[Congressional Record Volume 151, Number 35 (Sunday, March 20, 2005)]
[House]
[Pages H1731-H1735]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




         FOR THE RELIEF OF THE PARENTS OF THERESA MARIE SCHIAVO
        (Continuation of Proceedings of Sunday, March 20, 2005)

  Mr. HASTERT. Mr. Speaker, we come here with a heavy heart. I urge the 
Members of this House to do our duty to pass the Schiavo Act. Its 
purpose is simple--to allow the Federal courts to review this matter in 
the light of Terri's constitutional rights. That's not a lot to ask.
  Over the last few days, Members of both parties and chambers have 
worked tirelessly to reach this agreement. We hope that these efforts 
will help give Terri Schiavo new hope and a new chance at life.
  We have heard very moving accounts of people close to Terri that she 
is indeed, very much alive. She laughs, she cries and she smiles with 
those around her. She is aware of her surroundings and is responsive to 
them. This is a woman who deserves a chance at life and not a death 
sentence of starvation and dehydration.
  It is our hope that this bill will give Terri a new hope of life. It 
takes her case out of the Florida court system and puts it in the hands 
of the Federal court. There, her case will be tried anew where the 
judge can reevaluate and reassess Terri's medical condition.
  Oddly enough, on this very day last year, the Pope addressed a group 
of participants in an international Congress on life-sustaining 
treatments. The Pope said a human being's value and personal dignity do 
not change no matter what his or her circumstances.
  And I quote:

       A man, even if seriously ill or disabled in the exercise of 
     his highest functions, is and always will be a man, and he 
     will never become a ``vegetable'' or an ``animal.''

  I urge every Member of this people's House to carry these words in 
their hearts as we vote.
  Today, we have the opportunity to give a woman another chance to 
live. It is our turn to fulfill the promises etched in the Declaration 
of Independence to make life more perfect for the pursuit of life.
  I want to thank my colleagues Leader DeLay, Majority Whip Blunt, 
Representative Oberstar, Chairman Sensenbrenner and Dr. Weldon for 
helping us to get this life saving bill together.
  I want the Schindler family to know that no matter what happens, our 
hearts and prayers will continue to be with you.
  Mr. STUPAK. Mr. Speaker, as one of 203 Democrat and Republican 
Members of Congress who voted in favor of S. 686, a private bill for 
the Relief of the Parents of Theresa Marie Schiavo, I am pleased that 
President Bush signed this important piece of legislation that may 
result in the reinsertion of Ms. Schiavo's feeding tube. The bill 
empowers a Federal court to examine the Terri Schiavo case.
  As I listened to my colleagues debating this issue on the House floor 
last night, I heard many emotional statements from Members on both 
sides of the aisle in support of and opposed to what this bill stands 
for. This is not about Democrats or Republicans, it is simply about 
protecting the rights of disabled individuals.
  Unfortunately, after many years of dispute between Ms. Schiavo's 
husband and parents, a Florida State court ordered the removal of her 
feeding tubes and subsequent fate of death by starvation and 
dehydration. Due to the urgency of Ms. Schaivo's case, this bill was 
limited in considering just her life. However, there are many more 
people out there who also need help like this and I firmly believe that 
before we extinguish any life, we should allow that individual all 
legal and constitutional protections, so they can leave this world with 
dignity.
  I feel so strongly about this that I was an original cosponsor of 
Congressman Dave Weldon's recently introduced bill, H.R. 1151, that 
would have given legal representation to all incapacitated persons who 
are without written documentation as to their wishes and whose family 
is involved in a dispute as to the person's wishes.
  S. 686, which we passed early this morning, allows Ms. Schiavo's 
parents to bring the case before the Federal court in Florida and they 
would be able to hear all evidence without being prejudiced by any of 
the information from the Florida State case that led to the feeding 
tubes being removed. The bill also directs the Federal courts to rule 
on whether removing Ms. Schiavo's feeding tubes is a violation of her 
civil rights granted to her both by the Constitution and Federal laws.
