Hartzler points to abortion and gender identity as she opposes effort to revive ERA
Rep. Vicky Hartzler warned about abortion and gender identity Thursday as the House passed a resolution aimed at reviving the Equal Rights Amendment.
The Equal Rights Amendment, which passed Congress in 1972, would guarantee equal treatment of the sexes under federal law.
The amendment failed to receive ratification by the required three-fourths of states to become part of the Constitution by a 1982 deadline set by Congress, but the Democratic-controlled U.S. House passed a resolution Thursday to eliminate that deadline in hopes of saving the ERA after Virginia became the 38th state to ratify it last month.
The 232-183 vote in favor of the resolution fell mostly along party lines, garnering the support from every Democrat in Kansas and Missouri and facing opposition from every Republican from the region.
Hartzler, a Republican whose district stretches from the Kansas City metro area to central Missouri, distinguished herself as one of the legislation’s most outspoken critics.
In a lengthy statement ahead of the vote, Hartzler argued the effort to eliminate the deadline was unconstitutional and that even if the time limit could be extended “the ERA would not bring women any more rights than they currently have but it would entrench the legality of abortion.”
Hartzler pointed to a 1998 New Mexico State Supreme Court ruling to argue that adoption of the ERA could lead federal courts to require taxpayer-funded abortions.
M’Evie Mead, statewide director of policy and organizing for Planned Parenthood Advocates in Missouri, said Hartzler shouldn’t separate women’s advancements from their reproductive rights.
“You can draw a direct line from the societal advances women have made to women’s access sexual and reproductive health care — including the ability to decide if and when to have a family,” Mead said in a statement.
Missouri has not ratified the ERA. State Sen. Jill Schupp, a St. Louis area Democrat now running for Congress, has championed a recent effort to pass the amendment in the state.
“Right now, under the Constitution, women do not have equal rights. It is absolutely unacceptable that American women are seen in the eyes of the law as second-class citizens. Congress can and should take action to recognize what a majority of states have now affirmed: women deserve equal rights,” Schupp said in a statement when asked about the U.S. House vote.
“The solution to ratifying the ERA is simple — Congress set the deadline, Congress can change the deadline.”
Hartzler, who was one of the leading voices in favor of barring transgender soldiers from serving in the military, also pointed to gender identity as reason for her opposition to the ERA.
“Besides being unconstitutional and shredding state and federal pro-life protections, the ERA would also erase decades of progress which have provided opportunities for women, advanced women’s progress through federal programs, and secured necessary protections for women and girls,” Hartzler continued.
“How? By incorporating gender identity in the definition of ‘sex’, jeopardizing private spaces for women, girls’ sports programs, and women’s educational institutions.”
This story was originally published February 13, 2020 at 1:36 PM.
