Proposal to clarify when Texas doctors can perform life-saving abortions faces critical vote
Texas banned all abortions three years ago, with a narrow exception that allows doctors to terminate a pregnancy only to save a pregnant patient's life. Immediately, doctors and legal experts warned that this exception was too narrow and vaguely written, and the penalties too severe, to ensure that women could get life-saving care.
That has proven true in many cases. Dozens of women have come forward with stories of medically necessary abortions delayed or denied, and at least three women have died as a result of these laws. Faced with these stories, Republican lawmakers have conceded that the language of the law might need some clearing up.
Senate Bill 31, also called the Life of the Mother Act, does not expand the exceptions or restore abortion access. It instead aims to clarify when a doctor can terminate a pregnancy under the existing exceptions by aligning language between the state's abortion laws, codifying court rulings and requiring education for doctors and lawyers on the nuances of the law.
The bill was tightly negotiated among lobbyists for doctors and hospitals, anti-abortion groups and Republican lawmakers, including Sen. Bryan Hughes of Mineola and Rep. Charlie Geren of Fort Worth, who carried the bill.
'All of these groups are going to, with one voice, tell the medical community and moms and everyone else, 'Here's the law in Texas. It's clear. Let's follow the law,'' Hughes said on the Senate floor in late April.
In the Senate, Republicans threw their support behind the bill, while Democrats pushed back on its narrowness, noting that Texas law still does not allow abortions in cases of rape, incest or lethal fetal anomalies.
'The folks who are working on this fix are, from my perspective, the folks who have created the problem,' said Houston Sen. Molly Cook. 'Over the past four years, we've watched women suffer and die, and this bill is the confirmation that we all agree that something is broken in Texas.'
In the House, however, the bill may face headwinds from both directions. In a committee hearing last month, some conservative Republicans raised concerns that this bill offered a loophole enabling doctors to work around the strict limits of the law.
Rep. Mike Olcott, a Fort Worth Republican, asked what would prevent doctors from 'checking a box' to say a patient's life was in danger to provide 'abortion on demand,' a sentiment echoed by other conservatives on the committee.
The bill's architects have been careful to say this is not a 'choice' bill, but rather a bill aimed at addressing doctors' liability and pregnant women's health needs.
'I have voted for every anti-abortion bill that's been in front of the House since I've been here for 24 years,' Geren said at the committee. 'This is not a choice bill. This is a protect-the-mothers'-life bill.'
Some doctors groups, including the Texas chapter of the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, have criticized the bill for not going far enough to protect doctors and the patients they treat. Others say these changes will be sufficient to free doctors to perform medically necessary abortions without fear of lengthy prison sentences and massive fines.
'At the end of the day, our hope is that political differences can be set aside, because at the heart of this is a pregnant mother whose health and safety are on the line,' Texas Hospital Association president John Hawkins said in a statement. 'Hospitals and doctors need to be able to act on the medical facts and merits in front of them, without fear of prosecution. We sincerely believe this will have an immediate and positive impact, helping us provide life-saving care to our patients.'
The House will also hear Senate Bill 33 on Wednesday, which prohibits a city or county from using taxpayer dollars to pay for abortion-related expenses. The bill is aimed at Austin and San Antonio, where city officials have allocated budget dollars to support abortion funds that help pay for people to travel to abortion clinics out-of-state.
Disclosure: Texas Hospital Association has been a financial supporter of The Texas Tribune, a nonprofit, nonpartisan news organization that is funded in part by donations from members, foundations and corporate sponsors. Financial supporters play no role in the Tribune's journalism. Find a complete list of them here.
First round of TribFest speakers announced! Pulitzer Prize-winning columnist Maureen Dowd; U.S. Rep. Tony Gonzales, R-San Antonio; Fort Worth Mayor Mattie Parker; U.S. Sen. Adam Schiff, D-California; and U.S. Rep. Jasmine Crockett, D-Dallas are taking the stage Nov. 13–15 in Austin. Get your tickets today!