  I believe this bill is the right thing to do and I believe we should 
protect human life from its inception to a person's last breath.
  Mr. HONDA. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to address S. 686 for the Relief 
of the Parents of Theresa Marie Schiavo. Numerous courts have reviewed 
the tragic case of Terri Schiavo, and all have agreed that the right to 
make decisions about her care rests solely with her legal guardian: her 
husband, Michael Schiavo.
  Even in cases where the patient has made it clear that she did not 
wish to persist in a catatonic state, families face excruciating 
decisions about how to proceed. Disagreement about the medical facts or 
the express wishes of the patient only add to the agony, and often lead 
to painful disputes within families.
  We are a nation of laws, and as such we have a proper and unbiased 
way of resolving these difficult situations. The Schiavo case involves 
a family dispute over who has final decisionmaking regarding Terri 
Schiavo's medical care, and as such falls exclusively under 
jurisdiction of the State courts. Federal courts do not have any 
jurisdiction in this case; the U.S. Congress does not have any 
jurisdiction in this case; only the courts of the State of Florida have 
jurisdiction here.
  But Republican leaders in Congress have decided they must get 
involved in this tragic story. Perhaps Bill Frist sees a chance to 
score political points in advance of his 2008 presidential bid; perhaps 
Tom DeLay sees a way to distract from his ongoing ethics problems; 
perhaps they are motivated by more noble standards.
  Regardless of their motivation, the GOP congressional leadership has 
pushed S. 686, legislation pushing an after-the-fact remedy by pre-
empting State court jurisdiction. Foregoing even the pretense of 
federalism, and the notion of America as a nation of laws, S. 686 
reflects the Republicans' belief that they may

[[Page H1732]]

pick and choose the jurisdiction of their choice, depending on the day 
and the case.
  This bill places politics before the judgment of State judges, 
imposing Federal adjudication on a case that has been comprehensively 
reviewed and decided. S. 686 represents a gross abuse of legislative 
authority and a violation of the U.S. Constitution.
  Michael Schiavo has wrestled with the agonizing decision of what to 
do for his wife. He has followed Terri's instructions in accordance 
with the laws of his State and this country. Congress has no business 
in this matter, which involves a family decision based on mutual 
agreement between a husband and wife.
  Mr. EVERETT. Mr. Speaker, the Congress has been called upon to take 
emergency action to protect the rights and life of Terri Schiavo.
  While I normally do not favor Federal government involvement in 
personal decisions, there are a number of aspects to the Schiavo case 
which disturb me and call for further investigation.
  I am concerned about the lack of written evidence that Terri Schiavo 
did not want her life preserved, the fact that her husband waited years 
before telling anyone that his wife supposedly did not want to live, 
and also the fact that her husband is pushing for her feeding tube 
removal after he has become involved with another woman and had 
children.
  Terri Schiavo is a living human being and every reasonable effort 
should be made to ensure that her constitutional rights have not been 
denied.
  I encourage all Members to support this legislation.
  Mr. KING of New York. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of S. 686, 
to provide for the relief of Terri Schiavo's family. In 1990, Terri 
Schiavo suffered a heart attack and subsequent brain damage due to lack 
of oxygen. She is not in a coma, and with the exception of the feeding 
tube, requires no artificial life support to keep her alive. Removal of 
the feeding tube, as was done this past Friday, will result in Terri's 
death by starvation and dehydration. By some estimates, she could be 
left to suffer for up to a month. This is a drawn out and painful 
process and Terri can feel pain.
  In a case like this one, where there is a clear dispute between 
Terri's parents and husband as to her wishes, the presumption should 
always be on the side of life. Every effort should be made to ensure 
that no mistakes have been made in this case. I urge support of this 
important legislation.
  Mr. GENE GREEN of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I support this legislation, S. 
686, for the relief of the parents of Terri Schiavo. This deeply 
personal family matter has come to our attention and been acted upon by 
Congress when the State courts have already made their decisions and 
rightfully so as this matter is in their jurisdiction.
