Maine Question 1, "Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act" Initiative (1999)

Maine Question 1
Election date November 2, 1999
Topic Abortion
Status d Defeated
Type State statute	Origin Citizens

Maine Question 1, the “Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act” Initiative, was on the ballot in Maine as an indirect initiated state statute on November 2, 1999. The ballot initiative was defeated.

A “yes” vote supported prohibiting physicians from "knowingly perform[ing] a partial-birth abortion," which the initiative would have defined as "an abortion in which the physician performing the abortion partially vaginally delivers a living fetus before killing the fetus and completing the delivery."

A “no” vote opposed prohibiting physicians from "knowingly perform[ing] a partial-birth abortion," which the initiative would have defined as "an abortion in which the physician performing the abortion partially vaginally delivers a living fetus before killing the fetus and completing the delivery."

Overview

What would Question 1 have changed about abortion law in Maine?

Question 1 would have prohibited partial-birth abortions, which would have been defined as "an abortion in which the physician performing the abortion partially vaginally delivers a living fetus before killing the fetus and completing the delivery." This type of abortion has also been called dilation and evacuation. Question 1 would have provided an exception for when this type of abortion "is necessary to save the life of a mother whose life is endangered by a physical disorder, illness or injury."

The ballot initiative would have made performing this type of abortion a Class D criminal offense. Question 1 would have allowed a woman's husband or the woman's parents (in cases where the woman receiving an abortion was under 18 years old) to file civil action against a physician who performed this type of abortion in cases where the plaintiff did not consent to the abortion.

Election results

Maine Question 1
Result		Votes	Percentage
Yes		185,541	44.42%
No		232,113	55.58%

Results are officially certified.

Source

Text of measure

Ballot title

The ballot title was as follows:

“

Do you want to ban a specific abortion procedure to be defined in law, except in cases where the life of the mother is in danger?

”

Full text

The ballot initiative would have amended Maine Revised Statutes Annotated (MRSA). The following underlined text would have been added and struck-through text would have been deleted:

Sec. 1. 22 MRSA §1597.B is enacted to read: S1597 B. Partial-birth abortions prohibited 1. Definitions. As used in this section the following terms have the following meanings. A. "Abortion" means the intentional interruption of a pregnancy by the application of external agents, whether chemical or physical, or by the ingestion of chemical agents with an intention other than to produce a live birth or to remove a dead fetus. B. "Partial-birth abortion" means an abortion in which the physician performing the abortion partially vaginally delivers a living fetus before killing the fetus and completing the delivery. C. "Partially vaginally delivers a living fetus before killing the fetus" means deliberately and intentionally delivering into the vagina a living fetus, or a substantial portion of a living fetus, for the purpose of performing a procedure the physician knows will kill the fetus, and kills the fetus. 2. Partial-birth abortions prohibited: exception. A physician may not knowingly perform a partial-birth abortion and thereby kill a human fetus. This prohibition does not apply to a partial-birth abortion that is necessary to save the life of a mother whose life is endangered by a physical disorder, illness or injury. 3. Criminal liability. A physician who violates this section: A. Commits a Class D crime: B. Is subject to damages awarded in a civil action under subsection 4. 4. Civil action. The father, if married to the mother at the time she receives the partial-birth abortion procedure, and the maternal grandparents of the fetus, if the mother has not attained the age of 18 years at the time of the abortion, may in a civil action obtain appropriate relief unless the pregnancy resulted from the plaintiff's criminal conduct or the plaintiff consented to the abortion. Appropriate relief shall include: A. Money damages for all injuries. psychological and physical, occasioned by the violation of this section; and B. Statutory damages equal to 3 times the cost of the partial-birth abortion. 5. Hearing. A physician accused of an offense under this section may seek a hearing before the Board of Licensure in Medicine or the Board of Osteopathic Licensure, as applicable, on whether the physician's conduct was necessary to save the life of the mother whose life was endangered by a physical disorder, illness or injury. The findings on that issue are admissible on that issue at the trial of the physician. Upon a motion of the physician, the court shall delay the beginning of the trial for not more than 30 days to permit such a hearing to take place. 6. Immunity. A woman upon whom a partial-birth abortion is performed may not be prosecuted under this section for a conspiracy to violate this section or for an offense under section 1597-A or 1598 based on a violation of this section. Sec. 2. 22 MRSA §1598, sub-§l, as amended by PL 1993, c. 61, 24 §2, is further amended to read: 1. Policy. It is the public policy of the State that the State not restrict a woman's exercise of her private decision to terminate a pregnancy before viability except as provided in section 1597-A. After viability an abortion may be performed only when it is necessary to preserve the life or health of the mother or, in the case of a partial-birth abortion, when permitted under section 1597 -B, subsection 2. It is also the public policy of the State that all abortions may be performed only by a physician. Sec. 3. 22 MRSA §1598, sub-§4, as enacted by PL 1979, c. 405, §2, is amended to read: 4. Abortions after viability; criminal liability. Except as provided in section 1597-B, a person who performs an abortion after viability is guilty of a Class D crime if: A. He That person knowingly disregarded the viability of the fetus: and B. He That person knew that the abortion was not necessary for the preservation of the life or health of the mother.

