Governor Kelly vetoes 'Born Alive' Bill, firearms education bill

Article/Abortion and 2A - 9 minute read

Kansas Governor Laura Kelly is known for vetoing more Republican bills than any other Kansas governor in recent history, yet she continues to claim to work to pass bipartisan legislature. This is technically true, but typically, the bipartisan legislation she signs into law regards bills like the following:

HB 2290 - Authorizes the affiliation of Northwest Kansas Technical College and North Central Kansas Technical College with Fort Hays State University. 

HB 2395 - Continues the existence of certain exceptions to the disclosure of public records under the Kansas Open Records Act. 

HB 2087 - Directs political parties to have procedures for the selection of presidential electors, bringing the state into compliance with the federal Electoral County Reform and Presidential Transition Improvement Act. 

House Substitute for SB 208 – Clarifies provisions relating to the Governmental Ethics Commission's authority to investigate and enforce the Campaign Finance Act and limitations on the receipt and expenditure of contributions. 

These were all announced in a press release from the governor on Friday, April 14, 2023. The press release was titled ‘Governor Kelly Signs Four Bipartisan Bills,’ however, the press release also mentions two bills she vetoed—neither of which had links provided, unlike these four.

The bills Governor Kelly vetoed included HB 2304—Standardizing firearms safety programs in school districts, and HB 2313—the born-alive infants protection act.

When Governor Kelly vetoed HB 2304, she claimed that the bill was “yet again an act of legislative overreach” attempting to override “locally elected leaders and insert partisan politics” into children’s education.

When it comes to gun control, Governor Kelly has an interesting history, especially as a Democrat. In 2015, she was one of two Democrats in the Kansas Senate to vote in favor of SB 45, authorizing concealed carry without a license. She was also one of three Democrats to vote in favor of HB 2502 a year later which amended the Weapons Free School Act, allowing activities involving air guns to occur on school property.

However, despite this, she did say in a 2018 interview, “I support common sense gun safety measures to keep our children and communities safe. I voted to ban guns on campuses, as well as in hospitals and adult care homes. I voted to prohibit anyone convicted of domestic violence from possessing a gun. I also supported safeguards like universal background checks and banning bump stocks and assault weapons.”

The bill Governor Kelly vetoed, HB 2304, is similar to another bill she vetoed back in 2021. In section 1(a) of this bill it states, “the board of education of a school district may provide firearm safety education programs.” The key word being “may.” In other words, a local school district does not have to provide firearm safety education programs, but if they want to, they can. So, this bill isn’t really pushing “partisan politics” into children’s education as Governor Kelly claims, as the school districts still have a choice in the matter. However, that doesn’t mean there wasn’t legislative overreach by those who voted in favor.

The bill specifies that “the state board of education shall establish curriculum guidelines for a standardized firearm safety education program.” According to the bill, the safety education program must be based on the Eddie Eagle GunSafe program offered by the National Rifle Association (NRA) or any successor program for children K-5. As student’s age, they can take a safety education program based on the Hunter Education in our Schools program offered by the Kansas Department of Wildlife and Parks or any successor program.

The issue with this is that if a school wants to have firearm safety education, but doesn’t want to use either of these two programs for whatever reason, they can’t, as the program must “be in accordance with the guidelines established by the state board of education,” including being based off one of these two programs or their successor programs.

In regard to the veto, Speaker Dan Hawkins (R—Wichita) issued the following statement:

“It’s clear that with the veto of the Eddie Eagle GunSafe fire-arm safety bill, Governor Kelly cares more about scoring political points simply talking about gun safety rather than taking action to actually increase the safety of our children around firearms. With over 30 years of experience in schools and communities, Eddie Eagle’s GunSafe program teaches kids the simple phrase “Stop! Don’t Touch. Run Away. Tell a grown-up.” and would give Kansas schools a framework for teaching gun safety. House Republicans are committed to ensuring the commonsense tools of the Eagle GunSafe program are available to teach kids about firearm safety.”

As for the ‘Born-Alive Infant Protection Act,’ Governor Kelly referred to the bill as “misleading” and “unnecessary.”

“Federal law already protects newborns, and the procedure being described in this bill does not exist in Kansas in the era of modern medicine,” Governor Kelly stated, regarding her veto of the bill. “The intent of this bill is to interfere in medical decisions that should remain between doctors and their patients.”

A press release by Speaker Hawkins called the governor’s veto “radical” and that Kansas House Republicans were set to take action.