  Now we find ourselves in the middle of a deeply personal battle 
between Terri's husband and her family. While we all understand the 
pain and tragedy of this family's struggle, we cannot overstep our 
boundaries in this heart-wrenching situation that many families have 
made and will have to make in the future. No one wants to witness the 
death of a family member; however, if that person stated their wish was 
not to be kept alive artificially, those wishes must be upheld.
  In this case, the State courts of Florida have ruled that Terri's 
wishes were indeed to not be kept alive artificially if she were to 
ever fall into a persistent vegetative state. The idea that Congress 
would intervene in this case is indeed unsettling and does bring some 
disturbing questions of constitutionality to the table.
  We are justified in sending this highly emotional case to the United 
States District Court for the Middle District of Florida even though 
Terri remains in this persistent, seemingly unrecoverable, state. The 
Federal courts should review Terri's case to determine if her 
constitutional rights have been violated because it is not the role of 
Congress to make such decisions regarding these issues.
  Mr. McNULTY. Mr. Speaker, I support S. 686, for the Relief of the 
Parents of Theresa Marie Schiavo.
  While I continue to support the right of individuals (through living 
wills) and families (when no living will exists) to make such difficult 
decisions, this case is unusual in two ways. First, while most families 
are united in these judgments, this family is clearly divided. Second, 
Terri Schiavo is not unresponsive to those around her, as is typically 
the case when these decisions are made. According to her mother, Terri 
smiles, laughs, cries, and otherwise responds to the presence of her 
family and others.
  S. 686 does not make medical decisions. It merely allows Terri 
Schiavo's family the right to have their case heard in Federal court--a 
right routinely accorded to death row inmates. That right certainly 
should be accorded to a disabled person.
  Mr. ROGERS of Michigan. Mr. Speaker, passage of S. 686 today 
reaffirms that our Nation is built on a foundation of reverence for 
life and a commitment to protect life.
  Protection of life is at the core of our constitutional republic. 
Beyond issues of separation of powers and court jurisdiction, is the 
fundamental notion that our government--both State and Federal--was 
established to protect the lives of all citizens.
  Extraordinary circumstances require us to defend the life of Theresa 
Marie Schiavo and her right to due process. Absent congressional 
action, those rights, and in fact, her life, will be forever 
extinguished.
  I join the overwhelming bipartisan support for ensuring that Theresa 
Marie Schiavo has full due process and that we uphold our reverence for 
human life.
  Mr. SHADEGG. Mr. Speaker, thank you for giving me an opportunity to 
voice my thoughts on this significant issue.
  This Nation was founded to preserve the sacred rights of mankind: 
life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Alexander Hamilton 
correctly noted that these rights were intrinsic and could ``never be 
erased or obscured by mortal power.''
  Our Nation was premised on this notion, and our government built upon 
its foundation. Yet, more than 200 years after our founding, we are 
still fighting to realize this sacred vision. The fight to save the 
life of Terri Schiavo, a disabled Florida woman, is evidence of our 
struggle.
  In cases like Terri's, when there is no living will and exact wishes 
are impossible to determine, we must err on the side of protecting 
innocent life. Without such guiding principles, how can we be sure that 
we have not forsaken her rights and replaced them with a court-ordered 
death sentence based solely on hearsay?
  It is not only mortal power that seeks to take the life of Terri 
Schiavo, but moral power overseen and blessed by government. If we 
allow this course to continue, and if we stand idly by as this human 
life expires as a result of government-ordered starvation, we will have 
lost the moral compass passed down to us by our forefathers.
  If we cannot protect innocent life in these circumstances where there 
is no written evidence of the individual's wishes, the family is deeply 
divided, and death is neither imminent nor certain in the near future, 
we have failed to do our jobs of protecting her constitutional rights.
  Ms. LEE. Mr. Speaker, I am outraged that the Republicans continue to 
lead the charge in legislating their personal beliefs on the American 
people.
