LUMBERTON — Two Democrats with ties to Robeson County say they will vote to override Gov. Roy Cooper’s veto legislation that aims to protect an infant who survives an abortion.

It is unclear exactly when that vote will take place, but Rep. Charles Graham, whose District 47 is all in Robeson County, and Rep. Garland Pierce, whose District 48 once included part of Robeson, said they will vote to override.

The looming veto showdown was set in place on Thursday when Cooper vetoed Senate Bill 359, titled “An Act Establishing The Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act.” All Republicans present in the Senate and the House voted to approve the legislation.

Four House Democrats, including Graham and Pierce, and two in the Senate voted in favor.

But House Republicans will need more Democratic votes to reach the threshold of three-fifths of the members present in each chamber to override the veto. If all 120 members of the House are present the 65 Republicans would need seven Democrats to vote with them to override the veto. In the 50-member Senate, only one Democrat would need to join the 29 Republicans in voting to deny Cooper’s veto.

“I am not sure if the Democrats who voted with us on the original bill will vote with us this time or not,” said Sen. Danny Britt Jr., a Republican from Lumberton. “I feel like at least one of the Democrat members who is a pastor will vote with us again, but that is just an assumption. The governor as well as many of the Democrats receive lots of campaign donations from Planned Parenthood, who advocate heavily for late-term abortion, so many will not vote in favor of life with the Republicans.”

Britt is not certain when a veto override attempt will be made. The Senate is not in session this week, but is likely to take up the veto “immediately after we return,” Britt said.

Graham is hearing a veto vote may be taken on Tuesday in the House, which is back in session on Thursday.

“I voted for the bill,” he said. “When it comes to another vote I will vote to protect the life of a child. So I will be voting to override the veto.”

He does not know if there are enough votes in the House to override, Graham said.

“It’s a numbers game,” he said. “We don’t know if the numbers will stay the way they were last week. We’ll have to wait and see.

“… In my mind its about protecting that infant’s life. It’s a vote of conscience.”

The conscience must be the first driver of a legislator’s vote, said Pierce, a Democrat from Wagram who represented part of Robeson County until district lines changed on Jan. 1.

His conscience led him to vote in favor of SB 359, said the Baptist minister. And he plans to vote to override Cooper’s veto because it would be hypocritical of him to vote in favor of the legislation and then not vote to override the veto.

The Republicans no longer have a super majority in the General Assembly, which means more Democrats would have to break ranks and join Republicans in voting to override.

“It’s going to be difficult either way it goes,” Pierce said. “I don’t know.”

Robeson County’s other House member, Brenden Jones, a Republican, is expected to vote to override.

Gov. Cooper cited an objection raised by many of the legislation’s opponents when he issued his veto.

His wrote in his veto message, “Laws already protect newborn babies, and this bill is an unnecessary interference between doctors and their patients. This needless legislation would criminalize doctors and other health-care providers for a practice that simply does not exist.”

Sen. Joyce Krawiec, one of legislation’s primary sponsors, issued on Tuesday a rebuttal to opponents’ claim that existing laws require doctors to provide care for infants that survive abortion attempts.

“Reality check: No, current law does not require doctors to care for infant after a botched abortion,” the Republican from Raleigh wrote in a press release. “Non-partisan legislative central staff: ‘There are currently no laws requiring an affirmative duty of care.’”

According to Krawiec, existing law covers death of an unborn child, other than an abortion — for example, if a pregnant woman is murdered or attacked in a manner that results in the death of her unborn child — and involuntary manslaughter, which is killing another human being by a culpably negligent act or omission.

The new law would update the criminal code to create a duty to care for an infant after a botched abortion and create a felony for health-care providers who violate the duty to care for an infant after a botched abortion, according to Krawiec.

The senator cites the nonpartisan Legislative Analysis Division as a supporting source.

According to Krawiec, the division recently wrote, “The deliberate killing of infants, including those who have survived an attempted abortion, is a criminal offense. There are currently no laws requiring an affirmative duty of care to preserve the life of infants who survive attempted abortions.”

Britt
https://www.robesonian.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/web1_Britt-Danny-4.jpgBritt

Graham
https://www.robesonian.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/web1_Charles-Graham-2.jpgGraham

Pierce
https://www.robesonian.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/web1_Garland_E_Pierce-1.jpgPierce

T.C. Hunter

Managing editor

Reach T.C. Hunter by calling 910-816-1974 or via email at [email protected].