[Congressional Record Volume 164, Number 19 (Monday, January 29, 2018)]
[Senate]
[Pages S546-S547]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]



               Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Bill

  Mr. LEE. Mr. President, the United States is just one of seven 
countries in the entire world that currently allow elective abortions 
after 20 weeks of pregnancy, and we are not in good company on that 
list. Of the other six countries that allow elective abortions at that 
very late stage of the child's development, half of those countries 
have authoritarian governments--communist governments with horrible 
records when it comes to human rights.
  Yes, our abortion laws are as extreme and inhumane as the abortion 
laws in Vietnam, China, and North Korea. It pains me--and it should 
pain all Americans--that the United States lags so very far behind the 
rest of the world in protecting the unborn, protecting human beings, 
simply because they have yet to take their first breath.
  Twenty weeks is the fifth month of pregnancy. Think about what that 
means. At that stage, the unborn child is about 10 inches long from 
head to toe. He or she is roughly the size of a banana. A baby at this 
stage sleeps and wakes in the womb. She sucks her thumb, makes faces, 
and, in some cases, might even see light filtering in through the womb.
  By 20 weeks, if not before, science suggests that the baby can also 
feel pain. Each year in this country, more than 10,000 abortions occur 
after this point in the baby's development. Today, we have a chance to 
stop this grave injustice.
  Moments ago, this body voted on the Pain-Capable Unborn Child 
Protection Act, a bill that would prohibit abortions after the 20th 
week of pregnancy. This is a commonsense restriction that is supported 
by a majority of Americans. More than 6 in 10 Americans support a ban 
on abortion after 20 weeks, according to a Marist poll conducted 
earlier this month. Not only that, but a majority of Democrats--56 
percent--said they would support an abortion ban at 20 weeks. Yes, this 
bill does, in fact, have widespread support, and it would bring America 
back into the mainstream of nations.
  More importantly, this bill is just. It is humane. It is the right 
thing to do. It is the natural outcome of any question asked with a 
degree of moral probity: Is this right?
  The reason we signed up for this job is to fight for what is right. 
And it is wrong--self-evidently wrong--that our country allows 5-month-
old unborn babies to be killed. We, in this body, have a moral duty to 
protect those vulnerable human beings, but I have no illusions that 
this will be easy.
  We have to overcome the misinformation of the abortion industry. This 
is a powerful special interest group that wants to keep abortion legal 
right up to the moment of birth. The abortion industry is attacking 
this bill by denying that there is any evidence that unborn babies can 
feel pain at 20 weeks. The linchpin of its argument is a 2005 study 
that claimed unborn babies could not feel pain until the 30th week of 
pregnancy. What the abortion industry never mentions, of course, is 
that this study was written by individuals with significant and, I 
would add, undisclosed ties to the abortion industry itself.
  As reported by the Philadelphia Inquirer, the study's lead author, 
who was not a doctor but a medical student, previously worked for 
NARAL. Another of the study's authors actually performed abortions as 
the medical director of an abortion clinic.
  How convenient that the abortion industry's denial of fetal pain 
rests on a study by its own employees. If I recall, the tobacco 
industry tried something similar when they denied that cigarettes cause 
cancer. As always, the antidote to misinformation is more information, 
and the antidote to bad science is good science.
  I have three studies that address the topic of fetal pain 
specifically. They were all published after the abortion industry's 
favorite study--the one they prefer to acknowledge to the exclusion of 
all others. Unlike that study--the one they prefer to the exclusion of 
all others--none of these studies are compromised by a conflict of 
interest.
  This one is by the International Association for the Study of Pain. 
It concludes: ``The available scientific evidence makes it possible, 
even probable, that fetal pain perception occurs well before late 
gestation.'' The study pinpoints fetal pain to the ``second trimester'' 
of pregnancy, ``well before the third trimester.''
  Here is another study by the American Association of Pharmaceutical 
Scientists. It concludes that ``the basis for pain perception appear[s] 
at about 20 to 22 weeks from conception.''
  Finally, here is a 2012 study published in the Journal of Maternal-
Fetal and Neonatal Medicine. This paper states that there is evidence 
that unborn children can feel pain beginning at 20 weeks. The authors 
note that at this stage, unborn children have pain receptors in their 
skin, recoil in response to sharp objects like needles, and release 
stress hormones when they are harmed.
  They conclude: ``We should suppose that the fetus can feel pain. . . 
. When the development of the fetus is equal to that of a premature 
baby.''
  I could go on, but I think that is enough for now. The takeaway is 
this. The science at a minimum suggests that unborn children can feel 
pain around 20 weeks. It can feel the abortionists' instruments as they 
do their grisly work.
  These children feel until they cannot. That possibility alone--the 
mere possibility--should be chilling to us, and that possibility alone 
should have us rushing to ban abortion at 20 weeks. I implore my 
colleagues who didn't vote for this to reconsider and, the next time 
they have an opportunity to support it, to vote yes on the Pain-Capable 
Unborn Child Protection Act.
  A vote for this bill is a vote to protect some of the most vulnerable 
members of the human family. And yes, we are talking about members of 
the human family. The life form we are talking about is not a puppy; it 
is not some other form of animal. This is a human being we are talking 
about. This is something that instinctively calls out for us. We think 
about the needs of the most vulnerable among us, and we should be eager 
to protect them.
  Together, we can move our country's laws away from those of North 
Korea and China and toward our most fundamental belief that all human 
beings are created equal and that they have an unalienable right to 
life.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from New Hampshire.
  Ms. HASSAN. Mr. President, I rise today to oppose dangerous 
legislation that would endanger the health of women by limiting their 
constitutional right to access a safe and legal abortion. We must 
recognize the capacity of every woman in our Nation to make her own 
healthcare decisions, control her own destiny, and ensure that all 
women have the full independence to do so.
  Unfortunately, throughout the last year, the Trump administration and 
Republicans in Congress have repeatedly tried to roll back access to 
care and undermine the health of women. We have seen bill after bill 
targeting women's healthcare by restricting access to abortion, 
increasing the costs of maternity care, and allowing insurers to treat 
giving birth as a preexisting condition.
  The Trump administration issued interim final rules, allowing 
employers to deny women access to the birth control coverage they need. 
My colleagues on the other side of the aisle have confirmed Trump 
administration officials and judges to the bench who are vehemently 
opposed to a woman's right to make her own reproductive health 
decisions. Republicans have been relentless in their attempts to defund 
Planned Parenthood, which is an essential source of care for women in 
New Hampshire and provides key services like birth control and cancer 
screenings.
  Here we are, once again, with Republican leadership bringing a bill 
to the floor that attempts to marginalize women and take away their 
rights to make their own decisions. This bill

