[Congressional Record Volume 166, Number 36 (Monday, February 24, 2020)]
[Senate]
[Pages S1098-S1099]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
Abortion
Mr. CORNYN. Madam President, this week, the Senate will vote on two
bills that will protect our most vulnerable citizens--literally, our
babies. The first bill we will vote on is the Born-Alive Abortion
Survivors Protection Act, which was introduced by our colleague from
Nebraska, Senator Sasse.
This legislation is simple and straightforward. It requires
physicians and healthcare providers to treat babies who survive an
abortion with the same lifesaving care that other infants born at the
same stage receive. While you might be forgiven for wondering, why
would we need such a bill; surely, that standard must already exist in
our law--unfortunately, no. There are no Federal laws requiring
healthcare providers to care for abortion survivors, just as they would
for any other infant in their care.
One of the most notorious reasons why we need this law sits in the
Governor's mansion in Virginia. About this time last year, our country
was shocked and outraged by comments made by Gov. Ralph Northam--a
pediatrician, believe it or not--about what should happen when a baby
is delivered and survives an abortion. He said:
The infant would be delivered. The infant would be kept
comfortable. The infant would be resuscitated if that's what
the mother and family desired. And then a discussion would
ensue between the physicians and the mother.
Rather than immediately doing everything possible to save the baby,
to provide the same sort of care he would to any infant, he wants to
sit around and decide whether the baby will live or die. That is not
healthcare; that is infanticide. Voting for the Born-Alive Abortion
Survivors Protection Act is how each Member of this Chamber can go on
record to say they are against killing innocent babies.
While some are desperately trying to paint this as an anti-abortion
bill, which would infringe on women's reproductive rights, those claims
could not be further from the truth. There is nothing in this bill
about limiting access to abortion, no mention of first, second, or
third trimester abortions, nothing about overturning Roe v. Wade.
There is one goal with this legislation and one goal only: to give
every baby a fighting chance. In a rational world, we wouldn't be
having this discussion but would, rather, unanimously be condemning
this practice for the evil that it is. I am proud to be an original
cosponsor of the bill and, once again, vote to stop the practice of
infanticide and protect babies who survive abortions alive.
We will be voting on a second bill, which will provide protections
for unborn children that are practiced in almost all of the civilized
world. This is the Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act that would
make it a crime for doctors to perform abortions on unborn babies at or
beyond 20 weeks.
There is significant medical research that shows that unborn children
at this stage experience pain. At 5 months into a pregnancy, these
babies are beyond halfway to delivery.
One of President's Trump's guests at the State of the Union a few
weeks ago was 2-year-old Ellie Schneider--one of the youngest babies to
survive in the United States. Ellie was born at 21 weeks and 6 days--
just 13 days beyond the point in time we are discussing. She weighed
less than a pound at birth and is living proof of the medical
achievements and advancements that have improved the chance of survival
for extremely premature babies.
Ellie and her mother Robin are an example of the impact this
legislation would have on the lives of many Americans families.
Unfortunately, just as our Democratic colleagues have tried to deceive
the American people about the purpose of the Born-Alive Abortion
Survivors Protection Act, they are trying to mislead everyone about
what this bill would do as well.
First, this bill would apply only to elective abortions, not those
involving rape or incest or where the life of the mother could be in
danger. It in no way places the mother in legal jeopardy for seeking an
abortion. It clearly and solely places responsibility on healthcare
providers.
[[Page S1099]]
Passing this legislation wouldn't make the United States an extreme
outlier when it comes to abortion practices. In fact, it would put us
in line with international norms. Currently, only seven countries in
the world allow elective abortions after 20 weeks. One, of course, is
the United States. The other countries on the list should make all of
us second-guess allowing abortions beyond 20 weeks--China, Vietnam,
North Korea. Countries with a history of human rights violations are
hardly the model we should aspire to.
It is time to give every baby a chance to live and stop doctors from
performing abortions on infants who feel pain. I am proud to be a
cosponsor of both of these bills and stand with my colleagues in the
fight for human life.
Our friend from Montana, Senator Daines, established the first-ever
Senate Pro-Life Caucus to fight for the lives of our most vulnerable
citizens. A couple of weeks ago, he said: ``These back-to-back votes
will present an opportunity for Senate Democrats and all of us to show
the American people whether there are any limits at all to radical
abortion extremism.'' We will soon learn the answer.
I appreciate our colleagues--Senator Sasse, Senator Graham, and
Senator Daines--for their leadership on this legislation and for
consistently fighting for the most vulnerable among us. I will be a
proud ``yes'' vote on both of these bills--yes to protecting newborn
babies, yes to equal medical care for all infants, and yes to a
fighting chance for all babies.