Highlights:
Baker Vetoed A Bill To Codify The Right To An Abortion Into Massachusetts Law. According to Herald News, “Gov. Charlie Baker vetoed legislation Thursday that would codify the right to an abortion in state law and make the procedure in Massachusetts more accessible by expanding access for women after 24 weeks of pregnancy.” [Herald News, 12/24/20]
Baker Claimed He Could Not Support The Legislation Due To A Provision Which Lowered The Age Of Consent For An Abortion. According to Herald News, “The bill known as the ROE Act would also lower the age of consent for an abortion to 16, which the Republican governor said he ‘cannot support.’ […] ‘However, I cannot support the sections of this proposal that expand the availability of later term abortions and permit minors age 16 and 17 to get an abortion without the consent of a parent or guardian,’ Baker wrote.’” [Herald News, 12/24/20]
An Abortion Rights Group Criticized Baker’s Veto Of The Legislation. According to the Herald News, “The ROE Act coalition released a statement describing Baker's veto as ‘callous and dangerous’ to the health and well-being of women in Massachusetts. ‘With this veto, the Governor has made plain that he has no problem imposing medically unnecessary barriers that delay and deny care, and forcing families to fly across the country to get compassionate care. Our abortion laws are broken, and with two recent actions against equitable abortion access, Governor Baker is upholding our broken system,’ the coalition said.” [Herald News, 12/24/20]
Baker’s Veto Of The Pro-Abortion Bill Was Overrode By The Massachusetts Legislature. According to the Washington Times, “The Massachusetts legislature on Tuesday overrode Republican Gov. Charlie Baker’s veto of legislation establishing a right to abortion and expanding access to late-term procedures as blue states erect pro-choice firewalls against a conservative-trending Supreme Court.” [Washington Times, 12/29/20]
Baker’s Veto Was Overridden By Votes Of 32-8 And 107-46 In The State Legislature. According to the Washington Times, “The Democratic-controlled state Senate voted 32-8 to override the Mr. Baker’s Christmas Eve veto of H. 5179, better known as the ROE Act, mustering the necessary two-thirds vote a day after the state House overrode the veto by 107-46.” [Washington Times, 12/29/20]
Baker Vetoed Funds That Would Educate The Public On Anti-Abortion Crisis Pregnancy Centers. According to Commonwealth Magazine, “But Baker, a Republican, once again entered into a controversy with the Democratic-led Legislature over reproductive rights by vetoing an education campaign about crisis pregnancy centers. […] The Legislature, as part of its economic development bill, appropriated $17.5 million for organizations that provide reproductive health care, including abortion care, to spend on hiring, security, and education. That money included a $1 million education campaign regarding crisis pregnancy centers. Baker left the $16.5 million earmarked for reproductive health organizations but vetoed the $1 million public awareness campaign as well as language requiring the state to publish a list of providers that offer ‘legitimate’ family planning services. The state already maintains such a list. ‘I am striking language that earmarks funding for a program not recommended. The information required to be published by this earmark is already publicly available from the state,’ Baker said in his veto message.” [Commonwealth Magazine, 10/10/22]
When Asked For Further Opinion On The Supreme Court’s Hobby Lobby Decision, Baker Said, “It Doesn’t Matter. What I Care About Is Massachusetts.” According to MassLive.Com, “Baker declined to offer his opinion on the decision more broadly. ‘It doesn’t matter. What I care about is Massachusetts, and for Massachusetts it doesn’t change a thing,’ he said, arguing that the employer mandate in Massachusetts works.” [MassLive.Com, 7/9/14]
In The Hobby Lobby Case, The Supreme Court Rule That Companies Could Opt Out Of Providing Contraception Coverage Under The Affordable Care Act. According to the New York Times, “The Supreme Court ruled on Monday that requiring family-owned corporations to pay for insurance coverage for contraception under the Affordable Care Act violated a federal law protecting religious freedom. […] The contraceptive coverage requirement was challenged by two corporations whose owners say they try to run their businesses on Christian principles: Hobby Lobby, a chain of craft stores, and Conestoga Wood Specialties, which makes wood cabinets. The requirement has also been challenged in 50 other cases, according to the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, which represented Hobby Lobby.” [New York Times, 7/1/14]
Baker’s Comments Implied He Did Not Support Women’s Access To Birth Control Coverage And Admitted He Misspoke When He Said The Ruling Did Not Affect Women In Massachusetts. According to the Boston Globe, “In a statement, Baker said he was ‘deeply concerned’ that when he said Wednesday that his personal view of the ruling ‘doesn’t matter,’ he may have led voters to believe that he does not support women’s access to birth control coverage. And he said he misspoke when he said the ruling would not affect women in Massachusetts.” [Boston Globe, 7/10/14]