Call me back later today. the speaker of one other point mm then it would have to go into the process of substitution on the special order calendar Well, it would depend on what emotions the author would wish to make at that point. The bill again would be before the body. That's what emotions the normal process without any motions. May would be Fork be substituted for the bill that's on special order one last question the speaker on this motion to delay the action on the bill. How many votes is required the motion to send for comparison that requires the majority of those voting. Shopko one further and care what happens if we defeat the motion to send for comparison, then we consider the motion to suspend the rules of the house in the Constitutional rule. Alright. Alright that takes 90s actor. I what happens if that motion doesn't pass. Otherwise, we defeat the motion to send for comparison and the motion does not fast to suspend. The rules would be referred to committee. at that point the point at which a represent us a vehicle brings us to can the motion to 2 the Cana later motion again be made would have to be reconsidered. One further inquiry the bill is not as a special order for today. And does that special order rule take present precedence over the the other words if if there is a referral to committee does the special order today giving the bill a special order today take presses to the extent that we have the bill before today because currently what special order it is a house phone that Center file. Why shouldn't we have applied to Senate file? 2236? What all right. Then there would have to be another rules which committee would that be sent to? You have to wait and see when that time comes. It's normal to send a bill like this to rules committee. That normally goes the last time I came from. All right, what if the motion to referred for comparison did not pass what I could we then could we make a motion to substitute the house file for the Senate file. We have the bill before at the point that the bill work before us after the rules were suspended someone if they so desire to can move to substitute the language of the house bill for the Senate. One would not want to substitute the house while for the Santa flower with same-day house while back the Senate with son would go to Committee in the Senate. Piscataquis between the speaker's table and House minority leader Henry's have a call there. Is that a motion to suspend the rules and that goes our promotion serves first one to suspend the Constitutional Rule and then there was one to suspend the rules of the house which would put the bill before and if either one. And what is your question if either one of those is defeated? All right, is it a simple majority then to reconsider that vote and then send it for comparison you would be reconsidering that assumes it's kind of late on motion was defeated. Alice is very complicated as you can hear what they're trying to do is to decide whether to essentially whether to take up the vote today or put it off until sometime next week. The motion that is on the floor is that the Senate filed be referred for comparison with the house file to take a simple majority to do that if that motion fails, then there will be a motion that the Constitution and the house rules be suspended. So if a cinephile the one that was passed last night by the Senate can be considered on and voted on today by the house. So, let's see how much speaker Staples it's cussing. Companion house file that is a higher motion. Are the Nets Motion in case that is not successful is the motion of mr. Campys to suspend the Constitutional rule in the road to the house and place the bill before x-ray media passage, which speaker is an appropriate. Mr. Speaker who makes turn immediately. Further discussion of the con lado motion that's a file 2236 and Hausfeld 1708 now in special orders be referred to the chief clerk for comparison canopy Mister speaker and members of the body. I heard that we vote down the con motion. We then vote to suspend the rules. If we aren't able to suspend the rules then we can reconsider the con motion. That was Arnold Cappy brother of Ray campi Ray campi is the chief author of the hospital. I don't have a Be live experience here. I've only passed are weed legal but not one of them has had that kind of treatment. I guess that I think that this is an important issue. It's an important to one is will probably ever have before us at least this year. And I think that it ought to follow the correct procedures and be treated like the other major policies of the state and I think that it should be sent out for comparison as any other bill would be November 7th I missed your speaker. We're heading for a potential tournament date of Friday. Although it may be extended some what is concur with representative can it can't be that that the best way to handle us everyone knows how they're going to vote less defeat the con Amendment vote red on that motion then moved to get it to the floor and boot it up or down and if if we can't if the votes aren't there to suspend it then let's reconsider the vote senate for comparison to have the time but it really doesn't make sense. We have about four controversial issues now facing us and they're just keep piling it up by I would suggest we get some of them voted on and get them out of here. We're not going to be changing a lot of mines. Your brother discussion clerk will take the role on the con light on motion the bill be sent for comparison Kirk take the roll. All this is going down handily. I don't see more than a dozen. Yes votes on the board. So the bill will not be sent to the chief clerk for comparison. And if I want to see what the boat is now. Man, 28 eyes 99 days a motion is not at a motion before us. And this is the motion to suspend the rules for the NFL number 22 36 be given at second and third readings. I'm be placed upon his final passage opportunity to vote on this bill on its merits that's why I asked you to vote with me just to spend the roof. Thank you. further discussion of the camp a motion to suspend the rules pause name all in favor, please. Rise. I only going to have to go through the process accounting now, so it's always a lot easier when they use the electronic vote board because that gives you the answer than a few seconds. Now the chief clerk add verdict Canada one of his assistants going through the process of counting heads the motion to send the bill for comparison fail Vine and it was 99 volts. So it is fairly likely that the motion to suspend the rules will will get the required 90 volts and the members will be able to debate in Act of the measures. campfire music be given at second and third readings and we place upon his final passage scampi. Hey, Brother Not Park to take the roll. Okay. Now we get a l roll call going on suspending the house real see there's two rules that have to be suspended one is to the State Constitution and the other is to the house rules and this one also passes so easily. Travel time 106 size 23 and Hayes emotion is adapt the clerk phone number 2236 in San Rafael 2236, John Deere. What's the speaker members of the body of a down the field against a bill dealing with public funds being paid being used to pay for abortions? this bill Has hurt been hurting the Senate last night and passed it substantially identical with the bill that was heard in the preparations committee with some differences and I want to go over those while the bill is not the bill that I originally drafted or had drafted. It does include exceptions for rape and incest, but these rape and incest exceptions. Are very tightly and drawn? I want to state that ever since the United States Supreme Court. decided in January 1973 that the unborn child was not human person that was right could be protected the pro-life people throughout the United States been working for human life Amendment. We have here before us. legislation That is sponsored by. The Minnesota citizens concerned for life, which is a pro-life organization. At at the nonprofit educational organization dedicated to fostering respect. And protection for human life including that of The Unborn Child. I'm speaking on behalf of over 16500 family to belong to that organization. I think I'm speaking on behalf of the vast majority of the Minnesota into our clothes. Did the killing of The Unborn children by abortion? now send a file 2236. Is based on the Maher versus Road decision? And that my heart versus row decision, which was decided on June 20th 1977 states that the appropriate form. For deciding whether public monies are going to be used to pay for abortions should be left up to the states to decide. We are the appropriate for him to decide this issue. We are the ones that have to make this decision. How are your tax dollars in mine are going to be used? I'm out her case stated that a state does have the authority to make a value judgment. And this value judgment concerning its public monies, whether it should be used for childbirth or whether it should be used for abortion and Implement that judgment through the allocation of its public Monies. The language in this bill is not like the Loosely drawn Federal language or rules and regulations have been promoted by the department of health education and Welfare. The exceptions in this bill will prevent welfare fraud in the false reporting claims of alleged rape. The language of this bill will encourage the immediate reporting to a law enforcement agency of the most serious crime the crime of forcible rape. I'm the reason for reporting it. I think it's obvious. It has to be reported in mediately so that the offender can be apprehended. And so that medical evidence can be obtained. Eye doctors in order to sustain and obtain a conviction. moreover the victim of this rate He may have to be treated. prevent venereal disease and also medically treated to prevent the very remote possibility of possible pregnancy. Now there will be arguments. I'm sure that this is class discrimination against the poor. This is not true. Let me quote from the United States Supreme Court decision of Moher versus row. That Court stated the equal protection Clause of the United States Constitution does not require a state participating in the Medicaid Program to pay the expenses incident to non-therapeutic abortions. For Indigent women simply because it has made a policy choice to pay these expenses. to childbirth Show members of this body it is not class discrimination against the poor nor is it violating any equal protection Clause of the United States Constitution? I submit to you. this bill Will simply take the state of Minnesota out of the abortion business. and it will what is in the position of saying? The girls who want to have an abortion should be are the moral responsibility as well as the financial responsibility. The Senate language in Section 1 contains a policy statement that policy statement expresses the policy for the state of Minnesota that has between normal childbirth and abortion it is there going to be the policy of the state of Minnesota. The normal childbirth is to be given preference and encouragement and support by law and stayed action that being in the best interest and well-being and common good of the citizens of the state of Minnesota Section 2 is already in Aloha. 256b of our Minnesota statute defines medical assistance and Medical Care And you'll note what that covers that covers and just let me read. Means payment for part or all of the cost of the following care and services for eligible in individuals whose income and resources are insufficient to meet all of such cost. It provides for inpatient Hospital Services Skilled Nursing Home Services Physician Services outpatient hospital or clinic Services Home Health Care Services private duty nursing Services physical therapy and related Services Dental Services laboratory and x-ray services and Claus number 10, which is an existing Minnesota law states that the phone and get prescribed by a licensed practitioner drugs eyeglasses dentures and prosthetic devices that simply means artificial devices emit. There may be those you're going to argue But this is class discrimination and I say here again, that is not true. You notice the existing Minnesota statute does not provide for medical expenses for a facelift for silicone injections or for hair transplants. d Your language is in. + 13 where we Define abortion services, but only if one of the following conditions is met Klaus a state's abortion is a medical necessity and medical necessity means the sign written statement of to Physicians indicating abortion is medically necessary to prevent the death of the mother. To the patient has given her consent to the abortion in writing unless the patient is physically or leg legally incapable of providing informed consent to the procedure in which case consent will be given as otherwise provided by law. I frankly like the language that was used by representative Pharisee and committee worry just use the word of Guardian, but this is sexually says the same thing But if she's unable to give her consent. Then the patient there's a way of providing that consent as otherwise provided by law. Klaus B states that the pregnancy is result of criminal sexual conduct is defined and 609.342 clauses c d e i and F. Are