HB1684 (2016) Detail

Prohibiting the use of public funds, employees, and facilities in assisting or performing abortions.


\t \t\t \t\t \t\t \t \t \t\t

HB 1684-FN - AS INTRODUCED

 

2016 SESSION

\t16-2536

\t09/01

 

HOUSE BILL\t1684-FN

 

AN ACT\tprohibiting the use of public funds, employees, and facilities in assisting or performing abortions.

 

SPONSORS:\tRep. Hoell, Merr. 23; Rep. Itse, Rock. 10; Rep. Ingbretson, Graf. 15; Rep. Abramson, Rock. 20; Rep. Hull, Graf. 9; Rep. Seidel, Hills. 28; Rep. Moore, Hills. 21

 

COMMITTEE:\tJudiciary

 

-----------------------------------------------------------------

 

ANALYSIS

 

\t This bill prohibits the use of public funds, public employees and public facilities for the purpose of performing or assisting in an abortion which is not necessary to save the life of the mother.

 

\tThe bill also prohibits such funds, employees and facilities to be used to encourage or counsel a woman to have an abortion not necessary to save her life.

 

\tThe bill further requires a second opinion from a licensed physician before any abortion is performed when a mother’s life is deemed to be in danger.

 

\tThe bill includes penalty provisions for violations of this law.

 

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

 

Explanation:\tMatter added to current law appears in bold italics.

\t\tMatter removed from current law appears [in brackets and struckthrough.]

\t\tMatter which is either (a) all new or (b) repealed and reenacted appears in regular type.

\t16-2536

\t09/01

 

STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

 

In the Year of Our Lord Two Thousand Sixteen

 

AN ACT\tprohibiting the use of public funds, employees, and facilities in assisting or performing abortions.

 

Be it Enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives in General Court convened:

 

\t1  New Subdivision; Public Funding of Abortions Limited.  Amend RSA 132 by inserting after section 40 the following new subdivision:

Public Funding of Abortions Limited

\t132:41  Definitions.  In this subdivision:

\t\tI.  “Public employee” means any person employed by this state or any of its agencies or political subdivisions.

\t\tII.  “Public facility” means any public institution, public facility, public equipment, or any physical asset owned, leased, or controlled by this state or any of its agencies or political subdivisions.

\t\tIII.  “Public funds” means any funds received or controlled by this state or any of its agencies or political subdivisions, including, but not limited to, funds derived from federal, state, or local taxes, gifts or grants from any source, public or private, federal grants or payments, or intergovernmental transfers.

\t132:42  Use of Public Funds Prohibited.  It shall be unlawful for any public funds to be expended for the purpose of performing or assisting an abortion not necessary to save the life of the mother, or for the purpose of encouraging or counseling a woman to have an abortion not necessary to save her life.

\t132:43  Public Employees; Certain Activities Prohibited.  It shall be unlawful for any public employee within the scope of his or her employment to perform or assist an abortion not necessary to save the life of the mother.  It shall be unlawful for a doctor, nurse, or other health care personnel, a social worker, a counselor, or a person of similar occupation who is a public employee within the scope of his or her public employment to encourage or counsel a woman to have an abortion not necessary to save her life.

\t132:44  Use of Public Facilities Prohibited.  It shall be unlawful for any public facility to be used for the purpose of performing or assisting in an abortion not necessary to save the life of the mother or for the purpose of encouraging or counseling a woman to have an abortion not necessary to save her life.

\t132:45  Second Opinion Required.  In addition to the requirements of RSA 132:42-44, any decision that an abortion is necessary to save the mother’s life shall require a second opinion from a licensed physician before the abortion is performed.

\t132:46  Penalty.  Any person who performs an abortion or counsels a woman to have an abortion in violation of this subdivision shall be guilty of a misdemeanor if a natural person, or guilty of a felony if any other person.  In addition, any physician or other person qualified to perform an abortion shall have his or her license suspended by the board of medicine for 90 days for the first offense and revoked for any subsequent offense.

\t132:47  Taxpayer Standing to Bring Suit.  Any taxpayer of this state or its political subdivisions shall have standing to bring suit in a superior court in the county in which the alleged violation occurred to enforce the provisions of this subdivision.

\t2  Effective Date.  This act shall take effect January 1, 2017.

 

\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\tLBAO

\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t16-2536

\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t12/23/15

 

HB 1684-FN- FISCAL NOTE

 

AN ACT\tprohibiting the use of public funds, employees, and facilities in assisting or performing abortions.

 

 

FISCAL IMPACT:

The Department of Health and Human Services states this bill, as introduced, will decrease state revenue and expenditures by $370,000 in FY 2017, and by $740,000 in each year thereafter.  Office of Professional Licensing and Certification, Office of Legislative Budget Assistant and  Department of Justice state this bill may increase state and county expenditures by an indeterminable amount in FY 2017 and each year thereafter.  There will be no impact on county and local revenue or local expenditures.

