Vote no on Amendment 79
Vote no on Amendment 79
In Colorado abortion until birth is already legal. Vote no on an extreme law to force taxpayers to pay for abortion for any reason and at any gestational age.
Most Colorado voters are not aware that abortion until birth is legal in Colorado, 71% according to a recent poll. In other words, a healthy baby who can feel pain can be aborted in the second or third trimester of gestation. In fact, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention report that hundreds of abortions are performed after 21 weeks gestation every year, often on healthy moms with healthy babies.
In our state, abortionists face only two restrictions; they must notify the parents or guardians of minors seeking an abortion and they cannot bill taxpayers for elective abortions. Both of these commonsense laws will be eliminated if Amendment 79 passes and a “right” to abortion is added to the state constitution and the prohibition on public funding for abortion is lifted.
Parents, in particular, should be concerned. As with any medical procedure, abortion entails some risk to the mother. After an abortion, women can experience bleeding, pain, inflection, anesthesia complications, hemorrhage, sepsis, uterine perforation, and other problems. While the overall risk of developing complications from abortion is 2%, the risk increases as the baby grows.
Ten percent of second-trimester abortions cause health complications. The rate of life-threatening complications is 1.7%. Although the death of the mother from abortion is rare, an average of five women died from the procedure every year between 2020 and 2010. And abortion clinics are not regulated in Colorado the same way as other institutions that perform surgeries — even though they do — placing mothers at additional risk.
If a 15-year-old girl experiences a medical emergency post-abortion, she needs an adult to get her to a hospital.
Parental notification is important for other reasons. I have known several teens whose parents helped them when they faced an unexpected pregnancy. Some of these young women raised their infants at home, others made an adoption plan, and a couple chose abortion. In each case, their parents knew what was going on and were involved.
I have also known young women who were trafficked or sexually abused. In one case, a pregnancy is what alerted parents to intervene and get help. When parents are not notified, traffickers and molesters can hide the abuse by eliminating the evidence, an inconvenient baby. A majority of states have parent notification laws for these reasons. Such laws protect teens from untreated health complications and from continued sexual abuse.
Amendment 79 would likely lead to the attempted repeal of parental notification laws as it is considered an impediment to abortion access and could violate a person’s rights under the amendment.
Amendment 79 also removes taxpayer protections. Through Medicaid, taxpayers only pay for abortions if the life of the mother is in jeopardy or if the baby was conceived through rape or incest.
Senate Bill 23-189, which is now law, also requires private insurance providers to cover abortion; this is why proponents of 79 argue that the elimination of Sec. 50 of Article V of the state constitution is necessary to provide for abortion coverage for public employees.
Proponents of 79 could have made a constitutional amendment to Sec. 50 of Art. V, but removing it entirely means the state legislature can now pass a direct taxpayer funding stream for elective abortion procedures and travel for any reason and at any gestational age.
There is no fiscal note on the amendment, however, meaning that funding for abortion will come from other health priorities including prenatal care, emergency services, and preventative care for lower-income Coloradans.
Colorado already has one of the most permissive abortion laws in the country. This amendment would not only remove protections for teens and taxpayers, it would cement the status quo into the Constitution.
What if future medical technology made it possible for a woman to end a pregnancy without ending the life of her unborn baby? A case report published in the journal Pediatrics by Doctors Ahmed and Frey show premature babies born at 22 weeks’ gestation are surviving with neonatal medical advancements not available even a decade ago. Scientists are working on creating an artificial womb. Human trials are close at hand.
Why would we want something extreme in our Constitution that prevents us from following the science – and also removes commonsense safeguards to abortion, such as parental notification and direct taxpayer funding?