“I’m saddened to see that with this veto of the Born Alive Infant Protection Act that the Governor has chosen to abandon the dignity of life by allowing for the ending of an infant’s life even once it’s outside the womb,” Speaker Hawkins said. “This veto gives abortionists free reign to walk away as a living, breathing baby dies. This is not only radical, but also inhumane and I am confident House Republicans will make every effort during veto session to protect all living, breathing infants in our state regardless of the conditions surrounding their birth.”

Governor Kelly and Speaker Hawkins are giving two objectively different perspectives, so here is a breakdown of their claims:

First, addressing Governor Kelly’s claims, yes, federal law does already protect newborns born alive after a failed abortion, but much like how she claims the bill is “misleading,” her claim is also misleading. The ‘Born-Alive Infants Protection Act’ which was signed into law in 2002 by President George W. Bush (R) made it so the terms ‘person’, ‘human being’, ‘child’, and ‘individual’ would also legally mean to include born-alive infants. However, the ‘Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act’ passed the U.S. House in January this year and has yet to be voted on by the U.S. Senate. What this bill would do is establish “requirements for the degree of care a health care practitioner must provide in the case of a child born alive following an abortion or attempted abortion.”

The Kansas bill that Governor Kelly vetoed essentially does the same thing as the ‘Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act,’ which is currently not federal law. So, yes, while we already have a federal law that protects newborns, at least to a degree, as Governor Kelly said, what she vetoed was a bill that would take things a step further in ensuring babies born alive after a failed abortion were protected through ensuring certain standards of care healthcare practitioners currently do not have to legally provide at a federal level.

Governor Kelly further claims that “the procedure being described in this bill does not exist in Kansas in the era of modern medicine.”

The “procedure” in this bill is abortion which is described in section 2(a) “"Abortion" means the same as defined in K.S.A. 65-6701, and amendments thereto.”

K.S.A. 65-6701 states,

"Abortion" means the use or prescription of any instrument, medicine, drug or any other substance or device to terminate the pregnancy of a woman known to be pregnant with an intention other than to increase the probability of a live birth, to preserve the life or health of the child after live birth, or to remove a dead unborn child who died as the result of natural causes in utero, accidental trauma or a criminal assault on the pregnant woman or her unborn child, and which causes the premature termination of the pregnancy.

So, yes, this “procedure” still exists in Kansas in the era of modern medicine.

As for Speaker Hawkins claim that “this veto gives abortionists free reign to walk away as a living, breathing baby dies” is actually true.

On March 8, 2023, Kansas Representative Dr. Ron Bryce (R—Montgomery) testified on this bill as a proponent in the House Health and Human Services Committee.

He shared a personal story where he was called in for a code blue, which is typically called in when someone has a life threatening condition. When he had entered the room, he found the patient in no distress, no one active, and no one would tell him why he was summoned for a code blue. It wasn’t until he heard a cry coming from the corner of the room that he found a premature baby boy on a metal table who had survived his abortion—strong enough to live outside the womb, temporarily. He began to monitor the baby over the next several hours until the baby’s eventual death, as he was too weak to survive.

Rep. Bryce concluded with three options that abortion providers currently have when it comes to born alive infants.

“Number one: Treat the baby as you would any other living baby of gestational age,” Rep. Bryce said. “Doesn’t mean you have to do heroic measures for a baby that has no chance of survival, but we need to treat them as a human being. Number two, as in this case that I was, the abortion provider set the baby aside to die, but the baby would not die quickly so the nurses finally call the code blue. That’s why I was summoned to the operating room. The third option, God forbid, is actively killing the baby. Those are the three options for an abortion provider. Of those three options, this House Bill 2313 would provide only one lawful option for the abortion provider, and that is to treat the living baby as you would any other living baby in that situation at that gestational age.”

Rep. Bryce’s testimony is important as it confirms Speaker Hawkins’ claims. It also refutes claims made by left-leaning Legislative resource Loud Light who reported in their week 11 Legislative recap, “Since infanticide is already illegal the bill is most likely to impact situations where a wanted pregnancy is aborted due to a terminal defect in a fetus. The bill would require the doctor to attempt to save the terminal fetus instead of allowing the parents to hold it for the few moments it’s alive.”

While both bills have been vetoed, the House and Senate will have a chance to override the governor’s vetoes. This will require a two-thirds vote (84 in the House, 27 in the Senate). The House passed the firearms bill 78-43, the Senate 31-8. The House passed the ‘Born Alive’ bill 86-36, the Senate 31-9. Furthermore, there are 85 Republicans currently in the House, 29 in the Senate, so the ‘Born Alive’ bill had to have bipartisanship to get the votes it did in both House and Senate.

---

Thanks for reading. Be sure to like, share, and subscribe. You can also help support independent journalism in Kansas by buying me a coffee at buymeacoffee.com/kscon.