Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Passes House, Comes Closer to President’s Signature     6/5/2003
By Pamela P. Wong

“The ban has always had the support of the American people, now it will have the full force of law,” said CWA President Sandy Rios.

In an historic vote last evening that culminated eight years of hard work within the pro-life community, the U.S. House of Representatives passed the Partial Birth Abortion Ban (HR 760) with a two-thirds majority of 282-139. President George Bush has promised to sign it into law.

Next, the bill will go to a conference committee for the House and Senate, where it is hoped language in the Senate version that endorses the Supreme Court decision Roe v. Wade, which unleashed abortion on demand, will be removed from the bill. The Senate version passed last March.

This is the third time a ban of the late-term abortion procedure has passed both houses of Congress. However, President Bill Clinton vetoed the bill twice during his administrations.

“The ban has always had the support of the American people, now it will have the full force of law …,” said Sandy Rios, president of Concerned Women for America. “What a triumph of the American spirit it has been to see moms and dads, activists and plainspoken parishioners remain committed vote after vote, even through the Clinton vetoes, to seeing this legislation become law.”

The House also defeated an amendment introduced by Rep. Jim Greenwood (R-Pennsylvania) to add a “health” of the mother exception to the ban. Pro-abortion forces widely support a health exception because it would continue to make partial-birth abortion available for almost any reason. In an important distinction, the bill does contain a “life” of the mother exception.

The passion of pro-life representatives struck observers of the debate last evening. On the other hand, remarks from the opposition revealed misconceptions still rampant. According to a Capitol Hill source, Rep. Louise Slaughter (D-New York) stated that Roe v. Wade doesn’t permit the abortion of a baby in the third trimester—unless two doctors certify that he or she is deformed and unable to survive.

In reality, however, even The Washington Post

acknowledges that the law of the land allows abortion throughout pregnancy, while permitting the states to regulate abortion after “viability.” The Court did not define when viability occurs. Further, in Roe’s companion case Doe v. Bolton, the Court ruled that abortions could be performed after viability based on the broadly defined “health” of the mother. “Health,” the Court said, included the physical, but also factors such as emotional and psychological, familial and age-related.

President Bush may sign the bill even before the July 4th holiday. At that point, opponents have said they will immediately file suit charging that the ban is unconstitutional. Proponents, however, say the bill is carefully written to prevent that from succeeding.

Printer Friendly Version

Recent Articles

Fetal Homicide: Always Two Victims of Violence

CWALAC Objects to “Ambassador for Abortion” Bill

Pro-Life Activism in the Aftermath of Tiller's Murder

Statement on Killing of Late-Term Abortionist George Tiller

California Supreme Court Yields to “We the People”

New! Research Must Respect Life

Crouse Laments the President’s Spin at Notre Dame

A Solution to the Notre Dame-Obama Conflict

Gallup Shows More Americans Pro-Life

Guest Commentary! Is Obama the First Pro-Euthanasia President?