[Congressional Record Volume 165, Number 21 (Monday, February 4, 2019)]
[Senate]
[Pages S837-S839]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
UNANIMOUS CONSENT REQUEST--S. 130
Mr. SASSE. Mr. President, thank you.
In a few minutes, the U.S. Senate is going to have an opportunity to
condemn infanticide. One hundred U.S. Senators are going to have an
opportunity to unanimously say the most basic thing imaginable, and
that is that it is wrong to kill a little newborn baby. Every Senator
will have the opportunity to stand for human dignity, to stand for the
belief that in this country all of us are created equal, because if
that equality means anything, surely it means that infanticide is
wrong.
Frankly, this shouldn't be hard. Politicians come to this floor every
single day and talk about how they care for the poorest or the weakest
or the most marginalized members of our society. In recent weeks, I
have heard it stated this way in powerful, eloquent, and, from some
ambitious Senators, very clear terms about human dignity.
One of my distinguished colleagues recently on the campaign trail
declared rightly ``that the people in our society who are the most
often targeted by predators are also most often the voiceless and the
vulnerable.'' Amen to that.
Another Democratic Senator seeking the Presidency said they seek to
``build a country where no one is forgotten, no one is left behind.''
Amen to that.
Giving words of hope and encouragement, a third Senator reminded us
that ``no matter where you live in America . . . you deserve a path to
opportunity.'' Amen to that.
A fourth continued that this individual was committed ``to fight for
other people's kids as hard as I would fight for my own.'' Yet again,
Amen.
But, sadly, in the last week, these beautiful and inspiring words
have been choked out by the ugliness and the cruelty from another
public official. In Virginia, disgraced Governor Ralph Northam
tarnished the American idea of equality under law. He betrayed the
universal truth of human dignity, and he turned the stomachs of
civilized people, not just in this country but in every country on
Earth.
Governor Northam endorsed infanticide. He said:
The infant would be kept comfortable. The infant would be
resuscitated if that's what the mother and the family
desired, and then a discussion would ensue between the
physicians and the mother.
This was the quote--that the infant would be kept comfortable and
resuscitated if that is what the mom and doctors wanted to do, and then
they could have a debate about what to do next. He was literally
talking about allowing space and time for a discussion about
infanticide--no euphemisms or weasel words there. Infants can be kept
comfortable and resuscitated, and baby girls could be left cold and
alone to die.
Just a few years ago, the abortion lobby was really clear in its talk
about hoping that abortion would be safe and legal, but rare. This was
the slogan. Abortion would be ``safe, legal, and rare.'' Now we are
talking about keeping a baby comfortable while the doctors have a
debate about infanticide. That is what we are talking about here on the
floor tonight. We are not talking about second-trimester abortion. We
are not having some big, complicated discussion about a mother's
reproductive freedom. As important as all of those debates are, we are
actually talking about babies that have been born.
The only debate on the floor tonight is about infanticide. The
abortion industry's PR army couldn't defend this. Many in the national
media decided to overlook it, but none of us in this body can escape
it. What we are talking about on the Senate floor tonight is
infanticide.
Instead of saying he misspoke and instead of offering an apology, the
Governor of Virginia decided to double down on the ugliness and
cruelty. This is not about a clump of cells. This is about fourth-
trimester abortion. That is actually what we are talking about here
tonight.
Governor Northam is a disgraced coward, and he has such an abysmally
low belief of human dignity that he couldn't say this basic truth: It
is wrong to let babies who have been born die. He couldn't say it.
This isn't about Republicans and Democrats. We are way beyond that.
Everyone in the Senate ought to be able to say unequivocally that the
little baby deserves life, that she has rights, and that killing her is
wrong. Tonight every Member of this body has that chance.
The Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act prohibits exactly
the kind of infanticide Governor Northam was endorsing. That is it. It
is based on the simple idea that every baby deserves a fighting chance.
It is a simple idea that every human being is an image bearer. Even the
weakest and most marginalized among us is no less human, and every one
of us has a moral obligation to defend the defenseless.
It is my understanding that some of my Democratic colleagues are
prepared to object tonight. I humbly say that I don't understand why,
and I beg you from the bottom of my heart not to do so.
Please don't betray the ideals that have been so eloquently
expressed. Please don't reduce truths to an empty campaign slogan, and
please don't take the principle of dignity and equality this cheaply.
