[Congressional Record Volume 150, Number 90 (Friday, June 25, 2004)]
[Senate]
[Pages S7507-S7510]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                      THE REAGAN CULTURAL DOCTRINE

  Mr. BROWNBACK. Mr. President, I rise today to speak on a topic called 
the Reagan Cultural Doctrine.
  Presidents are noted for foreign policy doctrines which they 
articulate and put forward. President Reagan had his own noteworthy and 
very successful foreign policy doctrine, the Reagan Doctrine, involving 
the confrontation with communism that led to its ultimate demise. 
President Reagan is to be credited and given great praise for it.
  But President Reagan had another doctrine I want to speak about 
today, the Reagan Cultural Doctrine, which I think it would be fitting 
for us to acknowledge and press forward to its successful completion.
  President Reagan respected each and every human life at whatever 
stage of that life and wherever it was located. This was a unifying 
theme that lay behind some of his most significant policy choices and 
movements. It led him to insist that the Soviet empire was evil and to 
demand of the new Soviet leaders that they ``tear down this wall.''
  It was what led him to note that ``until and unless someone can 
establish the unborn child is not a living human being, then that child 
is already protected by the Constitution which guarantees life, 
liberty, and the pursuit of happiness to all of us.''
  That is a direct Reagan quote.
  Toward the end of his Presidency on January 14, 1988, President 
Reagan took the opportunity to clearly articulate the Reagan cultural 
doctrine, a very simple yet profound Presidential Declaration. 
President Reagan proclaimed and declared ``the inalienable personhood 
of every American from the moment of conception until natural death.''
  I ask unanimous consent that a copy of President Reagan's January 14, 
1988 Presidential declaration on the inalienable personhood of the 
unborn be printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

                 Proclamation 5761 of January 14, 1988

               National Sanctity of Human Life Day, 1988

           (By the President of the United States of America)

       America has given a great gift to the world, a gift that 
     drew upon the accumulated wisdom derived from centuries of 
     experiments in self-government, a gift that has irrevocably 
     changed humanity's future. Our gift is twofold: the 
     declaration, as a cardinal principle of all just law, of the 
     God-given, unalienable rights possessed by every human being; 
     and the example of our determination to secure those rights 
     and to defend them against every challenge through the 
     generations. Our declaration and defense of our rights have 
     made us and kept us free and have sent a tide of hope and 
     inspiration around the globe.
       One of those unalienable rights, as the Declaration of 
     Independence affirms so eloquently, is the right to life. In 
     the 15 years since the Supreme Court's decision in Roe v. 
     Wade, however, America's unborn have been denied their right 
     to life. Among the tragic and unspeakable results in the past 
     decade and a half have been the loss of life of 22 million 
     infants before birth; the pressure and anguish of countless 
     women and girls who are driven to abortion; and a cheapening 
     of our respect for the human person and the sanctity of human 
     life.
       We are told that we may not interfere with abortion. We are 
     told that we may not ``impose our morality'' on those who 
     wish to

[[Page S7508]]

