State Senate votes to block deceptive ads from pregnancy centers

HARTFORD — In a long-running battle over abortion, the state Senate voted Wednesday for ending deceptive advertising by faith-based crisis pregnancy centers.

The emotional issue has caused clashes for the past four years, and an opponent vowed after the vote that the measure will likely end up in court if signed into law. The limited services centers do not provide referrals for emergency contraception or abortions, but advocates say the centers sometimes try to dupe pregnant women into believing they would be entering a medical facility when they were not.

With sharp disagreements over free speech, religious rights and abortion rights, senators battled over the issue at the state Capitol in Hartford for more than two hours before approving the bill by 21-15. Three Senate Democrats — Joan Hartley of Waterbury, Cathy Osten of Sprague, andDennis Bradley of Bridgeport — broke with their party and joined with Republicans in opposing the bill.

“Connecticut will not allow deceptive advertising practices,’’ said Sen. MaryDaugherty Abrams, a Meriden Democrat who co-chairs the legislature’s public health committee. “Ultimately, this bill is simple: tell the truth. ... The women of Connecticut deserve the truth.’’

Although many of the centers are faith-based, Abrams said, “I don’t believe this does target any faithbased organizations of any kind. ... There is no threat to the constitutional rights under the First Amendment. .... The constitution does not protect the ability to have deceptive advertising.’’

As the controversy has spread in recent years, Abrams said that some centers have already changed their websites and “became more transparent in what they were doing.’’

But Sen. Heather Somers, a Groton Republican, said she strongly opposes the bill, despite her support for abortion rights and for Planned Parenthood.

“There has yet to be any evidence of deception,’’ Somers said on the Senate floor. “We have heard countless testimony year after year. ... There have been no complaints submitted to Connecticut. Zero.

None. ... Not one person has come forward [to the state consumer protection department] and talked about themselves being delayed or a deceptive practice that they witnessed.’’

Noting that hundreds of residents have testified against the long-controversial bill in recent years, Somers said, “I do not believe that pregnancy crisis centers are deceiving. ... They are helping women who choose parenthood. ... The accusations that have come forth are unsubstantiated.’’

Somers added, “Many people don’t like that they are faith-based, but they are. ... They do not take money from the state, and they don’t provide terminations. ... I have not been able to get anybody to tell me what’s deceptive.’’

Saying that she visited crisis pregnancy centers and Planned Parenthood to see how they operate, Somers said ,“They both have a place, and they both can co-exist. ... I looked up the complaints on the crisis pregnancy centers and Planned Parenthood. There are no complaints on file.’’

The measure still requires approval by the House and Gov. Ned La mont as the leg islature moves to finish its work before adjournment on June 9.

Republicans said a major problem was that the bill does not define the word “deceptive,’’ despite being in the title of the measure that is “an act concerning deceptive advertising practices of limited services pregnancy centers.’’

While Republicans offered an amendment to include a definition of the word “deceptive,’’ Sen. Saud Anwar, a South Windsor Democratic lawmaker who is also a medical doctor, said the amendment was unnecessary because an explanation was“clearly stated in the bill.’’ The amendment was defeated, 23-12, along party lines.

Anwar rejected the views of Some rs that there had been no complaints over the issue.

“We have to be sure we are protecting the health of our individuals,’’ Anwar said. “There was one individual who was assaulted when that individual was going to get health care. ... This is a concern. Thisbill is notabout pro-life or pro-choice even though people would want us to look through that lens. ... This is a bill about honesty. This is a bill about transparency .... We really need to stop dividing people.’’

Under the bill, the state attorney general — the state’s top lawyer — would investigate complaints about the advertising. The centers could be fined up to $500 and charged “reasonable attorney’s fees and costs’’ if a court found that they had engaged in deceptive advertising. Abrams said the measure is necessary because some of the centers do not fall under the Connecticut Unfair Trade Practices Act. Planned Parenthood, Abrams said, falls under the regulations of the state.

Peter Wolfgang, executive director of the Family Institute of Connecticut, says the battle will continue over the issue.

“Should this bill become law, it will be on very shaky ground in court, especially after the discussion that was just held today,’’ Wolfgang said. “Supporters of the bill empowered the attorney general to sue faith-based pregnancy centers on a claim of ‘deceptive advertising,’ which they refused to define. They could not have made it any clearer that this is viewpoint discrimination, that they are targeting just one group, pro-life pregnancy centers, and that it is essentially a political hit job on them. The courts are not going to look kindly on that.’’

The long-running public battle has already included a civil lawsuit over a 2017 Hartford city ordinance that was settled last year with both sides claiming victory in an agreement that did not include cash awards for either side.

Senate majority leader Bob Duff of Norwalk said he does not believe the bill is an attack on faith, adding, “I view myself as a faithful person — one who believes in God. ... The reason the bill is here today is because there are clinics that are deceptive.’’

Sen. JohnKissel, anEnfield Republican who serves as the ranking member on the judiciary committee, said that free speech is protected by the U.S. Constitution. Hesaid that faith-based organization do good work, adding that his late grandmother spent decades working for Catholic Charities in Massachusetts.

“I have a hard time finding a genuine problem out there that we should spend so much time addressing,’’ Kissel said during the debate.

Senate Republican leader Kevin Kelly of Stratford said, “It’s an attempt to chill our First Amendment rights.’’