Kansas Gov. Kelly vetoes abortion coercion ban, survey of women ending pregnancy

Kansas Democratic Gov. Laura Kelly on Friday vetoed two bills that would have created additional rules surrounding abortion.

Nearly two years after Kansans overwhelmingly voted to protect state constitutional protections for abortion, the Republican-controlled Kansas Legislature passed bills that impose additional requirements on providers and create a new crime related to abortion.

One bill would have required abortion providers to ask women to disclose their reasoning for seeking an abortion and mandate the collection of personal data except in a medical emergency. Another would have made it a felony to coerce a pregnant person into getting an abortion.

Kelly, a strong supporter of abortion rights, said Kansas spoke “loud and clear” in the August 2022 vote rejecting an amendment that would have allowed lawmakers to ban abortion. The legislation requiring providers to question women seeking abortions is “invasive and unnecessary.”

“Voters do not want politicians getting between doctors and their patient by interfering in private medical decisions,” Kelly said in a statement.

On the bill creating the crime of abortion coercion, Kelly said that while she agrees no one should be coerced into undergoing a medical procedure, threatening violence against someone else is already a crime.

“Additionally, I am concerned with the vague language in this bill and its potential to intrude upon private, often difficult, conversations between a person and their family, friends, and health care providers,” Kelly said in a statement.

“This overly broad language risks criminalizing Kansans who are being confided in by their loved ones or simply sharing their expertise as a health care provider.”

Both proposals have or are close to obtaining the two-thirds veto-proof majority necessary to override her veto.

One of the Kansas bills – propelled forward by the influential anti-abortion group Kansans for Life – would direct abortion providers to ask women seeking an abortion to choose from among 11 reasons, but they would be able to opt out of the survey. That data would be compiled by the Kansas Department of Health and Environment, which would release a biannual report.

Some of the reasons listed in the Kansas abortion survey include being unable to afford a child, interference with the pregnant person’s career or health, domestic abuse, that their partner desires for an abortion or that the child has a disability.

The measure passed with a two-thirds, veto-proof majority in the Senate, but came up three votes short in the House. However, three House Republicans were absent from the vote, meaning supporters may have enough votes to override Kelly’s veto.

Opponents have called the bill unnecessary and invasive. But proponents say collecting data is useful for making future decisions about abortion.

House Minority Leader Vic Miller, a Topeka Democrat, said the bills are indicative of how Kansas treats abortion differently than other forms of health care. Collecting invasive abortion data, he said, doesn’t serve any purpose except to make obtaining an abortion more difficult.

“There were a number of amendments made that would have implemented a similar survey to health care decisions made by men,” Miller said. “But those were summarily rejected. It’s absolutely true that when it comes to abortion, the Legislature sticks their nose deeper into these personal decisions much more than any other kind of medical care.”

But proponents say the measures would ensure the pregnant person’s decision to obtain an abortion remains a choice, and that collecting data is useful for making future decisions about abortion.

Rep. Brenda Landwehr, a Wichita Republican who chairs the House Health and Human Services Committee, said the data would help lawmakers better serve pregnant women.

“Knowledge is power, and with more knowledge about why women are seeking abortion comes empowerment of choice,” Landwehr said during a floor debate last month. “This bill was not taken lightly. We just want to have more information, make sure we’re making the right decision for these women.”

The second bill vetoed by Kelly would make it a felony to coerce a woman into getting an abortion. Physical or financial threats to the mother’s wellbeing, the withholding of legal documents and controlling access to medical care would count as coercion in the legislation.

The legislation passed with a veto-proof majority in the Senate, but the House came up two votes short. Four House Republicans were absent during the vote, meaning it is possible the bill will achieve the two-thirds majority needed to enact the measure into law.

Proponents contend the legislation is a non-partisan issue that ensures the pregnant woman’s decision to obtain an abortion remains a choice.

Lucrecia Nold, a lobbyist for the conservative Kansas Catholic Conference, supported the bill. She said the measure would protect women who are victims of human trafficking who may be forced into obtaining multiple abortions.

“Women trapped in the slavery of sex trafficking are already being used and seen as objects,” she told The Star. “Their traffickers coercing them into abortion, simply for their sole profit gain, only commodifies these women even more. Protecting women from the harms and degrading circumstances of sex trafficking should be a priority for all Kansans.”

Republicans earlier garnered bipartisan support with a version of the bill that would have criminalized all kinds of reproductive coercion, such as controlling a woman’s access to birth control. But the bill that ultimately passed only criminalizes abortion coercion.

Rep. Stephanie Clayton, an Overland Park Democrat, said the bill that passed did not go far enough to protect Kansas women.

“There are abusive relationships happening right now in Kansas where men are sabotaging birth control, lying and saying they’re using contraceptives or even threatening divorce if their wife won’t have another child,” said. “That is abuse, and that is coercion – the same as abortion coercion.”

The Star’s Jonathan Shorman contributed reporting