Craig Robinson raises some great questions about the personhood bill that State Representative Kim Pearson (R-Pleasant Hill) sponsored (HF 153), and it was something I wondered (but didn’t blog) about when the late-term abortion ban passed in the Iowa House. He wrote:
In another head spinning move by The FAMiLY Leader, despite the fact that House File 153, Pearson’s personhood bill, failed to make it through the first funnel on March 4th, The FAMiLY Leader sent out the following statement that day:
“More great news! We have been informed by Representative Kim Pearson and others that HF 153, the “life at conception bill,” will move forward next week in a new form. Many pro-life Republicans in the Iowa House, led by Reps. Pearson, Massie, Shaw, and Speaker Kraig Paulsen, are committed to protecting life from conception. We applaud them for their efforts, we will keep working with them to find ways to jump legislative hurdles, and we ask that you pray for their and our success in advancing this important issue.”
Was this “new form” they talked about Massie’s amendment? Did House Leadership back out on a deal? Or did The FAMiLY Leader misinform its members?
I was under the impression that it was going to survive as a separate bill. I didn’t expect them to take the language and try to attach it as an amendment onto another bill. That isn’t a “new form.” It is a legislative tactic. A tactic that unfortunately sunk another good piece of legislation. It would be great to get an explanation of why we were told it survived when can clearly see that it really didn’t.
Update: I need to apologize for this post. The way I approached this was out-of-line, and I should have approached the parties involved to find out what happened before even thinking about writing this. Anyway, you can read my full apology here.