  There is no legal or moral justification for Congress to be meddling 
in the personal lives of any American. Further, it sets a terrible 
precedent. The Florida courts have repeatedly ruled that any action on 
the part of the legislature or governor is a violation of the 
separation of powers enshrined in the Constitution. Yet under the cover 
of darkness, the majority has made a national example out of a local, 
individual, and very personal issue.
  It is my hope that, when the time arrives, these same ``civil 
rights'' advocates will fight with the same zeal for the rights to 
equality, education, health care and housing that all Americans 
deserve.
  Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Speaker, there is no more difficult decision for a 
family than to remove a loved one from life support. My heart goes out 
to the Schiavo family in this very personal and difficult time. 
However, I believe this to be a private family matter to be decided 
based on their own faith and values, without the government's 
intervention.
  The Schiavo case has been a long and difficult one for Ms. Schiavo's 
family and friends. Mr. Speaker, I trust that the multiple court 
decisions and the multiple court reviews were properly evaluated. Each 
time the evidence pointed to the same unbiased conclusion: Terri 
Schiavo's wishes were clear and convincing. Doctors who have examined 
Ms. Schiavo have consistently said that she is in a persistent 
vegetative state. The only ones who disagree are those who are deciding 
based on videotapes. In fact, the Florida State legislature has not 
overridden the decisions of their State courts.
  There is no doubt that this is a family tragedy. But, there is no 
room for the Federal Government in this case or in any similar case. It 
is unfair that this family during their time of grief has become a 
political pawn in an ideological war the conservative leadership is 
inappropriately propelling.
  Mr. Speaker, Congress intervening in this matter sets a bad precedent 
for our entire legal system. The Republican leadership has repeatedly 
made a point of calling for the removal of Federal court jurisdiction 
over issues, such as gay marriage or displaying the Ten Commandments in 
public buildings, when the Federal courts render a decision that does 
not meet with their political ideology. In fact, they have gone so far 
as to introduce several legislative initiatives to strip controversial 
religious and social issues from the jurisdiction of Federal courts. 
Now, ironically, when a State has

[[Page H1733]]

rendered a final decision that the Republican leadership disagrees 
with, they support reinstating the power of ``activist judges'' on the 
Federal level. The Republican leadership cannot have it both ways and 
should not interfere with the judicial process that has worked for over 
200 years.
  Instead we should be fighting to cover the 45 million Americans who 
are currently without health insurance and unable to get the services 
they need to live. We should be increasing scientific research funding 
to improve our medical procedures and help more people overcome the 
impossible.
  Mr. Speaker, I am not here today to judge what is right or wrong in 
Ms. Schiavo's particular case. Only her loved ones can truly know in 
their hearts what is right for her, even if they cannot agree. But, 
what I do know is that whether someone has the right to live or die is 
not a decision that the Federal Government, and Members of Congress 
should not make.
  Mr. ANDREWS. Mr. Speaker, I am deeply saddened over the pain and 
suffering of Ms. Schiavo and her family. This is a tragedy of great 
depth.
  I cannot imagine the pain that Ms. Schiavo has endured. As a husband, 
I certainly can empathize with Mr. Schiavo. As a father, I can 
empathize with the feelings of Ms. Schiavo's mother and father.
  My feelings for the pain of this family are precisely the reason for 
my position on this bill. In the first instance, tragic choices such as 
those confronting this family should be made by the family itself. In a 
case such as this, in which the family cannot come to a consensus, the 
courts are the proper place for decisions to be made.
  The Florida courts have examined this matter in great detail for a 
very long time. For any legislative body--least of all the Federal 
legislature--to impose its will is an abuse of its power.
  Excruciating decisions such as this belong first to families, and 
only if there cannot be agreement within a family--in the courts. The 
political process is the least appropriate place for such a decision to 
be made.
