{"id":235833,"date":"2020-12-10T09:43:48","date_gmt":"2020-12-10T15:43:48","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.liveaction.org\/news\/?p=235833"},"modified":"2020-12-09T15:30:55","modified_gmt":"2020-12-09T21:30:55","slug":"governor-baker-veto-massachusetts-roe-act-why","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/archive.liveaction.org\/news\/governor-baker-veto-massachusetts-roe-act-why\/","title":{"rendered":"Governor Baker, you should veto the Massachusetts ROE Act. Here’s why."},"content":{"rendered":"
<\/div>

(Townhall.com<\/a>)\u00a0Dear Governor Baker,<\/p>\n

As you know, both chambers of the Massachusetts state legislature recently passed a reconciled budget, which contains the ROE Act. The ROE Act, which would make abortion policy in Massachusetts even more permissive, has been considered in the past. Previously, you have expressed misgivings about the ROE Act — stating that you support the status quo on abortion policy. Recently, you indicated that you were unhappy that a significant policy initiative was included in the budget bill. However, I would strongly encourage you to use your line item veto to strike down the ROE Act for an even more important reason. It is terrible public policy.<\/p>\n

First, the ROE Act would effectively legalize abortion throughout all nine months of pregnancy.<\/strong> It states that a physician can perform an abortion after 24 weeks gestation, according to his \u201cbest medical judgment.\u201d However, the ROE Acts states that medical judgment can include a very wide range of factors including physical health, emotional health and the person\u2019s age. As such, this legislation places no significant obstacles to women seeking to abort viable. preborn children in Massachusetts<\/em>. Furthermore, there is strong opposition to late term abortions in Massachusetts. A spring 2019 poll\u00a0<\/a>conducted by The Tarrance Group found that 62 percent of Massachusetts voters oppose \u201callowing more late term abortions.\u201d<\/p>\n