[Congressional Record Volume 144, Number 115 (Thursday, September 3, 1998)]
[Senate]
[Pages S9911-S9912]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




            OVERRIDE THE VETO OF PARTIAL BIRTH ABORTION BAN

  Mr. SANTORUM. Mr. President, in conversations with the leader over 
the last couple of days, we have set a date for the Senate vote on the 
override of the President's veto of the Partial Birth Abortion Ban Act 
of 1997. It is going to be September 18, which is just a couple of 
weeks from now. I am hopeful, even though the numbers do not look good 
right now, that we will be able to muster sufficient support to do what 
the House did, which is to override the President's veto. The House 
voted, with I believe six or seven votes more than necessary, to 
override his veto. Here in the Senate we are three votes short of 
overriding the President's veto, of getting the 67 votes. We had 64 
Senators vote in favor of the ban. We will need three more Senators to 
change their vote and support this act and override the President's 
veto.
  I want to pick up on what Senator Thomas was talking about and what 
is being talked about around the country, which is the President and 
his unwillingness to come forward with the truth, and his propensity to 
look at a factual situation and skew it some. Some would say lie; I 
would just say maybe skew it some, to put a different spin or color on 
what the real facts are.
  I think we have maybe the first opportunity here in the Senate, since 
the President's admission a couple of weeks ago, to really pass 
judgment on the President's ability to be truthful with the American 
public. How many people in this Chamber are going to stand by this 
President when he has blatantly not told the truth about the issue of 
partial-birth abortion and the need for it to remain legal? He has 
stood behind this notion that this procedure needs to remain legal 
because of the potential impact on the health of women who have 
abortions and that this needs to be an option available to them because 
there may be circumstances in which women need this procedure to avoid 
serious health consequences. That was potentially a legitimate 
argument, even though I could give, and I will when the bill comes up, 
lots of reasons why from a medical perspective that makes no sense. We 
have made those arguments time and time again, and others have made 
those arguments, including Dr. Bill Frist.
  But, just prior to the vote last year here in the Senate, the 
American Medical Association came out with a letter that said that a 
partial-birth abortion is never medically necessary to protect the life 
or health of a woman. And this is an organization, by the way, that 
supports abortion rights. This is not a right-wing, radical, pro-life 
organization--take your pick, right-wing, radical, or pro-life, or all 
of the above. It is

[[Page S9912]]

none of those. It is an organization that in principle supports 
abortion rights, but came out and said that there is no medical 
necessity here. It is not necessary. Yet the President, just weeks 
after this letter was released--and by the way, there are hundreds if 
not thousands of obstetricians who have come forward and said the same 
thing--the President stood up and said I need to veto this bill 
because--I think it was on a Friday night he vetoed it, so not too many 
people were around to watch the veto--this is medically necessary to 
protect the health of women, when we have experts upon experts and the 
definitive body representing physicians in this country saying that it 
is not necessary and that, in fact, the President is not telling the 
truth to the American public or to Members of Congress.
  So we are hiding behind a lie. I guess the question I have is how 
many Senators are going to continue to hide behind Bill Clinton's lie 
on the issue of partial-birth abortion? Many Senators--many Members of 
his Cabinet, many people--were apologists for Bill Clinton for the past 
several months because he told them one thing and we found out later 
that it was not true. And a lot of people were hurt by that, burned by 
that, the fact that the President wasn't coming clean with the American 
public. We have another instance right here where the President has not 
come clean with the American public on this issue. How many people are 
going to continue to go out and defend this President and his veto on a 
bill where his rationale for vetoing it is not true? Hopefully: Fool me 
once, shame on you. If Senators allow this President to fool them 
twice, shame on them.
  I yield the floor.
  Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Gorton). The clerk will call the roll.
  The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. CAMPBELL. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order 
for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

                          ____________________