The only Republican senator to vote against West Virginia’s new abortion law did so because, he concluded, it didn’t go far enough. So when Senator Eric Tarr received a text right before the bill’s consideration that a pro-life organization would be scoring “yes” votes favorably, it rubbed Tarr the wrong way.
“You know, West Virginians for Life, they’re going to score this vote — and when they score it, when I vote no on this bill, they’ll score that vote no as a vote against life. They’ve got it wrong,” Tarr, R-Putnam, said on the Senate floor.
And then, referring to a provision of the bill allowing a window of time for adult and minor victims of rape and incest to seek an abortion, Tarr continued by saying “West Virginians for Life is stopping at 8 and 14 weeks. I’m astounded that we have to have this debate.”
That was the context for a rhetorical flourish that drew shock. Tarr asked listeners what they would do if a burning building meant being able to save some children but not all. Tarr sounded like his personal answer was “I’d burn the building.” But he later said he’d meant to better enunciate “I’d burn in the building.”
His point was that the restrictions in the bill were, in his view, not restrictive enough and that he would pay the consequences for his no vote. Either way, it was inflammatory all-or-nothing language. Taken to its logical conclusion, even with clarification, the morality tale means all of the children would perish along with their would-be savior.
His whole speech was not only insight in the moment about how a senator explained his vote on a difficult issue but also foreshadowing of some lawmakers who believe West Virginia’s abortion law needs to go even farther. This issue is emotional and divisive, and there could be more to come.
This month, West Virginia’s Senate and then members of the House of Delegates overwhelmingly voted in favor of the abortion bill, and it was quickly signed by Gov. Jim Justice.
That made West Virginia the second state in the nation to pass a new ban since the U.S. Supreme Court reversed Roe vs. Wade’s federal abortion guarantees. In recent years, West Virginia law had allowed abortion up to 20 weeks of gestation. Now there is no time after conception to choose ending a pregnancy, except for in some limited situations.
Much public discussion has focused so far on whether the bill goes too far. But lawmakers like Tarr have already said they intend to press the issue of whether the bill goes far enough.
A ban eliminating exceptions for rape or incest seems out of step with most West Virginians, according to some recent polling.
A poll on behalf of the West Virginia Chamber of Commerce asked respondents where they would consider their position to be on abortion on a range of policy choices.
Only 13 percent of all respondents said abortion should be illegal under all circumstances. That was generally true of Republican respondents, with just 19 percent saying abortion should be illegal in all instances.
A large block of respondents — 39 percent of the entire group, regardless of party — favored abortion being legal in cases of rape, incest or saving the life of the mother. Fifty-five percent of Republican respondents agreed with that view.
The new West Virginia law allows abortions in cases of a nonmedically viable fetus, an ectopic pregnancy, which is when a fertilized egg implants and grows outside the main cavity of the uterus, or a medical emergency, not including psychological or mental health situations.
The bill specifies that several things are not considered abortion: a miscarriage, stillbirth, use of established cell lines or human fetal tissue research, in vitro fertilization or contraceptives.
Adults seeking abortions in cases of rape or incest have up to eight weeks and must make a police report. Minors who are victims of incest or sexual assault may undergo an abortion within 14 weeks and may either make a report to law enforcement or be treated by a licensed medical professional in the hospital. The medical treatment may not be provided by the same person providing the abortion.
The bill specifies that the abortions that are performed must be in a hospital by a licensed medical professional with hospital privileges.
In a local radio interview, Tarr agreed that the new law will prevent many abortions. But he maintained it isn’t restrictive enough.
“I’m glad we actually got some legislation that ends up being one of the most pro-life states in the country now,” Tarr said on “580 Live” on WCHS Radio. “I was disappointed that we didn’t go all the way to protect all the innocent lives in West Virginia.”
And he again described being frustrated by the West Virginians for Life scorecard that would count his “no” vote against his record. He described the bill as being imperfect, from his view, because it would restrict most abortions with the exceptions still allowing some.
“And moments before we go onto the floor, all the senators receive a text message saying ‘West Virginians for Life is going to score this vote. So in your elections, whether you’re going to be endorsed by West Virginians for Life or not — which to a lot of people means whether you’re pro-life or not — we’re going to look at this vote,'” Tarr said.
He continued, “So if you’re going to go in there and the people who are recognized as the organization that advocates for life says that it’s OK to sacrifice these that are left to save the 98 — I was upset, really, frankly disgusted, that we would go in when it’s all on us, the Legislature has the wherewithal to go in and protect all life and we stopped short.”
West Virginians for Life last week acknowledged Tarr’s concern and said that although its scorecard will reflect his no vote, he will still receive the organization’s endorsement. Tarr is unopposed in the coming General Election for the Senate seat covering Mason and parts of Putnam, Jackson and Cabell counties.
“Senator Tarr has a solid pro-life record and he was rightfully upset. We wish the bill could have been stronger and protect every single baby in the state. We respect and understand his position,” said Sadie Shields, legislative director for West Virginians for Life, responding to a question from MetroNews.
“In the end, legislators were presented with an opportunity to accomplish more than 98 percent of what we’ve been fighting for these past 50 years. Only 1 to 2 percent of abortions make up the hard cases. While we respect Senator Tarr’s decision, we do not agree with it. A ‘Yes’ vote on HB 302 was the single largest victory for the pro-life movement in the history of our Legislature. Senator Tarr’s vote will be recorded negatively on his otherwise perfect record he will continue to have the endorsement of West Virginians for Life in his 2022 re-election.”
Other Republicans who voted for the bill also contended in their floor remarks that it could have gone farther. Some, like Senator Robert Karnes, vowed to continue trying to remove the exceptions in the legislative sessions still to come.
Karnes had voted against a similar abortion bill earlier in the summer, but concluded this one would stop West Virginia’s only abortion clinic from providing the procedure. One policy he specifically mentioned would be a requirement to collect DNA evidence in the rape and incest cases. “I’ve been told that particular piece is something a lot of people intend to come back and work on in January,” said Karnes, R-Randolph.
Tarr, in his floor remarks, said he would vote no on this bill and continue trying to eliminate all abortions in West Virginia. He said too many of his colleagues continue thinking in terms of the abortion rights allowed under Roe vs. Wade, which was rolled back this year by the U.S. Supreme Court.
The exceptions for rape and incest will result in abortions, he said.
“I’m torn and disappointed that my vote now is to decide when do you execute an innocent. That’s really the decision we have before us now. It’s not how close to we push it because we can take it all the way, and we’re not doing that,” Tarr said. “If life is sacred, when does it become sacred? So my vote is a vote that I can go to bed and know that I’m at peace with God.
“In the future, as long as I get the honor to serve as a senator, I will push this to conception as hard as I can for the innocent life. This bill doesn’t do that. It stops short.”