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
7 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Mike Johnson Shuts Down House Early To Block Vote On Jeffrey Epstein Files
WASHINGTON ― Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) on Tuesday abruptly canceled upcoming House votes and decided to send lawmakers home early for a five-week recess, all because he wants to block a bipartisan effort to force a vote on releasing files on Jeffrey Epstein, the disgraced financier and former close friend to President Donald Trump. The House was scheduled to be in session through Thursday, with votes set for that day. But Tuesday morning, Johnson scrapped those plans and decided to close up shop by Wednesday afternoon. Lawmakers are now heading back to their districts until Sept. 2. Johnson told reporters he's fed up with Democrats' efforts to force votes on releasing Epstein's files. 'The American people are best served by putting an end to Democrats' side shows,' he said in a Tuesday press conference. 'That's what we're doing by not allowing the Rules Committee to continue with that nonsense this week.' ADVERTISEMENT 'We're done being lectured on transparency,' he said. On Monday night, Democrats forced an early end to a House Rules Committee hearing by announcing plans to force the committee to vote on a bipartisan bill to make the Justice Department release all of its files on Epstein, who faced multiple charges relating to sex trafficking of minors. The committee, which the speaker directly controls, ended its meeting and never came back. Johnson claimed Tuesday that he supports 'maximum transparency' on Epstein's records, but is concerned about the need to 'protect innocent victims' of Epstein. The idea that the Justice Department should release all of its records on Epstein could harm them, he said. 'We also have to be judicious and careful about protecting the innocent,' he claimed. 'We cannot be careless in an open release like that.' ADVERTISEMENT But Johnson glossed over the real problem he's facing, which is that many House Republicans also want to see all of Epstein's files released. Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) and 11 other Republicans signed onto the bipartisan bill with Democrats, and they're not backing down in trying to force a vote on it. 'Americans were promised justice,' Massie said Tuesday on social media. 'Our binding bipartisan legislation to release the complete Epstein files now has 20 sponsors. Soon we can begin collecting signatures required to force a public vote in the U.S. House. Is your member on this list?' The other GOPers on this bill are Reps. Marjorie Taylor Greene (Ga.), Tim Burchett (Tenn.), Eric Burlison (Mo.), Lauren Boebert (Colo.), Jeff Van Drew (N.J.), Eli Crane (Ariz.), Cory Mills (Fla.), Tom Barrett (Mich.), Max Miller (Ohio), Nancy Mace (S.C.) and Keith Self (Texas). Trump created this problem for himself. He and top officials in his administration spent years fueling conspiracies about an Epstein client list, and Trump vowed to release this purported list when he was running for president. They all fanned this idea that Democrats were hiding Epstein's client list to protect powerful figures in their party who they alleged were on it. Attorney General Pam Bondi defiantly claimed in February, weeks after Trump had won, that Epstein's client list was 'sitting right now on my desk for review.' But Bondi is now claiming this list doesn't exist at all, and Trump is trying to move on. President Donald Trump previously vowed to release Jeffrey Epstein's client list, but now he's trying to move on. Why? AP/Getty Images It infuriated many of his staunch supporters, who are wondering, along with everyone else, why he's hiding Epstein's files. Meanwhile, the Wall Street Journal reported last week on a racy birthday card that Trump gave to Epstein in 2003, with a strange note. Trump, furious about this story, is now suing the newspaper for $10 billion over it. ADVERTISEMENT During his Tuesday press conference, Johnson knocked Massie for working with Democrats to try to force the release of Epstein's files. 'Massie is the one trying to bite Republicans,' Johnson said in response to a question about his GOP colleague's efforts. 'Let me just say about Thomas Massie: Could you just accept my southern, 'Bless his heart?'' The speaker also seemed to be trying to mislead people about what Massie and others are trying to accomplish with their bill versus what action Trump is currently taking regarding Epstein's files. He repeatedly said Trump ordered the Justice Department to 'get everything released,' which means there's 'no purpose for Congress' to also push for this. But Trump only directed the release of grand jury testimony related to Epstein's case, which is a tiny fraction of Epstein's records and files. And even this order only came in response to a groundswell of pressure from his own base. Trump is all over the Epstein Ted Lieu (D-Calif.) ADVERTISEMENT Rep. Ted Lieu (D-Calif.) said he talked about the Epstein files during the Biden administration, and it's clear how close Trump and Epstein were based on what's been made public so far. He said the two appear together in multiple videos and photos, there's 'weird quotes' from Trump about Epstein, court pleadings that include Trump's name, plane logs showing Trump flying with Epstein, and 'now this creepy birthday card.' 'Trump is all over the Epstein files,' Lieu told reporters Tuesday. 'Why do you think we have this entire explosion now about Epstein?' he asked. 'Because Attorney General Pam Bondi went on national TV and told the American people that Jeffrey Epstein's client list was, quote, sitting on my desk right now. Where's that client list? Why doesn't she release it?' Related...
