[Congressional Record Volume 159, Number 69 (Thursday, May 16, 2013)]
[Senate]
[Pages S3553-S3555]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
UNANIMOUS CONSENT REQUESTS--S. RES. 133 and 134
Mr. LEE. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the HELP
Committee be discharged from further consideration of S. Res. 133; that
the Senate proceed to its consideration; that the resolution be agreed
to, the preamble be agreed to, and the motions to reconsider be made
and laid upon the table, with no intervening action or debate.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
Mr. BLUMENTHAL. Madam President, reserving the right to object, I
wish to point out that the incident that led to this resolution--the
Kermit Gosnell prosecution--indeed resulted in a successful
prosecution. He was convicted of three counts of first-degree murder
and one count of involuntary manslaughter. That case is closed. The
criminal justice system has done its part, and the three life sentences
without the possibility of parole means that the interests there--the
very important public interests--will be served and he will never again
harm women, infants or anyone else through his version of medical
practice, that distorted and unfortunate betrayal of trust that he
called a medical practice.
We need very much to focus on the kind of abuse of trust--unsanitary,
abusive, unsafe medical practices--across this country, no matter what
kind of procedure is involved, and that is the reason I think this
resolution is too narrow in its focus on violations of the standard of
medical care when they occur in medical practice, which most certainly
was involved in the Gosnell case and involved, unfortunately, in
thousands of cases across the country every year.
As Senators, we have a responsibility to focus on that betrayal of
trust and care when it occurs. That is the reason I have offered a
resolution--S. Res. 134--to express the sense of the Senate that all
incidents of abusive, unsanitary, illegal, unhealthful medical
practices should be condemned and prevented, and the perpetrators
should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law, as Gosnell was.
There are, unfortunately, many instances already publicly disclosed
of these abuses of standards, and one of them, for example, I cited on
the floor just very recently--last week. I remind my colleagues of the
Oklahoma dentist who exposed as many as 7,000 patients to the HIV and
hepatitis B and C viruses through unsanitary practices. So far, 60 of
his patients have tested positive for these viruses. Those are 60
people who trusted a health care provider in a position of authority to
provide safe, quality care. Those patients now face life-threatening
diseases. In Nevada, practitioners at an endoscopy center exposed
40,000 patients to hepatitis C through their unsanitary practices,
which went on for years. My resolution speaks to these kinds of
abuses--unsafe, unsanitary practices--no matter what the medical
procedure involved may be. So I urge my colleagues to support my
resolution, and I do object to the proposed resolution of the Senator
from Utah.
Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the HELP Committee be
discharged from further consideration of S. Res. 134, and the Senate
proceed to its consideration; that the resolution be agreed to, the
Blumenthal amendment to the preamble, which is at the desk, be agreed
to, the preamble, as amended, be agreed to, and the motions to
reconsider be laid upon the table, with no intervening action or
debate.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Objection is heard to the request of the
Senator from Utah.
Is there objection to the request of the Senator from Connecticut?
The Senator from Utah.
Mr. LEE. Reserving the right to object, the kind of abuse, the kind
of betrayal of trust described in the resolution proposed by my friend
and my colleague from Connecticut is different in kind from that
described in my resolution. The kind of abuse involved in my resolution
involves the intentional taking, the first-degree premeditated murder
of a human life. I think that deserves its own consideration, and on
that basis I object.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Objection is heard.
The Senator from Connecticut.
Mr. BLUMENTHAL. If I may respond to my friend's remarks--and I
certainly not only sympathize with his motivation but also with the
result--I just think it is too narrow a result--to investigate one form
of medical practice, no matter how egregious the violation of standard
of care may be. In this instance, it involved murder. We can say it
now, no longer with the word ``alleged'' before murder, as we did last
week. It is now proven. It is heinous and unacceptable. But so are the
practices that involve exposing patients to very severe illnesses; and,
likewise, the nursing home director in California who inappropriately
administered an antipsychotic medicine to residents simply for
convenience and which resulted in the death of one patient. Those kinds
of practices may be equally egregious in the results and impact they
cause, and my resolution would be broader and more inclusive and fairer
not only to those victims' families--and I want to express my sympathy
to the families of those victims who were so deeply and irreparably
harmed by Gosnell--but also with the families and victims of other
kinds of medical malpractice and to respect the States that have an
independent responsibility to ensure adherence with those standards of
care and ought to have the ability to enforce their laws, which might
be impeded by the resolution that has been offered by my friend from
Utah.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Utah.