the forcible rape situations in our present? criminal code the incident have to be reported within 48 hours. Cavalli law enforcement agency and unless the victim is unable to report it in which case the 48-hour. Will not be kind to rent. Until the time she was able. But the thing that's important I feel is that it must be reported and the reason is obvious to make sure. three conditions of apprehending the offender prevent venereal disease to make sure that there is no possibility of pregnancy. The third condition is the pregnancy result of incest. But only again if the Ensign incident and relative are reported to a valid law enforcement agency for investigation prior to the abortion that members of the body. Is briefly explain the bill I again request your support in this. and I willing to stand for any questions Carson offers the following Amendment clerk report the amendment Glaceon is moving to a man Senate file 2236 as follow page for after line 10 insert the following section 7 plus the speaker. I move adoption the next. Speaker and members I didn't attend to offer this is the first amendment. I probably should have never had them but that's not a bad place to begin in his introduction to the bill extra company made reference to a national movement to adopt a new amendment to the Constitution guaranteeing the right of life to every person. My Amendment proposed has a slight change to section 645.44 of the Minnesota statutes. Which is something of our garbage bill steps Charlie speaking. It's the portion of statutes that spells out what what the definitions are if you were to a dump this amendment essentially we'd be doing in Minnesota statute what the right to life Amendment Clauses and that is to define the term person anywhere that occurs in statute as applying to an individual a natural person from the moment of conception. The Supreme Court in its 1973 decision wisely, I think chose to ignore the issue of when life begins and I clearly is up two states acting on their own initiative to adopt such a definition until their statute. I'd ask you to support this amendment and add it to the bill. camping just because I asked for a roll call vote. 15 + 0 we have here before us an issue that the members want to decide not in this amendment but on the bill, so I asked you to vote. No on this amendment. Mr. Speaker. I would have to share the rules whether not this amendments germane to the issue before us. Frankly, I don't understand what this amendment does. Mr. Spencer speaker. If it refers to a another subdivision in chapter in the statutes and has no reference in the bill to it and it simply adds that the reference into the bill itself and I see Ashley no relationship between the two. Plano Have any advice on the subject, I believe the amendment is clearly Jermaine Jermaine in the title of Mister campys Bill Wareham ending. Statutes all over the place from 256b 393 256b again. We're going back and forth with my Amendment simply would change the statutory definition of person so that wherever person occurs in the statute we wouldn't be talking about someone from the time of EX utero, but we be talking about it from the moment of conception. Carlson mr. Speaker. Mr. Campus Bill deals with sections 256 b - 02 and some of the other sections related in those chapters. Mr. Clawson's motion refers to section 645 and there's a vast difference. I realize the philosophical question. He's trying to bring but that's simply going to Cloud the issue might point out that 6:45 is universal from that chapter from that 64544 sub-7. We draw the definition of person is used in 4 and 1/2 volumes of statutes quite a number of times in mr. Kemp is Bill. The word person is used the issue a person is clearly germane to the issue of abortion. Where is dried rather consistently at roulette moving from the specific to the universal is not your me some Gerald rule at the point of order is? Foresight offers the following Amendment clerk reports the amendment. That would appear to have been an effort by people opposed to this bill to put on something that would make it so a passage in and agreement a little bit more difficult and Leah member was real not your name. Speaker Sable. Here's a representative for inner side with another amendment. I assume our problem is trying to fit into the sun of Fire. Mr. Speaker. I think that that was taken care of as I brought it to the desk. okay, it's page 3 line 7 of rain for those of you who have not received this as yet it I did that I For those of you who have not received the amendment you look on page 3 line 7 after the word abortion insert or D the pregnancy occurs in a mentally retarded person as defined by section section 2 5 2 8 .02 subdivision to providing the pregnancy has been reported prior to the abortion to a valid law enforcement agency. Mr. Speaker in members, I think through the Years in this body most of you know that I have been very much opposed to abortion on demand. I would like to ask you to make this exception in this bill for this group of people. And I ask it on the basis that I feel these people are truly not responsible. They cannot be held responsible for their actions. They don't understand it. I I would ask without a lot of verbiage. I would like to have your vote on this. This amendment would allow an exception and would permit to State funding of abortions in the case of rape of a mentally retarded person. mentally retarded people whether they're both. Mentally retarded weather. This is the result of a rape or incest situation or not. But the point I'm trying to make is simply this. We have medical evidence. That even if both of the parents are retarded, there's over a 60% chance that the child will not be retarded. It'll be a healthy child and there is substantial medical evidence that if one of the parents is only retarded that there's an 82% chance that the child will be normal. I think this is a frightening concept of saying we're going to make a determination. And who is going to live and who is going to die? I don't like that concept, I think. While it may have a peel to say that we're dealing with mentally retarded here. And that they're not confident knowing what they're doing. You know many of the mentally retarded are there out living in society with us. They're working their productive useful members of our society. There are no longer confined to the institutions like they used to be and I think it's wrong. To make a process of determining who lives and who dies their for adipose the amendment and ask for roll call book. 1015 hands of a roll call vote Mr. Speaker and members. I would like to read for you the definition as indicated in this amendment subdivision 2 of 2 5 2 8.002 reeds. Mentally retarded person refers to any person who has been diagnosed as having significantly sub-average intellectual functioning existing concurrently with demonstrated deficits in adaptive Behavior such as to require supervision and protection for his welfare or the public welfare. In other words. We're talking about Wards of the state. brother discussion Amendment Waldorf Will the author of the deal? Centipede Waldorf how many cases that were speaking about here? I can't give you any figure. I think it would probably be very small. well I think that you can probably identify maybe a real severe case. But are you aware that there are there are private funds which are offered to cover those situations. Mr. Speaker. Mr. Waldorf. I am again. I point out to you that many of these people are Wards of the state. What are you think? We have a responsibility in that instance? Mister mister chairman represent in Forsyth that doesn't preclude other funds being used private funds being used. Waldorf Miss chairman members, I guess the problem I got with the amendment it is that it doesn't it doesn't require discretion. It address of everyone in a certain class in the end. I don't think the state wants to go on record as supporting abortion for mentally retarded individual. He's individuals and back backing at policy with money. I happen to have a neighbor who is it was a daughter of two mentally retarded parents and she is quite normal. and I can't tell that person that the state of Minnesota thinks her life should have been terminated. I think this is a serious question and I and I just I just wanted the members of be aware that that's a discretion has to be involved here and at that the amendment does not provide for that. Waldorf St. Paul and again Mary Forsyth of Edina at this amendment to you. I had a description by a doctor. Forsyth A doctor called me. Not very long ago. And gave me the description of a mentally retarded woman in labor. I'm the mother of five people. I can't imagine what it would be like. To try for this human being giving birth to a child and not understanding anything about it. I don't know if you Who have not had children can understand completely what I'm saying? But let me just bring this to your attention. Because I think that this is the only merciful thing we can do for these people. Carlson mr. Speaker members of the body. I guess we all know they're also probably one of the Sacred and tough areas of life that we come to talk about. But I guess it really bothers me and I have a great deal of sympathy and having had the Good Fortune to serve on a committee where we visited and seen many of the people that have got some mental deficiencies. I think that the point of the amendment that represent of course I do is bring me up. Is it She's forgetting that there's a totally innocent fetus there that has no fate and no control of its Destiny and I think I realize I Wrong to a mother doesn't make it any better but to destroy and totally innocent fetus is certainly wrong and therefore have an opposing Amendment. Downtown st. Louis Brooklyn speaker member, so I think that we should September, Duluth. We've already determined as representative Camp as indicated. He says it's frightening to say that we're going to determine who is going to live and who is going to die. We're already making that determination. By allowing abortion for an individual a mother who made died as a result of that childbirth. So we're not Puris in this area. We've already given that concession up that we are going to make that determination. So it's not deceive anybody and saying that we aren't going to make that because we already have in the bill and I personally would support this amendment because I think it's unconscionable to force a severely mentally retarded girl who's been taken advantage of and has become pregnant to go through the trauma of a childbirth a representative campion's Distributors sheet here. On the first page in the third paragraph then indicates that there is strong evidence that persons with mental handicaps are emotional disorders may be the very ones who are least mentally equipped to emotionally handle the trauma of an abortion. I was wondering if it's your speaker of Representative campaign. Would you look for a question to me any evidence that those same individuals are any more mentally equipped to handle the trauma of a childbirth when they don't know what's going to happen to speak to representative Berkman. I submit to you that mentally retarded people. and here again, there's degrees of mental retardation many of these mentally retarded people are presently out in our society today living the same as you and I young child that's mentally retarded is merely a slow learner. We are now taking him into our school educational system. To give them the opportunity of an education the same as anyone else. The mentally handicapped or mentally retarded child has an opportunity to be educated the same as anyone else we've done that on the educational system. We are providing an education for them. And the fact that they are a slow learner, there's no reason we found out to deny them the right to an education know we are also saying that these mentally retarded people are useful and productive members of our society because they are trained and vocational training. so that they are becoming productive use of a members of our society and I submit to you that the same that merely because there's a pregnancy. And when one of the parties is mentally retarded that you should then. Can find a death sentence to that child I think is wrong. And therefore this type of amendment saying that when a pregnant pregnancy results in a mentally retarded person that there should be a An abortion I think is the type of policy of saying we're going to be determining who is the perfect individual and who is the imperfect one and the imperfect ones. We don't want to leave continue in society. Mr. Speaker members, I you know, I want to repeat something I said just a few minutes ago is that you've already committed to use your words that death sentence to the to the unborn child. That's that's inside the mother whose life may be in Jeopardy so I can submit you. Let's not take a purist view of this if you're against abortion and you should be against abortion but we've already established that what we're doing now is just trying to determine how far Harbor start we're going to follow that so we've already made that determination that we are going to allow it in some cases. I just think that it's it's very wrong. And I know it's a tough decision and I don't I'm going to