• D & X Abortion Ban Passes House, Senate To Vote Soon
• D & X Talking Points/ Constitutional Analysis
• Victory: International Family Planning Funding Resolution Approved
• FDA Okays Emergency Contraception Use
• Bill to Mandate Insurance Coverage for Contraceptives
• Domestic Violence Offender Gun Ban May be Weakened
• NOW Contributes to New Hate Crimes Report
• Adding Sex-based and Sexual Orientation to Hate Crimes Statutes
• ERA is Re-introduced

• List of All Updates
• Look up legislation on Thomas
• Sign up for the NOW Action Alert list

D & X Abortion Ban Legislation Passes House, Senate to Vote Soon

The anti-abortion leadership, through Rules Committee action, also turned back an effort by a bipartisan group to advance a more "moderate" ban bill (also opposed by NOW) and would not allow any amendments to be offered from the floor during final passage. Abortion rights supporters in Congress were thus foiled in their numerous attempts to modify H.R. 1122 or breathe life into an alternative, (H.R. 1032); Reps. Barney Frank (D-MA) Jerrold Nadler (D-NY), Sheila Jackson-Lee (D-TX), Jim Greenwood (R-PA) and Steny Hoyer (R-MD) led these efforts.

H.R. 1122 is essentially the same legislation as vetoed by the President last year: it prohibits a particular abortion procedure whether before or after fetal viability, except when abortion is necessary to save the life of a mother whose life is endangered by a "physical disorder, illness or injury." This very narrow exception may not allow for life-threatening conditions which are the result of the pregnancy itself (although the Canady bill did allow for this) and there is no provision that allows an abortion to preserve the health of the woman.

At the time of the House vote, President Clinton issued a statement indicating the he would again veto such legislation because it contained "the same serious flaws."

H.R. 1122 does not refer by name to the dilation and extraction (D & X, also known intact dilation and evacuation or D & E) procedure. Rather the non-medical term "partial-birth abortion" is used and is defined as an "abortion in which the person performing the abortion partially vaginally delivers a living fetus before killing the fetus and completing the delivery." The D & X procedure is most commonly used in the 2nd trimester, pre-viability --which would be prohibited by this bill -- a direct violation of Roe v. Wade.

H.R. 1122 would impose criminal penalties for physicians who perform the procedure of up to two years in prison and a fine. It also allows the father of the fetus and the maternal grandparents if the woman is under age 18 to sue the doctor. Criminal prosecution of the woman having the abortion is specifically prohibited. However, some legal scholars independent from the abortion debate including Columbia Law School (NY) Professor William K. Jones, have said that, if H.R. 1122 became law, a woman who had an abortion would probably be subject to civil lawsuits from the man who impregnated her or from the fetus's prospective grandparents (as reported in the Bergen County Record, NJ, 3/18/97).

The bipartisan measure, H.R. 1032, The Late Term Abortion Restriction Act, advanced by Reps. Greenwood and Hoyer, would have prohibited any abortion procedure (not just the D & X procedure) performed after fetal viability, except when a doctor believes it "necessary to preserve the life of the woman or to avert serious adverse health consequences." It also prescribed a civil penalty -- rather than criminal -- of a $10,000 fine. No definition of fetal viability or serious adverse health consequences is provided in the legislation. This same language has been introduced (S.481) in the Senate by Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) and co-sponsored by Sens. Barbara Boxer (D-CA) and Carol Moseley-Braun (D-IL).

The Senate is expected to vote on H.R. 1122 -- or its equivalent, S. 6 -- at any time following the members' return from the Easter recess (April 8). Because the bill has already been read into the record twice, as required prior to a vote, the matter could be taken up quickly with very little advance notice.

Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott told reporters after the House vote that he would hold up the Senate vote until enough support was secured to override a veto. Last year, the Senate failed to override the H.R. 1833, which President Clinton vetoed because it did not protect women's lives or health, by a vote of 57-41 -- a two-thirds vote (of members present) in each body is necessary. With the November elections several more anti-abortion senators have been added to give a 51-49 split against abortion rights; the margin may be razor thin.