Mr. LEE. Madam President, I rise to ask my colleagues once again to
join me in expressing the sense of the Senate that governments at all
levels have a compelling interest in preventing and punishing the
practices of late-term abortions under unsafe, unsanitary, and illegal
circumstances.
It seems as though every day we find new evidence that this problem
is much bigger than we could have feared previously. Earlier this week,
of course, Philadelphia abortion doctor Kermit Gosnell was convicted on
three counts of first-degree murder for severing the spines of newborn
infants, and one count of involuntary manslaughter for the death of a
pregnant mother who came to see Dr. Gosnell for care.
The shocking details of the Gosnell case have, despite the best
efforts of
[[Page S3554]]
the mainstream media to cover it up, become national news. The abortion
industry has spun into action, trying to isolate and condemn Gosnell as
an aberration. Planned Parenthood cited Gosnell's ``appalling crimes.''
NARAL called him a ``butcher.'' On this very floor last week, Gosnell's
actions were decried by pro-choice Senators as ``reprehensible'' and
``an outrage . . . a violation of everything we hold dear.''
But Kermit Gosnell has only been sentenced to life in prison and
condemned as a monster for doing things for which--had he done them
just a few seconds earlier or a few centimeters in a different
direction--those same voices might have hailed him as a hero and not as
a monster.
Remember, President Obama himself, while serving in the State
legislature of Illinois, voted against legislation that would have
protected the civil and constitutional rights of infants--human
beings--born alive.
At a recent hearing in the Florida State Legislature, a Planned
Parenthood representative refused even to acknowledge that newborn
babies have the right to life. In recent weeks, undercover videos have
caught abortion clinics around the country casually offering to kill
infants born alive. Just this week, evidence emerged about similar
abuses at a clinic in Texas.
This has nothing to do with health care or even with medical
negligence but with murder--a war on women and children waged under the
guise of legitimate health care.
As much as we might want to agree that Kermit Gosnell is an
aberration, recent revelations, indeed, suggest otherwise. A mounting
body of evidence seems to suggest that at least among some late-term
abortion providers and advocates, the immorality of infanticide may be
an open question.
The abortion industry's defense of late-term abortion has always been
based on a rejection of innate human dignity. How could it be
otherwise? But as technology advances, their case for late-term
abortion increasingly rejects medical science as well.
We now know as a scientific fact that unborn children, after about 20
weeks of development, can feel pain. We know Dr. Gosnell's victims
squirmed and cried before he severed their spinal cords, and we know
that every day medical technology progresses our abortion laws fall
further behind the science.
It is a tragedy all on its own that even today our laws defining
human life depend more on geography than biology. The unsettling
question before us now is: Has an industry whose profits have always
depended on dehumanizing unborn children gone even further and
dehumanized children born alive too?
The case of Kermit Gosnell, the undercover videos, and recent clinic
scandals around the country all hint at a terrifying answer. Yet right
now we just don't know. My resolution would call on governments at all
levels to find out--to find out what the late-term abortion industry is
up to and to take any appropriate and necessary measures to prevent and
punish abusive, unsanitary, and illegal practices.
Some might say this resolution is a symbolic gesture, and I and
others have introduced more concrete legislation. Perhaps. But even so,
symbols are themselves important. It is important that the strong stand
for the weak; that we, in the world's greatest deliberative body, lend
our voices to the voiceless; that we, representatives of the most
powerful Nation on Earth, promise to protect the weakest, most
innocent, and most vulnerable among us and punish those who would do
our children harm.
Mr. CRUZ. Would the Senator from Utah yield for a question?
Mr. LEE. Yes, I would.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Texas.
Mr. CRUZ. Madam President, I wish to ask a question but will start by
laying a predicate and ask the Senator's views on that predicate.
I rise to support the resolution offered by Senator Lee calling upon
the Senate to investigate and hold hearings about the late-term
abortion practices in this country.
