I'm so aghast at this, thankfully the news articles seem to be suggesting that it wouldn't be passed.
My knowledge of US politics is pretty poor, but I don't understand how this could even get to the 'proposing' stage.
Legislation can be proposed by any member of the New Mexico legislature ("upper" or "lower" houses). Colleagues can sign on as "co-sponsors" to help generate support & momentum. It appears that she had 9 colleagues who co-signed.
A bill needs to pass both houses to be signed into law. The law maker who introduced this bill is a Republican. Generally speaking, Republicans don't have a great track record with introducing or supporting pro-choice legislation.
Since Democrats hold the majority in both houses, it is very unlikely that this bill will pass.
Often, you'll find people introducing bills that have no chance in hell of passing because they are trying to send a message to their core constituents -- or force "the other side" to respond.
Is it saying that a person who is responsible for rape/incest would be charged if they try to force their victim to terminate... or
That the victim would be charged?
The author claims that she was trying to prevent rapists from forcing their victims to have abortions or "tampering" with any evidence that might prove a sexual assault crime" NOT that she was trying to charge victims with a crime. However, the language is written in a way that suggests that anyone "procuring" an abortion could be charged.
The Democrats are essentially saying, "Your excuse is bullsh*t. You & your party have a horrible record of protecting a woman's right to choose -- this is just another misguided tactic to try to criminalize abortions."
At least that's what I can gather from the few articles I've read.