I don't know, but it certainly has impassioned legislators on its side:
Rep. Chris Madsen, R-Sioux Falls, said no price is too high to pay.
"I feel a great injustice and scourge is upon this land. I will vote for this bill irregardless of the cost, because I think it is the right thing to do," Madsen said.
Rep. Bill Peterson, R-Sioux Falls, said "For those of you thinking only about the money, ask: What is the value of one human life?"
The question came down to a moral one for those both for and against HB1191.
Looby protested that HB1191 makes no provision for women who have been raped or are victims of incest. In 2002, that was 20 women, according to the state Health Department.
"Those women would be forced to carry the progeny of their rapist or close family member to term," Looby said. "Twenty might not sound like a very big number until you are one of those 20."
Rep. Ben Nesselhuf, D-Vermillion, said he could not vote for the bill because he finds it disingenuous.
"I do not believe this is going to prevent one single abortion," Nessulhuf said.
Others said they felt obligated to challenge the law of the land that has stood for 30 years.
"The question in front of us, when it's all boiled down, is: Is this right, or is it wrong?" Rep. Larry Rhoden, R-Union Center, said. "We can't try and compromise. We have an opportunity as a state to take back some of the 10th Amendment rights, and we have a responsibility to do so."
It's interesting to see this cast as a state's rights issue. It is, of course, but that's an angle rarely used. I've always believed that state legislatures were the most appropriate place for this debate.