     allow or participate in the taking of the life of infants 
     before birth; yet no one calls it ``imposing morality'' to 
     prohibit the taking of life after people are born. We are 
     told as well that there exists a ``right'' to end the lives 
     of unborn children; yet no one can explain how such a right 
     can exist in stark contradiction of each person's fundamental 
     right to life.
       That right to life belongs equally to babies in the womb, 
     babies born handicapped, and the elderly or infirm. That we 
     have killed the unborn for 15 years does not nullify this 
     right, nor could any number of killings ever do so. The 
     unalienable right to life is found not only in the 
     Declaration of Independence but also in the Constitution that 
     every President is sworn to preserve, protect, and defend. 
     Both the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments guarantee that no 
     person shall be deprived of life without due process of law.
       All medical and scientific evidence increasingly affirms 
     that children before birth share all the basic attributes of 
     human personality--that they in fact are persons. Modern 
     medicine treats unborn children as patients. Yet, as the 
     Supreme Court itself has noted, the decision in Roe v. Wade 
     rested upon an earlier state of medical technology. The law 
     of the land in 1988 should recognize all of the medical 
     evidence.
       Our Nation cannot continue down the path of abortion, so 
     radically at odds with our history, our heritage, and our 
     concepts of justice. This sacred legacy, and the well-being 
     and the future of our country, demand that protection of the 
     innocents must be guaranteed and that the personhood of the 
     unborn be declared and defended throughout the land. In 
     legislation introduced at my request in the First Session of 
     the 100th Congress, I have asked the Legislative branch to 
     declare the ``humanity of the unborn child and the compelling 
     interest of the several states to protect the life of each 
     person before birth.'' This duty to declare on so fundamental 
     a matter falls to the Executive as well. By this Proclamation 
     I hereby do so.
       Now, therefore, I Ronald Reagan, President of the United 
     States of America, by virtue of the authority vested in me by 
     the Constitution and laws of the United States, do hereby 
     proclaim and declare the unalienable personhood of every 
     American, from the moment of conception until natural death, 
     and I do proclaim, ordain, and declare that I will take care 
     that the Constitution and laws of the United States are 
     faithfully executed for the protection of America's unborn 
     children. Upon this act, sincerely believed to be an act of 
     justice, warranted by the Constitution, I invoke the 
     considerate judgment of mankind and the gracious favor of 
     Almighty God. I also proclaim Sunday, January 17, 1988, as 
     National Sanctity of Human Life Day. I call upon the citizens 
     of this blessed land to gather on that day in their homes and 
     places of worship to give thanks for the gift of life they 
     enjoy and to reaffirm their commitment to the dignity of 
     every human being and the sanctity of every human life.
       In witness whereof, I have hereunto set my hand this 14th 
     day of January, in the year of our Lord nineteen hundred and 
     eighty-eight, and of the Independence of the United States of 
     America the two hundred and twelfth.
                                                       Ronald Reagan.  

  Mr. BROWNBACK. Mr. President, our Nation cannot be the ``shining city 
upon the hill'' without the respect and recognition of the inalienable 
personhood of every American from the moment of conception until 
natural death. Reagan realized and declared this. The Reagan Cultural 
Doctrine is synonymous with the culture of life. President Reagan's 
commitment to the culture of life was evident from the first days of 
his Presidency.
  In recent days, some have implicitly questioned President Reagan's 
commitment to the inalienable personhood of every American by 
suggesting that destructive embryonic stem cell research should be 
conducted in President Reagan's name. And here we are not talking about 
adult stem cell research or umbilical cord blood which are supported by 
virtually everybody and are producing true results--here we are talking 
strictly about destructive embryonic stem cell research which results 
in the death of a young human embryo after its conception.
  To suggest that this should be conducted in President Reagan's name 
is a completely contrary view of the Reagan Cultural Doctrine. It is a 
misappropriation of President Reagan's legacy, and it is damaging to 
the culture of life that President Reagan was so steadfast in 
defending. It is an assault on the Reagan Cultural Doctrine.
  As former Reagan National Security Adviser and Interior Secretary 
William Clark noted in the New York Times recently,

       Ronald Reagan's record reveals that no issue was of greater 
     importance to him than the dignity and sanctity of all human 
     life. ``My administration is dedicated to the preservation of 
     America as a free land,'' he said in 1983. ``And there is no 
     cause more important for preserving that freedom than 
     affirming the transcendent right to life of all human beings, 
     the right without which no other rights have any meaning.'' 
     One of the things he regretted most at the completion of his 
     Presidency in 1989, he told [William Clark], was that 
     politics and circumstances had prevented him from making more 
     progress in restoring protection for unborn human life.

  Continuing in his New York Times piece, Clark then addressed Reagan's 
early efforts to protect innocent human life through halting Federal 
efforts on destructive research involving human embryos. Here we find 
that President Reagan himself pushed to stop destructive human 
embryonic research.
  Clark says:

       Reagan consistently opposed federal support for the 
     destruction of innocent human life. After the charter expired 
     for the Department of Health, Education and Welfare's ethical 
     advisory board--which in the 1970s supported destructive 
     research on human embryos--he began a de facto ban on federal 
     financing of embryo research that he held to throughout his 
     presidency.