Support

The committee Yes for Life led the campaign in support of the ballot initiative.

Supporters

Organizations

• Christian Civic League of Maine
• Christian Coalition of Maine
• Maine Right to Life
• Pro-Life Education Association

Arguments

• Michael Heath, executive director of the Christian Civil League of Maine: “All babies are precious, everyone know that. Here we stand today perched on the abyss of another frightful debate on whether or not Maine law should protect healthy full-term babies from having their brains sucked from their skull. Everyone knows that this should not be allowed to happen. Yet our society, in support of choice, allows this killing to go on.”
• State Rep. Douglas Ahearne (D-150), the sponsor of the indirect initiative in the Legislature: “Once the people of Maine hear the facts, and not the distorted views of the pro-choice lobby, they, too, will see the need for safeguards on unrestricted abortions in Maine and why the ban on partial birth abortion is needed."

Opposition

The Campaign to Protect Women’s Health led the campaign in opposition to the ballot initiative.

Opponents

Officials

• Gov. Angus King (Independent)

Organizations

• Family Planning Association of Maine
• Maine Civil Liberties Union
• Maine Medical Association

Arguments

• Sally Sutton, executive director of the Maine Civil Liberties Union: "Implicit in this [initiative] effort is that abortions in Maine, and particularly the procedures they now seek to ban, are done frequently and frivolously, and they are always wrong. We are discouraged and outraged that these groups, supported by politically extreme Christian organizations nationwide, want to insinuate themselves into the physician-patient relationships in this state — especially in cases involving very painful, personal and deeply religious decisions."
• Karen Stram, former chairwoman of the Maine Republican Party: "Proponents of the referendum would have you believe that this referendum simply eliminates a specific procedure. But what they fail to tell you is that procedure is not a medically defined procedure, but a politically defined one."

Path to the ballot

See also: Laws governing the initiative process in Maine

Maine Question 1 was an indirect initiated state statute. Proponents needed to collect signatures equal to 10 percent of the total votes cast for governor in the last gubernatorial election prior to filing their petition. In 1999, the number of signature required was 42,131.

On April 28, 1998, a coalition of organizations, including the Christian Civic League of Maine and Maine Right to Life, announced a campaign for the ballot initiative.

Proponents filed 91,113 signatures on January 21, 1999. Secretary of State Dan Gwadosky (D) announced that 82,372 signatures were valid on February 22, 1999. At least 42,131 needed to be valid.

The Maine State Legislature had the option to approve the indirect initiative, which would have enacted the initiative as law. On May 20, 1999, the Maine House of Representatives voted 74-70 to approve the proposal. The Senate voted down the bill. As the state Legislature did not pass the proposal, the initiative was sent to the ballot for voters to decide.

See also

1970 Measures

• 1970 Measures
• Abortion policy on the ballot
• 1970 legislative sessions

Washington

• Washington ballot measures
• Washington ballot measure laws

News and analysis

• Ballot measure lawsuits
• Ballot measure readability
• Ballot measure polls