Related articles:

2 abortion bills are vetoed by Napolitano Governor gets bill on minors' abortions Napolitano vetoes abortion restictionsState lawmakers send two abortion bills to Napolitano

Other articles by Howard Fischer:

Voters: Here are issues you'll be asked to decideAt least 11 measures likely to be on ballot Low cost to state aim of points-free photo radar tickets Group seeks easing of Arizona law targeting employers of illegal immigrants Appeals court: State can seize wire transfers Backers of tax boost for roads squabble over funds, petitions School vouchers OK for now, but funds aren't there Initiative to scuttle affirmative action faces court challenge New homes could get new warrantiesAz voter initiative would require 10-year new-home warranty

Production and Manufacturing
Pioneer Landscaping
Crushing Crew Trades/Construction
Pioneer Landscaping
Yard Person/Loader Operator Trades/Construction
Paragon Electric
Electricians General
Prestige maintenance USA
Custodian Trades/Construction
Wentz and Patrick Construction
Carpenters & Helpers Health Care
FRONT OFFICE Trades/Construction
Lectra-Serv, Inc
Electricians & Helpers

PHOENIX — State lawmakers want to give Gov. Janet Napolitano a chance to prove she means what she says when it comes to abortion restrictions.

On a 6-3 vote Wednesday, the House Committee on Natural Resources and Public Safety approved a measure to again make "partial-birth" abortions illegal in Arizona. The measure now goes to the full House.

The vote came less than a week after Napolitano vetoed a similar — but not identical — bill. Abortion foes hope that difference changes her mind.

Arizona's first attempt to outlaw the late-term procedure, enacted in 1997, was kept from taking effect by a federal judge who said it was unconstitutional.

Since then, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld a federal statute outlawing the procedure except to save the life of the mother. Backers of the bill that went to Napolitano last week said it was patterned on the federal law.

But Napolitano, in her veto message, pointed out two differences.

The federal law sets the maximum penalty for doctors at no more than two years in prison. Arizona's version could have led to longer incarceration.

And the federal law lets a doctor charged with breaking the law seek an opinion from a panel of other physicians to determine whether the procedure was medically justified. That provision was stripped out of the earlier bill at the request of the Arizona Medical Board, the panel that would have had to do that here. Virtually all the board members are Napolitano appointees.

SB 1048 now includes both the two-year maximum penalty and the medical-review provision.

"This bill is doing exactly what the governor asked for," said Rep. Jerry Weiers, R-Glendale.

Gubernatorial press aide Jeanine L'Ecuyer said she would not comment on whether Napolitano will sign the new version.

And Rep. Kyrsten Sinema, D-Phoenix, said supporters of the legislation were looking at just part of the veto message.

She noted Napolitano also said it would be preferable for lawmakers to pay more attention to the causes of unwanted pregnancy by addressing issues of family planning and violence against women "rather than introducing more criminal penalties into the relationship between a woman and her physician."

Sinema said she does not believe the procedure should be criminalized.

"It still places some unnecessary restrictions on women who are, sadly, facing a difficult choice at a later time in pregnancy, often in circumstances beyond their own control or their own choosing," she said.

The legislation is backed by the state's three Catholic bishops and the anti-abortion Center for Arizona Policy.

Ron Johnson, who lobbies for the bishops, said the lack of a state statute does not prevent doctors from being charged under the federal law, if a federal prosecutor decides to pursue the case. A state law gives that power to the 15 county attorneys.

Napolitano vetoed another measure the same day spelling out the factors judges must consider when determining if a minor is mature enough to terminate a pregnancy without parental consent. She called the measure unnecessary, saying those factors already are in court decisions.