  Mr. MOORE of Kansas. Mr. Speaker, since February 1990, Terri Schiavo 
and her family have been coping with a tragic situation involving the 
most sensitive and difficult question imaginable. Congress and the 
American people should respect any person and their family dealing with 
an end of life decision. Over the past 15 years, 19 judges sitting on 
six different courts have ultimately determined that Terri Schiavo did 
not wish to be kept alive in a persistent vegetative state. Congress 
should respect her wish and stay out of the personal lives of families 
in tragic situations such as this. These heart-rending decisions are 
best made by the individual and family after discussions with treating 
physicians and clergy--not by Washington politicians.
  At the time I received notice there would be a vote on the bill 
regarding Terri Schiavo, I went immediately to the airport but was not 
able to get a flight to Washington in time. Had I been present, I would 
have voted to respect the wishes of Terri Schiavo.
  I hope every American will consider writing or revising a living will 
to clearly state their wishes regarding end of life decisions and keep 
a similar tragedy from happening in their family.
  Mr. HENSARLING. Mr. Speaker, as the elected representatives of the 
American people, we have no greater responsibility than defending the 
lives and liberties of the most vulnerable among us. Today, both the 
legislative and executive branches of the United States government are 
acting in concert to defend the life of one such human being, Terri 
Schiavo.
  While the legal issues related to this case remain uncertain, the 
moral issues could not be more clear. Terri Schiavo is very much alive 
today. By all appearances, she is responsive to her family and still 
has the capacity to feel joy and pain, like the rest of us.
  Terri Schiavo has a right to live, and we have a responsibility to 
help her. With such complex ethical questions that fall between 
interpreting the law and saving an innocent human life, we must always 
err on the side of life.
  President Abraham Lincoln said, ``I have been driven many times upon 
my knees by the overwhelming conviction that I had nowhere else to 
go.'' This week, millions of Americans, many of my colleagues, and I 
found ourselves in a similar position.
  Through this action, Congress is not only saving the life of Terri 
Shiavo, we are making a statement about the country we live in and the 
culture of life which we seek.
  Mr. OXLEY. Mr. Speaker, I want to express my support of House 
leadership for working on our behalf to give Terri Schiavo her day in 
Federal court.
  From our founding days, the Federal system we enjoy has reserved 
significant authority to the States to settle disputes. However, 
Federal courts have always been able to review possible violations of a 
citizen's constitutional rights. The narrowly drawn language of S. 686 
merely gives a Federal court the chance to review the unique 
circumstances of the Schiavo case in accordance with her Fourteenth 
Amendment guarantee: That no State shall deprive her of life without 
due process of law. In seeking this Federal review, Congress ensures 
that the basic protections available to all citizens are available to 
Terri Schiavo as well.
  No federally guaranteed right is more sacred than this right to life. 
I applaud the authors of this legislation for crafting language 
allowing for a more thorough examination of Terri Schiavo's rights 
under the Constitution of the United States.
  Mr. FERGUSON. Mr. Speaker, it was with heavy hearts and steady 
resolve that we came to the House chamber on Palm Sunday to pass S. 
686, a carefully crafted bill with a singular purpose: To ensure that 
Terri Schiavo enjoys the same due process under the Constitution as any 
other citizen, and to guarantee that her right to life is fully 
protected.
  This is an extraordinary situation, one that requires an 
extraordinary response. This is a life or death situation for this 
young woman. Terri's parents should have the chance to have her case 
heard by a Federal judge, and now they will. If we make an error, we 
should err on the side of life.
  Mrs. CUBIN. Mr. Speaker, as someone who respects human life in all 
its stages, I wholeheartedly support S. 686 and efforts to save Terri 
Schiavo.
  Terri is not in a coma, nor are extraordinary measures being taken to 
keep her alive. Terri may need feeding tubes to help her eat, but that 
doesn't mean she doesn't deserve the constitutional protections 
afforded by our judicial system. That Terri's life could be taken 
without such consideration is shocking to the conscience and contrary 
to notions of the rule of law and due process.
  It is imperative that Congress act swiftly to enact this bipartisan 
legislation, without which Terri Schiavo would most certainly die 
without the legal redress she so rightfully deserves.
  With that, I urge my colleagues to pass S. 686 and give Terri Schiavo 
and her family their day in Federal court.