This is especially important given the fact we are seeing allegations
of similar conduct to that of Dr. Gosnell potentially being performed
in other locations across the country. Indeed, there have been
allegations of similar conduct in my hometown of Houston, TX, which I
understand are being investigated by the local district attorney and
other authorities and that need to be fully and thoroughly
investigated.
The crimes committed by Dr. Gosnell are almost unspeakable. The harm
inflicted to the mothers and to the babies who were born alive and had
their lives willingly extinguished--unthinkable. The actions detailed
in the grand jury report depict a house of horrors.
Knowing what we know now about what happened, everyone in this body
should be supporting conducting an investigation to make sure there are
not other Dr. Kermit Gosnells across this country. We need to make sure
it is not happening to other unsuspecting mothers, that other newborn
babies are not being murdered as they were in Dr. Gosnell's clinic.
Specifically this resolution states:
Congress and States should gather information about and
correct abusive, unsanitary and illegal abortion practices
and the interstate referral of women and girls to facilities
engaged in dangerous or illegal second- or third-trimester
procedures.
This body should be concerned what referrals were made to Dr. Gosnell
and who else might be performing these late-term abortions in such
horrific conditions.
This resolution goes on to say:
Congress has the responsibility to investigate and conduct
hearings on abortions performed near, at, or after viability
in the United States, public policies regarding such, and
evaluate the extent to which such abortions involve
violations of the natural right to life of infants who are
born alive or are capable of being born alive and therefore
are entitled to equal protection under the law.
In my judgment this is a resolution everyone should support. Everyone
who proclaims himself or herself to be a champion for women and
children should enthusiastically support this resolution.
Many of these late-term abortion clinics serve under-privileged
populations. Anyone who proclaims himself a champion dedicated to
helping the most vulnerable should be supporting this resolution. The
Senate has an obligation to conduct oversight.
Planned Parenthood, the Nation's largest abortion provider in 2001
performed 333,964 abortions in the United States. From 2011 to 2012,
Planned Parenthood received 45 percent of its revenue from taxpayer-
funded sources. Almost half of its income comes from the taxpayer. This
body has an obligation to make sure there are not other Gosnell houses
of horror practicing today.
The conditions described in the grand jury report shock the
conscience. They describe how doctors and nurses worked without proper
licenses.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The time of the Senator from Utah has expired.
Mr. CRUZ. My question to the Senator is, does he see how any Senator
of good faith, given these facts, could oppose this resolution?
Mr. LEE. I ask unanimous consent I be given 60 seconds to answer the
question and then I will yield.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Mr. LEE. Madam President, in short, in response to the question from
my colleague from Texas, I do find it difficult to understand why
anyone would oppose this resolution. I also find it difficult to
understand how this can be put on the same plate--as serious as other
kinds of abuses are, as serious as other acts of medical malpractice
may be, this one is different. This is about premeditated first degree
murder of the most defenseless, most vulnerable people in our society,
and I urge my colleagues to support it.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Connecticut.
Mr. BLUMENTHAL. Again, I renew my objection. Let me say, my two
colleagues have made excellent closing arguments to the Gosnell jury. I
would expect that to be the case since they are two well-trained,
excellent lawyers. But the Gosnell case is over. It is done. He has
been sentenced--or he will be shortly. These kinds of abuses ought to
arouse outrage wherever and whenever they occur. Anytime, anywhere a
doctor endangers a patient in violating standards of care, we ought to
condemn them. So I urge my colleagues to join
[[Page S3555]]
me in the outrage I feel about the dentist in Oklahoma or the endoscopy
center in Nevada or the nursing home director in California. In any
case where prosecution is appropriate, an investigation should be done
properly by State authorities who have jurisdiction, and they should
condemn such practices. I ask them to join me in resolution S. 134.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Virginia.
Mr. WARNER. Madam President, I appreciate the courtesy of the Senator
from Oklahoma, recognizing that he has other accommodations he has to
deal with. I ask unanimous consent I be granted up to 4 minutes to
speak after the Senator from Oklahoma completes his comments.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Mr. INHOFE. I thank the Senator from Virginia.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Oklahoma.
Mr. INHOFE. I ask the Chair if I am correct when I say after comments
by the Senator from Virginia, the senior Senator from Texas will be
recognized?
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator is correct.
____________________