The sponsor of S. 6 is Sen. Rick Santorum (R-PA) with all Republican co-sponsors: Lott (MS), Abraham (MI), Allard (CO), Ashcroft (MO), Bond (MO), Brownback (KS), Coats (IN), Coverdell(GA), Craig (ID), DeWine (OH), Domenici (NM), Enzi(WY), Faircloth (NC), Gorton (WA), Gramm (TX), Hagel (NE), Hatch (UT), Helms (NC), Hutchinson (AR), Kempthorne (ID), Kyl (AZ), Lugar (IN), McConnell (KY), Murkowski (AK), Nickles (OK), Roberts (KS), Sessions (AL), Smith (OR), Smith (NH), Thomas (WY), Thurmond (SC), and Warner (VA).

Senate Minority Leader Tom Daschle (D-SD) may unveil his "alternative" language at the last moment and, reportedly, may be quietly organizing a floor strategy in order to give some Democrats a chance to vote for a more "moderate" ban bill. Reportedly, Sen. Daschle was working on an approach for post-viability abortions which would have a more narrow health exception than H.R. 1032/S. 481 contain.

The campaign to pass a D & X abortion ban bill received renewed momentum this year when, prior to the House vote, Ron Fitzsimmons, executive director of the National Coalition of Abortion Providers, said that he lied "through his teeth" in a Nightline interview about the numbers of abortions done by this procedure (though the alleged "lies" were never aired). The actual total, he said, is more like 5,000 annually. Fitzsimmons alleged that a majority of these procedures were performed on healthy women with a healthy fetus that is 20 weeks or more along, according to various news reports. (At the same time, Fitzsimmons reportedly defended use of the D & X procedure, saying that it was a safe and appropriate method.)

As was done last fall just before passage of H.R. 1833, subsequently vetoed, an effort was successfully made by abortion opponents to confuse the press, legislators and the public on important differences between the 2nd and 3rd trimesters of pregnancy. Despite the cloud of confusion, the number of 3rd trimester abortions by any procedure remains quite small -- between 2/100ths and 4/100ths of one percent of the total.

ACTION NEEDED:

D & X Talking Points/ Constitutional Analysis:

Talking points to stress:

1) Any abortion ban prior to the point of fetal viability, even with exceptions protecting the life and health of the woman, is clearly unconstitutional under Roe v. Wade.

2) These bills violate Roe's requirement that restrictions in the 2nd trimester be designed to protect the woman, not the fetus.

3) Viability of the fetus varies with each pregnancy and should not be arbitrarily defined in a statute of law, rather determined by the attending physician.

4) Likewise, "serious adverse health consequences" is a potential condition to be diagnosed by a physician and cannot be defined in a statute -- and a doctor who fears jail time may be twoo conservative in this judgement, thus increasing the woman's risk.

5) Congress may not constitutionally single out for sanctions an abortion method that is recognized as medically appropriate for women in some circumstances.

6) Criminal penalties for physicians set a dangerous precedent and are an unjustified interference with medical practice and judgement.

Victory: International Family Planning Funding Resolution Approved

U.S. aid supports family planning services to about 35 to 40 million persons in numerous developing nations. Without U.S. funds, many clinics faced closure or reductions in services. Experts estimated that funding reductions could lead to an additional four million unplanned pregnancies, up to two million unplanned births, 134,000 infant deaths, 8,000 deaths among woman in childbirth and pregnancy, and 1.6 million abortions. Family planning opponents had touted international family planning program funding as part of 'Clinton's international campaign to promote abortion.'

ACTION NEEDED:

FDA Okays Emergency Contraception Use

The FDA-recommended procedure calls for taking 2 to 4 pills within 72 hours after unprotected intercourse and repeating the dosage 12 hours later. According to the FDA, brands that have been found safe and effective for emergency use are Ovral, Lo/Ovral, Nordette, Levlen, Triphasil, and Tri-Levlen. Research shows that emergency contraception is 75 percent effective in averting unplanned pregnancies.

Every year, there are approximately 3.5 million unplanned pregnancies in the U.S., with about half of those believed to result from contraceptive failures. Some experts believe that use of emergency contraception could reduce that number by 1.7 to 2.3 million per year.

Bill to Mandate Insurance Coverage for Contraceptives

Advocates reported that women of reproductive age spend about 68 percent more than men in out-of-pocket expenses on health care. Much of that cost is due to the fact that insurance plans, by and large limit or exclude coverage for contraception. A survey by the Alan Guttmacher Institute showed that Health Maintenance Organizations frequently provide more coverage of contraception than do traditional insurance (indemnity) plans.

