federallegislation@nrlc.orgWASHINGTON (October 10, 2012) -- On October 9,
the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU)
disseminated an email alert, urging its supporters
nationwide to lobby ABC News correspondent Martha Raddatz, who will moderate the October 11 debate
between Vice President Joe Biden and the Republican
nominee for vice president, Congressman Paul Ryan.
In the alert, Jennifer Dalven, who is the
director of the ACLU "Reproductive Freedom
Project," complained that the abortion issue did
not come up during the first presidential debate
on October 3. She asked readers to send an
email to Raddatz to urge that she press for
answers "straight from the candidates' mouths
[on] where they stand on . . . access to
abortion. . ."
However Raddatz reacts to this campaign, it
is likely that abortion will come up one way or
another in the debate. When it does, most
likely Biden will give voice to the Obama
campaign theme that Romney and Ryan hold
"extreme" views on pro-life issues, or even that
Republicans are waging a "war on women."
Yet, for anyone who is familiar with Biden's
actual record during his decades in the U.S.
Senate, this begs for a couple of follow up
questions -- such as, "Mr. Biden, since you
yourself voted for several major types of
pro-life legislation for a period of decades in
the U.S. Senate -- taking positions the same as
Mr. Ryan on those issues -- when exactly did you
decide that those positions were 'extreme'?" Or
even better, "Mr. Biden, isn't it hypocritical
for you to criticize Mr. Ryan for supporting
positions for which you yourself often voted as
a U.S. senator -- especially since your record
is opposite the positions taken by Barack Obama
on those same issues?"
Many readers might be surprised to read the
statement made by to the Wall Street Journal
in 1986 by Jeannie Rosoff, then a top official
of Planned Parenthood: "Joe Biden moans a lot
and then usually votes against us."
This is not to say that Biden was ever a
solid, consistent supporter of the pro-life
agenda, as Ryan has been. Even early in Biden's
long Senate career, which began in 1973, he
suggested that allowing legal abortion (at least
early in pregnancy) was "consistent with the
tenets of religious freedom." But he also said
he thought Roe v. Wade had gone too far
-- and in 1982, as a member of the Senate
Judiciary Committee, he voted for a
constitutional amendment to overturn Roe v.
Wade. An objective examination of Biden's
record in the Senate (1973 through 2008) reveals
him to be a long way from Barack Obama. On many
key pro-life issues, including limits on late
abortion and federal funding of abortion, Biden
voted for legislation that is consistent with
the votes cast by Paul Ryan -- and in stark
contrast with the extreme pro-abortion positions
taken by Obama both as a legislator and as
president.
For example, throughout his Senate
career Biden voted for the Hyde Amendment,
prohibiting most federal funding of abortion.
Indeed, Biden explicitly advocated that the Hyde
Amendment should contain an exception only to
save the life of the mother, and he voted
repeatedly against adding exceptions for rape
and incest to the amendment. Biden
also consistently voted for the federal ban on
partial-birth abortions. He expressed concern
that the so-called "Freedom of Choice Act" would
go too far in overturning state abortion
limitations.
Even if Biden has changed his mind on
some or all of these issues -- it is one thing
to say one has changed one's mind, quite another
to assert that one's previous position was
"extreme" or constituted a "war on women."
Here are four major abortion policy issues
(not an exhaustive list) on which Joe Biden as a
senator took positions directly contrary to the
positions embraced by Barack Obama -- but
consistent with the positions taken by Paul
Ryan:
Partial-Birth Abortion: In 1995,
legislation was introduced in Congress to place
a national ban on partial-birth abortion -- the
abortion method, used usually in the fifth and
sixth months and sometimes later, in which the
baby is mostly delivered alive before being
stabbed in the head and killed. Biden
consistently voted for this legislation and
against attempts to weaken it. When President
Clinton twice vetoed the ban, Biden voted to
override the vetoes. The ban finally became law
in 2003, when Congress again passed it with
Biden's support and sent it to President George
W. Bush, who signed it. The ban was vehemently
opposed by pro-abortion advocacy groups, in
part because it contained no so-called "health"
exception (although it did contain an exception
for life-of-mother cases), and it applied both
before and after "viability."
In 2007, when Biden was challenged on his
support for the ban when speaking before a
liberal group; he responded, "I voted for the
partial-birth abortion ban . . . I think it’s an
extraordinary circumstance, I make no apologies
for it."
In contrast, Barack Obama opposed a similar
ban on partial-birth abortion as a member of the
Illinois State Senate. When Obama arrived in
the U.S. Senate, the federal ban had already
been enacted, but when the U.S. Supreme Court
upheld the ban in 2007, Obama denounced the
Court's ruling. Soon after that, Obama
cosponsored the "Freedom of Choice Act," a
proposed federal bill designed to nullify the
federal ban on partial-birth abortion -- and
virtually all other federal and state
limitations on abortion.
