House approves bill tightening regulations on abortion clincs
HARRISBURG — The state House today approved legislation requiring unannounced inspections of abortion clinics and applying the same regulations to them that regulators use for ambulatory surgical facilities.
The bill, filed in the aftermath of criminal charges against a West Philadelphia clinic, has bounced back and forth from the House and Senate this year as changes were made.
But House Health and Human Services Chairman Matthew Baker, R-Tioga County, said the version moving now has support of the Senate and the governor and likely will become law.
It comes on the heels of a House-passed bill preventing insurance coverage for abortions in health exchanges that the federal health care law might create in 2014.
Pro-choice lawmakers and advocates claimed it is part of a Republican effort to stop abortions, using the Dr. Kermit Gosnell case in Philadelphia merely as an excuse. Prosecutors accuse Gosnell of murdering a female patient and killing viable babies born alive, amid horrendous conditions.
Rep. Phylllis Mundy, D-Luzerne County, said the legislation would mark a return to back-alley abortions because the physical changes needed to comply with the new law will put clinics out of business.
Rep. Dan Frankel, D-Squirrell Hill, said it is part of national effort by pro-life legislators to circumvent the Supreme Court decision legalizing abortion.,
"Let's not go back to the Dark Ages when women were forced to have abortions in back alleys," Mundy said.
House Majority Leader Mike Turzai, R-Bradford Woods, said it "only makes sense" to treat abortion clinics the same as surgical facilities. And it is in response to the Philadelphia grand jury allegations about Gosnell's clinic, he said.
"It is consistent. It is commonsense," said Turzai. "It is fair."
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments â either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.