Virginia Gov. George Allen (R) recently signed into law two bills pertaining to insurance coverage of contraception; one requires coverage in state employees' health plans and the other requires private insurers who also cover outpatient prescription drugs to "make available" coverage for any FDA-approved prescription contraception drug or device.

ACTION NEEDED:

Domestic Violence Offender Gun Ban May be Weakened

Members of Congress are responding to a campaign conducted by some police departments and professional organizations, backed by the National Rifle Association (NRA), to limit the effectiveness of the ban. Some police officers and their professional associations have complained that the new ban is difficult to enforce and is unfair to some officers who may have committed an offense many years ago, but maintained a clean record since. The NRA has indicated that opposition of the ban is part of its long range strategy to get rid of all bans on firearms.

A hearing was held on March 5 in the House Judiciary Subcommittee on Crime where representatives of police groups and domestic violence survivor advocacy organizations presented testimony. Several press conferences were conducted by the ban's chief proponent, Sen. Frank Lautenberg (D-NJ), together with Reps. Carolyn Maloney (D-NY), John Conyers (D-MI), and Sheila Jackson-Lee (D-TX). Leaders of women's rights and domestic violence survivor advocacy groups as well as family members of victims, like Denise Brown, sister of Nicole Brown Simpson, offered support for the ban. NOW President Patricia Ireland and NOW Action Vice President Rosemary Dempsey spoke at these events as well.

NOW wrote to House and Senate Judiciary committee members that retaining the ban is necessary because "incidents of domestic violence which involve guns are 12 times more likely to result in death than domestic assaults involving knives, physical force or other means," according to the Journal of the American Medical Association. The letter also noted that rates of domestic violence among law enforcement officials is much higher than is found in the general population, according to a number of studies.

Apparently, the outcry on gutting of the gun ban was effective in that some committee members appear to be backing away from their earlier support of the legislation. With continued pressure and more favorable news articles and editorials, like the strong statement of opposition to watering down of the gun ban in the New York Times (3/20) and the Atlanta Constitution (3/11), support for maintaining the ban may be gaining.

ACTION NEEDED:

NOW Contributes to New Hate Crimes Report

"Cause for Concern" is the first comprehensive assessment of the hate crime problem in the U.S., and researchers noted that the 25,000 hate crimes reported from 1992 - 1995, represent only a part of the true picture with not all law enforcement agencies reporting to the federal government. Additionally, crimes against women which may be gender- or sex-based are not counted at all.

NOW assisted in the preparation of sections of the report which pertain to sex-based hate crimes, noting that women as a class are not covered in either the criminal statutes prohibiting certain types of hate-based crime or by the Hate Crime Statistics Act that requires the FBI to collect crime reports. The National Crime Victims Treatment Center reported that close to 700,000 adult women are raped each year, while the U.S. Department of Justice statistics office indicates that intimate partners committed more than a million assaults, rapes, and murders of women between 1992 and 1993. Not all these crimes could be classified as hate crimes, but many could easily fall into that category with the identified characteristics of hate language, sexual assault, mutilation, and extreme brutality and cruelty.

The report states that, "Many crimes against women reflect a resistance to their efforts to achieve equality. These crimes are often intended to intimidate women into staying in -- or returning to -- their "place of subservience to men at home, in the workplace, and throughout society."

Recommendations include expansion of the federal criminal civil rights statutes to cover gender, sexual orientation, and immigration status as well as enactment of tougher hate crime laws at state and local levels, with "penalty-enhancement" provisions that impose harsher punishments for criminal acts motivated by bias.

A copy of the report is available from the Leadership Conference on Civil Rights/ Leadership Conference Education Fund, 1629 K St., NW Suite 1010, Washington, D.C. 20006. Phone: 202-466-3311.

Adding Sex and Sexual Orientation to Hate Crimes Statutes

Attorney General Janet Reno issued a statement on March 11 indicating that new data from the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and other sources "have shown a disturbing rise in the number of hate crimes based on race, color, national origin, religion and sexual orientation." She added that, "We must also work to improve the ability of the Federal government to respond. Federal hate crime statutes do not now permit us to prosecute offenses motivated by a victim's sexual orientation." The National Coalition of Anti-Violence Programs recently released data showing an increase in the number of hate crimes related to a victim's sexual orientation.

ACTION NEEDED:

ERA is Re-Introduced