"Freedom of Choice Act": During
much of Biden's Senate career, pro-abortion
groups actively pushed officeholders to embrace
the "Freedom of Choice Act" (FOCA). The FOCA of
the 1990s was a bill to overturn virtually all
state limitations on abortion. Biden
repeatedly declined to support such legislation
unless a number of exceptions were added --
exceptions that were unpalatable to pro-abortion
advocacy groups.
For example, in a 1990 letter, he said, "I
have some questions about the language of S.
1912 [FOCA] and its legal implications. For
example, it could result in federal preemption
of state abortion regulations and laws in areas
where Roe v. Wade now permits states to
act, such as laws regulating second and third
trimester abortions."
(While Biden in that statement and on other
occasions displayed a misunderstanding of the full
parameters of the original Roe v. Wade, the
statement is one evidence among many that he was
sympathetic in that era to recognizing state power
to place some limits on abortion, which was contrary
to the core purpose of the FOCA.)
In 2007, on the day after the Supreme Court
upheld the ban on partial-birth abortions,
pro-abortion leaders in Congress reintroduced
the FOCA. This bill (S. 1173) contained
explicit language to overturn federal as well as state limits on abortion -- and the
bill was openly billed by its sponsors as
incorporating nullification of the federal ban
on partial-birth abortion that the Supreme Court
had just upheld. On May 11, 2007, Senator Obama
cosponsored this FOCA, but Senator Biden did
not. (For more information, see "Pro-Abortion
Lawmakers Propose 'FOCA' to Invalidate All
Limits on Abortion," NRL News,
April 25, 2007.)
On July 17, 2007, Obama told the Planned
Parenthood Action Fund that if elected
president, "The first thing I’d do as president
is sign the Freedom of Choice Act. Now that’s
the first thing I’d do." Since Congress never
sent the FOCA to Obama's desk, this promise was
never tested, but Obama has never repudiated his
endorsement of the FOCA.
On October 9, 2012, the Center for
Reproductive Rights announced a new campaign for
a "national level" solution to end state-imposed
limitations on abortion -- a possible precursor
to a renewed drive for the FOCA if Obama is
re-elected. Does Biden continue to oppose such
an extreme national abortion statute -- or does
he now embrace the FOCA endorsements of Barack
Obama?
Federal Funding for Abortion: For
decades, Senator Joe Biden voted for the Hyde
Amendment and similar limitations on federal
funding for abortion. In 1983, Biden wrote, "I
might also add that I find it difficult to
understand how those who refuse to limit the
right of abortion in this country can at the
same time support the expansion of the
government's financial involvement in providing
for abortions. That is why I have been a
consistent supporter of the Hyde Amendment,
which prohibits the use of Medicaid funds to
finance abortions. I believe that it is not the
government's business to be promoting abortion
in any way." In a 1994 letter, Biden wrote,
"[T]hose of us who are opposed to abortion
should not be compelled to pay for them. As you
may know, I have consistently -- on no fewer
than 50 occasions -- voted against federal
funding of abortion."
It is noteworthy, especially in view of
recent rhetoric from the Obama campaign and
the mainstream news media, that Biden
consistently favored the original form of
the Hyde Amendment, which contained only one
exception, allowing federal funding if an
abortion was deemed necessary to save the
life of the mother. When opportunities were
presented to Biden to choose between the
Hyde Amendment with only the life-of-mother
exception, and proposals to add additional
exceptions, Biden supported the
life-of-mother-only version.
Biden advocated the life-of-mother-only
position at least as early as 1977, and at
least as late as 1988, which was the last
time that the Senate voted directly on the
question of whether to add exceptions for
rape and incest. (Roll call on inclusion of rape/incest
amendments in the Hyde Amendment, September
13, 1988, roll call no. 326.)
Ultimately, in 1993, Congressman Hyde
himself added rape-incest exceptions in
order to fend off an attempt by newly
elected President Clinton and his allies to
repeal the Hyde Amendment altogether. After
that, the Senate no longer voted on whether
to add the exceptions.
As an Illinois state senator, as a U.S.
senator, and as a candidate for president in
2007-2008, Barack Obama consistently opposed
all limitations on government funding of
abortion, including the Hyde Amendment. As
president, Obama has sometimes used clever
verbal formulas to fool some gullible
journalists into thinking that he now
supports the Hyde Amendment, but in reality
Obama has never changed his substantive
position.
Indeed, in 2009-2010 Obama worked
actively against the Stupak-Pitts
Amendment, which would have applied the
principles of the Hyde Amendment to his
health care legislation, which is why the
final Obamacare law contains multiple
abortion-expansive provisions. In 2010 he
issued a hollow executive order which many
journalists accepted as extending the Hyde
Amendment to Obamacare, but which NRLC
dismissed as "a transparent political fig
leaf" and the president of Planned
Parenthood dismissed as "a symbolic
gesture."