support the bill representative campy, but I think the members of this body should know that this issue was brought up in both the Health and Welfare Committee in in the Appropriations Division and in before the full Appropriations Committee, and there wasn't support for deleting this section at all. In fact, there was strong support to keeping it in. And I think that it's it's kind of a breach of confidence of the members of those committees to try to strike the section and I would really encourage the members to vote in favor of this. John Malkovich Megan What's the speaker members of the body? I Rise to speak against this amendment is terrifically poor policy to be making determinations when a doctor called a legislator and describe a case. We took many many many years to get the humanism built back into our laws. I never said just think would be a terrible shame to have this anti humanistic approach to set a class of people aside. Under the extremely loose definitions of retardation retardation is extremely loose or Loosely defined in our culture and our laws rules regulations many people are defined as retarded in school when they leave school the lead rather normal. I've seen many many many people like this. I've been working 27 years in the field. I can think of so many people that had this label hung on them by a psychologist. I've seen so many horrible cases where the psychologist missed by as many as sixty IQ points and the IQ point at self. The IQ itself has been subject to a very rigorous study with in the last 15 years and found wanting any of the old IQ tests are now outlawed. They cannot be used as many states there. Are there are there usually been Limited in their own State just in the in the practice of psychology to place a people that class of people under such a loser Define term as mental retardation when they're really Can I be a definition anyone in this house could contracted virus would be retarded tomorrow. It could happen. It does happen. I just surged the defeat of this motion. Tom Mangan of Anoka and now Joni house from Sauk Centre feel about it like mrs. Forsyth does but here we're dealing with the life of a human being let's not forget that you we're destroying a human life and took compare this to the first part if a mother's life is at stake if the mother's mother dies, the child dies to it's an altogether different situation. Stripes on Master speaker is I understand the amendment 252 8.0 to this is Forsyth is talking about mentally retarded children that are Wards of the state. Is that correct? I want to support that amendment. I don't know why we would allow an abortion for rape with this reported within 48 hours. We allow an abortion for incest as long as it's been reported to the proper authorities. And I think when I look at mental retardation and I think in her statues, we probably would consider that as a rape so it is if your Well, I'm the father of mentally retarded child. And I just can't conceive to see that girl go through a pregnancy without knowing what she's doing. I would certainly hurt your support of this amendment. liquor stores North Saint Paul Mr. Speaker little while ago. I read you the definition of mentally retarded person that I have used in this amendment. This is the tightest definition of mental retardation that we have in our statutes and I put it in this one in by design it says Such as to require supervision and protection. Mangan Mr. Speaker members of the body of Mrs. Forsyth yield. Would you believe mrs. Forrester I said I have personally assisted in rescuing people from our state hospitals were adjudicated as retarded. by licensed psychologist and committed by judges porcine I certainly would believe you if you tell me I just don't see what connection that has here. Except that. There might be a very very few people that were mistakes were made. I'm sure that's true every place speaker. My point is that your definition is extremely inaccurate extremely loose. There is no such definition just can't be. Weather discussion Amendment General Washington was flighting just figure out a question on the amendment. Would it be possible under the definition? I'm not sure where the decision would lie. Maybe if I could just give an example. We had a ward of the state who was in this situation with your Amendment. Would it be possible that that person would like to to go through where they can sit and I'll go through and have the birth. Is it possible that either the superintendent of the institution or someone who has the power of attorney? Could the retarded person desire to go through with it with the birth and yet someone else be able to make a decision that that child should be aborted. Forsyth mr. Speaker representative lighting It's still as a matter of choice. I don't think they'd Force anyone into this if they were capable of making a decision. Why didn't your speaker up son of force at you know, I got some problems and I can understand why you're offering the amendment that I guess I'd like to be clear in my mind that under your definition. Would it be possible for the retarded person to want to go through with the birth and yet someone else be able to make the decision for the abortion? I'm sorry. I didn't get the last part. I think the answer to the first part is if that person is capable of making that decision. I'm sure that that woman could make the decision night. What was the second part? I didn't hear it as Forsyth. I'm asking if we had a retarded person institutionalized under your definition that the individual wanted to go through a child go through with a birth. Is it possible if we adapt your amendment that someone else other than that individual could make a legal determination for the abortion? I would doubt it if that person is capable person Forsyth. Would you be amenable to an amendment to your amendment to insert the word profoundly retarded? I think this would clear up some of the concern that some people have and it does give a little clearer definition. I'm supporting your Amendment and I think this only brings more support in because it does delineate between the classifications of retardation. Forsyth mr. Speaker representative Rose, will you define what profoundly is please? Royals mr. Speaker rivers in Forsyth I'm not certain that I can Define him in the terms that would satisfy this body but having worked two years with profoundly retarded students that were classified at that time as trainable retarded. I know what you're speaking of is a deep concern of mine and if we get tangled up and caught up in the web of whether or not some legal description classifies a person for this particular, right? I think we could be here for a long time. It just does give some stature to the fact that profoundly retarded does mean for profoundly retarded. I'm sorry for everything for that can help you with a clear definition. I will just not say anything and you can see how you come out. I I personally don't know what your what you really mean by that and I would let the body decide speaker may be represented before profoundly retarded Mister rolls. There is a definition and there is a set of terms the categories run from mild moderate severe and profound. I just about the only persons now who are institutionalized at least in the state of Minnesota are the profoundly retarded. Buying large profoundly retarded people do not cause or do not become pregnant. At least that's what put this with in some kind of bounds of acceptability. Mr. Speaker of the the four terms mild moderate severe and profound to believe are set by an accepted Nationwide and internationally the American Psychological Association. I believe that is set this terminology, brother. Speaker representative Mangan, would you yield in the definition that is in this amendment? We say significantly sub-average. Do you feel that that covers all of that all of the Levels of retardation speaker. Mrs. Forsyth. Unfortunately, the intelligence quotient is widely on misunderstood. It's a mathematical I mathematically devised figure. And it's the response that a person makes under given circumstances as compared to a select group of people. And when you say significantly sub-average, you could be sick of the significantly sub-average and have an IQ of 85. Somebody could say that significantly sub-average. I can keep you out of many many things to many many activities. So I think if we're going to have that kind of amendments you should be more specific and probably should say profoundly retarded. Pharcyde, mr. Speaker representative mang and are those terms that that you were talking about now defined any place in the statutes? No, they're not. Mr. Speaker, I guess I just submit that I tried to be in my Amendment tried to adhere to statutes cuz I thought that's what we were supposed to do. This is Hockinson. Mr. Speaker. I have a question early hoping syndrome. Rosetta titillating raised on the amendment and I make the probably ought to be directing the question to him. But either of you, I believe you were referring Gary to the possibility of Coors and if that would be it and wondering where this could be put into the amendment quite frankly. I welcome this discussion because I haven't decided how I intend to vote on amendments yet. And so I offer this only as a suggestion to the author if so, there would be no question of Coors in there if language such as the following might be added. Marry after your Amendment add. However, this provision shall not prohibit the carrying to full term if the mentally retarded person so desires Where you get that? Mr. Speaker represented Wilkinson. I certainly have no objection to that at all. I would welcome that into my Amendment. Thank you. Also move. You're listening to live debate on the Minnesota house floor of legislation to cut off the public funds for most abortions right now. They're talking about an amendment which would make an exception in the case of mentally retarded people who are raped and or result pregnancy results from incest. And the representative Mary Forsythe is off of the amendment. I'm not sure if the the clerk has that but I accepted that as part of my Amendment. It would appear that we're going to be getting to vote on this amendment within a reasonable time. The amendment currently there are no words to the amendment pending. I accepted her suggestion is part of my amendment in your Amendment which reads all over this provision shall not prohibit the carrying to full term if the mentally retarded person so desires that is now a portion of your Amendment. First of all I ask for roll call vote on. There has been here is Rick MP again pointed out to you. There's various degrees that we're talking about here and to Simply state that the mentally retarded many of whom now. We are providing with educational opportunities many of whom now have not only been given training but are productive useful employment Burrs of our society. most of whom now are living not in institutions, but out in society like you and I I think it's a mistake to say to this group. Did you? I going to do German. the different pregnancy results and remember medical evidence shows that the child may be perfectly normal as matter of fact in certain cases of higher percentage is 88% The child will be normal that that child. Should be put to death. Simply because we have a class. People who are merely slower Learners than URI. I think it's wrong. I heard you to vote against. Mr. Speaker and members of the House. I'd like to make just one short statement the discussion that's been going on should give you a good indication of how confusing and undefinable. This amendment would be if it actually was written into law. I feel we should give her the novo. Discussion of the amendment not clerk will take the role in the foresight Amendment. I know in a moment. We'll find out the fate of the First Amendment offer to this bill and then one which would liberalize the measure slightly. Looks like about an even number of red and green buttons at this point. I think it's going to go down. We'll find out just a second though. Taylor Swift's know it being 55 by 73 neighs amendments not adapted for Clawson offers the following Amendment clerk report. The amendment is moving to a man 4236 is filed page one after line 10 insert a new section to read section Plaza again, Mister speaker. Can the clerk help me out, which how I got a little bit more than a month. Just a state treasurer. adoption speaker moved out I might add. I think the the desktop. I got to notwithstanding. This is employers. Obviously obvious we're going to be in for a fairly lengthy and possibly someone confusing afternoon Vista Crossing himself as got several amendments in and the desk is not absolutely certain which one it is. He wants to take up at this point Chief clerk at Burdick and speaker marks table are conferring. The Crossing is standing by there probably will be several amendments offered to liberalize the bill slightly. Where are all the papers together the one that we currently have relates to nonprofit hospitals? I'll take that. I've got to not when I moved out for that one. Speaker. I have to notwithstanding amendments. That's probably part of the confusion. This is mr. Speaker and members. This is the I'm sorry for the confusion. This is the one that relates to hospitals. How