[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 177 (Thursday, November 9, 1995)]
[Senate]
[Pages S16928-S16929]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                           ABORTION BAN BILL

 Mr. LAUTENBERG. Mr. President, I am pleased that the Senate 
has voted to commit this bill to the Judiciary Committee.
  Mr. President, the pending bill is proposing a major change in 
criminal law. For the first time, this body may pass a law making a 
medical procedure a crime.
  If this legislation becomes law, doctors in this country could be 
thrown behind bars for performing medical procedures that they feel are 
necessary to protect the life and health of the mother.
  The bill also creates a new cause of action for people to sue doctors 
who perform a certain medical procedure.
  Mr. President, we should not make a decision on a bill with these 
far-reaching implications until we have a hearing.
  There are just too many questions about this bill that have not been 
answered by expert witnesses. Let me mention a few of them:
  Is this bill Constitutional?
  Does it violate the principles that the Supreme Court established in 
Roe versus Wade?
  Why is the Federal Government criminalizing a medical procedure when 
medical procedures are typically regulated by the States?
  What is the rationale behind the 2-year prison sentence for 
physicians who perform this procedure?
  Will this bill result in hundreds or thousands of new civil lawsuits 
that will overwhelm our legal system?
  What does the term ``partial birth abortion'' mean? I understand that 
no 

[[Page S 16929]]
such term exists in the medical lexicon. Is Congress just inventing a 
new medical term to advance a political end?
  Which Federal law enforcement agency will enforce this law? Will FBI 
agents be snooping around physicians' offices? Will the FBI put hidden 
cameras into examining rooms?
  Mr. President, the Senate has not asked any expert witnesses to 
answer these questions. And before we vote on this legislation, I think 
we should have the opportunity to ask these questions.
  We also should hear from individuals, groups and organizations that 
will be affected by this bill.
  Have we heard testimony in the Senate from any of the following?
  The Justice Department?
  The FBI?
  Constitutional experts?
  The trial and criminal bar?
  Doctors?
  Patients?
  Families?
  This is the only question that we all can categorically answer. The 
answer is no! We have not heard testimony in the Senate from any of 
these parties.
  How can the Senate debate such a complicated bill without the input 
of such persons?
  Mr. President, the Senate should be more deliberate and responsible! 
We should not ram this bill through without proper consideration.
  It would be wrong and irresponsible for the Senate to act before we 
have a hearing on the provisions in this legislation. This is a new 
proposal that has not been before the Congress in the past.
  Before we should be asked to vote, we should have testimony and a 
committee report on our desks.
  Mr. President, I have great respect for the chairman of the Judiciary 
Committee. We do not agree on many issues but I believe that he is 
fair. Now since the Senate has voted to commit this bill to the 
Judiciairy Committee, I trust that he will put together a fair hearing 
on this bill so that the Senate can make an informed decision.
  Once again, I am pleased that the Senate has voted to send this bill 
back where it belongs--to the Judiciary Committee.

                          ____________________