[Congressional Record Volume 143, Number 67 (Tuesday, May 20, 1997)]
[Senate]
[Pages S4714-S4715]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                 PARTIAL-BIRTH ABORTION BAN ACT OF 1997

  The Senate continued with consideration of the bill.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from North Carolina.
  Mr. HELMS. What is the pending business?

[[Page S4715]]

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The pending business is H.R. 1122, as amended.
  Mr. HELMS. I ask for the yeas and nays.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second? There is a 
sufficient second.
  The yeas and nays were ordered.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The bill having been read the third time, the 
question is, Shall the bill pass?
  The clerk will call the roll.
  The legislative clerk called the roll.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Are there any other Senators in the Chamber 
desiring to vote?
  The result was announced-- yeas 64, nays 36, as follows:

                      [Rollcall Vote No. 71 Leg.]

                                YEAS--64

     Abraham
     Allard
     Ashcroft
     Bennett
     Biden
     Bond
     Breaux
     Brownback
     Burns
     Byrd
     Campbell
     Coats
     Cochran
     Conrad
     Coverdell
     Craig
     D'Amato
     Daschle
     DeWine
     Domenici
     Dorgan
     Enzi
     Faircloth
     Ford
     Frist
     Gorton
     Gramm
     Grams
     Grassley
     Gregg
     Hagel
     Hatch
     Helms
     Hollings
     Hutchinson
     Hutchison
     Inhofe
     Johnson
     Kempthorne
     Kyl
     Landrieu
     Leahy
     Lott
     Lugar
     Mack
     McCain
     McConnell
     Moynihan
     Murkowski
     Nickles
     Reid
     Roberts
     Roth
     Santorum
     Sessions
     Shelby
     Smith (NH)
     Smith (OR)
     Specter
     Stevens
     Thomas
     Thompson
     Thurmond
     Warner

                                NAYS--36

     Akaka
     Baucus
     Bingaman
     Boxer
     Bryan
     Bumpers
     Chafee
     Cleland
     Collins
     Dodd
     Durbin
     Feingold
     Feinstein
     Glenn
     Graham
     Harkin
     Inouye
     Jeffords
     Kennedy
     Kerrey
     Kerry
     Kohl
     Lautenberg
     Levin
     Lieberman
     Mikulski
     Moseley-Braun
     Murray
     Reed
     Robb
     Rockefeller
     Sarbanes
     Snowe
     Torricelli
     Wellstone
     Wyden
  The bill (H.R. 1122), as amended, was passed.
  Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote by which 
the bill was passed.
  Mr. LOTT. I move to lay that motion on the table.
  The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.
  Mr. DASCHLE addressed the Chair.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Democratic leader is recognized.
  Mr. DASCHLE. Mr. President, I wish to explain my vote today on H.R. 
1122, the partial-birth abortion ban.
  As with many of my colleagues, this was not an easy decision. 
Virtually every Senator who has participated in the debate has noted 
his or her abhorrence to the procedure.
  I respect the views of Senators on either side of this issue. I have 
chosen to speak after the vote because this is a decision each Senator 
must decide for himself or herself.
  My own decision was not easy, in part, because this bill may have no 
practical effect on abortions in this country. It is likely that 
doctors wishing to perform later-term abortions will simply choose 
another option.
  As I repeated last week, this is not a ban of abortion; it is a ban 
of a specific procedure.
  It is not an easy decision because I favor a woman's right to consult 
the physician of her choice to decide the most appropriate course of 
action on matters directly affecting her health and her most personal 
circumstances.
  This decision was not easy because, in spite of the personal nature 
of this debate, its complexity, the medical repercussions, and its 
seriousness, this issue has become politicized to the extent that much 
of the rhetoric has substantially diminished the potential for real 
discourse on such an important matter.
  The result is that sincere efforts to find common ground have been 
labeled as ``shams,'' as ``political cover,'' and ``deceptive'' by many 
who passed judgment without having even read the legislation.
  Perhaps because my expectations were much too high, my greatest 
disappointment is reserved for some officials in the Catholic Church, 
especially in my State, for whom I had great respect and from whom I 
was given initial encouragement for my efforts. Their harsh rhetoric 
and vitriolic characterizations, usually more identified with the 
radical right than with thoughtful religious leadership, proved to be a 
consequential impediment to the decision which I have made today. It 
was most instructive.
  This was not an easy decision, because it is highly likely that H.R. 
1122 will be declared unconstitutional should it be enacted into law.
  The Supreme Court has been very clear in regard to two issues 
concerning abortion.
  First, prior to the viability of a fetus, a woman's ability to choose 
to terminate her pregnancy is a fundamental constitutional right and 
cannot be abrogated. The Court has ruled that the Government cannot 
impose an undue burden on a woman who wishes to terminate her pregnancy 
with an abortion, prior to the viability of the fetus. Second, that 
after a fetus is determined to be viable, it can be given protection, 
so long as it does not endanger the life or health of the mother.
  On both principles, the bill just passed appears to be in conflict 
with numerous Supreme Court rulings.
  Yet in spite of the difficulty in coming to my decision, I voted in 
favor of its passage because I still desire to find common ground with 
those outside the extremes who truly hope to resolve the issue in a 
constructive and meaningful way.
  I will continue to insist that any common ground approach fall within 
the constitutional parameters which protect a woman and respect the 
legitimate concerns for her health. But I will consider other proposals 
which accommodate that need in a manner more effective than mine.
  My hope is that we can get beyond this debate to find a lasting, more 
acceptable legislative response. Recurring efforts to pass and veto a 
bill which is likely to be found to be unconstitutional only delays 
meaningful progress in an effort to ban not just one procedure but all 
of them once a fetus is viable.
  Failure to find common ground leaves little choice but to accelerate 
the legislative process to allow the earliest review of the law by the 
Supreme Court. Its determination of the questionable constitutionality 
of this approach will guide us and will certainly force those unwilling 
to compromise now to a more conciliatory position later.
  Our Nation must find the solution to this deeply vexing, moral 
problem which has persisted in dividing us.
  Let us not give up hope.
  I yield the floor.
  Mr. CRAIG addressed the Chair.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Idaho is recognized.

                          ____________________