about the players? Do you want now one comes later? Okay. Do you want to take somebody else's Amendment will get organized. Well, I'm just wondering if you want to take we have a number of other amendments in our desk if you want to take one of those and we'll pick these up and when Where are the state treasurer during during the debate on the very first? I think I'm at the pages were walking around with flurries of papers in their hands Distributing them to the to the members. Apparently everybody hasn't gotten a copy of the one that they were about take up. And here's another one that Mr. Crossing is going to offer again. Speaker this relates the state treasurer. I need to make one one oral Amendment after the commissioner of Finance insert and the commissioner of Public Welfare. and the commissioner of Public Welfare Mr. Speaker remembers one of the things that I'm a little concerned it will greatly concerned about what this discussion is protracted as it's been and as difficult maybe is the components might be when the bill is finally enacted is that all people in the ball game will not have copies of the rules all that this amendment States says that once we have done this thing the state treasurer the commissioner of Finance in the commission of Public. Welfare will all have to sit down and establish standards to make sure that no funds of the state or any subdivision thereof and no federal funds passing through the state treasury or a state or local agency. I think the members will understand how complicated this thing can all get to be when it's finally accomplished and I want to hear the treasurer do is as the person who disburses money is to sit down with the appropriate people come up with some standards for you. List of tax dollars send them out to the local units are government so that everybody understands what the rules of the game are. I'd ask for support of the amendment. What's the speaker remembers? I oppose the memo and ask for roll call vote again. The speaker remembers it's really unnecessary. We haven't Section 3 and 4 and 5 the provisions in here that Prohibit the probably find this being used other than authorized by subdivision 8 of 256 be so I asked you to vote it down. Can be representative plus No Deal questions is Arnold camping out. Well, mr. Speaker of a skimpy. I'm not not talking about rules. I carefully avoided that the question is the sort of thing. I suppose that the Department of Public Welfare does from time to time and that is to send out can't think what they call it, but it's just kind of a position statement. This is how it ought to be done. My only concern is that everybody speaks with a single voice. We have a disbursement agency. We have to policy agencies and we have at least four levels of funding in my only concern is that everybody speaks with a single voice? Mr. Speaker flashing but there is authority to do what you were you here want to mandate be done. There is a 38 to do that. I suspect. Yes, my very clearly want to make sure that we ordered those three people sit down and do the talking Harbor. Lighting store speaker lighting Stillwater section 256 BO2 subdivision to I I don't see it in the Senate file were working on. What is that sectional law? Mr. Speaker. Mr. Lydick that language is referred to at page three lines 16 through 23 and it is the section of Statute which Defiance eligibility for Excuse me. All right. It should be subdivision 8 we messed up in typing should be subdivision 8 that's just the eligibility description. Play wanted mr. Refers to it line 23 and page 3. Mr. Speaker, mr. Closter. What is a subdivision to I don't know what subdivision 8 is just correcting. It was just a typographical error. brother discussion not the clerk take the role on the clasp on the moon. This is another amendment. That would make the bill good deal more complicated and is opposed by Chief author Ray camping. her clothes are all and see what the outcome is 318is amendments not adopted. Burger King offers the following amendments Bergland is moving to Manson file. 2236 is follow Drake everything after the enacting clause and insert Section 1. This where do you meet remembers like a strong opponent of the account pay bill? What does amendment does it says that the state of Minnesota will fund abortions for persons who are otherwise eligible for medical care under a state law? I offer the amendment for several reasons. First of all, I believe the bill we have in front of us today clearly discriminates against the poor any person in the state of Minnesota who is in an equal situation who has Financial Resources may choose to have an abortion if they want to Furthermore any person who is qualified for medical assistance who sells induces an abortion in begins hemorrhaging may receive Medical Care paid for by the state of Minnesota. We know that this is happening. In fact, just last week. There was a woman brought to Ramsey County Hospital who had ingested enough sewing machine oil to cause her to begin convulsions and therefore she aborted We also heard testimony and committee about the increase of poor women who are desperately trying to find the money to seek an abortion. They feel they must have and there are cases where they are resorting to prostitution. in order to Financially be able to meet. The conditions that were imposing upon them. I do not think the bill we have before us is sound policy. I believe it is a discriminatory bill. We are not suggesting that other people who have their medical care provided by the state of Minnesota should be subject to the conditions that we have in this bill and I would therefore urge you to adopt this amendment. Representative Linda Berglund with an amendment that clearly is the direct opposite of the campy Bill and mr. Campy obviously opposes it talk about freedom of choice in the state of Minnesota want the freedom of choice to determine how their tax dollars going to be used to and you know, we forget one thing the unborn child has no freedom of choice is interested to know there's no Miranda warning given to that unborn child. No due process. No hearing I heard you to defeat the Brooklyn Amendment. speaker numbers for most of us are views on this question are profoundly influenced by our being members of a church. That's true for me. I happen to be a Catholic and although we we don't like to bring religion into this chamber. It permeates this question. I raise it now though because several times the author of the bill has has argued that its has assumed that we are dealing in the question of abortion with the human person. Presumably from from the beginning from conception in both the Christian and the judaic Traditions. There are alternative points of view particular in the GTX Edition. It is you're clearly very much an alternative point of view. But I'd also like to make the points on the floor that there is an alternative point of you even theologically for those of us who are feel ourselves to be members preps loyal members of of Christian churches. In fact the bill contains an exception. I think based on the geological Traditions the exception in lines 20 and following on page 2. It says that the abortion is medically necessary what the theologians called the principle of proportionate reason that there's another important item that must be taken into consideration when considering an abortion the woman's the mother's life is being endangered. There's a recognition that on the part of the author that there are alternative. Viewpoints are alternative arguments that can be taken into consideration. But there are a host of others. There are a host of others. For example, the argument that says this is not a human person unless it's actual actually an individual. It's not a human life there until it's past the point where it could possibly become twins. What is this is not a human person until it is capable of conscious response. The point here is that not only not only ones own experience, but also the theological Traditions which affect us all. Suggest that another reading can be given to this question then the automatic assumption that necessarily we're dealing with a human person from the beginning. That's not to mention the practice of members of churches who threw their practice are in effect at least suggesting a widespread belief that it is not understood universally unanimously in this country that a fertilized egg is a human person from beginning. There's also a strong tradition in the judaic Christian world of respect for the conscience of an individual with one who disagrees with one cell. I don't I don't believe that this bill is paying sufficient regard to that that runs through this the religious Traditions not just a second about the religious Traditions that have influenced all of us greatly. We also I think in this discussion are ignoring the fact that apart from our own personal views and I have horrible or shahnaz we as I'm sure we all do but apart from our personal views, the legality of this operation has been established for some years. That representative Bergen and raising this amendment is making a serious point. She's sick. She's suggesting that some day in this country. We will have health care available to all who need it and we won't fall back. On the on the notion that somehow some people haven't earned it. So we'll decide who will have what someday this country will have health care available for all and 4 available to anyone who wants it at their own choice not for us to determine. So I can clued then that this is not an obvious case of one being needing to to in order to be true to one's conscience or true to one's religious Traditions when needing to vote against this amendment and for this bill, there are alternative threads throughout our culture throughout our history and throughout our religion that would lead one and it has led me despite my membership in the Christian church and despite my feeling strongly attached to that church has led me to believe that I must vote for this amendment and against this bill. representative John Randle of Minneapolis Janet Clark speakers tentative campy suggest that public funds are not to be used to pay for abortions for people on medical assistance as I interpret the bill the way it is now public funds could be used for abortions for public employees and which leads me to believe that I might even qualify myself as an individual for public funds to pay for an abortion for myself. I agree. This is an extremely discriminatory Bill representative Kempy. I wonder if he would yield Which speaker would representative Kempy yield of Tempe. I understand that the con amendment was offered in Appropriations that would disallow any use of public funds for abortions for public employees and you rejected that amendment I guess if you could enlighten me. Mr. Speaker representative Clark there's a distinction here between funds that the employee has in the way of a fringe benefit the regard to life insurance health and accident insurance, which is really Dean part of his compensation for services and we can't control how that employee may use his funds at all. That's a big difference the public Monies. We do have control over. and I think there's a vast distinction you notice the sections they were dealing with representative fart deal with medical assistance For the needy General Provisions for poor relief. and the United States Supreme Court has ruled The Thirst is not a violation of the equal protection Clause. This is not class discrimination. And they have stated that the policy of the state may be established to prefer childbirth and childcare over abortion. Spark, mr. Speaker representative campi. I guess I don't agree with that argument. We are making the exception for public employees saying that public funds can be used for abortions for public employees. I think representative savacool should be giving this argument. I've heard him make it many times. But I also would add representative can't be that the Supreme Court of this country also made a decision in favor of freedom of choice. Why did stir speaker members not believe that government has a perfect right to make a decision and how its money is spent and if you look at the first part of the bill and some of the areas at medical assistance in assembly eligible. Reasons that we should get medical assistance, you know, if you're talking about tonsillectomies or bad backs or eyeglasses and things if it wouldn't be anybody here today, and I don't believe there be any discussion or debate on whether or not we should provide that if we look at the second part of the bill where we have an involuntary conception government has made a decision. We're going to provide funds but I don't think government should be providing funds to pay for abortions where it's been a balance Ray Concepcion. North brother Island Mr. Speaker and members just one point I want to make funds have been cut off for medical assistance abortion. They are not being funded at the present time. We heard testimony in the Health and Welfare committee from doctor after a doctor who said that they would not sign something saying that they could say for sure that a person's life would be endangered. And we're asking in this bill for two doctors to say that I think it's clear. We're cutting the funds off in total. Mr. Speaker