  I ask unanimous consent a copy of William Clark's June 11, 2004, New 
York Times op-ed piece titled ``For Reagan, All Life Was Sacred,'' be 
printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

                [From the New York Times, June 11, 2004]

                    For Reagan, All Life Was Sacred

                         (By William P. Clark)

       Paso Robles, Calif.--Ronald Reagan had not passed from this 
     life for 48 hours before proponents of human embryonic stem-
     cell research began to suggest that such ethically 
     questionable scientific work should be promoted under his 
     name. But this cannot honestly be done without ignoring 
     President Reagan's own words and actions.
       Ronald Reagan's record reveals that no issue was of greater 
     importance to him than the dignity and sanctity of all human 
     life. ``My administration is dedicated to the preservation of 
     America as a free land,'' he said in 1983. ``And there is no 
     cause more important for preserving that freedom than 
     affirming the transcendent right to life of all human beings, 
     the right without which no other rights have any meaning.'' 
     One of the things he regretted most at the completion of his 
     presidency in 1989, he told me, was that politics and 
     circumstances had prevented him from making more progress in 
     restoring protection for unborn human life.
       Still, he did what he could. To criticize the Roe v. Wade 
     decision on its 10th anniversary in 1983, he published his 
     famous essay ``Abortion and the Conscience of the Nation'' in 
     The Human Life Review. ``We cannot diminish the value of one 
     category of human life--the unborn--without diminishing the 
     value of all human life,'' he wrote. He went on to emphasize 
     ``the truth of human dignity under God'' and ``respect for 
     the sacred value of human life.'' Because modern science has 
     revealed the wonder of human development, and modern medicine 
     treats ``the developing human as a patient,'' he declared, 
     ``the real question today is not when human life begins, but, 
     What is the value of human life?''
       In that essay, he expressly encouraged continued support 
     for the ``Sanctity of life ethic'' and rejection of the 
     ``quality of life ethic.'' Writing about the value of all 
     human life, he quoted the British writer Malcolm Muggeridge's 
     statement that ``however low it flickers so fiercely burns, 
     it is still a divine flame which no man dare presume to put 
     out, be his motives ever so humane and enlightened.'' And in 
     the Roe v. Wade decision, he insisted, the Supreme Court 
     ``did not explicitly reject the traditional American idea of 
     intrinsic worth and value in all human life; it simply dodged 
     the issue.''
       Likewise, in his famous ``Evil Empire'' speech of March 
     1983--which most recall as solely an indictment of the Soviet 
     Union--Ronald Reagan spoke strongly against the denigration 
     of innocent human life. ``Abortion on demand now takes the 
     lives of up to one and half million unborn children a year,'' 
     he said. ``Unless and until it can be proven that the unborn 
     child is not a living entity, then its right to life, 
     liberty, and the pursuit of happiness must be protected.''
       His actions were as clear as his words. He supported the 
     Human Life Amendment, which would have inscribed in the 
     Constitution ``the paramount right to life is vested in each 
     human being from the moment of fertilization without regard 
     to age, health or condition of dependency.'' And he favored 
     bills in Congress that would have given every human being--at 
     all stages of development--protection as a person under the 
     14th Amendment.
       Aside from the moral principle, President Reagan would also 
     have questioned picking the people's pocket to support 
     commercial research. He understood the significance of 
     putting the imprimatur of the nation, through public 
     financing, behind questionable research.
       He consistently opposed federal support for the destruction 
     of innocent human life. After the charter expired for the 
     Department of Health, Education and Welfare's ethical 
     advisory board--which in the 1970's supported destructive 
     research on human embryos--he began a de facto ban on federal 
     financing of embryo research that he held to throughout his 
     presidency.

[[Page S7509]]

       As for today's debate, as a defender of free people and 
     free markets, he would have asked the marketplace question: 
     if human embryonic research is so clearly promising as the 
     researchers assert, why aren't private investors putting 
     money into it, as they are in adult stem cell research?
       Mr. Reagan's suffering under Alzheimer's disease was 
     tragic, and we should do everything we can that is ethically 
     proper to help others afflicted with it. But I have no doubt 
     that he would have urged our nation to look to adult stem 
     cell reserach--which has yielded many clinical successes--and 
     away from the destruction of developing human lives, which 
     has yielded none. Those who would trade on Ronald Reagan's 
     legacy should first consider his own words.

