prevention of the 42 percent of all pregnancies that are unintended in this country.
Women say, “The timing was bad. I am not ready to raise a child,” he said. “The solution to unintended pregnancies…is to focus on prevention.”
Liz Canada, advocacy manager for Planned Parenthood Action Fund, said while a constitutional amendment is a “a high bar, the voters should be allowed to decide.”
State Sen. Becky Whitley, D-Hopkinton, asked if it is correct that even though a legislator might be opposed to abortion they could vote for this, to allow the voters to decide. Canada affirmed and said it was an important distinction.
“For all of the states, voters came out in strong support of abortion rights,” she said. Because reproductive rights…are all bipartisan supported issues. It affects all people in our state,” Canada said.
Canada said polls show 87 percent of New Hampshire voters want to see these abortion rights protected.
“It is extremely popular,” she stressed.
Officials for ACLU-NH also supported the measure.
Kayla Montgomery of Planned Parenthood spoke in support of the cross-state border protection bill (SB 575) and said they have not been issued yet in the state where other states have prosecuted individuals for leaving their state to come here for an abortion. But this bill is preemptive to deal with the potential.
Carson said there are many inter-state and intra-state issues related to the bill which may become complicated and said it is “very extensive” which does not just deal with abortion but all health care.
State Sen. Daryl Abbas, R-Salem, asked if it is similar to California’s recent legislation, she said she was unsure.
At a Democratic press conference prior to the hearings in the Senate Judiciary, state Sen. Cindy Rosenwald, D-Nashua, said the rights of women here are going to be “ripped away” if there is no actions taken by legislators.
Rosenwald has offered SB 461 which she said would remove the confusion in state law on the state’s abortion ban and provide clarity in the language.
It would repeal the language in RSA 329:49 providing that nothing in the fetal life protection act shall be construed as creating a right to abortion.
“Last year when we discussed similar legislation, there was endless back and forth on the senate floor,” she said.
Asked by a reporter how Democrats can win in a 14-10 Republican majority Rosenwald said, “it’s an election year and we hear from both women and men that they want abortion safe, legal and accessible.”
Altschiller noted that Americans overwhelmingly agree they don’t want the government in their medical decisions.
“They will not be able to justify their position to voters,” if they reject abortion protections, Altschiller said.
Whitley said New Hampshire “cannot afford to wait.”
“While we were told not to worry, that we were overreacting” that an absence of restrictions was not going to mean reproductive rights would not hold here, she said there are efforts underway to undermine it.
For example, she said Mifepristone almost 20 years on the market for instances when a woman needs to terminate a pregnancy, has been a safe drug but efforts are being made to remove it from the market.
“We know New Hampshire residents deserve and are asking for protection and legal clarity,” she said, “and we will not stand by.”
“We have the same rights as men to be able to choose what paths our lives take.”
In the hearing, Jason Hennessey, president of NH Right To Life, opposed HB 575 and said it struck him that this would shield the abortion industry from scrutiny even in the case where the woman is harmed by actions.