On June 4, the House approved, 282-139, the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban (H.R. 760). Sponsored by Rep. Steve Chabot (R-OH), H.R. 760 would prohibit a specific abortion procedure performed during the second and third trimesters. The bill would make an exception if the life of the pregnant woman is endangered by carrying the pregnancy to term. Physicians who violate the ban would be subject to two years’ imprisonment and/or fines. H.R. 760 also contains a number of congressional findings that state “partial-birth abortion is never necessary to preserve the health of a woman, poses serious risks to a woman’s health, and lies outside the standard of medical care.”
Congress considered similar bans during the 104th, 105th, and 106th Congresses. Twice the bans were vetoed by President Clinton. In 2000, the U.S. Supreme Court struck down a Nebraska law that would have banned “partial-birth abortions” because the law did not include a health exception and because the bill placed an undue burden on a woman’s right to choose due to a broadly worded definition. Last year, the House approved a ban; however, the Senate did not consider the measure (see The Source, 7/26/02).
During debate, the House rejected, 133-287, a substitute amendment offered by Rep. James Greenwood (R-PA) that would have made it unlawful to perform an abortion after the fetus has become viable, unless, in the medical judgment of the attending physician, it is necessary to preserve the life of the woman or to avert serious adverse consequences to her health. Under the amendment, violators would be subject to civil penalties.
Speaking in support of the ban, Rep. Jo Ann Emerson (R-MO) stated that “this legislation not only protects the rights of the unborn, but it is also a carefully crafted piece of legislation that addresses the concerns of the U.S. Supreme Court expressed in Stenberg v. Carhart.” She added, “for a few thousand children, upon whom the ‘partial-birth abortion’ procedure will be committed in the next year, H.R. 760 is not just legislation; it is life.”
Rep. Nita Lowey (D-NY) disagreed, saying that H.R. 760 “contains no protection for the health of the woman, leaves no role for the physician treating a woman, and never mentions fetal viability.” She continued, “Congress ignores women, families, doctors and the Supreme Court, and makes all the decisions.”
The Senate approved its bill (S. 3) in March (see The Source, 3/14/03). H.R. 760 is now headed to conference where conferees are expected to strip Senate language that supports Roe v. Wade. The President is expected to sign the measure into law.
