Abortion Clarification Bill Sparks Debate in Texas Legislature

With her son in her lap and a bottle in her hand, Sarah Harrison recounted the story of her pregnancy to a group of Texas legislators. She was one of several dozen people who spoke Monday on the abortion clarification bill at a hearing of the House Committee on Public Health.

In 2023, Harrison told the committee, she was pregnant with twins: the baby now sitting in her lap and another baby, who was diagnosed with a fatal fetal anomaly. Continuing both pregnancies, Harrison said, would have risked both her own life and the life of her healthy son. But Texas’ abortion ban — among the strictest in the country — did not allow her to receive in-state abortion care.

“I had to leave the state of Texas to get health care, not just to protect myself but to protect my son, this child that is sitting in my lap right now,” Harrison said. Her situation would be no different under the abortion clarification bill currently being considered in the Texas Legislature, Harrison told the House committee. “This exception in this bill would never have covered my case,” she said.

The two abortion clarification bills — House Bill 44 and Senate Bill 31, both called the “Life of the Mother Act” — aim to codify the exceptions to Texas’ abortion ban and make clear that doctors can provide abortions in medical emergencies. The bills do not add additional exceptions to the ban, which means abortions would remain illegal in cases of rape, incest and fatal fetal anomalies.

(Eric Gay / AP)

The clarification bills have received wide support from medical providers as well as abortion opponent groups, who collectively say the bills would protect women’s lives. The author of House Bill 44, Fort Worth Republican Rep. Charlie Geren, has called the legislation the “most important” of his career.

Agreement from Two Sides

Monday’s testimony mirrored a hearing held by the Senate Committee on Health and Human Services, which considered a package of three abortion-related bills in a hearing at the end of March. The House hearing, though, included more back-and-forth. While the Senate mostly moved speakers along without additional comment, House members asked frequent follow-up and clarification questions of the speakers.

The clarification bills have support from abortion opponent groups, who say the bill does not expand abortion access, and from medical providers, who say it provides much-needed clarification for doctors. Dr. Ezequiel Silva III, a radiologist and the chair of the Texas Medical Association’s legislation council, testified in favor of the bill.

“From the physician perspective, I want to stress: Our focus is absolutely making sure that we can provide the best care possible for these patients and that TMA believes that House Bill 44 will be an important step to enable that goal,” Silva said. Prominent abortion opponents — including president of Texas Right to Life John Seago and founder of the Texas Alliance for Life Joe Pojman — also testified in favor of the bill.

Concerns and Fears

Several women, including Harrison, told the committee their own stories of pregnancy complications and said the clarification bill doesn’t do enough to protect women. Speakers said exceptions to the ban should include rape, incest and fatal fetal anomalies. The two abortion clarification bills do not add exceptions in those cases.

Several speakers also raised concerns that the clarification bill could be used to revive century-old abortion laws, which criminalized people who provided abortions or otherwise helped people obtain abortions. Speakers referred to these laws as the “1925 law,” although the Texas State Law Library notes on its website that many of the laws predated 1925.

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton attempted to revive those laws after federal abortion access was overturned. Speakers at the Monday public hearing repeatedly asked the House committee to remove any reference to those old laws from House Bill 44 and to consider amending the bill so the 1925 law could not be revived.

Geren, who authored the House bill, told the committee that he and Republican Sen. Bryan Hughes, who authored the Senate version of the bill, are still in discussions about possible amendments. Geren said it is “not my intent to backdoor the 1925 law.” The House Committee on Public Health did not make any decisions on the bill on Monday. After more than six hours of testimony, the committee left the bill pending.

Conclusion

The debate over the abortion clarification bill in Texas is complex and multifaceted. While some argue that the bill provides necessary clarification for doctors and protects women’s lives, others believe it does not go far enough to protect women’s health and autonomy. As the bill moves forward, it is likely that the debate will continue, with both sides presenting their arguments and concerns.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is the abortion clarification bill in Texas?

The abortion clarification bill in Texas, also known as House Bill 44 and Senate Bill 31, aims to codify the exceptions to Texas’ abortion ban and make clear that doctors can provide abortions in medical emergencies.

What are the exceptions to the abortion ban in Texas?

The exceptions to the abortion ban in Texas include cases where the life of the mother is at risk. However, the ban does not include exceptions for cases of rape, incest, or fatal fetal anomalies.

What are the concerns about the abortion clarification bill?

Some of the concerns about the abortion clarification bill include that it does not go far enough to protect women’s health and autonomy, and that it could be used to revive century-old abortion laws that criminalized people who provided abortions or otherwise helped people obtain abortions.

What is the current status of the bill?

The House Committee on Public Health did not make any decisions on the bill on Monday. After more than six hours of testimony, the committee left the bill pending.