Gov. vows to sign law banning abortions if it passes legislature

| Monday, January 03, 2005

Previous Page

Share

• del.icio.us
• Digg
• NewsVine
• Fark

Print

Email

SIOUX FALLS (AP) - Gov. Mike Rounds said he would sign legislation making abortion illegal in South Dakota if the 2005 Legislature passes a bill that meets his inspection.

"If it saves lives - which is what our goal is - I would feel morally obligated to sign the bill," Rounds said.

Last year, a bill to ban abortions passed in the state House of Representatives but failed by a single vote in the Senate after lawmakers rejected changes Rounds included in a style-and-form veto.

The governor said he wants the U.S. Supreme Court to review a 1973 decision that prevented states from outlawing abortion.

"I'd like to see Roe v. Wade repealed," the governor said. "I'd like to get legislation in place that could successfully challenge Roe v. Wade and make good law."

Rounds said he doesn't know what form this year's legislation might take.

And as lawmakers prepare for the Jan. 11 start of the 2005 Legislature, they are saying little about what they intend to do.

"There are 105 legislators, and I'm just one. I wouldn't even try to guess," Sen. Lee Schoenbeck, R-Watertown, said.

When asked about a ban, Rep. Roger Hunt of Brandon said he wouldn't rule it out.

"There are a couple of legislators very interested in doing that," Hunt said. "There are others that feel, 'Hey, let's see what happens with the Bush administration. Let's see what happens with the makeup of the Supreme Court.' Maybe 2005 is not the year. Maybe it's 2006."

Kate Looby, state director for Planned Parenthood, hopes to turn the argument in a new direction. She will lobby for legislation she said would reduce the need for the procedure without attacking it as a basic right.

"Women don't have abortions because they're safe and legal," she said. "They have them because they have unplanned pregnancies. Anything we can do to prevent unplanned pregnancies will reduce the need for abortion in South Dakota."

Savings come from programs that work to prevent unplanned pregnancies, Looby said.

"Conservative estimates are that every $1 spent on public family planning programs to prevent unplanned pregnancies saves taxpayers $3 in Medicaid costs for prenatal and newborn care," she said. "So, obviously, prevention of unplanned pregnancies is in society's best interests."

The need for abortion will not go away, she said.

"That's just not going to happen," Looby said. "It never has in the history of the world, but I think we can do a lot to prevent unplanned pregnancies ... by making emergency contraceptives available, by providing better education for young people, by making the birth control accessible to young people in this state affordable. We can do a lot more."

If another bill to ban abortion goes before lawmakers this year, it will force lawmakers to express their feelings on the issue for the second consecutive year. To some, it is a misplaced discussion.

"When it comes, I say, 'Whatever, here it comes again,'" said Sen. Tom Dempster of Sioux Falls, who believes the state has more pressing concerns, such as lowering health care costs.

"I'm as against abortion as anybody else. But I'm also against the state telling people what to do in a highly personal decision. Does that make me pro-choice? You tell me."

Schoenbeck said his view on the issue is clear.

"I'd like to see no more little South Dakota kids getting killed," he said. "I think this is the worst civil-rights issue our country faces today."