Sponsor Statement for HB 234

Relating to assistance for abortions under the general relief program; and relating to financial responsibility for the costs of abortions

House Bill 234 provides a new measure of logic and consistency to the state's abortion law in two areas -- first, in establishing the procedure's priority on the official list of medical procedures the state will pay for under the general relief medical program; and second, by creating a mechanism by which the state can identify and hold financially responsible the would-be father.

The Governor has complained that the Legislature has not appropriated adequate funding in the general relief medical program to provide for the lowest priority items on the list. These include such necessities as eyeglasses and emergency dental care for the poor and elderly. Obviously, the Legislature agrees that these items should continue to be on the priority list. However, it is not logical that an elective procedure, such as abortion, should continue to hold a higher priority. HB 234 would eliminate the priority status that abortions have enjoyed at the expense of other, more essential demands.

HB 234 also allows the state to require payment from the pregnant woman, either partially or in full, for an elective abortion it has paid for under the general relief medical program.

And consistent with other provisions of state law, HB 234 would require that the male responsible for the pregnancy be identified and held financially responsible for an abortion sought under the general relief medical program. Currently, under Title 47, the state requires a woman seeking financial assistance from the state to identify the father of her dependent children. The state then recovers any costs it can from the father through the Child Support Enforcement Division. It is logical that if a father of a born child should be made to reimburse the state for state-funded services, so should the father of an unborn one that is aborted.

House Bill 234 represents a new benchmark in requiring accountable parties to accept the full responsibility for their actions. For too long, women have been able to obtain free abortions, courtesy of the state and at the expense of others who have medical needs that go unmet. At the same time, their male partners have had little more burden than to drive the woman to the abortion clinic, if that; often they simply abandon the woman.

If we are to continue to have a policy in Alaska of publicly-funded abortion, the state should do all it can to collect from the responsible persons.