[[Page S547]]

would ban abortions after 20 weeks--an extremely rare procedure that is 
often the result of complex and difficult medical circumstances. The 
bill lacks adequate exceptions for survivors of rape or incest, and it 
gets in the way of a woman and the judgment of her doctor, threatening 
to jail physicians for providing patients the care they need.
  In fact, a group of medical and public health organizations have 
written to Congress, saying: This bill places healthcare providers in 
an untenable situation. When they are facing a complex, urgent medical 
situation they must think about an unjust law instead of about how to 
protect the health and safety of their patients.
  This bill is a direct challenge to the precedent set in Roe V. Wade. 
We are at a moment in our country when women are speaking out and 
fighting for basic dignity and respect at home, in the workplace, and 
in their daily lives. They also deserve that respect with regard to the 
most deeply personal health decisions they can make.
  Passing this legislation would send a message to women across the 
country that politicians in Washington do not believe that women have 
the capacity to make their own healthcare decisions--as if women don't 
understand or are unable to grapple with the physical, emotional, 
economic, and spiritual issues that are involved in deciding when or if 
to have a family or how to handle critical health challenges.
  Rather than marginalizing women, we should be doing everything we can 
to include them in the bipartisan work we need to do on priorities to 
move our Nation forward. Divisive and partisan bills like this one 
undermine women and undermine our strength as a country. I was proud to 
join many of my colleagues in voting against this bill, and I am glad 
that it has failed in the Senate today.
  I thank the Presiding Officer.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Kansas.