and members of the House. We should not allow any Public Funding to become available for abortions in the state of Minnesota money should be used for important matters rather than abortions. I asked you what has The Unborn done to deserve to be aborted. Can anybody prove or show to me? In any of the EMS statutes where The Unborn is committed a crime. You deserve to be aborted. And yet we find people committing murder not twice, but continually. found guilty and serving time in a correctional institution soon after the return to society committing the same crime of murder and no one dares take them to task. It's because capital punishment is been out loud. We can't do that. But what has The Unborn done to deserve murder? Can anyone answer that? He does not have a public defender. a murderer does he's at the mercy of all of us. And I subscribe to you and submit to you to defeat a Bergen Amendment and vote for the Bill. Thank you. John Spanish Oaks busy. Take the role in the Berglund a minute and I will have the roll call on the bourbon Amendment which is going down by very very wide margin. Get the final vote here in just a moment. You're listening to live coverage from the Minnesota House of Representatives of debate on legislation to cut off most public money for abortion services. Bill was passed by the Minnesota Senate last night and appears. babe 105 days amendment is not adopted. Bill will be passed here in the house this afternoon. I meant by representative en Linea. Line 15. Delete Mister speakers member is I think this is actually a fairly non-controversial. Yes. I'd like to move him in the change in the apology statement. I think it's a non-controversial one the language in the the bill before it's now indicates that it is the policy of the state to give preference and encouragement and support to childbirth over abortion. I think it is important that we acknowledge hear that. We may also eliminate abortion through Family Planning and the change you would simply indicate that she'll be the policy of the state to give preference to both normal childbirth and Family Planning. I would ask your support. camping What's the speaker remembers? I proposed amendment ask for local vote? Mr. Speaker in represented Wendy. I think you will all have an opportunity to vote on that bill when it comes back from conference committee, depending at Forest what what was put in and Conference? I don't really feel it's appropriate to put it in this bill which deals with a different matter. Mr. Chairman and members, I guess. I'm I'm I'm really very disappointed that representative campy cannot support this amendment because as I read the policy statement here via the state of Minnesota is basically saying that it is their policy to encourage childbirth and and no no alternative to that in terms of not being pregnant. And the message that I read in here is it is the policy of the state of Minnesota that women shall bear children, and and I I think that I certainly no way opposed to childbirth and in and I think it's that it's a very desirable thing, but I guess I do think that families are making that choice and they should be permitted to make that choice and certainly the state of Minnesota should encourage them to do so raw discussion This is pica rise to speak against the amendment for the simple representative Ken McDonald Watertown and secondly to suggest that Family Planning. Is it a rather that abortion is is part of Family Planning is the wrong connotation. The two items have to be separated. And thirdly the the Family Planning act will take care of our concerns on on this. So it's really not needed at all. And I heard you're a no vote on this amendment. Camping. Mr. Speaker has a role, been requested. Explicitly does not include abortion as family planning in this particular amendment that I am offering in here in no way increases the exemptions or makes it easier to obtain abortions. It is simply recognizing that women should at least have some control over their reproductive future and that. But it is not the policy of this state simply to mandate pregnancy on them, but to provide an option Berglund represent of Campeche little question is the policy section of this bill needed at all in order to cut off the Public Funding of abortions clearly stated a policy that would permeate all throughout and I believe it is needed. Well, mr. Speaker represent of campy. The question was is it needed in order to cut off the funds? I think it should yes. I miss your speaker and members. I guess I don't read it that way and the argument is being made that we don't need to include the amendment onto the policy section that may be true. But we don't need the policy section and I guess I think if we're going to have the policy section, but then the policy Autumn or more clearly reflect the intention of the state of Minnesota. Policy statement they talking about says that between normal childbirth and abortion the state policy is it normal childbirth is to be given preference and encouragement and support and the amendment that representative wynia has offered and is now being voted on would add that to between abortion and childbirth. It would be the state's policy to encourage child birth and family planning. representative Winnie ice from Saint Paul clozaril being 58 eyes 69 days amendments not at this is coniferous the following Amendment. God is moving Representatives, Minneapolis is also close to the camp e bill. du page 3 scum mister mister speaker this amendment what this amendment has is exactly what I believe representative. Doug Carlson has asked it does what representative John Spanish has asked it does what representative Ray can't be spoken for this amendment will more fully protect the innocence of the fetus. This amendment strikes conditions be and see where we allow abortions. Are there as a result of criminal sexual conduct under very restrictive conditions and it also defined and it also strikes close see where we where we remove When we allow an abortion if the pregnancy is the result of incest. I guess I would ask mr. Campi to yield to a question. I just called. What you offered? Tempe can you give me a substance of reason for keeping those that those two Clauses in the bill for reason that even though I originally did not want this in the bill and 60 dfl legislators? And I'm sure just as vast majority of independent Republicans support a provision without any of those exceptions. This is what the Senate is past and I feel that the restrictions that they put on there are tight enough I can live with him mccl can live with him. I think they're reasonable because they prevent any of the loopholes that we've seen with the federal law on the federal guidelines. Time is the speaker. It's been said before that you and all the members of the House can live with anything that this that's in this bill. We're talkin about what about the poor women of the height of the state? We're talkin about one of the women. What about the women that were covered by the Clauses that the people in the in the committee on Health and Welfare wanted what about the person who is subjected to severe medical disability? What about the person who might really die of heart disease who might really die of kidney disease who can no longer get an abortion because you couldn't live with those Clauses in the bill what happens to them Stampy? Mr. Speaker? Mrs. Khan, I submit to you the poor women do not support your position. They support mine. camping mr. Speaker. I don't get up and presume to speak to poor went for poor women, and I find it's kind of presumptuous bigger point of order. We speak we have before us a highly emotional Bill and we're we've strayed way way you feel now from the condiment in the discussion is currently going on. I want to be a private dispute not one on public display. common trees by Arne Carlson in Minneapolis Spell professional. Mr. Speaker in St. Louis Park I would urge everybody in the house to do that. I can't for the life of me understand. Why representative Kempy would not support this amendment? You know, you're either for or against abortion, no reps and if campi you're willing to compromise your principles is I see it if you don't support this amendment. you know if someone becomes pregnant as a result of criminal sexual conduct Or because of incest. And they have an abortion. It's still an abortion. And I know that the people like to use the the term pro-life. I know you consider yourself to be a pro-life or I do to but I submit that day if you do not support this amendment representative campy. You are not the very consistent with what your position has been from beginning to end. And if you're not willing to compromise on this and support this I just don't see how you can I you can carry this bill and I would urge members of this by to support representative cons of amendment roll call vote. Well, what's your speaker represented petrify so I can't speak for all the members here, but I certainly will state my personal opinion. Is opposed to that but I feel that this legislation is needed and we've drawn a bill that is acceptable and reasonable because it prevents I feel federal funds from being used and for fraudulent purposes. I think it prevents a fraud situation from arising and you know, it's obvious the intent of the amendment. Just tried to kill a bill with kindness. I only wish you would have author that bill from the beginning. I have no kindness for this bill. The representative Campion members of the house now if you're going to use your definitions and you're going to say you're pro-life then a life is a life is a life. Is it is you have it written in this bill and as well as you believe Now if you're going to be consistent with your policies. Then you have to adopt this amendment. And there's no logical reason. For you not to continue with that policy. I'm fine with Carrollton. Mr. Speaker members of body. I hope that you're listening to what the represent of Petra peso to sing. You take a look at the subsection B and C B talks about criminal sexual conduct and we tighten it up to 48 hours. And I think most of you have been apprised of the fact that if the report is properly made and the the woman who is in the victim comes to the medical people the procedures are taken care of so that the pregnancy never results and I guess the second thing in the first place we don't have to have that abortion because there is no pregnancy and I think that's the number one issue II Lee another important issue is that we do want to stop this type of thing from happening. So he may be the person who committed the crime the rapist if it's at least reported to the valid law enforcement people they can be apprehended and they can be brought to Justice. I think the area that is a very difficult one for many of us is section. See when you start Talking about incest that's a very difficult area, you know, maybe we're compromising our position more than we should but I would challenge you represent a petrol Paso. I'll bet you wouldn't even end up supporting us, even if we took that out. This is Khan. Is the speaker will represent of cost needle to a question after a rate that will prevent a pregnancy that will prevent conception or else you want me to go to the summer and some of the others aren't here veterinarians get caught in these situations quite frequently and we have I guess I have to use the analogy and we deal with the dogs and pigs and we called this meeting and there are drugs there estrogen compounds and I know there's many people that are concerned about the diacetyl. Diethyl Esther still best roles that are involved and their the DS compounds but they've got them down to the synthetic products now can be given and in very safely. It's a One-Shot deal. They're not going to be entered into the cancer that many people are going to be talking about There's other manual techniques that can be done so that they are very safe and medically sound so that the pregnancy does not come about to speaker. Representative Carlson as I understand then you are advocating to prevent a potential pregnancy with cheap at we've had people speak throughout the day say almost never occurs because somehow they believe pregnancy almost never occurs as the result of rape but you would Advocate giving a known carcinogenic substance to everyone who reports that as opposed to letting them wait and using a simple mechanical procedure a few weeks later. That would do it at exactly the same the same effect. As far as the fetus is concerned those procedures are identical as I would understand if it prevents the growth of the fetus to full term and yet you would Advocate the giving of a known carcinogenic substance to women who would happen to be raped to avoid interfering with your Morrow feelings about what you want to do that fetus. And for some reason you think that it's better to destroy it by chemicals than to destroy it by mechanical means How much do speaker members were clouding the issue as I'm trying to tell you there has not been a fetus are to destroy and I guess that's the first thing and I think that the second that you're dragging up a a a smokescreen to say that that known carcinogen is is the thing that we normally would use and they're going to have all these women get come down with cancer. And that's