  Ms. SOLIS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in opposition to S. 686, Relief 
for the Parents of Theresa Marie Schiavo.
  I am very disturbed that this tragedy is being used for what seem to 
be political purposes.
  I am concerned because this bill would set a dangerous precedent in 
dealing with a very serious and personal issue. This bill is an 
intrusion into a family's medical decision and Congress should not play 
a role in a private family matter when it is being dealt with in the 
State courts.
  As Congress, we should respect the sanctity of the judiciary and not 
use legislative powers to overturn court decisions when we disagree 
with such decisions.
  I wish for Terri, her husband and family peace.
  Mr. WELLER. Mr. Speaker, my remarks today are to commend the United 
States House of Representatives for taking such swift and just action 
during the early hours of Monday, March 21st when this body passed S. 
626 for the relief of the parents of Terri Schiavo. This bill will 
transfer the case regarding Terri Schiavo's life to the review of a 
Federal court. Doing so staved off efforts to permanently remove 
Terri's feeding tube, which would have slowly killed her by means of 
starvation and dehydration. Ms. Schiavo is neither brain-dead nor 
dependent on artificial life support; she simply needs a feeding tube 
to eat as do many incapacitated people.
  As a cosponsor of the original House bill to save Ms. Schiavo's life 
and a strong supporter of the Senate measure, I regret that I, along 
with numerous other members of Congress, was unable to return to 
Washington, D.C. in time to participate, due to the sudden and 
unexpected nature of the debate and vote. I am, however, committed to 
continuing my support of efforts aimed at saving Ms. Schiavo's life.
  While the case regarding Terri Schiavo is unique and tragic in many 
ways, it would be a much greater tragedy for those in power to do 
nothing to save an innocent woman from a slow, agonizing death. I am 
grateful that our efforts in Congress have assisted in staving off 
injustice and I am hopeful that new techniques and therapies may be 
applied to Terri for her benefit so that she may live out her life in 
the most productive and peaceful manner possible.
  Mr. BARTLETT of Maryland. Mr. Speaker, Congress typically writes laws 
with a broad application, but sometimes a special situation, such as 
this one, requires unusual legislative action. Life is sacred. Many 
across America have voiced support in an effort to keep Terri Schiavo 
alive. Nothing can diminish the importance of life.
  Terri Schiavo suffered a heart attack 15 years ago and experienced 
brain damage. While in the hospital, tubes were inserted in her 
digestive system to provide nutrition and

[[Page H1734]]

hydration. Three years later, Terri was still talking when speech 
therapy was discontinued. Terri Schiavo is currently not terminally ill 
or in the process of dying. She is brain damaged, but she is otherwise 
healthy. Terri Schiavo is not on artificial life support. No 
extraordinary measures are being taken to keep her alive.
  Ms. Schiavo is a living person. She is awake and aware of her 
surroundings. Many are galvanized by her cause because like me, they 
recognize that the right to life is one of our core fundamental human 
values.
  The 14th Amendment states, ``No State shall deprive any person of 
life, liberty or property without due process of law.'' In this special 
circumstance, we were left with a last legal recourse to help save her 
life by providing her with the opportunity to have her case heard 
before a Federal court. There is clear precedent for Federal review of 
life and death cases.
  I strongly value the importance of States' rights. This case does not 
weaken my resolve to fight for States' rights. The State and Federal 
government should not take life, but by giving the Federal court an 
opportunity to hear the case, this allows one more opportunity for 
Terri Schiavo to live.
  Judge Greer of the Pinellas-Pasco Circuit Court stated, ``I see no 
cogent reason why the committee should be able to intervene into a case 
involving the decision of whether or not to remain on life support.'' 
He added, ``I don't think that legislative agencies or bodies have 
business in court proceedings.''
  I respectfully disagree. The Constitution not only outlines a 
separation of powers but also a system of checks and balances. It is 
Congress's duty to hold the judicial branch accountable or to act 
itself within its powers when it believes it is necessary.
  The driving force behind many people's efforts on behalf of Ms. 