In short, Obama's actually record on federal
funding of abortion is fully consistent with the
language of the 2012 Democratic Party platform,
which says, "The Democratic Party strongly and
unequivocally supports Roe v. Wade and
a woman's right to choose a safe and legal
abortion, regardless of ability to pay." As was
widely reported, President Obama personally
fine-tuned some other planks in the 2012
platform -- but he did not touch this
unequivocal language in support of
government-funded abortion.
Protections for infants born alive during
abortions: On 2001, Biden voted for the
language of the federal Born-Alive Infants
Protection Act (BAIPA), which recognizes babies
who are born alive during abortions as legally
protected persons. (Senate roll call 208, June
29, 2001) The roll call in favor of this
legislation was 98-0.
In contrast, in 2003, state Senator Obama
voted against an Illinois bill that was a direct
copy of the federal bill. In an August
16, 2008 interview with the Christian
Broadcasting Network, Obama denied having ever
voted against an Illinois bill containing the
federal language, and said NRLC was "lying" for
asserting that he had done so.
On August 25, 2008, FactCheck.org concluded
that NRLC was truthful, stating: "Obama’s claim
is wrong. . . The documents from the NRLC
support the group’s claims that Obama is
misrepresenting the contents of SB 1082 [the
BAIPA]." (For further details, see the
NRLC White Paper of August 28, 2008.)
On September 10, 2012, the Washington
Post Fact Checker column concluded,
regarding Obama's 2008 denial, "The evidence
suggests we could have awarded Four Pinocchios
to the former Illinois senator for his [2008]
comments to the Christian Broadcasting Network .
. . " ("Four Pinocchios" is the
Post's
highest rating for deception.)
The contrast between the histories of Barack
Obama and Joe Biden on abortion policy issues is
only one evidence among many that Obama holds
positions on abortion-related issues that are
far outside the mainstream of public opinion in
America. However, the "mainstream" news media
so far have shown an aversion in exploring the
outer parameters of Obama's positions on
abortion policy, despite their prevalent
eagerness to scrutinize -- and often amplify and
misinterpret -- the positions of pro-life
Republicans. Biden is probably counting on his
abortion policy history falling squarely into
that great big news media blind spot.
ADDENDUM --
October 12, 2012
In the October 11 debate, Biden warned that a
President Romney might appoint new Supreme Court
justices who would "outlaw abortion." But even
if the U.S. Supreme Court completely and
unambiguously overturned Roe v. Wade,
that action would not itself "outlaw"
abortions. The true effect would be that
described by Paul Ryan a minute earlier, when he
said "people through their elected
representatives . . . through the democratic
process should make this determination."
You may be sure that Biden understands very well
that overturning Roe v. Wade would not
"outlaw abortion" -- he was a longtime member of
the Senate Judiciary Committee, and as a member
of that committee, Biden voted for a
constitutional amendment to overturn Roe v. Wade
-- I was there, and we have posted
the official Judiciary Committee report on the
vote, along with a letter from Biden taking
credit for it. By the way, Biden made it quite
clear that he understood that this was a vote to
allow legislative bodies to determine abortion
policy -- not a vote to "outlaw" abortions. But
Biden also understands, I think, that it is
unlikely that the "mainstream news media" will
call him out on the "outlaw" distortion -- and
he was not disappointed, at least not in the
next-day coverage of the debate by mainstream
media "fact checkers."Biden also
took a passing swipe at Ryan for endorsing a
bill that would have limited federal funding of
abortion to cases of "forcible rape" and
incest. [This was a reference to language
in the 2011 No Taxpayer Funding of Abortion Act,
H.R. 3, as introduced.] This remark was rather
brazen on Biden's part, since throughout Biden's
decades in the Senate, he consistently voted for
the Hyde Amendment, he said he believed the only
exception to the Hyde Amendment should be for
life-of-mother cases, and he consistently
voted AGAINST adding exceptions for rape and
incest to the Hyde Amendment. Biden cast
votes against adding rape/incest exceptions
at least as early as 1977 and at least as
late as 1988, and on multiple occasions in
between. Biden used to boast of this strict
position when communicating with pro-life
people.
(Congressman Henry Hyde himself added the
rape/incest exceptions to the Hyde Amendment in
1993, to fend off an effort by newly elected
President Clinton and his allies to repeal the
Hyde Amendment altogether -- but in 1993 Biden
told us that he still favored the
life-of-mother exception only. After Mr.
Hyde made that modification, the Senate never
again voted on the specific issue of whether or
not to include the rape/incest exceptions.)
As to "forcible" rape: It is a myth, originated
by the abortion lobby, that the House
Republicans invented a "narrower" definition of
rape in 2011. In reality, "forcible rape" is a
legal term of art, employed by the FBI for
decades in classifying crimes -- until
January of 2012, when
Attorney
General Eric Holder decreed otherwise
.
Biden
himself cosponsored six bills that contained the
term "forcible rape," and Biden used the term
"forcible rape" in Senate floor speeches at least 10
times.
-- Douglas Johnson, NRLC Legislative Director