There are two sides of the debate on the floor tonight. You are
either for babies or you are defending infanticide. That is actually
what the legislation is before us.
Please don't block this legislation. Please don't let Governor
Northam define you. Don't let an extremist pro-abortion lobby and
pledge hold you hostage. Please don't protect infanticide.
Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on the
Judiciary be discharged from further consideration of S. 130 and that
the Senate proceed to its immediate consideration. I ask unanimous
consent that the bill be considered read a third time and passed and
that the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the
table.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Sullivan). Is there objection?
The Senator from Washington.
Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, we have laws against infanticide in this
country. This is a gross misinterpretation of the actual language of
the bill that is being asked to be considered, and, therefore, I
object.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The objection is heard.
Mr. SASSE. With all due respect, Mr. President----
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Nebraska.
Mr. SASSE. To the Senator from Washington, the bill we are talking
about before this body tonight is because New York and Virginia--New
York already and Virginia in debate--are having a conversation about
removing exactly these protections. This debate is about infanticide
and infanticide only, and this is a sad day for this body.
It shouldn't be controversial to say that a newborn child deserves to
be treated with dignity and humanity. It shouldn't be difficult to say
that babies who survive an abortion shouldn't be left to die cold and
alone on that table.
I am sad, but I am not discouraged. I am actually encouraged by the
strong group of Senators who cosponsored this legislation and who have
come to the floor to support it tonight, and I am encouraged by the
millions and millions and millions of pro-life Americans who continue
to speak the truth in love. There is legislative work we need to do,
but, far more importantly, in the movement for love and life and
science and little babies, what we need to have happen is a lot more
persuasion and a lot more conversation with our neighbors. A number of
my colleagues on the floor tonight are prepared to do just that, and I
look forward to listening to their eloquent and love-based, science-
based speech.
Thank you.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Iowa.
Ms. ERNST. Mr. President, I rise today very, very disheartened, and I
do want to thank the junior Senator from Nebraska for having this very
difficult discussion on the floor of the Senate.
[[Page S838]]
As my colleague from Nebraska was speaking, I felt a tightness in my
chest. I am a mom. I have been through childbirth, and I can't imagine
anyone taking my child, setting her aside, and then having a discussion
on whether she should live or die. I can't imagine that. I can't
imagine, after having such a precious thing as a child brought into the
world, having these odious discussions of whether she should live. I
can't imagine putting a baby through that.
So I am disheartened and I am absolutely appalled by the debate we
have in front of us--a debate I would have once considered unfathomable
on the floor of the U.S. Senate.
Many have often referred to this as the world's greatest deliberative
body, but let me be clear, folks. There is nothing great, there is
nothing moral or even humane about the discussion we have before us
today.
Over the past week, we have witnessed the absolutely ugly truth about
the far-reaching grasp of the abortion industry and its increasingly
radicalized political agenda. Politicians have not only defended
aborting a child while a woman is in labor but have gone so far as to
support the termination of a child after his or her birth--a child--a
baby.
Rationality, decency, and basic human compassion have fallen by the
wayside. Somehow this conversation has devolved so completely that a
bill prohibiting the murder of children who are born alive--a bill that
simply prohibits infanticide--has tonight been blocked on the floor of
the Senate. We have moved beyond all common sense, and this body can no
longer unanimously condemn murder. We face a moral crisis when this
body refuses to acknowledge the repugnancy and savagery of infanticide.
This assault on human dignity cannot stand. I urge my colleagues to
set aside their partisanship and, instead, defend the most basic values
of compassion and decency that should define our society. We can and we
must do better, folks.
Again, I thank the junior Senator from the great State of Nebraska
for his leadership on this issue, and I call on my colleagues to bring
this commonsense legislation to the Senate floor for a vote. I also
implore my colleagues.
Thank you.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Missouri.
Mr. HAWLEY. Mr. President, I rise in support of S. 130, which I am
proud to cosponsor. This legislation would ensure that healthcare
providers treat babies who have been born alive, after failed abortion
attempts, with the same care they would treat any other baby born at
the same stage of pregnancy.
I also thank the Senator from Nebraska for his leadership on this
issue and for bringing this issue to the floor.