 

METHODOLOGY:

The Department of Health and Human Services states this bill prohibits the use of public funds, public employees, and public facilities for the purpose of performing or assisting in an abortion which is not necessary to save the life of the mother. The Department notes federal law prohibits funds to pay for abortions unless the pregnancy would endanger the life of the woman.  For this reason, the Department assumes the bill would create a higher standard and therefore conflict with federal Medicaid law.  The Department notes currently, federal and state general funds are used to fund family planning centers in New Hampshire, although they are not used for terminations of pregnancy.  The centers are required, pursuant to their federal Title X grant funding, to counsel patients about options, including abortion.  The bill would prohibit the use of public funds for such purposes, resulting in reduced revenue and expenditures of $370,000 in FY 2017 and $740,000 each year after if the state is prohibited from contracting with these family planning centers.

 

The Office of Professional Licensure and Certification states this bill requires it to impose a 90-day suspension of a physician's license to perform an abortion unless it is medically necessary to save the woman's life.  The Board would be required to impose the same sanction against any licensee who encourages or counsels a woman to have an abortion that is not necessary to save her life.  The Office states pursuant to the Board's statute and the constitutionally-protected property interest that a licensee has in his or her license, the Board must hold a hearing before it can take action against a licensee.  Due to the severity of the required sanction, the Office assumes any licensee will proceed with a hearing rather than enter into a negotiated settlement.  The Office also assumes any hearing that hinges on "medical necessity" will require lengthy testimony by expert witnesses.  Such hearings may require multiple days to adjudicate.  Finally, the office assumes the Board may need to retain its own expert to review and testify in such a case.  The Board is also required to pay the Department of Justice for prosecutorial representation in adjudicatory proceedings.  Although the Board is unable to determine the number of hearings that will be held, it notes that the known per hearing costs (in addition to the unknown costs described above) are $1,288 per hearing ($1,000 per diem cost plus $288 mileage cost).   

 

The Office of Legislative Budget Assistant states this bill contains penalties that may have an impact on the New Hampshire judicial and correctional systems.  The bill provides for an unspecified misdemeanor, which can be either class A or class B, with the presumption being a class B misdemeanor.  In addition, the bill provides for a felony if the crime is committed by an entity other than a natural person.  There is no method to determine how many charges would be brought as a result of the changes contained in this bill to determine the fiscal impact on expenditures.  However, the Judicial Branch, Department of Corrections and New Hampshire Association of Counties have provided the Office with potential costs associated with the penalties contained in this bill.  See table below for average cost information:

 

\t\t\t \t\t\t\t \t\t\t \t\t\t\t \t\t\t \t\t\t\t \t\t\t \t\t\t\t \t\t\t \t\t\t\t \t\t\t \t\t\t\t \t\t\t \t\t\t\t \t\t\t \t\t\t\t \t\t\t \t\t\t\t \t\t\t \t\t\t\t \t\t\t \t\t\t\t \t\t\t \t\t\t\t \t\t\t \t\t\t\t \t\t\t \t\t\t\t \t\t\t \t\t\t\t \t\t

 

FY 2017

FY 2018

Judicial Branch

 

 

Class B Misdemeanor

$50

$53

Class A Misdemeanor

$70

$74

Routine Criminal Felony Case

$449

$470

Complex Equity Case-  Enforcement Action

$717

$740

Appeals

Varies

Varies

Administrative Appeals

Varies

Varies

It should be noted average case cost estimates for FY 2017 and FY 2018 are based on data that is more than ten years old and does not reflect changes to the courts over that same period of time or the impact these changes may have on processing the various case types.

Department of Corrections

 

 

FY 2015 Average Cost of Incarcerating an Individual

$34,336

$34,336

FY 2015 Average Cost of Supervising an Individual on Parole/Probation

$520

$520

NH Association of Counties

 

 

County Prosecution Costs

Indeterminable

Indeterminable

Estimated Average Daily Cost of Incarcerating an Individual

$85 to $110

$85 to $110

\t\t

 

The Department of Justice states the Public Integrity Unit investigates and prosecutes crimes committed by public officials in their official capacity, which may include this type of offense.  The Department cannot estimate the number of investigations and/or prosecutions that may result from passage of this bill.  The bill would afford a taxpayer standing to bring suit for a violation of the statute.  The Department states if a lawsuit was brought against the state, the Department would provide the defense.  The Department has no way to estimate if or how many cases may be generated.  The Department's Administrative Prosecutions Unit investigates and prosecutes complaints filed before the nursing and medical boards, upon request by a board.  The Unit is funded by the licensing boards and the Department expects any additional complaints could be handled within the current budget.

 

The Judicial Council states this bill will have no fiscal impact since individuals charged would not require the assistance of appointed counsel.  The Council assumes because the bill would regulate the conduct of a medical doctor acting within the scope of his or her professional responsibilities, a doctor charged with an offense under this legislation would be defended or indemnified by the medical provider's insurance.  The Council also assumes a public employee charged with an offense under the bill would be defended or indemnified by the State.