A.G. Gancarski
On Tuesday, the Senate is poised to approve legislation barring doctors from performing abortions on minors without express permission from a parent or guardian.
Sen. Kelli Stargel‘s legislation (SB 404) roiled Senate Democrats in committees in recent weeks, and in a floor session last week, when attempts to modify the bill failed to permeate a partisan wall of resistance.
Assuming the bill passes (and there are no indications that Republicans will break on this slice of election-year red meat for their base), the matter will still have to pass the House.
Getting the votes there: the easy part. The House is more Republican and more socially conservative than the Senate.
The hard part will be the internal politics of the Democratic caucus, where a small but vocal group backs the House version of the legislation, thus far successfully paralyzing the group at large from taking a position in direct opposition to the bill.
The measure (HB 265) is soon headed to the House floor, after its sole committee stop. And not every Democrat is in opposition.
Rep. Kim Daniels, a self-described “Blue Dog” Democrat from Jacksonville, is co-sponsoring the bill for the second straight year.
Daniels joined House sponsor Rep. Erin Grall and fellow Democrat Rep. James Bush III at a press conference last week, staged just before a Democratic caucus meeting.
The move seemed designed to force the hand, one way or another, of caucus leader Rep. Kionne McGhee. McGhee said the week before a position would be coming soon.
Daniels, an evangelical preacher, put those pulpit skills to work in a spellbinder of a press conference.
Daniels asked “how dare any caucus position or any other position try to shut my mouth,” adding details about her own botched abortion as a teenager — one obtained with a forged signature from her mother.
“There are some in my caucus who have no respect for me as a representative for my district … no respect for my values as a believer. They want to make me vote with them, and that ain’t happening,” Daniels said.
She went on to decry “caucus critics” for saying they are trying to “get her” for this and other positions that deviate from the caucus, such as on LGBTQ issues.
“What’s happening to me, it goes ignored, when it is literal religious discrimination,” Daniels said, calling out “far-left special interest groups” and bemoaning “the political okey doke.”
Soon thereafter, McGhee addressed the caucus. He punted on what would have been an opportunity to clarify the caucus position, using “big tent” language.
McGhee said this issue, which has divided the caucus for more than a week, was a “teachable moment.”
He urged people disagreeing not to call people out by name, but to “have a brief conversation behind closed doors.”
“A caucus position is a very complex, strategic tool … that we use when we are unified in our beliefs,” McGhee said, urging people to consider from where legislators hail and who they represent.
Florida Politics’ read on that meeting was that the caucus would not take a position.
However, after publication of an article last week, a McGhee representative said a position would not be ruled out; that it would be contingent on what the Senate did.
On Tuesday, barring the unforeseen, the political problem will be out of the Senate’s hands. And into those of House Democrats, who will not have consensus on the matter, no matter what.
