A House committee on Tuesday advanced a bill criminalizing abortion and reproductive “coercion” as a felony offense, but a proposed amendment striking the word “abortion” from the bill’s language caused much upheaval. 

Rep. Jo Ella Hoye, D-Lenexa, sought to replace “abortion” with “reproductive” coercion in the language of House Bill 2813. Hoye’s amendment defined reproductive coercion as control over the reproductive autonomy of another through force or intimidation, including “deliberately interfering with contraception use or using coercive tactics to control pregnancy outcomes.” 

“This [amendment] includes all forms of coercion that interfere with pregnancy outcomes,” Hoye said.

The bill’s original language defines abortion-related coercion as threats of physical harm, facilitating or controlling access to a controlled substance, and other schemes that could inflict physical or emotional distress. 

Hoye, the ranking minority member on the House Committee on Federal and State Affairs, said her amendment broadens the definition of coercion as it relates to the legislation, including tampering or denying access to contraceptives. 

“I think it’s important to look out for all reproductive rights and decisions for women in these circumstances,” Hoye said, adding that “it’s an opportunity to take a good bill and make it a really good bill.” 

The amendment passed but quickly threatened to go off the rails when Rep. Leah Howell, R-Derby, raised concern with the removal of “abortion,” resulting in a motion to reconsider Hoye’s amendment. Howell also said she was “disturbed” that the amendment struck the wording “unborn child” from the bill’s language. Rep. Lisa Moser, R-Wheaton, later added that “an unborn child is the basis” of the bill.

“This [bill] is about coercion of pregnant women, so I’m not interested in striking out anything that takes away from that,” Howell said. 

Rep. Stephanie Sawyer Clayton, D-Overland Park, pressed Howell for further clarification on her motion to reconsider Hoye’s amendment. Howell explained she had “slipped” into the hearing late and didn’t have time to fully process the amendment before the vote. But after taking another peek, Howell said she determined the amendment “basically strips out almost every single reference” to abortion. She added that the intent of the bill is to “protect pregnant women from people like pimps or parents or their spouses.”

“And this is stripping out the intent of this original bill and replacing it instead of adding to it,” she said.

Howell added that the bill’s introducer, Rep. Rebecca Schmoe, R-Ottawa, would not be on board with Hoye’s amendment. But Sawyer Clayton reminded Howell that Schmoe testified last week that “coercion is coercion,” adding she believes Schmoe’s intent was to protect “women who were forced to terminate a pregnancy and forced to be pregnant.”

“[The amendment] simply adds to the base bill — that someone sabotaging birth control, or threatening a woman with financial ruin if she doesn’t have a baby, is also wrong,” Sawyer Clayton said. 

Sawyer Clayton continued to grill Howell over the motion to reconsider Hoye’s amendment.

“So if you only think coerced abortion is wrong but you’re totally cool with coerced pregnancy, then you would vote for this motion to reconsider,” Sawyer Clayton said. “If you think that both of those things were wrong, then you would not reconsider — because the Hoye amendment makes both of those things wrong.”

Rep. John Eplee, R-Atchison, indicated the committee’s dialogue was wading into “semantics” because “forced acts by an intimate partner” are already covered in domestic violence statutes. 

“I think it’s somewhat redundant to try to broaden this bill to encompass that at this time,” Eplee said.

Rep. Kirk Haskins, D-Topeka, chastised fellow committee members over the tenor of the debate, indicating that he had previously “experienced” a degree of bipartisanship while working on the bill but that Tuesday’s discussion seemed more about “gamesmanship.” 

“I ask our colleagues to remember that we’re representing both sides of our constituents,” Haskins said, “and this was an amendment that made the bill better.”

Rep. Adam Thomas, R-Olathe, implored his colleagues to reject the amendment and support the underlying bill. Specifically, Thomas objected to language referencing “reproductive autonomy” in the amendment as too broad. The committee ultimately approved a “friendly amendment,” changing the language of Hoye’s original amendment to reflect both “reproductive coercion” and “abortion coercion.” 

The Senate Committee on Federal and State Affairs held a hearing Tuesday morning on its version of the legislation, Senate Bill 527.

Matt Resnick is a Statehouse reporter at State Affairs Pro Kansas/Hawver’s Capitol Report. Reach him at [email protected].

Twitter: @StateAffairsKS
Facebook: @stateaffairsks
LinkedIn: @stateaffairspro