April 25, 1997
Activists are urged to start making contact with key members now, even though there is still some uncertainty over when the Senate vote will take place on the D & X abortion ban, This is our final opportunity to stop this terrible legislation and the challenge is great because the number of abortion opponents in the Senate has grown since the November elections. There are now 51 solid anti-abortion votes and a number of otherwise pro-choice Senators may be voting for the ban. So please make your calls and deliver a strong message of opposition to any restrictions on abortion procedures.
The legislation, H.R. 1122/S. 6 - the so called "partial-birth" abortion ban act, clearly undermines a woman's right to an abortion after the first trimester and endangers women's lives and health. The bill contains no exception to preserve a woman's health and is, therefore, unconstitional. (See Lawrence Tribe analysis at NOW's website: http://www.now.org/issues/abortion/dxanalysis.html). It is essentially the same bill that was vetoed by President Clinton last year and indications are good that he will veto the bill again. However, there are more Senators in this Congress who will vote to override, so it important to provide reinforcement for our supporters.
Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott (R-MS) has announced that he plans to schedule a Senate vote for either late in the week of April 28th or early in the following week. However, Sen. Rick Santorum (R-PA), sponsor of S. 6, has said that he believes the vote will take place in mid-May. Sen. Santorum wants to see the vote delayed until enough Senate members have committed to override a possible presidential veto.
Several efforts are being made to advance bills that contain a narrow health exception, but most observers believe that the Republican leadership will not let these bills be voted on. One bill (S. 481), sponsored by Sens. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA), Barbara Boxer (D-CA), and Carol Moseley-Braun (D-IL), prohibits abortion after fetal viability except when a woman's life is in danger or when there would be serious adverse health consequences. Senate Minority Leader Tom Daschle (D-SD), reportedly, is planning to introduce a similar bill but has not introduced one as yet.
Because Senate rules differ from the House rules, there is a chance that a more "moderate" bill (which would most likely still undermine abortion rights) could be offered from the floor as an amendment, but the likelihood of passage is slim. The Republican leadership has vowed that they will give President Clinton the same bill that he vetoed last year. The count of senators in favor of the ban currently totals 58. Four senators are undecided and need to hear from abortion rights supporters: Ernest Hollings, (D-SC), Mary Landrieu (D-LA), Patrick Leahy (D-VT) and Arlen Specter (R-PA).
Please note that the House of Representatives was inundated by hundreds of thousands of letters, calls, and faxes from abortion rights opponents and the pressure on senators to vote for a ban is tremendous. Letters to the editor, activation of fax broadcast and phone tree networks and all other actions to increase our numbers is extremely important. In the meantime, thanks for everything that you are doing on this tough issue -- we don't want to lose.
1. Passage of H.R. 1122/S. 6 is a direct attack on the right to abortion as protected by Supreme Court decisions in Roe v. Wade and Casey v. Planned Parenthood. There is no exception in the legislation to allow for abortion to preserve the woman's health as required by the Supreme Court. Both of these cases made it clear that, after fetal viability, the government may restrict abortion only if the law contains exceptions for pregnancies that, if carried to term, would endanger the woman's life or health. The Supreme Court, in both cases again, found that before fetal viability a woman has the right to choose to terminate her pregnancy without undue interference by the state.
2. H.R. 1122/S. 6 prohibits use of an abortion procedure (D & X, sometimes called intact D &E) which is recognized by medical professionals as safe and effective. It causes less trauma, lowers the risk of unnecessary bleeding, reduces complications, and is more likely to preserve the woman's fertility than other available procedures.
3. "Partial-birth" abortion is not a medical term and there are no medical or legal guidelines about the meaning of the term. This vagueness, when combined with the threat of criminal prosecution specified in the bill, is designed to scare away any doctor who will not want to risk criminal liability.
4. This legislation constitutes an unwarranted intrusion of Congress into medical decision making and is opposed by many professional medical organizations, such as the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG).
5. Key terms like "fetal viability" and "serious adverse health consequences" are not defined in the statute. Determination of fetal viability and what constitutes serious adverse health consequences should be made only by physicians, not politicians.