not true. I wouldn't do you know somebody else is here to speak on these things may be more knowledgeable. I'll be happy to listen, Bedford Faso. That last exchange between Representatives Doug Carlson and Phyllis Kahn. Miss Carlson in the case of raping is it have to be a proven or it just reported? I think that the presents a few problems in and of itself and I think good because it's unclear as to what's going to occur there. I think that's another reason to support representative cons of amendment to remove add sections B and C. Stampy what's the speaker remembers? I oppose the kind of management. I think you know, it's rather strange if we didn't report such a serious crime. I'm sure you're not advocating that we don't report a serious crime like right. I wouldn't think anyone would Advocate that. Donald Speaker numbers there is a bit of smokescreen here and we heard some talk about being inconsistent. My memory of the committee meetings that I sat in on a listen to wear that the now the condiments that this being offered was the very provision that mrs. Khan and mr. Pepper. Pesto insisted should be on the bill. I heard the discussion now they want to take it out who's being inconsistent. The truth of the matter is if we remove this it'll be unacceptable to the Senate and the bill will be dead for this year. But down the con Amendment percentage of Kim McDonald you've heard what the basic strategy of the people who don't like the campy bill is here. We have representative Spanish accounts. That you know, what are we doing? For the poor people, especially the women when they have problems of preps facial type of surgery. There's no funds for that. There is no funds for silicon type of implants. There is no hair type of implants. For General Health purposes, are there any any funds available that a person cannot live in this type of weather might be rather in Clement and I cannot stand the the type of weather. We have your are there any funds that we may send them to a warm climate so they are there help me improve. No. But they want funds to be provided for abortions absurd both down this amendment. Thank you. Debbie mr. Speaker representative con. Would you yield to a question? McDonald, I'm sorry McDonald true that actually you're reversing your position here on the house floor. by your Amendment It's the speaker that is not true. I've never taken a position in support of causes B&C. I think that they're totally inadequate and I think they had nothing to the bill and a representative of time to vote for the bill if your Amendment goes on. Mister mister speaker representative can be there a lot of amendments pending. I'd want to see what the bill looks like in its final form before I make any promises. Brother Sky not birthday Carolyn Amendment. Now they're voting on Lee, then lift. It would strike out the exceptions for rape. And incest. They're very tight restrictions earlier the Health and Welfare Committee of the house and put an exception allowing Public Funding of abortion the case of rape if it was reported to the police or a health department within 60 days of the incident and now is it now reads. It's within 2 days. This one down 12 in favor of 114 against and we have another amendment 30 strike. George spigot I'll be a correction in the amendment Bridge Mahtomedi. the work to have the change in the amendment this amendment by mr. George would allow the reporting Curry to be extended to seven days. Currently. It's at 2. The cast of the right but kind of a sexual contact. It would be a 7 Day or one-week provision in which the victim would have the ability to to report the the incident. I more of the fact that there was a good deal testimony. And I tried is both parties. the trauma that said rape victims undergo I recall very specifically the testimony. About two-and-a-half 3 years ago. In what was then the Judiciary Committee of this house? Whenever that a burglar has Bill really finding the four degrees of criminal sexual conduct was moving through this body girdle testimony at that time. American people and other professionals and paraprofessionals about the trauma of rape victims. I'm not sickly love with 7 Days myself. But I think that it's at least a reasonable. Of time. In which in which there is a victim ought to be able to to have to report the particular incident. I do not think it does violence to the to the concept of the bill. I think it's reasonable and I would ask for your support. miscopy the speaker Members First of all, I can ask for roll call vote. Do you wait 7 days before you report? Here is the most serious crime I submit to you of all. And you want to wait 7 days. The medical legal evidence need to obtain a conviction is lost. The time necessary to try to apprehend your lose. It is obvious. I think all the urgency of trying to get police work come in immediately. Secondly, I think it really doesn't Injustice 2 the rape victim to wait 7 days for medical treatment for venereal disease. and thirdly the even though play me some resulting from rape are extremely rare. within a certain time. There's that remote possibility can be removed. So I heard you defeat this amendment. George Ticketmaster Campanile JPL speaker at the camping. Are you telling us that the members of his body that cannot be cured? Mr. Speaker. Mr. George. I didn't state that but I think it be inappropriate for anyone to wait that long. Of time, but the most important aspect. I think it's the immediate reporting to a law enforcement agency so that the necessary evidence can be obtained to convince the offender. That's final and you need in a court of law this evidence to help obtain a conviction. Speak with Cappy does does this amendment in any way affect the ability of a woman to do to a panic addiction? It is a far as it relates to this bill. Mr. Cappy. Mr. Speaker. Mr. George anytime. You delay getting police work commenced. Obviously. It would do that Mister Maker Mister George. Can you name me one other crime you wait for 7 days before you report it to a place other Valley Life. Does my amendment in any way of speak to the time. In which a crime must be reported for the purposes of Prosecuting that crime? There's no statutory time. This is statute limitations. But the longer you delay representative George the more difficult it is and or impossible to obtain the medical evidence to help sustain a conviction when you're do arrest the offender and you delay, please work necessary to commence it bigger working prosecution's but my another nice if it does not stick to that. I would also rather agree with you that it only probably to the rape victims advantage to report that particular incident as soon as possible after the Kurds. I don't disagree with that. The command double philosophy. But the fact that matter is that we do not exist it to my knowledge in this state right now is just flat-out require rape victims to report the rape. In order it was on the flashlight. Of time in order to obtain a conviction will talking to her about a situation in which a rape victim can suffer severe trauma. We're talking about the time. What's that? Victim is allowed. Public Funding for abortion If in fact she qualifies for it, that's all we're talkin about what you saying that she has to wait 7 days or that if she does wait 7 days is automatic and not going to be able to be what day is the rapist is not going to be able to be prosecuted were talking about a reasonable time. That's why you confuse the issue when you start talking about the ability of the process that's not relevant. Esther Carlson The girl some speaking representative George we're getting the issue a little bit confused here to try and extend it to 7 days. I think the member should be made aware of it. There will never be a prosecution by a law enforcement agency on a crime that was committed in the area of rape unless it is reported within about four hours. The standard procedure is that unless they come in immediately. They will not charge the person that's being named with rape. If a if a young lady comes in the next morning and says I was assaulted and I was raped the doctors the first thing they do they notify the lot of people but the most they would charge him with would be a salt but the horcrux that we're after that 48 hours is to help that person and it requires a medical examination the doctors don't do things without at least making sure that something would transpire they're not going to give any medications or do anything to prevent a pregnancy. If in fact there was no evidence that there was a sexual crime committed so that has nothing to do it. We're not going to get a conviction on the rape charge where basic Trying to prevent a pregnancy. If in that rare case, it does exist and this involves it taking the cultures and examination the physical examination by the doctor. But once you get beyond that 48 hours, then you're going to start running into conception and where you're going to start to end up then you're going to have a fetus in in a fertilized ovum. Mr. George Springer. Mr. Carlson the hill. In paragraph B beginning on page two and give me a call when top page 3. We have the the kind of the exception to the exception if you will the exception provided following Clause Bewitched it with reeds. Unless the victim is physically unable to report the criminal sexual misconduct in which case the report should be made within 48 hours after the victim becomes physically able to report the criminal sexual conduct. I've heard you say earlier. And I just heard you say now but after a. Of 48 hours were talking about actual conception. Will you tell me mr. Carlson? Yes, if for example if the victim is physically unable to report the criminal sexual conduct until three days after the incident aren't you in the present Bill allowing in fact an abortion after conception? Much to my kitchen speaker lights to my dismay. In fact that may just be the case of mr. Carlson your arguments against my Amendment. Are are invalid to the extent that you've already allowed that exception to occur in the present language. Mr. Speaker members body in a represent George. No, we're not allowing it to happen. There's going to be some cases. It don't like me and I don't know how many views in percentage wise what you're trying to talk about. I think you know, you got to keep in contact the percentages in the likelihood of these types of things happening and I obviously you can find exceptions to anything. We know that and we're not sitting here saying that this is perfect. But we're saying it's by far the best that we can do. Wow, just very busy message Vegas. It's clear why I never feel I'm sure but the facts about her is the exception of the post conception exception is already in the language. If you're truly concerned about the the the trauma the rape victim support. Go further discussion Burke will take the role. Fred Norton is not taking over and the speaker's chair for Marcus Abel. Mr. Norton is Chairman of the Appropriations Committee and frequently sits in when it's just a bow steps out for a while. This amendment is going down by quite a wide. Margin. Well, very substantial margin and we'll have the result in the second. Members are yelling question every so often one Lee debate gets a little more protracted than they would like. There'd been some hope that the house couldn't adjourned by about 3 today pending on 31 297. The amendment is defeated and we have another amendment. 236 as follows page for after Line 6 insert gentleman from Hennepin, mr. Williamson and mr. Speaker like the movie Amendment speaker members of the body has Williamson unlike some of the deal with what kinds of restrictions or what the definitions of those restrictions will be in a dress that is itself to the question of how broadly those restrictions will be applied who will be subject to them Section 3 as you've noted in the bill before you already prohibits the federal fun pass through section four effects of the use of the state and its subdivisions in their money Section 5 effects County welfare boards and how they use their money and what this amendment does is applies the very same limits whatever they end up being after we're done today applies them to the funding for the employees of governmental units. And their medical insurance programs for instance legislators legislative history. Speak loud ass to charity Rule and Jermaine us to this amendment does not pertain to any of the subdivision that we're dealing with him the bill. Mr. Speaker. Could I offer some advice on that question Master speaker get does ISO I submit pertain vary directly to the bill because it affects how the use of public money shall be applied in the eligibility of funding abortions in the restrictions that apply to that funding whether it be for welfare or through Insurance programs or anything else. It's the use of public money on abortions, which I understand to be the very subject the very life of this bill if you will, mr. Speaker, if I may give advice to the chair Arne Carlson calling here for the point of order to the general Alex Smith. This is precisely the same thing with the campies bill as I read it pertains to Minnesota statutes chapter to 256 B and various subdivisions. They are of the Mister Williamson pertains to Minnesota statutes chapter 145 Mr. Speaker might offer a suggestion and turns out that you'd never guess. It's mr. Williams said I'm having trouble hearing you. Mr. Speaker in terms of the statute references. The references in the amendment do tie in the 256b .02 the same as the bill and it applies those restrictions to a broader use of public funds rather than just solely to the use of the pass through in the federal funds the use of County welfare board funds in the use of the state and its subdivisions Factory applies to the use of the same money, but used through a different route to accomplish the same purpose all the statute references in the amendment refer to the same references in the bill. Mrs. Mr. Williamson is trying to amend the bill so that the state employees health policies could not pay for abortions. 