Joseph Zambon
The first of his proposed bills to limit women’s reproductive rights is AO3307, “An act to amend the public health law, in relation to establishing the requirement of testing for a fetal heartbeat prior to the performance of an abortion…” is sponsored by DiPietro without other sponsors or co-sponsors, suggesting this bill is too extreme even for his republican colleagues.
Introduced a Fetal Heartbeat Bill to the NYS Assembly
AO3307 requires that (editorial comments in [ ]):
- “Any person who intends to perform or induce an abortion on a pregnant woman shall determine whether there is a detectable fetal heartbeat…”
- “No person shall knowingly and purposefully perform or induce an abortion on a pregnant woman before… determining … detectable heartbeat”
- “In the event that testing reveals a fetal heartbeat…no person shall knowingly and purposefully perform or induce an abortion on a pregnant woman … Whoever violates the provisions … is guilty of abortion in the third degree…” [By defining “guilt” this way, this bill ignores the standard dictum “Innocent until proven guilty” and ignores the requirement for judicial process to establish guilt. But DiPietro is not a lawyer. DiPietro did not write this legislation. This legislation was provided to DiPietro by those against women’s reproductive rights as they have provided to legislators in other states. This is the Texas law that criminalizes abortions following detection of a fetal heart beat. A fetal heartbeat may first be detected by transvaginal ultrasound as early as 5 1/2 to 6 weeks after conception. At that point, a woman may not even know she is pregnant.].
As the excerpts of the proposed legislation show, the bill would delay abortion procedures for an extended period of time – the time it takes to schedule and perform the testing and the counseling. It mandates that a pregnant woman have a test, fetal heartbeat monitoring, that she may not want. There is no provision for a woman to refuse this test except for a poorly worded provision “for the health of the mother”, a provision which courts in other states have severely limited. So much so, that women have fled their home states to have appropriate medical care in other jurisdictions.
Introduced a Mandatory Obstetric Ultrasound Bill
The second proposed bill, A06818 “Ensures that women seeking an abortion receive an ultrasound and the opportunity to review the ultrasound before giving informed consent to receive an abortion” is again sponsored by DiPietro without other sponsors or co-sponsors.
A06818 requires that (editorial comments in [ ]):
- Prior to a woman giving informed consent to having any part [???] of an abortion performed, the abortion provider … shall perform an obstetric ultrasound … [a medically unnecessary test to delay healthcare and to inflict psychological trauma. There is no provision for the woman to refuse this test, an obvious conflict with patient rights.]
- …provide a simultaneous explanation of what the ultrasound is depicting
- display the ultrasound images so that the pregnant woman may view them
- provide a complete medical description of the ultrasound images…dimensions of the embryo… cardiac activity … presence of external members and internal organs …
- Nothing …to prevent a pregnant woman from turning her eyes away from the ultrasound images required to be displayed and described to her [there is no provision for the woman to refuse to listen to the medical description of the ultrasound images].
- Abortion provider who knowingly commits … a violation…a penalty …not to exceed $100,000 for…first such violation; and $250,000 per [subsequent] violation
- The attorney general shall notify the appropriate medical licensing authority.
Again, as excerpts of the proposed legislation show, the bill would delay abortion procedures for an extended period of time – the time it takes to schedule and perform the testing and the counseling. Similar to the fetal heart monitoring required in AO3307, this bill makes ultrasound a mandatory test. The woman may not want an ultrasound but she can not refuse it. She can refuse to look at the ultrasound images but the provider is still required to describe the ultrasound to her in detail.
Bill Requires Ultrasound Before Medication Abortion
The bill also requires ultrasound prior to a medication abortion such as using mifepristone and misoprostol. A06818 applies to, “the intentional use or prescription of any instrument, medicine, drug, or any other substance or device or method to terminate … the pregnancy of a woman known to be pregnant”. Since medication abortions are primarily “at home” it’s difficult to see how the requirement for an obstetric ultrasound could be enforced prior to a medication abortion except if the woman had a complication requiring her to seek medical care from a physician or a hospital or a clinic.
Polling shows that 85% of Americans believe that abortion should be legal under any circumstance or under some circumstances. Only 13% say abortion should be illegal in all circumstances. Related to this, 61% of Americans say that overturning Roe v. Wade – last years Dobbs decision – was bad while 38% said it was good. And more than 6 in 10 Americans want to keep abortion pills, mifepristone and misoprostol, available by prescription.
Taking a “Hit” for the GOP
Why would DiPietro, the Republican deputy whip in the NYS Assembly, sponsor these two bills in the face of New Yorkers clear preferences? Bills that would mandate medically unnecessary tests and which would criminalize abortion in New York State. Why are there no other sponsors or co-sponsors for either of these bills?
One possibility is that DiPietro is taking a hit for the party. As one of the newest members of the Republican Party leadership in the NYS Assembly – Deputy Whip – it may have fallen to him to introduce these two bills which have no chance of getting out of the Assembly Health Committee, much less become law. Also, representing a rural, upstate assembly district lacking major media outlets, DiPietro may think that sponsoring these two bills would fly under the radar. We’ll see.
DiPietro is being primaried for the first time in many years by Republican Mitch Martin who according to his election flyer is endorsed by a number of elected Republicans throughout the 147th district including the current mayor of East Aurora, Pete Mercurio, a position DiPietro had before becoming assemblyman. Channel 7 political analyst Bob McCarthy says that there’s “something going on” in this primary.”Mitch Martin is well known and has his own base in the Republican Party… there’s a lot of money being spent…that tells you that it’s serious…there’s ads on TV, there are signs all over that district.”
"Mitch Martin is well known and has his own base in the Republican Party... there's a lot of money being spent...that tells you that it's serious."
Bob McCarthy, Buffalo News
DiPietro Endorsed by Convicted Felon Trump
DiPietro is being supported by former president and convicted felon, Donald Trump. McCarthy says that he’s hearing out of the Trump campaign that in a couple of weeks, just before the June 25th Republican primary, “Donald Trump will talk about an assembly race…he and David DiPietro have a long history together…it goes back to DiPietro supporting Trump for his thought about running for governor in 2014”.
Will Trump’s support help DiPietro in June’s Republican primary? If past elections are any predictor, Trump’s support will help DiPietro. Trump did much better than Biden throughout the 147th assembly district in the 2020 presidential election although Biden carried New York State. And Trump’s criminal convictions have not moved polling versus Biden. It may even be that since his conviction, Trump has gained more support in areas that previously supported him like the 147th district.
Hurt His Chances?? Probably Not
So, DiPietro’s attack on women’s reproductive rights in the two assembly bills he has sponsored, AO3307 and AO6818, are unlikely to have much effect on his bid for primary re-election. But abortion will be an issue for the November general election as much as Republicans would like it not to be. Yesterday’s (June 5, 2024) cloture vote (51-39-10, 60 required to pass) in the U. S. Senate avoided a roll call vote to create a federal right to access contraception, was a Republican attempt to obfuscate reproductive rights with contraceptive rights and to confuse the electorate.
Women’s reproductive rights has been a winning issue for Democrats since the Dobbs decision overturned abortion rights guaranteed for the past 50 years by Roe v Wade. The Republicans are searching for a strategy to take that issue away from the Democrats or at least diminish its importance. Immigration at the Southern border was a winning issue for Republicans but Biden’s executive order effectively closing the border to immigrants might take that issue away from them. Prior to Biden’s executive order, Senators had negotiated a bipartisan resolution to address the border problem but it was abandoned by Republicans at the behest of Trump who wanted to use it as a campaign issue this Fall.