March 24, 2003
Senate breathes life into 'partial-birth' abortion bill
___By Robert Marus
___ABP Washington Bureau
___WASHINGTON (ABP)--Legislation that would restrict so-called "partial-birth" abortion has passed the United States Senate, meaning almost certain confirmation by the House and White House.
___The March 13 Senate vote was 64 to 33, with 16 Democrats joining the majority. Three Republicans and one independent voted against the legislation.
___The vote was hailed as a major victory by anti-abortion groups and President Bush. Supporters expect the bill to sail through the House by the end of April and for Bush to sign it into law shortly thereafter.
___In the last Congress, a similar bill passed the House but died in the Democratic-controlled Senate. Previous versions of the bill have passed but were vetoed by then-President Bill Clinton. Congress could not muster enough votes to override the veto in those cases.
___"Partial-birth abortion is an abhorrent procedure that offends human dignity, and I commend the Senate for passing legislation to ban it," Bush said. Employing terminology popularized by Pope John Paul II in his essays opposing abortion, euthanasia and capital punishment, Bush called the action "an important step toward building a culture of life in America."
___Opponents, however, said the bill is virtually identical to a law overturned by the Supreme Court three years ago. In that case, Stenberg vs. Carhart, the court invalidated a Nebraska "partial-birth" ban because it was overbroad and failed to include an exemption to preserve the health of the mother.
___Supporters of the bill--including chief sponsor Sen. Rick Santorum, R-Pa.--attempted to address that concern by including in the legislation a congressional "finding" that the procedure "is never medically necessary and should be prohibited." In the procedure, a physician partially delivers a fetus, pierces the base of its skull with a sharp instrument and suctions out its brain matter.
___During floor debate on the bill, Santorum said he has repeatedly asked one question to opponents of his bill: "Tell me why this is medically necessary. Tell me why, when even abortionists say it is not medically necessary, where no medical school in the country teaches this procedure, tell me why we have to keep this brutality of killing a child literally inches away from being born."
___But Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., cited other medical professionals who pointed to cases in which the "dilation and extraction" abortion, as the procedure also is called, was the safest option for preserving the mother's health when ending troubled pregnancies.
___Feinstein offered an amendment that would have added a health exception to the ban, but senators turned down the amendment as well as others designed to lessen the bill's impact.
___Opponents of the bill said it is an attempt by anti-abortion groups to get their foot in the door and could be interpreted to ban much more than "partial-birth" procedures.
___"I want to expose this proposal for what it is. It is deceptive, it is extreme, and it is unconstitutional," said Sen. Patty Murray, D-Wash. "The other side wants you to think that this just affects one procedure performed in the third trimester, but that is not true."
___Longtime abortion opponent Ken Connor of the Family Research Council predicted the bill is sufficiently narrow to pass Supreme Court scrutiny.
___"From a tightened definition of the partial-birth abortion procedure to evidence showing that it is never medically necessary, the bill specifically addresses the concerns needed to garner majority support in the court," Connor said. "It's time we put this barbaric procedure behind us."
Get printer-friendly version of this story
Send this story to a friend
News of religion, faith, missions, Bible study and Christian ministry among Texas Baptist churches, in the BGCT, the Southern Baptist Convention ( SBC ) and around the world.
Contents/ Masthead / Why We're Here / Links / Archive / E-mail us/ SUBSCRIBE!/ Signup for FirstLook