5.42 is the public health chapter in the state statutes, not the insurance chapter. When there was some question raised about this in the senate in a senate committee several weeks ago the public employee unions were around on this issue and wanted to make sure that that this provision would not apply and obviously this is an attempt by opponents of the of the campy Bill to add a provision to it that would make it unacceptable to the senate representative Norton speaker. Norton is looking over the amendment looking over the statutes trying to rule on the point of order brought by the Carlson who is suggest that this amendment is not germane. There is a provision of the house rules that say that amendments cannot be offered unless they are related to the bill. But it is comprable to the class Amendment and ruling that the amendment is not Germain Ford. My mother is not germane. So now they move on to another amendment quite a list of them sitting down there on speakers desk. Glasson is moving to amend Senate file. 2236 is follows page one after line 10 insert a new section to read section speaker point of order. Danger point of order. I was going to ask the chair and keeping with the previous two rulings that this amendment is not your main to the bill before us this particular Amendment refers to chapter 181. What? Mr. Clawson, what is chapter 144 and we're not even sure what this amendment is. The amendments are distributed down on the floor and in the gallery. We just have to wait until they're explained a little bit. Carlson is braces point of order before. Mr. Clawson one chance to explain which amendment was the Department of Health statutes. Generally Health Provisions, generally. Find a water Mister speaker mister mister speaker can a point of order be raised before the the Amendments moved? I guess I guess not I guess I missed your class and Moe's adoption Amendment. Mr. Carlson has raised the point of order that he's already raised. And mr. Klassen, what advice do you have for the chair relative to the point of water? Mr. Speaker. We're taking the chapter 144 Amendment a ticket. We're taking the 144th Amendment. Yes, okay. You got it all full of the entire issue here. Is that a health clearly the issue on the floor for several hours before us today has been the use of public money to provide abortion Services clearly by the funding mechanism, which we have established for a nonprofit hospitals in Minnesota public funds are used directly to provide abortion services and these particular kinds of facilities. I have been in contact with quite a number of people who have expressed concern is directly avenica. Well expressed concern with the use of public monies for this purpose. I've been into or indirectly and concern in contact with people who Express their concern by taking this issue as far as United States Supreme Court for a ruling and I can't believe that we've discussed any issue today, which is more Charming than this one. Mr. Speaker if I'm a mess. Pacific into the general we've had two amendments ruled out of water. We're trying to deal with the Kempy bill, which is narrowly defined it deals with one section of the Minnesota statutes. And unless we start pulling these out of order we're going to be wandering all over the field today just to class is amendment on this particular one deals with chapter 144. He has another one coming up that deals with chapter 181. They should all be ruled out of order. Mr. Chairman. Clawson anything further I don't like to say 144 is the health chapter Miss campus Bill and wanders into a numbers for number chapters that sell. Well, I'm going to rule it is not your main. I think it's consistent with the other ruins sorted. Mr. Carson offers are following a man with clerk report the amendment. Glaceon is moving to a man Senate file. 2236 is follows page one after line 10 and for the new section to read. speaker mod option amendment 2 chapter 181 Well here we have exactly the same argument again on a different amendment by representative Clawson. Oh, wow, Mister class to me, I guess I would not make a real prior to hearing from you. I was hoping you'd be open to a bit of council listening to live debate from the floor of the Minnesota House of Representatives on representative. Ray campus bill that would cut off public funds for most abortions performed in Minnesota in the senate pass the Bill last night and the house voted about 2 hours ago now to suspend the rules, which would have required the bill to live over for a couple of days. Order to suspend the rules and pick it up this afternoon. The debate has been going on for about 2 hours. Now. We've had a number of amendments that were offered all of them designed that to loosening some of the restrictions on the billboard defeated as have been several designed to tighten the restrictions. They provisions on tightening. The restrictions are tactics by those opposed to the camp evil trying to make it unacceptable to the Senate and therefore requiring a conference committee and possibility of not having an abortion bill at all this session. Every member of this house, we still arguing here about the point of order raised on the Carlisle and the Clawson Amendment. Go to the germaneness of this amendment and I got a lecture on the morality of this body or the issue before us well. Mr. Claus when the point is well-taken, will you confine your remarks to any advice to the chair relative to the point of order? I'm doing that. It's just called laying the foundation. very broad Foundation Mister flask well I am I am not chastising the body for its morality that has not been my position here. I've left that to some others except to say that that we are in fact saying that the wealth will not fund abortions for about 2500 2500 rather miserable welfare mothers in this state, but we will continue to fund abortion services for 201 members of the legislature if we were all women and for several tens of thousands of state employees. Mr. Spanish declares that we should not allow her to public dollars to this motion not again to a general electron this broad subject that is correct to the point of order. on the question of whether or not to 144 Okay, I subscribe to what Mr. Spanish said I eat we should not allow the use of public dollars for abortion money should be used for important purposes tax dollars Finance Minister class, and you're not being responsive to the point of order that has been raised about the tremendous of the amendment. Public tax dollars go directly to hospitals to finance the operation in all its operations putting the operation of abortion. I think the amendment is clearly Jermaine Amendment appears to be similar to the Williamson Amendment and it is real. Not your me. God is moving to a Manson file 2236 is files page 3 line 14. Delete 25 6B and insert. scon or we get to the amendment that my I introduced to former members. the house or with us or both currently judges in Wright County Glen Swenson and the most recent member Harold all Martin Siegel has a gun taking over the speakers check. I will hear the amendment by representative Conte. The way that I believe is Jermaine is Jermaine to the bill. What is specifically does this specific is immense out the specific reference to Medical to medical assistance and replaces chapter 10 with 2256 256b speaker. Point of order. Mr. Speaker have it again request the chair read the amendment related to the chapter here with mrs. Khan is doing is it is a subtle way of accomplishing Clawson and represented Williamson could not do and that is to Simply strike the chapter number here and substitute another one. It's the speaker. Mr. Speaker. Actually, my my form of the amendment would put the bill for the back into the into the position that it was as representative Kempy introduced it. It is certainly the Restriction when you have a very long you have a a bill which starts out with a policy statement and then I can hardly hear anyone who speak speaker as I read through the policy statement you then have a whole definition of when abortion is medically necessary and you then have a state statement which then talks about the prohibition of subsets of of subsidies for abortions. I believe that this is Jermaine the way it's written does not interject a new. Well mister speaker. I would argue. I was trying to read. the debates on on points of order continue what to representative Khan and before her representative Clawson and before him representative Williamson were trying to do was restrict the use of State money to pay for health insurance policies of state employees baker's table is reading the language and now asking for advice from this Carlson. Call mrs. Khan. Breaking a chapter number that's now in the Kempy Bill and substitute another chapter in this case night number 10, and thereby accomplish the same purposes that the that the chair has ruled out of order into prior. Remember I should say three prior amendments. My name choir is a how this amendment is different from those others was Carlson. Number to speaker. I guess I would contend it's not mrs. Khan in their opening Arguments for the amendment acknowledged that she could now accomplish what mr. Williamson and mr. Clawson could not do I put in this amendment on and I would contend that she's an error what she's doing is striking a chapter number instead of stand striking and put in place in and another chapter number in its place. And if the speaker where do I pull that ruling it would mean that in a timing belt is before speaking simply a minute any wandering past you that we want to buy striking numbers. Turn speaker as a matter fact. I can just take out the references to 10. So just delete the 25 60 and just take out the 10 everywhere it appears. Find me so I would just like to just remove any of the references to chapter 10 or not necessary. I would have been the amended by deleting the references to chapter 10. So just delete 256b. Everywhere it appears. So on my amendment, I would just remove any references to chapter 10. So just delete the first line with MB. Delete 256b. The next one would be delete 256b .40 and then we move the insertion. The next line would say delete medical assistance. The next line would would stay the same stay the same and the the speaker mister mister speaker Mr. Speaker. I think I can give you leave I can leave line 3 and I can leave. Set appointment formation in a point of order. No, but somebody can modify the amendment they're offering But I think it's quite clear that the basic thrust of the kind of amendment is basically the same as I read them the same as to Williamson, not necessarily the same as a cross and Amendment, which is I read it. What appeared to be substantially different the point of orders well-taken amendments? Not your main? Swinney offers the following Amendment clerk reports the amendment when er is moving to amend Senate file 2236 is follow page for line 7 Delete 40000 + insert 500,000. I miss you. I wish to move the amendment is simply to increase the appropriation to the Department of Welfare for Income Maintenance by the amount of $500,000, which is the amount which was in the house bill which passed out of the Appropriations Committee the Senate Bill provides for an appropriations of only $40,000. I think we are kid ourselves. If we think that the effect of encouraging a policy and giving preference to childbirth over on abortion is a cheap one and I guess I've never really thought that this is an issue that we should be debating on the grill. Which is the cheapest way to go and I'm quite willing to pay for the cost of a policy that does encourage childbirth. I think that you know, if we really serious about this bill if we really believe in in and care about infants and young children, we do want to make sure that they have the kind of Necessities that will enable them to grow and develop and live happy lives. And so Mister Tim and I would ask the support of the members for this amendment. This amendment has she said increases the appropriation of the welfare department to essentially take care of the cost of raising the children who will not be born instead of the abortion said that would occur and they'll be roll call on it. I question whether you've ever discussed it. Because in my talking to a commissioner Dierks Walker and his Deputy stated that no appropriation was needed they felt they had sufficient funds the Handler. and I don't believe that that's necessary and I think you're a champ representative when you're really Is misplaced so I asked the members to vote. No