Why herd women’s rights issue to Ag Committee?

• Reprints

Updated: August 6, 2011 12:20AM

I honestly thought it might be an April Fool’s joke gone wrong when I first heard that a bill in the Illinois House (HB3156) concerning abortion providers had been sent to the Agriculture and Conservation Committee. Jokes comparing women to livestock are probably universal, but given the way women have been treated historically — and continue to be treated in some parts of the world — such jokes are now considered to be in very poor taste.

State Rep. Darlene Senger, R-Naperville, recently authored a bill concerning the regulation of abortion clinics. It then somehow landed in the hands of the Agriculture and Conservation Committee. Yes, that’s the committee that normally deals with grazing and water rights, livestock and hunting. So I phoned her office to ask why.

She had a very busy day and by mid-afternoon had no choice but to call me from the House floor in order to get back to me by my deadline. Though it was difficult to hear her above the loud voices from the floor, she clearly told me that Speaker Mike Madigan’s office decides which committees get which bills.

So I phoned Madigan’s office and asked why this bill had gone to the Agriculture and Conservation Committee when that just doesn’t make sense. I was told, “the practice is when the author of a bill makes a request for a specific committee, that is where the bill goes.” I asked whether Senger had made such a request and the above quote was simply repeated to me. So it seemed no one wanted to take credit for the not-so-funny joke where a bill about women goes to the Agriculture Committee.

I asked Senger what prompted this bill, since there has been a system in place for 20 years to regulate abortion facilities, created by the Illinois Department of Public Health and approved by the courts and the Illinois Joint Committee on Administration and Regulations. She said there was a lawsuit in 1990 having to do with abortion at an ambulatory clinic. She said clinics have changed since 1990, and the older ones need to be brought up to code. “It’s like if you go to get a tooth pulled, you don’t go to a regular dental office. You need a place where they have special equipment.”

Some things don’t add up. Republicans are not usually proponents of increased governmental regulations. Bernard Turnock, former director of the IDPH, wrote in a letter to the Chicago Tribune on Monday, “I oversaw the creation of a rigorous and extensive set of regulations tailored to ensure women’s health and safety at abortion clinics ... I am not aware of problems in the current regulatory system that would warrant the changes proposed by HB3156.”

What does add up is that the usual pro-abortion and anti-abortion groups are lining up to defend or demonize the bill, leading me to believe this is probably more about political maneuvering than about safety, health or adequate regulations. Detractors say it is about trying to impose costly and unnecessary regulations on abortion clinics in an effort to close them. Ninety-two percent of Illinois’ counties have no abortion providers. HB3156 would potentially reduce that number further, making it more difficult for women who lack the means to pay for good medical care and/or travel great distances to see a reputable doctor. Senger noted, however, that Aurora’s Planned Parenthood is definitely up to code and it would not affect them and the bill’s impact would be minimal in this area. I truly hope her concern for women’s health issues is as genuine as it sounded on the phone.

I understand wanting to make abortions a thing of the past — I’d like that, too. Abortion is not a great idea. Illegal, unregulated abortions are a worse idea. What worries me is that some people believe all abortions are elective procedures that selfish, irresponsible women use as birth control. While this undoubtedly happens sometimes — the same way guns or drugs are abused by a minority of people who have access to them — most abortions are the result of heart-wrenching decisions that women and their doctors must make as a result of rape, incest or medical issues that threaten the mother’s health. For me it comes down to one basic question: Do we trust women to make decisions about their own bodies, or do we really see them as livestock after all, incapable of making difficult choices for themselves? On April Fool’s Day we must ask ourselves, is this bill’s routing through the Agriculture Committee just a bad joke or should we be seriously worried that our politicians think bills concerning women’s health issues should be reviewed by the committee that normally handles legislation about cows and sheep?

Deena Sherman can be reached at deenasherman@att.net.