  Mr. BROWNBACK. Mr. President, I mean no disrespect to anyone in 
addressing this important issue, but we are talking about innocent 
young human life. Someone must speak for those who have no voice and 
for the great pro-life legacy of President Reagan now that he is no 
longer with us.
  I would like to share the stories and memories of some of the Reagan 
revolutionaries who were privileged to interact with the President on 
this particular vital issue.
  Just 2 days after his January 20, 1981, inauguration as President of 
the United States, Ronald Reagan made his personal commitment to pro-
life issues clear. At a time when hundreds of people were waiting to 
meet the newly elected President in order to seek positions in his 
administration, the President made time for an unrelated meeting with 
pro-life leaders in Congress and the nonprofit sector. Senators Richard 
Schweiker and Jesse Helms were present at that meeting, as were 
Representatives Henry Hyde and Bob Dornan.
  This meeting, which was to become an annual policy meeting on the 
anniversary of Roe v. Wade, was tremendously significant. By 1980, the 
pro-life movement had been largely marginalized by previous 
administrations. But President Reagan's willingness to hold these 
meetings and to annually address the March for Life meeting by phone 
took the pro-life movement into the mainstream.
  One participant in that first meeting noted that the President's 
personal conviction on the right to life for unborn children was 
obvious. The participant said:

       President Reagan's deep commitment to pro-life issues was 
     very evident when he spoke of viewing an inutero sonogram 
     while he was Governor of California. It was moving to watch 
     him speak. Clearly, he understood the life issue; it could be 
     seen in his body language.

  The quote continues:

       There we were, two days after his inauguration. He didn't 
     have to meet with us or do anything. Yet, he turned our 15 
     minute meeting into a 45 minute meeting.

  President Reagan truly had great zeal for pro-life causes. I share in 
the sentiment made by long-time Reagan aide Michael Deaver, who made 
this observation in his political memoirs. Deaver noted the President's 
zeal in the section of his book dedicated to the March 30, 1981, 
assassination attempt on President Reagan. This was in reference to a 
meeting soon after with the late Cardinal Terrence Cooke of New York. 
Deaver overheard the President's final words of this meeting with 
Cardinal Cooke. Reagan said this:

       I have decided that whatever time I may have left, is left 
     for Him.

  ``Him,'' referring to God. Anyone who knew Reagan has to acknowledge 
that this statement was from the heart. It summed up his subsequent 
involvement in the great moral issues of the day.
  Deaver concludes this section with his own thoughts after the death 
of Cardinal Cooke:

       When Reagan was told of his friend's death, the president's 
     words from their earlier meeting echoed in my mind. 
     ``Whatever time I may have left is left for Him.'' I would 
     never forget his promise, and I would see him deliver on it 
     time and time again.

  President Reagan's interest in life issues was not just convenient 
political positioning either. He actively wrestled with this issue. I 
will read a passage from ``What I Saw at the Revolution,'' political 
memoir of Reagan's speech writer Peggy Noonan.

       Look at him on abortion. It took courage to oppose an 
     option that at least 20 million Americans had exercised since 
     Roe v. Wade, when the issue isn't a coalition builder but an 
     opposition creator, when the polls are against you and the 
     boomers want it and when you've already been accused of being 
     unsympathetic to women and your own pollster is telling you 
     your stand contributes to a gender gap. . . .

  Let me continue now further with the book:

       But he puzzled it out on his own, not like a visionary or 
     an intellectual but like a regular person. He read and 
     thought and listened to people who cared, and he made up 
     his own mind. And suddenly when they said, ``The argument 
     is over when life begins,'' he said, ``Well look, if 
     that's the argument: If there's a bag in the gutter and 
     you don't know if what's in it is alive, you don't kick 
     it, do you? Well, no, you don't.

  He held to his stand against his own political interests (where were 
the anti-abortion people going to go?) and against the wishes of his 
family and friends. Nancy wasn't anti-abortion, the kids weren't anti-
abortion, and people like the Bloomingdales and his friends in Beverly 
Hills--they did not get where they are through an overfastidious 
concern for the helpless. He was the only one of his group who cared.
  A lengthy quote from Peggy Noonan.
  President Reagan did care deeply about the sanctity of life, and we 
know that he was actively engaged on this issue. One example of this 
was President Reagan's interest in the pro-life journal, the Human Life 
Review. We know the President read this journal because he actually 
wrote a letter responding to the heroic mother of a child with spina 
bifida who had written a letter that was published in the journal in 
the summer of 1982 edition.
  In his letter to the mother the President wrote:

       Your recent letter published in the summer issue of the 
     Human Life Review came to my attention. I want you to know 
     that I was deeply impressed by what you wrote and by the 
     obvious commitment you and your family have made to respond 
     to the affliction of a handicapped child with affection and 
     courage.
       I strongly believe that protection of these children is a 
     natural and fundamental part of the duty government has to 
     protect the innocent and to guarantee that the civil rights 
     of all are respected. This duty is a special order when the 
     rights involved are the right to life itself. . . .