Schiavo was plainly to save her life. Yet there have emerged a number 
of difficult and complicated issues. I applaud the efforts of those who 
fight for Ms. Schiavo to live. These issues resonate with many as some 
of us contemplate how we would like to die. I, however, focus on how 
Congress can protect Ms. Schiavo's life because that is of paramount 
importance.
  Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Speaker, this legislation provides a clear lesson 
for the American public about how Congress and American politics 
operate today.
  Make no mistake, this is not about what Terri Schiavo wants. It is 
clear from testimony of the family members who are fighting against 
Terri's husband that they would want the feeding tube reinserted no 
matter what Terri wants. Tom DeLay says he doesn't care what her 
husband wants. This is all about people who have chosen to use this 
poor woman as a political football. This legislative spectacle was an 
artful attempt to divert the public's attention.
  But in your mind's eye, the face in the picture that you should be 
thinking about is not Terri Schiavo's: You should be worried about the 
face of you or your loved one in the middle of a media circus, or 
worse, denied the right to control your own fate.
  This is not a narrow, specific bill about a single case. Their true 
intentions were revealed by H.R. 1332, the bill that Tom DeLay had the 
House pass last Wednesday. I led the debate against H.R. 1332 because 
it would have effectively overruled Oregon's Death with Dignity Act 
with language so broad and sweeping that it would call into question 
every living will and end of life directive. Anybody who wanted to 
force the issue, whether business partner, estranged family member, or 
friend could drag your loved ones into Federal court.
  Make no mistake, the goal is to take away your choice in making end 
of life decisions, just as their agenda is to control your choices at 
the beginning of life, whether regarding contraception or a woman's 
right to choose.
  The Schiavo case has received unbelievable attention and scrutiny by 
politicians and judges at every level in the State of Florida. For 
years, the battle has raged in a State that is controlled by 
Republicans and is governed by the President's brother. This is not 
about due process and letting the system work. Rather it is about some 
zealots who do not agree with the verdicts of the courts and the 
professional opinions of medical experts.
  The hypocrisy of Tom DeLay and the Republican leadership in Congress 
is breathtaking. The only time they trust the Federal courts is when 
they are using them as a political tactic. This fall they passed in the 
House of Representatives, bills that declared the Federal courts 
incompetent to rule on cases involving the pledge of allegiance and 
same-sex marriage.
  In a statement released early this morning, President Bush said he 
will ``continue to stand on the side of those defending life for all 
Americans.'' But the facts make it hard to believe that the President 
is standing on principle. In 1999, then Governor Bush signed a law that 
``allows hospitals to discontinue life sustaining care, even if patient 
family members disagree.'' Just days ago the law permitted Texas 
Children's Hospital to remove the breathing tube from a 6-month-old boy 
named Sun Hudson. The law may soon be used to remove life support from 
Spiro Nikolouzos, a 68-year-old man. The President has not commented on 
either case.
  Because of this media circus, attention is being diverted away from 
the seniors that will suffer and die in this country as a result of the 
Republican leadership's budget proposal to shortchange Medicaid. The 
very financial sources that have kept Terri alive for 15 years, 
Medicaid and her malpractice settlement, are under attack by the 
President and Tom Delay. For the time being, Republican leaders are 
succeeding in their effort to change the subject, and obscure this 
fact.
  While Congress's involvement is another sad chapter in the fight 
against Terri's wishes, I'm glad that we forced them to narrow the 
reach of this bill, at least for the time being. It is still an 
unfortunate precedent of inappropriate Congressional intervention into 
a personal family matter.
  In the final analysis, I'm pleased that the public was able to see 
what the stakes are and what some politicians and zealots are willing 
to do. Ultimately, it is this public awareness that will defeat efforts 
to take away the choice for each of us and of our families to control 
our own destinies.
  Mr. FEENEY. Mr. Speaker, as members of Congress, we have a moral 
obligation to protect innocent life and not stand idly by while an 
activist judge seeks to use extreme measures to destroy the life of an 
innocent woman. By transferring this matter to a Federal court we will 
ensure Terri is given every possible protection by allowing a Federal 
judge to see whether her constitutional rights have been violated.
