[Congressional Record Volume 143, Number 66 (Monday, May 19, 1997)]
[Senate]
[Page S4668]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                 PARTIAL-BIRTH ABORTION BAN ACT OF 1997

  Mr. HELMS. Mr. President, there are many times when I am so inclined 
to pay my respects to Senators who have gone out of their way to take a 
somewhat different stand. And I imagine that during the past week--and 
throughout the days of debate on the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act in 
the 104th Congress, as a matter of fact--that if unborn children had a 
vote or a message of communication and a way to deliver it, they would 
be sending their love to the distinguished Senator from Pennsylvania, 
Mr. Santorum; and to the distinguished occupant of the chair, Mr. 
DeWine of Ohio; and to the able Senator from New Hampshire, Mr. Smith 
as well as to the able Senators from Texas and Tennessee, Mr. Gramm and 
Mr. Frist; and on and on.
  It has not always been easy to take the pro-life position on this 
floor, but it is a lot easier and a lot more comfortable now, thanks to 
these great Senators and others. I personally pay my respects to all 
who have participated in the debate on the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban 
Act up to this point.
  By the way, as one who has participated in the abortion debates since 
the Supreme Court's Roe versus Wade decision in 1973, and as one who 
has been condemned by many in certain quarters, I am so thankful that 
the cavalry has arrived in the Senate and now other Senators are 
standing up to be counted on an issue that involves the survival of 
this country. I have long felt if our country cannot reconcile with 
morality and decency and honesty, the position on the deliberate 
destruction of the most innocent, the most helpless of human life, that 
may be at peril--lying just down the road--is the survival of this 
country.
  In any case, the abortion debate shifted dramatically when 
legislation was introduced in the 104th Congress to spare unborn babies 
from a merciless procedure known as a partial-birth abortion. Because 
of the debate in Congress and the heightened concern of the American 
people, the spotlight no longer is focused on the sanctimonious, so-
called right to choose; instead, the debate now centers around the 
ultimate question: Does an innocent, defenseless, unborn child have a 
right to live? Senators have cast their votes for and against 
legislation outlawing partial-birth abortions on two previous 
occasions--first on December 6, 1995, when 54 Senators voted to ban 
partial-birth abortions. But the President of the United States, Mr. 
Clinton, saw fit to veto that bill. The Senate, on September 26 of last 
year, failed to override that Presidential veto. Fifty-seven Senators 
voted to override, but the 57 were 10 votes fewer than the two-thirds 
necessary and required to override.
  Which brings me to where we are now and the reason I stand here to 
pay my respects to Senators like the distinguished occupant of the 
chair, Mr. DeWine, Mr. Santorum, Mr. Smith, and others. The Senate has 
been considering whether an innocent baby--partially born, just 3 
inches from the protection of the law--deserves the right to live, to 
love, and to be loved. Interestingly enough, the House of 
Representatives has already passed H.R. 1122, which is the bill now 
before the Senate. In my judgment, the Senate must not squander this 
opportunity to outlaw partial-birth abortions, and I cannot believe it 
will.
  Those who oppose the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act, as it is named, 
have again asserted the necessity of the procedure that enables doctors 
to deliver babies partially, feet first from the womb, only to have 
their brains brutally removed by the doctor's instruments. This 
procedure has prompted revulsion across this land, even among many who 
previously have been vocal advocates of the right to choose.
  Well-known medical doctors, obstetricians and gynecologists have 
repeatedly rejected the assertions that a partial-birth abortion is 
needed to protect the health of a woman in a late-term complicated 
pregnancy. Dr. Pamela E. Smith, who is director of medical education in 
the department of obstetrics and gynecology at Chicago's Mount Sinai 
Hospital, in a letter to Senators described these assertions as--in her 
words, not mine--``deceptive and patently untrue.''

  Also, Mr. President, there is much to be said about the facts 
surrounding the number of partial-birth abortions performed annually 
and the reason they are performed--or at least the given, stated 
reason. It is hard to overlook the recent confession of Ron 
Fitzsimmons, executive director of the National Coalition of Abortion 
Providers, who admitted that he, himself, had deceived the American 
people on national television about the number and the nature of 
partial-birth abortions.
  Mr. Fitzsimmons now estimates that up to 5,000 partial-birth 
abortions are conducted annually on healthy women carrying healthy 
babies. This is a far cry from the rhetoric espoused by Washington's 
pro-abortion groups who maintain that only 500 partial-birth abortions 
are performed every year, and only in extreme medical circumstances.
  Mr. President, I could go on and on, but Senators throughout this 
debate have provided ample evidence affirming the need to rid America 
of this senseless, brutal form of killing. And it is also important to 
note that the American people recognize the moral significance of this 
legislation. The continued outpouring of letters and phone calls from 
across the country in support of a ban on partial-birth abortions has 
been nothing short of remarkable.
  I remember so vividly the day in January 1973, when the Supreme Court 
handed down the decision to legalize abortion. It was hard to find many 
people to speak up, certainly on the floor of the Senate, on behalf of 
unborn babies.
  But it is time, once again, for Members of the Senate to stand up and 
be counted for or against the most helpless human beings imaginable, 
for or against the destruction of innocent human life in such a 
repugnant way. The Senate simply must pass the Partial-Birth Abortion 
Ban Act, and I pray that it will do it by a margin of at least 67 votes 
in favor of the ban.

                          ____________________