  After learning of President Reagan's interest in their pro-life 
publication through this letter, Jim McFadden of the Human Life Review 
invited the President to write an essay for publication in the journal. 
The President obliged, and thus his famous ``Abortion and the 
Conscience of the Nation'' was published in 1983. In this essay, 
President Reagan made some profound statements laying the groundwork 
for the Reagan cultural doctrine.
  A copy of this essay may be found on the Human Life Review website at 
http://www.humanlifereview.com/reagan/reagan_conscience.html.
  Mr. BROWNBACK. In the essay, President Reagan lays out the great 
cultural issues surrounding abortion. In one place, he notes:

       We cannot diminish the value of one category of human 
     life--the unborn--without diminishing the value of all human 
     life.

  Embryo, fetus, infant, child, and adult are categories of human 
development, and they are all human life. Whether one is physically 
healthy or ill, emotionally healthy or ill, these are categories of 
human beings, and thus deserve protection. We should heed the words of 
President Reagan. All human life, no matter how it is categorized, 
should be esteemed and valued.
  In his essay, President Reagan correctly argues that:

       [A]nyone who doesn't feel sure whether we are talking about 
     a second human life should clearly give life the benefit of 
     the doubt. If you don't know whether a body is alive or dead, 
     you would never bury it. I think this consideration itself 
     should be enough for all of us to insist on protecting the 
     unborn.

  This, again, a direct quote from President Reagan on the Reagan 
Cultural Doctrine.
  Then the President turns to discuss the real issue of the day. The 
President commented:

       The real question today is not when human life begins, but, 
     What is the value of human life?

  That question remains today.
  When President Reagan said, and those of us in the pro-life movement 
say, that human life begins at conception, we are speaking about 
biology, not ideology or belief.
  I am concerned that there may be some confusion on this point today, 
perhaps as a result of misinformation being disseminated by those who 
favor destructive research on the youngest forms of human life.
  A human embryo, an unborn child, or human fetus is, biologically 
speaking,

[[Page S7510]]

a young human life. To assert that it is not a life or that it is so-
called potential life is not a scientific statement. To assert a human 
embryo is not a human life is a belief not supported by the facts, much 
in the same way that to say the Sun revolves around the Earth is a 
belief not supported by the facts.
  Science is about the pursuit of truth in the service of mankind. 
Science tells us that the unborn child, from the moment of conception, 
is a human life.
  That is why, in the debate over embryonic stem cell research, I 
continue to assert we must address the fundamental question of law: Is 
the young human embryo a person or a piece of property?
  Our country has gotten this issue wrong before--notably, the 1857 
Dred Scott case--but our system gives us an opportunity to rectify past 
wrongs. I suggest we base our laws on what science tells us, which is 
that the young human embryo is indeed a human life.
  Anybody watching now was, at one point in time, a young human embryo. 
And if you were destroyed then, your life would not exist today. Those 
are the facts.
  Unfortunately, not everyone in this debate is looking at biology. But 
once both sides acknowledge the scientific truth, that the young human 
embryo or unborn child is a human life, then we can start to address 
what Reagan posited as the real question: ``What is the value of a 
human life?''
  In ``Abortion and the Conscience of a Nation,'' President Reagan 
lamented the case of Baby Doe, who was legally starved to death because 
he was mentally handicapped. In more recent times, we have the case of 
Terri Schiavo, who was saved from starvation. In that case, the 
American public, along with Florida Governor Jeb Bush, let their voices 
be heard that life is worth living. Those voices proclaimed that life--
even if not the ``quality of life'' many would deem acceptable--still 
has incredible value. The value of every human life must be defended 
without exception.