one. Mystery speaker on this bill was heard by the House Appropriations Committee and that committee decided that an appropriation of $500,000 was necessary to fulfill the purposes of this bill. And I I guess I really am just amazed that that represented can be can can be opposed to this. I mean, I think that if you really mean what you say, then you are prepared to pay for it. Now if the money is not needed it doesn't have to be spent but but to say that you don't even want the money to be there I think is is is a very cruel position to support. Stampy the speaker remembers the money is not needed. I heard you defeat this both the commissioner and Deputy Commissioner of indicated that Hey, bro, I'm a Madman. Now I'm a vape may be very mistaken, but I don't think I see any more amendments down there could be wrong about that. This one goes down by a wide margin. Being a 29 ISO 93 days amendments NADA. Stanton offers the following prefixes follows page one after line 10 at a section. Miss Baker As Russ Taman request 1015 hansborough, members of the Hollis what this amendment would do would be to prevent a minor from having an abortion without prior consent of a parent or Guardian, you know a few days ago. We had a very long lengthy emotional debate on this floor concerning the Family Planning built and there's a lot of issues brought up that parents. Do you have a right to know if their children are receiving Family Planning services this house and its wisdom Because I'm afraid I don't have them and I guess I wanted to see my speaker and should be. Beige one after lying 10 at a section to read Section 1 Minnesota statutes 1976 chapter 145 is a mended by adding a section to read consent subdivision. Y8 position should not perform an abortion for a minor female was not previously requested of the chair or ruling that this amendment is not your main to the bill this before us it refers to a chapter substantially different than the chapters of the currently before us. Krispy Kreme birthday Shogun representative Carlson raises point of order representative Russ Stanton to Marshall is disagreeing. abortion General subject abortion Side Road Punta Gorda as well taking amendments. Not your mate. Russia Pharisee Speaker. I'd like to make an amendment. Speaker. I'd like page 2. line 21 strike the word to insert the word a lion 22 for the word Physicians are found strike the S. So I would read Physician movie Amendment this amendment by representing the Great Fairy Rescue st. Paul would require one doctor sign a statement that to a pregnancy was life threatening not to if she's argument make to attest to that it I know the house took this position of having this language in it. I was accepted by the author in the committee, you know, you're dealing with something pretty vinyl to somebody right here. It's their life. And that's why I'm offering the amendment. Berlin discussion scampi speaker I'm going to do a post. I think really I didn't have any. Serious question at the time before but I think the thing is now we have a Senate bill before it's we're near the end of the session. I think it's important. This bill was introduced back in the fall of 77. I really feel that under present medical procedure. You have both a treating a Consulting doctor. I don't believe that this works any Injustice in regard or not. Ask Mr. speaker for roll call Pharisee that's a speaker. Let's see here. We just want to ask question if somebody let the Kayla's from. Mister Who was the Kayla's or somebody else. They're from out State, Minnesota in my community. Depends what you call my community. Mr. Speaker represented Royal Hometown Hometown Hometown. I have none in the discussion of the amendment. And the numbers are not voting on amendment by representative Pharisee to require just one doctor who signed statement that the agency would not to position statements. The amendment will be weather report the amendment Stanton is moving to MN Senate file. 2236 is files page two line 27 after the. Insert a patient who has a mine shall obtain the written consent of a parent or Guardian prior to the abortion Miss speaker. There's a sex wrong lines. 127 it's paid 3 line 7 to remember to consider that was ruled not your man little while ago. After the. Insert a patient with a minor shall obtain the written consent of her parent or Guardian prior to the abortion stand make a members of the holiday as I say and last week we had the Family Planning deal before this this body and we had heard a lot of a very emotional debate about the right of the parents to know whether or not their children are receiving Family Planning services this house in their wisdom decided that parents should have the right to know what the what the what kind of services their children receiving. It should have the right to approve of that part of the parents. Right? Well certainly abortion is a much more serious matter than Family Planning is my birth control services are and certainly a parent should have some control or something right to whether or not there. Their minor daughter is going to have an abortion because of a minor can be very easily talked into are coerced into doing something that they might later regret. So what this will do with will be give the parents of minor daughters the right to have prior consent before an abortion is performed. It only affects abortions that would be affected by this act. So it's directly related to the sack. camping Mr. Speaker with representative Stanton deal for question. How did you vote on that precise issue in the Family Planning issue was before you Mr. Chairman, I voted for Family Planning. I felt that that was a lie. Particular moment right now, mr. Speaker mister. Stanton I submit members of the body. First of all, I can ask for a different situation completely nice to meet you. Look if you have the time to see how some of these people are offering amendments are now voting in regard to the bill. Can I submit your not being sincere when you try to do this and asked you to defeat this amendment this speaker, I really find this surprising I don't think there's been one single pro-life bill it is gone through this legislature that I haven't voted for and for Mr. Can't be too then describe other motives to me I think is clearly out of line. stressed out speaker represent burgundy or the question We're going to the family planning Bill the other day, didn't you say the Supreme Court of United States ruled that a teenager could have an abortion without their parents consent Berglund. the courts have ruled that my understanding of this amendment is that it would apply only to those abortions funded by the state. I don't know whether that's constitutional or not. Mercy Well the person that carried the parental consent bill or quasi parental consent bill. I can offer you some advice on the thing. First of all in the St. Louis case the Supreme Court the Danforth cases Supreme Court has said that the parents did not have an absolute right of veto. So I think that the amendment is being proposed right now would be deemed absolutely unconstitutional second of all, there is in the bilotti case coming out of Massachusetts. There was some language that has been to the Supreme Court has gone back is back in federal court, which did provide that parents could be consulted or you could go if you had an option there where it's either the parent or additional officer the court that won the Supreme Court looked at and did not strike down. There's apparently still some questions going on about that possibility. But the one with absolute veto has been struck down in Danforth. That's the status of the wall right now. There's a question Mister Pharisee those Supreme Court decisions. Did they not deal with the parents right to Prior consent in all abortions? Pharisee going back to my days of logic. I guess all would be including welfare and others. So I guess between allowing abortion and Public Funding of abortion. They make very clear distinctions between that wouldn't that be relevant will go through speaker. Mr. Stand. I think the issue of the Public Funding has been addressed by that court and they say that that is not a matter of right they however have said that the decision as to whether or young woman wishes to have an abortion cannot be interfered with as an absolute right on the part of the parent and that's what you remembered is doing mrs. Speaker. We've had a number of abortion pills before this this house in the last few years and one of the things you know, there's always been constitutional questions raised and I remember a couple years ago. We had constitutional questions raised about the the number of weeks that a pregnancy could go on before Abortion could be reformed into his real serious constitutional questions and what people said at that time was while we're not the courts. Let's pass what we think is right and let the courts decide Justin response in those cases. The Supreme Court hadn't decided some of the issues that we were presenting in our legislation and there was a sort of up for grabs situation here. They have just no question about it. Representative faricy st. Paul is an attorney by profession. That nail. Question niehaus, mr. Speaker. Mr. Stanton under the present language in this bill. Just where would your Amendment come into play? Remember to the speaker Mister niehaus the amendment would be inserted on page 3 line 7. Is messersmith Speaker? Mr. T. I'll take that they simply wouldn't give the funds unless they had to consent wouldn't give the funds unless they had to consent. Mr. Speaker. There are three cases in your Oneness is the life of a mother at stake their it certainly wouldn't come into play rape. You have to notify within 4448 hours. They wouldn't come into play there. The other one is incest in that is within the family. So where does your Amendment come into play? That's a question. I've got a reply to all cases. Speaker with mr. Stamp, you'll please tell if you hauled the case of a young girl residing with her father is her only living parent. Could you remain mum to conceivably require in a certain case that in order to receive an abortion? The young girl would have to receive the permission of the father who raped her. Message Speaker mystery while the court would probably appoint a guardian in that case. Representative Ewald is from Minnetonka representative Stanton the point of order by making making apply only to cases where State funding of abortion was allowed. Turn on boats. No, it's not a means at last there are no more amendments. No more amendments can be off at this point and no more discussion. We are at the end. This is the vote on the bill. final vote on the bill how fast did the senate pass the last night? And Stalin right? So just like to ask for your speaker to call for the absentees if there are they Oh, they're mostly here. These role calls have been taking haven't taken quite a while in some cases. The house is under call which means that the the representatives have to vote under the house rules. and them the delay occurs because there are a number of conference committees meeting and the pages have to be sent out to bring the country's back and sometimes they are in other parts of the building couple of floors down and it takes a little bit of time for this physical voting process to occur. It does appear that everyone has now voted in speaker Sable will announce the results. Being a hundred and seven eyes and 27 days a bill has passed title, Greenfield. And that's it for the abortion funding bill. Minnesota house is just passed the bill by a vote of 107 to 27. And the bill is exactly the same as the one passed last night by the Senate. So I will now go to governor perpich for Signature the bill contains. First of all, a policy statement stating that between normal childbirth and abortion. The state refers normal childbirth should be given preference encouragement and support by law and by state action the legislation forbids the use of public money to pay for the abortions of poor people with just a couple of very restrictive exceptions. First. If the abortion is a medical necessity that is if two doctors certify that the abortion is necessary to prevent the death of the mother. And if the patient gives her consent in writing. That the that the procedure be performed that is one exception. The other exception is in the case of forcible rape criminal sexual conduct. And if the rape is reported to law enforcement authorities within two days, there is an exception in the case of incest if the incident and the relative are reported to the law enforcement agency prior to the abortion. and those are the only exceptions for welfare funding of abortion The state is less clearly on record that leave policy that the state welfare department is now carrying out will remain policy. The governor will be lobbied perhaps some extent to a veto the bill. He has not to veto legislation so far at least not a major legislation that I can recall and he is consistent with that policy. He will be signing this bill as well. Our live coverage of this event was made possible in part of the financial assistance of the Minneapolis Tribune technical director for the broadcast was Richard Nelson. This is Bob Potter reporting and your tune to Minnesota Public Radio a listener supported service.