  Life is precious and I will always work to see that it is protected. 
With so much controversy surrounding Terri's final wishes and current 
physical condition, I believe it is imperative that a Federal court 
take a fresh look at this case.
  I commend my colleagues from both the House and Senate for working 
around the clock to determine a legislative solution to ensure that 
Terri's life and her constitutional rights are protected.
  Thomas Jefferson once wrote that, ``[t]he care of human life and 
happiness, and not their destruction, is the first and only legitimate 
object of good government. I think Jefferson was right. I welcome this 
opportunity to join my colleagues in this effort to help defend and 
protect innocent human life.
  Mr. OWENS. Mr. Speaker, we have just set a frightening precedent in 
the halls of Congress by interfering in the life of an individual. Yet 
we show little compassion for the scores of families who do not have 
the financial means or insurance to cover the expenses of individuals 
on life support or individuals who are sick in general.
  There are 10,000 individuals on life-support throughout the country. 
The White House and Congress should find better ways to take care of 
all of these individuals and individuals who are in dire need of proper 
healthcare.
  If we continue on this path, the President of the United States 
should be made guardian of all people on life support. Then perhaps we 
can find an amicable solution to the sadness that is the state of 
healthcare for Americans.
  What are our priorities? If we care about saving lives, we should 
address the problem of 40 million Americans who do not have health care 
insurance. Eleven million children do not have basic health insurance. 
New York State ranked 33rd out of 50 states in quality of hospital 
care. And, 57,000 Americans die needlessly each year because the health 
care system failed to provide adequate care.
  Congress must stand up and do what the voters elected them to do--
focus on the critical issues facing everyone in this country.
  Ms. KILPATRICK of Michigan. Mr. Speaker, I regret that Congress is 
being called in to this special session while official business 
requires me to be elsewhere at this time. However, I wish to insert 
these remarks for the Record in order to make public my views and 
position on the legislation before this body tonight, S. 686, that will 
provide for the Relief of the Parents of Theresa Marie Schiavo.
  We are playing a dangerous game here as we try to act as Solomons 
when the nine Solomons of the U.S. Supreme Court have refused to review 
the case involving Ms. Schiavo. The arguments we have heard tonight 
both ``pro'' and ``con'' give testimony to the difficulty of the 
decision before us this evening, but it is a decision we should not be 
making. Issues of life and death should be determined personally, 
medically, legally, spiritually, morally--but not politically. 
Congress, the political body that it is, should not be involved in this 
sad debate tonight, and I strongly believe we will ultimately regret 
the precedent we are setting by our intrusion into this affair.
  My heart goes out to the Schindlers this evening, and I share with 
them their concern

[[Page H1735]]

and love for their daughter. Nonetheless, I do not think we have all 
the information we need to act wisely in this matter.
  Mr. DEAL of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I would like to commend the 
Leadership in the House and Senate for working together for a rapid 
compromise on legislation to allow for the relief of the parents of 
Terri Schiavo, and I rise today to support the bill.
  Terri Schiavo's struggle to live has been emotionally trying for 
anyone who has followed the case, let alone the incomprehensible 
emotions being faced by her family and caretakers who are directly 
involved. I, presumably like most Members of Congress, hoped to see the 
issue of Terri Schiavo resolved without Congressional intervention. 
While I do not feel it is the role of Congress to make medical 
decisions in the case of Terri Schiavo, I do feel it is our role to 
ensure her parents' opportunity to fight for their own daughter's life 
before a Federal court. Moreover, I feel whenever there is doubt and 
question and disagreement as to what a person in Terri's condition 
would want for herself, government must always protect one's right to 
live.
  I continue to pray for Ms. Schiavo and her family, and for the 
strength they need to endure this emotional trauma. Every life is 
worthy of protection, and given the circumstances surrounding this 
case, I support the efforts being taken to save her life.

                          ____________________