By CAMILLE GIGLIO
April 29, 2012 - San Francisco, CA - PipeLineNews.org - Indicating a rising tide of bipartisan opposition, SB 1338 [see our feature piece on this legislation https://www.pipelinenews.org/index.cfm?page=giglio4112012101%2Ehtm CA Legislation Empowers Midwives To Perform Backyard Abortions] authored by Sen. Christine Kehoe failed passageout of the Business and Professions Committee hearing today with a tie 4 to 4 vote. The bill received a tie vote because one legislator wasabsent. If he had been at the hearing it would have been a 5 to 4"NO" vote and the bill would have lost.
The absent legislator was Sen. Tony Strickland, [R-Santa Barbara]. Weunderstand he was out pursuing his own special interests - re-election.. His district contact number 805-965-0862.
The hearing before the Business and Professions Committee was aired overthe internet at www.calchannel.com. Two Democrats voted "NO"along with two Republicans creating a tie vote.
Sen. Kehoe immediately called for a re-consideration allowing her theopportunity to have two more weeks to lobby the Democrats on thecommittee. Since this was not a fiscal bill it has until May 11 to passto the assembly or fail.
Prior to today's hearing, the bill's language had been totallyrevised and new wording amended in. Very briefly, the wording called forrecognizing the training provided to the 41 persons involved in the pilot program [the details of which remain intentionally clouded by pro-abortion radicals] andauthorizes them to be licensed to perform abortions for as long as those licenses were maintained. It also seeks to extend the final date of the training periodto January 1, 2013.
To their credit the two opposing Democrats, Juan Vargas, [D-Chula Vista]and Lou Correa, [D-Santa Ana] provided the strongest opposition topassage, closely questioning the author, Sen. Kehoe and her one witness,Tracy Weitz, Ph.D. on the lack of any publicly published critique andanalysis of the training, how much training they received, and anyinformation on the competency of the group to perform this procedure.
Vargas, a lawyer by trade, questioned Kehoe and Weitz about potential lawsuits and about the lack of disclosure involved with the program.
Sen. Mark Wyland, [R-Carlsbad] questioned them on the length oftraining given to the group. Weitz stated that the length of time wasabout 7 days or 45 "procedures" required before it was felt thatthe trainees had satisfactory results.
The stage of the pregnancy and complications of the procedure were alsobrought up. Seitz stated, rather coldly, "The longer in gestation itgoes...the more complications can arise."
The California Nurses Association's representative, speaking at the hearing stated that the organization had previously opposed the bill, but now are supporting it because the author met their requirements of including inthe bill, the acknowledgement that abortion was already within the scope ofpractice of the "three clinicians," which this law will empower, i.e., nurse midwives, nursepractitioners, and nurse assistants.
She further said that the data provided to the stakeholders was peerreviewed; meaning that those involved rated themselves and that"abortion doctors" felt that these "clinicians" werequite competent to perform the abortions. Three institutions provided"peer reviews." UCSF, Kaiser and "one other" which she would notname.
This is not the standard definition of "peer review," which is widely understood in the academic community as having the findings of such studies published in professional journals, thereby making the data available for review by disinterested professionals.
A troubling aspect of the testimony provided by Ms. Weitz was a claim that as of now, even without this legislation, and apparently therefore outside the law, that approximately "halfof the abortions performed are done by non-surgeons." This bit of information, though offered proudly as testimony tothe value of midwife performed abortions, appeared to be a bit of a shock to the legislators. Abortions performed by non-surgeonsis a crime. SB 1338 would do away with the criminal aspect ofnon-surgeons aborting women.
Of the $4 million in funding part of it went to Planned Parenthood/MarMonte - in the Santa Cruz area, Kaiser/Oakland, PP-Los Angeles,PP/Shasta Diablo-Contra Costa Co. and to the Feminist Women's HealthCollective.
Further, many of the pregnant women seeking abortions were young,minority, low-income women who were offered $5.00 if they would consentto using a midwife to perform the abortion.
So, that's how much these clinics value the health and safetymantra, they look at the entire process as a clinical experiment, despite the fact that two lives will be affected, one, deprived of any choice, will be silenced forever.
The bill will be back in the Senate Business and Professions Committeesometime within the next two weeks. If this legislation is to be defeated, then Senators Vargas and Correa need toreceive phone calls thanking them for their courage in voting to protectwomen's health from the abortion predators. They will probablyreceive some sort of disciplinary action from the senate and Assemblyleaders. Juan Vargas - district office: 409-7690, Sacto office 651-4040. His office is in the heart of the Southern CaliforniaHispanic Community.Sen. Lou Correa [D-Santa Ana] Dist. office  558-4400, Sacramento 651-4034.
© 2012 Camille Giglio. All rights reserved.