  To deny that a human embryo is a human life is to disregard what 
science tells us. It is to live willfully in ignorance.
  In addressing his critics through the essay, President Reagan wrote:

       Obviously, some uninfluential people want to deny that 
     every human life has intrinsic, sacred worth. They insist 
     that a member of the human race must have certain qualities 
     before they accord him or her status as a ``human being.'' . 
     . . Every legislator, every doctor, and every citizen needs 
     to recognize that the real issue is whether to affirm and 
     protect the sanctity of all human life, or to embrace a 
     social ethic where some human lives are valued and others are 
     not. As a nation, we must choose between the sanctity of life 
     ethic and the ``quality of life'' ethic.

  President Reagan concluded his essay with these words:

       My administration is dedicated to the preservation of 
     America as a free land, and there is no cause more important 
     for preserving that freedom than affirming the transcendent 
     right to life of all human beings, the right without which no 
     other rights have any meaning.

  ``Abortion and the Conscience of a Nation'' was written by a man who 
was fully committed to the unalienable right to life from the moment of 
conception. And that man was President Reagan.
  However, President Reagan did not stop at ``Abortion and the 
Conscience of a Nation.'' He had to withstand much political pressure 
to maintain his stance in defense of life.
  A Reagan aide recalled the President's 1987 meeting with leaders of 
the pro-life movement. He wrote:

       In January 1987 the subject of parental consent for 
     abortion came up as the groups met with the President in the 
     Roosevelt Room. As you know, Ronald Reagan was a prodigious 
     letter writer during all phases of his life and career, but 
     he was also a prodigious letter reader and keeper. If a 
     letter's contents appealed to him or struck a chord, he would 
     keep it, use it in speeches, quote it to the media, etc. The 
     letter he received from the young boy asking him if he was 
     going to do his speech to the Congress ``in his pajamas'' 
     after his recovery from the assassination attempt was one 
     such example. Ronald Reagan loved to read samples of mail 
     from the American people and called Anne Higgins to ask for 
     it on Fridays if for some reason it was later than usual in 
     getting to him. Meeting with the pro-life leaders that 
     January day, he pulled from his left-hand jacket side pocket 
     and read a letter he said he had held onto for many years. It 
     was from a California mother who had written to him about the 
     parental consent issue when he was governor in the early 
     1970's.
       Ronald Reagan read the letter to the entire group. The 
     mother described her own family and the daughters she had 
     raised, the sweat she had expended, the clothes she had 
     washed and folded, the hurt knees she had bandaged, etc. She 
     wrote that now the opponents of parental consent for abortion 
     were telling her that they had a right to perform surgery on 
     those daughters without so much as letting her know. ``Who do 
     they think they are?'' went her refrain.
       The letter went on in this vein with other examples of the 
     worries and stresses of loving parenthood, and the abrupt 
     dismissal of that sacrifice by the [abortion providers] who 
     think they know better when a child gets in trouble. Ronald 
     Reagan read the letter through, folded it and put it back in 
     his pocket, and said softly, ``Who do they think they are?'' 
     You could have heard a pin drop.

  The record could hardly be clearer. President Ronald Reagan 
vigorously worked to promote a culture of life, which included 
consistent opposition to destructive research on human embryos. It was 
and it remains the Reagan Cultural Doctrine. Witness after witness 
affirms this. It is important that the great moral stance President 
Reagan took be reaffirmed and boldly declared.
  When we think of the great Presidential doctrines of the past, we 
think immediately of the foreign policy doctrines of Presidents Monroe 
and Truman--and, yes, Ronald Reagan. These doctrines have been and 
continue to be significant in defining American interests.
  On January 14, 1988, President Reagan declared a new doctrine: the 
Reagan Cultural Doctrine. This doctrine is not about foreign policy; it 
is about something that especially defines us as a people. This 
doctrine speaks volumes, in the sense that it makes clear who we are 
and what we stand for as a people. It reaffirms the Declaration of 
Independence and the founding values that have been the source of 
America's greatness.
  It is my hope President Bush will reissue the Reagan Cultural 
Doctrine on ``the unalienable personhood of every American, from the 
moment of conception until natural death,'' and that the Congress will 
reaffirm the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution by 
passing laws that will guarantee the right to life to every American 
conceived within the boundaries of this life-loving and freedom-loving 
land. That is the Reagan Cultural Doctrine.
  Madam President, I yield the floor and suggest the absence of a 
quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mrs. Dole). The clerk will call the roll.
  The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. FRIST. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the order 
for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

                          ____________________