Yahoo
7 minutes ago
- Yahoo
US considering removing tax on capital gains on home sales, Trump says
WASHINGTON (Reuters) -U.S. President Donald Trump said on Tuesday his administration is considering removing taxes on capital gains on home sales. "If the Fed would lower the rates, we wouldn't even have to do that," Trump told reporters in the Oval Office. "But we are thinking about no tax on capital gains on houses." Profits from the sale of homes, like other assets, are now subject to capital gains taxes, although there are large deductions for sales of primary residences. Republican Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene interpreted Trump's comments as a show of support for a bill she's proposed called the No Tax on Home Sales Act, which would eliminate the federal capital gains tax on the sale of primary residences. "Thank you, President Trump, for supporting my No Tax on Home Sales Act!" Greene said in a post on X. "You worked for it. You should keep it. Let's get this bill passed!" Greene said. Congress recently passed legislation that made permanent broad tax cuts passed in 2017 during Trump's first presidency. The bill also fulfilled Trump's campaign promises to include new tax breaks for tips, overtime pay, seniors and auto loans. Trump's political opponents say the measures will mainly help the rich and add trillions of dollars to U.S. national debt, only partially offset by deep cuts to healthcare and other benefits for the poor.
American Press
8 minutes ago
- American Press
Speaker Johnson refuses to allow Epstein vote as House set to recess early
Jeffrey Epstein, center, appears in court in West Palm Beach, Fla., on July 30, 2008. (Associated Press Archives) House Speaker Mike Johnson is rebuffing pressure to act on the investigation into Jeffrey Epstein, instead sending members home early for a month-long break from Washington after the week's legislative agenda was upended by Republican members who are clamoring for a vote. Johnson, a Republican from Louisiana, said Tuesday morning that he wants to give the White House 'space' to release the Epstein information on its own, despite the bipartisan push for legislation that would require more records to be released. 'There's no purpose for the Congress to push an administration to do something they're already doing,' Johnson said at his weekly press conference, his last before lawmakers depart Washington on Wednesday for their traditional August recess. Echoing President Donald Trump's position, Johnson insisted he, too, wants the files released, but only those that are 'credible.' The speaker's stance seemed unlikely to satisfy many GOP members who are threatening to support a bipartisan bill meant to pry information from the Justice Department. Even before Johnson spoke, a Republican-controlled subcommittee of the powerful House Committee on Oversight was advancing a resolution to subpoena Epstein's former girlfriend, Ghislaine Maxwell, for a deposition. The intra-party turmoil on Capitol Hill unfolded as many of Trump's supporters have been outraged at how his administration has reneged on promises to publicly release a full accounting of the sex trafficking investigation into Epstein, who killed himself in his New York jail cell in 2019 while awaiting trial. Under pressure from right-wing online influencers, as well as voters back home, rank-and-file Republicans are demanding that the House intervene in the matter. 'The public's not going to let this die, and rightfully so,' said Rep. Ralph Norman, a South Carolina Republican. Johnson decided to end the House's legislative business early this week after he essentially lost control of the powerful House Rules Committee, which sends bills to the floor for debates and votes. Late Monday evening business on that panel ground to a halt when the Republicans on the House Rules Committee abruptly recessed proceedings rather than risk more proposals from Democrats pushing them to release Epstein files. Republican leaders last week had signaled possible support for a vote on the Epstein files, putting forward a resolution that has no legal weight but urged the Justice Department to produce more documentation. Trump too has asked Attorney General Pam Bondi to seek the release of testimony from secret grand jury proceedings in the case, though that effort is unlikely to produce new revelations. Johnson, who has relied heavily on Trump to hold onto leadership in the House, cast the president's reticence to release information as out of concern for the victims of Epstein. 'We have a moral responsibility to expose the evil of Epstein and everybody who was involved in that — absolutely — and we're resolved to do it,' Johnson said. 'But we also have an equal moral responsibility to protect the innocent, and that is a fine needle to thread.' Epstein, sexually abused children hundreds of times over more than a decade, exploiting vulnerable girls as young as 14, authorities say. He couldn't have done so without the help of Maxwell, his longtime companion, prosecutors say.
