Roanoke Times
Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: TUESDAY, March 3, 1992 TAG: 9203030372
SECTION: VIRGINIA PAGE: B1 EDITION: METRO
SOURCE: BONNIE V. WINSTON STAFF WRITER
DATELINE: RICHMOND LENGTH: Medium
The final vote could come as early as today. The bill emerged unexpectedly from the Senate Courts of Justice Committee on Sunday night and on Monday survived an attempt to refer it to another committee, where it's demise would have been assured.
Several lawmakers and abortion rights opponents said the 23-16 vote against referring the bill to the Finance Committee suggested it would pass.
"We hope we can keep the coalition together," said Sen. Mark Earley, R-Chesapeake. "It's no question that the vote we saw today will have some bearing on what we see [today]."
Earley engineered Sunday's approval of the bill by the Senate Courts of Justice Committee. The parental notice provision was attached to a separate bill sponsored by Del. Robert McDonnell, R-Virginia Beach. Committee Chairman Edward Holland, D-Arlington, tried to rule the amendment out of order but was overruled by the committee, which then endorsed the measure, 8-7.
Earley and McDonnell denied suggestions Monday that McDonnell's original bill was solely to serve as a last-minute vehicle to which parental notice could be attached.
Sen. Janet Howell, D-Fairfax, said early estimates show that abortions would be reduced by 25 percent to 35 percent as a result of parental notice. As a result, she said, many of the new parents would swell the state's welfare costs by $3.9 million to $5 million annually.
Abortion rights opponents were heartened by the Senate action; this is the first time since 1987 that a parental notice or consent bill has reached the full Senate for debate, said Beth York of the Virginia Society of Human Life. Past measures have passed the House but been killed in Senate committees.
If passed by the Senate, the bill would return to the House, where approval is expected to come easily.
YEA OR NAY ON PARENTAL NOTIFICATION IN FAVOR: Sens. Madison Marye, D-Shawsville; Frank Nolen, D-New Hope; Jackson Reasor, D-Bluefield; Elliot Schewel, D-Lynchburg. OPPOSED: Sens. Brandon Bell, R-Roanoke; Virgil Goode, D-Rocky Mount; Malfourd "Bo" Trumbo, R-Fincastle; William Wampler, R-Bristol. ***CORRECTION***
Published correction ran on March 4, 1992\ Clarification
The "yea or nay" box published Tuesday with a story on a bill to require parental notification before minors could have abortions reported legislators' votes on whether they wanted to refer the bill to the Senate Finance Committee - a move that likely would have assured its demise for this session. Those legislators opposed to parental notice voted yes; those who support parental notice voted no. Here is how Southwest Virginia legislators voted:
\ IN FAVOR (of sending the bill to committee): Sens. Madison Marye, D-Shawsville; Frank Nolen, D-New Hope; Jackson Reasor, D-Bluefield; Elliot Schewel, D-Lynchburg.
\ OPPOSED (to sending the bill to committee): Sens. Brandon Bell, R-Roanoke; Virgil Goode, D-Rocky Mount; Malfourd "Bo" Trumbo, R-Fincastle; William Wampler, R-Bristol.
Keywords:
GENERAL ASSEMBLY
Memo: Correction