In one sense, it is very hard to imagine this legislation is even
necessary in the United States of America. In the 21st century, when,
every day, new, advanced technologies bring new revelations about the
wonders of human life, it is hard to fathom the extremism of the
politicians in New York and now in Virginia who would deny the
protections of law to the most vulnerable members of our society--the
innocent unborn--and allow them to be aborted, allow them to be killed
right up to the moment of birth. It is hard to comprehend statements
like those of Ralph Northam's, the Virginia Governor, who said that if
he had his way, infants who survived abortion attempts would be
delivered and kept comfortable--that is his word--while the doctors and
the parents decided their fate. Is this really what it has come to in
the United States? Is this really the social vision of today's
Democratic Party? Frankly, I can't imagine a vision less just or less
consistent with the goodness and compassion of the American people.
In another sense, perhaps we should not be so surprised. After all,
the cruelty and extremism that has been advocated by a growing number
of Democratic politicians made up the conventional wisdom for much of
recorded history.
We often hail the ancient Greeks as the founders of democracy, but,
of course, most of the Greeks believed that most humans were born to be
slaves and that their lives were utterly worthless. Oh, they had a
democracy, of course, but it was the democracy of the few ruling over
the many.
The Romans took the same view. They kept most of their subjects in
chains. They infamously killed children they didn't want and left them
to be exposed on hillsides or in deserted places. The Romans had a
republic, but citizenship was for the few. The strong ruled. Most
lives, they thought, didn't matter.
This has been the general rule of the ages. The Aztecs, the Mayans,
the Incas all practiced child sacrifice. Archaeologists recently
discovered a burial ground dated to the tomb of the empire in Peru
where more than 140 children were dismembered in a ritual of sacrifice.
So it has gone down through the years. The strong prey upon the weak.
The few rule the many. Individual lives don't count.
We here in the United States of America hold to a different
conviction. Our Constitution was written and the whole edifice of
American liberty depends on a very different belief, on a belief that
is as simple as it is powerful--that every life matters. We believe and
it is our pride to believe that every person has dignity and worth--
worth that is not given to one by the strong or the rich, that does not
come to one from the State or the city, that does not depend on place
of birth or social status, but is one's by right because of who one
is--a human being created in the image of the living God.
That is our faith, and against the drift of history, it is a
revolutionary creed. It is a creed that inspired the early Christians
to rescue those infants the Romans left to die and to bring them up to
be free. It led them to found hospitals and schools and, later,
universities on the supposition that all people should be cared for,
that all could learn, and that all could govern themselves. It is a
creed that has brought down empires and raised up the forgotten.
It is the faith of our Constitution and of our whole way of life.
Yes, we have struggled to realize it in this Nation. We have struggled
to make it real, and we have fallen short many times, but this struggle
for this faith defines our history and binds us together as Americans,
and this faith is again at issue in our time.
I know some are tempted, when they see this rising tide of barbarism
and cruelty, to feel despair, but I do not. I think of the words of
Lincoln, who spoke of the unfinished work of this Nation, and I take
courage that all of these years later, we are a revolutionary nation
still.
So we must press forward in this generation for our revolutionary
faith. Let us not go back to the darkness and cruelty of the past. Let
us not go back to the arbitrary rule of the powerful and the few. Let
us affirm again our founding belief in the equal worth and equal
dignity of all. As we do, we will do our part for liberty and justice
in our day.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Oklahoma.
Mr. LANKFORD. Mr. President, the Senate often does things by
unanimous consent in areas in which there is really no common
disagreement. This body will do a unanimous consent to congratulate the
New England Patriots for winning the Super Bowl, and, unanimously, all
of us will agree to congratulate them. Yet, today, the Senator from
Nebraska brought up a very straightforward, simple bill: Do we as a
nation permit infanticide?
For some reason, the New England Patriots is noncontroversial, but
the death of children at their deliveries is controversial enough that
my Democratic colleagues are blocking it. It is not some fancy, formal
bill with a trick piece in it; it is a very simple, straightforward
bill. Occasionally, an abortion is botched, and while they are actually
trying to take the life of a child, the child is actually delivered. At
that moment, the child is delivered and is on the table, crying, and
the question is, Now what do we do?
Current medical practice is to back away from the child and allow him
to die slowly on the table because there was supposed to have been an
abortion, although the child was fully delivered and was on the table,
with the umbilical cord attached, crying. It doesn't seem like this
should be controversial; it seems like this should be as
straightforward as congratulating the Patriots for winning the Super
Bowl. How can we as Americans say no to a fully delivered child's life?
[[Page S839]]
The question about abortion has been historically a question about,
when does life begin? I am one of those crazy radicals who actually
believe in science. I think, when cell division is occurring and when
DNA is there that is different from the mom's and different from the
dad's, that it is actually a different human being--a smaller human
being but a different human being. That is what everyone in science
believes. That child who is developing is alive. The day of his birth
is just another day. Now, it is a pretty traumatic day for him to
transition from being inside the womb to the outside, but birth is just
another day of life for that child because he is fully developed. He
was developing in the womb, and he is developing outside the womb.
Every single person who can hear this has had the exact same experience
of developing in the womb.
This seemed like a commonsense issue until the legislators in the
State of New York, a few weeks ago, stood and cheered and applauded
when they passed a bill for third-trimester abortions. These are ultra-
late-term abortions. This is a fully viable child abortion.
Let me review quickly what the State of New York did. There are only
four countries in the world that allow late-term abortions. There are
only four left--North Korea, China, Vietnam, and the United States.
Those in the New York Legislature stood and cheered that they are in
the middle of the human rights-depraved nations of China, North Korea,
and Vietnam. That is at 24 weeks and on. At 20 weeks, there is still
Canada and the Netherlands and Singapore that are left, but by 24
weeks, at that late-term, Canada, the Netherlands, and Singapore drop
off. They say: No, we are out. That is a fully viable child. Yet those
in the New York Legislature stood and applauded.
It got one-upped in Virginia last week as the Governor of Virginia
explained Virginia's late-term abortion bill as one-upping New York's.
He said, in Virginia's bill, in his words, this is how it would work.
If children have deformities, however that is defined, or for the
mental or physical health, however they want to define that because
there was no definition, they would deliver the child, make him
comfortable, resuscitate the child if the mother wants, and then would
discuss what to do with the child.
It is not enough for the State of New York to applaud late-term
abortions and join North Korea, China, and Vietnam as the only places
on Earth to allow this. No. The Virginia Democrats had to go one more
and say: Let's deliver the children and then discuss it based on their
deformities.
Back to the Super Bowl conversation, one of the most popular
commercials in the Super Bowl was for a gaming system that showed kids
with disabilities who played a video game just like other kids, except
now they want to decide at those children's births whether to just take
their lives then. How in the world can we as a culture run a television
commercial and say: That kid is just like that kid. Look, they play
games just alike. But when they are little, let's deliver them and
discuss it and figure out what we want to do.
This is infanticide. This is not about pro-life and pro-choice; this
is pro-humanity. To get to the point at which we are discussing whether
children live or die based on what they look like at birth and then, if
they don't quite look right, we will take those lives is inhumane and
is beneath us as a society. I cannot fathom the discussion that we are
having on the floor of the U.S. Senate as to whether a fully delivered
child lives or dies or discuss what happens during a botched abortion
when a child is fully delivered. It used to be that my Democratic
colleagues said life begins at birth. Now, apparently, it is not at
birth anymore; it is unknown when life actually begins because it is a
discussion we are going to have at their births now.
How can we block this bill? How can this, of all things, not bring
unanimous consent? It is inhumane.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Indiana.
Mr. BRAUN. Mr. President, I came here mostly to support my colleagues
and to actually listen for an objection to a bill like this. For the
short time I have been here, what a rude awakening as to what can
happen.
Everything I have heard here makes sense, and I would just ask for
the citizens across this country and for Hoosiers to weigh in. Let your
Senators know that this is a step too far when something like this
occurs in this Chamber, when it is crystallized so simply. You are
either for or against infanticide, and I never imagined I would be
seeing this so early in my tenure here. I ask for the folks across this
country to make their voices heard because this is a tragedy that has
happened.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Nebraska.
Mr. SASSE. Mr. President, this is gross, what has happened here
tonight. We should pass this by unanimous consent. If we continue being
unable to pass it by unanimous consent, a lot of us are going to
continue to fight for a rollcall vote because it is the right thing to
do. Those little babies aren't Republicans or Democrats; they are
babies. They need protection from all of us.
I thank the Presiding Officer.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Oklahoma.
Mr. LANKFORD. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
The senior assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. SASSE. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for
the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
____________________