New Congress Brings Push on Bills on Pain of Unborn Child and Parental Notification

WASHINGTON (February 3, 2004) - - Pro-life forces have hit the ground running in the just-convened 109th Congress, hoping to fast-track two major pieces of pro-life legislation.

One high-priority measure is the Unborn Child Pain Awareness Act (UCPAA), a bill to require abortionists to inform a woman who is seeking an abortion after 20 weeks that the baby will feel pain during the abortion, and, if she proceeds, to require that she accept or refuse administration of a pain-reducing drug to the baby.

Also a top priority is legislation to protect the right of parents to be notified before a minor undergoes an abortion in a state other than her state of residence.

"President Bush supports both pieces of legislation," White House press spokesman Trent Duffy told reporters on January 24.

Parental Notification

One version of the parental notification bill, the Child Custody Protection Act, was reintroduced on January 24 as part of a list of ten top priority bills issued by the Senate Republican leadership, with the bill number S. 8. The bill was introduced by Senator John Ensign (R-Nv.).

The Child Custody Protection Act would make it a federal crime to take a minor across state lines for a secret abortion, in violation of the parents' right to be notified beforehand.

Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-Tn.) told NRL News, "By giving the Child Custody Protection Act the designation S. 8, I intended to demonstrate that this bill is a priority to pass through the Senate and the House, and get to the President's desk for his signature. Requiring parental notification is commonsense protection for both child and parents, and has the support of the overwhelming majority of Americans."

The Child Custody Protection Act passed the U.S. House of Representatives in 1998, 1999, and 2002, but until now it has been obstructed in the Senate by a bloc of pro-abortion senators, mostly Democrats. With the pro-life gains resulting from the November 2 election, supporters of the legislation are now more optimistic about the prospects for success. (See "New Pro-Lifers Added to U.S. House and Senate," November 2004 NRL News, page 1.)

The chief House sponsor, Congresswoman Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-Fl.), has indicated that she will soon introduce a strengthened version of the bill, with NRLC's strong support, under the title "Child Interstate Abortion Notification Act."

Parental notification laws have very strong public support, exceeding 80 percent in some polls. The latest evidence of this came in Florida, where an amendment to the state constitution to advance parental notification for abortion passed 65-35% on November 2.

(For further information on this subject, see the "Parental Notification" page on the NRLC website, at http://www.nrlc.org/federal/ccpa/index.html)

In a written policy statement issued during his 2004 presidential campaign, Democratic nominee Senator John Kerry (D-Mass.) said that "forcing a young woman to obtain a parent's consent before obtaining an abortion could put her at serious risk of further harm or abuse, increasing illegal and self-induced abortion, family violence, suicide, late term abortions, and unwanted childbirth." Any law should have "broad exemptions for grandparents, aunts, and uncles to provide consent . . . or a licensed or certified professional certifies that parental notification could put the young woman at risk," Kerry said.

However, on the January 30, 2005, edition of Meet the Press, Kerry said, "I am for parental notification." When questioner Tim Russert asked, "With a judicial bypass?" Kerry replied, "With a judicial and doctor combined... some kind of adult involvement...."

On January 24, Senator Hillary Clinton (D-NY), regarded by many as a likely 2008 presidential contender, surprised reporters by saying, "I supported parental notification with a judicial bypass." A few days later, after pro-abortion groups expressed concern about this statement, Clinton's staff told reporters the law in New York is "the model" for what Clinton actually supports. The New York Times explained that New York is among the states "that do not have a parental notification requirement; instead, health care providers have to give information about medical options and risks to patients, including those seeking abortions."

Unborn Child Pain Awareness

In late January, Senator Sam Brownback (R-Ks.) and Congressman Chris Smith (R-NJ) reintroduced the Unborn Child Pain Awareness Act.

Under the bill, all abortionists would be required to give any woman seeking an abortion whose unborn child has passed the 20-week point certain specific information to the effect that the abortion will inflict pain on the unborn child. Then, the woman must sign a form either accepting or rejecting the administration of a pain-reducing drug directly to the baby.

As of February 2, the Senate bill (S. 51) had 34 co-sponsors, while the House bill (H.R. 356) had 82 cosponsors. (To see an always-current list of cosponsors of either bill, visit the Legislative Action Center on the NRLC website at http://www.capwiz.com/nrlc/home)

"It's my hope that . . . once a woman would know her child is going to experience extraordinary pain in this dismemberment that she would say, 'I don't want to do this to this child,'" said Senator Brownback.

Senate Majority Leader Frist told NRL News, "I plan to challenge Democrats to work with me to move the Unborn Child Pain Awareness Act through the Senate during the 109th Congress. The bill will provide important information to all Americans about the grim realities of abortion."

In a speech on the House floor, Congressman Smith - - who is also the co-chairman of the House Pro-Life Caucus - - summarized some of the scientific evidence that unborn children experience pain, and concluded, "Abortion clinics are not only killing centers, they are torture chambers as well."

A national poll in November by Wirthlin Worldwide described the bill and found 75% in support, including 51% strongly in favor. Only 18% were opposed to such legislation.

Many pro-life and pro-family groups have expressed strong support for the legislation.

"Women deserve to be informed about what the so-called 'choice' of abortion does to their babies," said Fr. Frank Pavone, national director of Priests for Life. "We are appalled at the fact that so many abortionists do not even consider the fact that a baby feels pain during an abortion."

"From testimony taken during the recent partial-birth abortion hearings and advancements in the field of in utero technology, we now know that the unborn child experiences excruciating pain when he or she is aborted," said Tony Perkins, president of the Family Research Council. "Women have the right to know what happens when they have an abortion and they have a right to know the pain their unborn children will experience during an abortion."

Pro-abortion advocacy groups seemed divided in their reactions to the bill.

Janet Crepps, a lawyer with the Center for Reproductive Rights, told Womensenews.org that the bill is "really inflammatory anti-abortion propaganda" and "an inappropriate exercise of congressional power."

Traci Gleason, director of public affairs for Planned Parenthood of Kansas and Mid-Missouri, told Knight Ridder News Service, "Women need health care at the doctor's office, not politics or a government-mandated lecture."

However, Nancy Keenan, who recently took over as president of "NARAL Pro-Choice America," said in a statement issued in late January, "Pro-choice Americans have always believed that women deserve access to all the information relevant to their reproductive health decisions. For some women, that includes information related to fetal anesthesia options. NARAL Pro-Choice America does not intend to oppose this legislation."

The National Abortion Federation, representing many abortionists, said, "We oppose S. 51 in its current form," arguing that there is "no consensus" regarding fetal pain, and objecting that "the mandated scripts [about the capacity of the unborn to feel pain] intrude upon a woman's relationship with her doctor and ignore a patient's individual circumstance."

However, Francis Kissling, a former executive director of the National Abortion Federation, acknowledged on January 26, "In my own experience in the provision of abortion services, a significant number of women who had decided to have an abortion were interested in knowing about the fetus. They asked about fetal size, level of development and awareness and asked, 'Will my fetus (or baby, the term I have heard women use most often) feel pain?'"

(For more information on this issue, see "Bill Highlighting Unborn Child's Pain Introduced," June 2004 NRL News, page 1, or visit the NRLC website section on "The Pain of the Unborn" at http://www.nrlc.org/abortion/fetal_pain/index.html)

Other Legislation

Both the Senate and House are also expected to vote on a number of other pro-life issues this year.

Pro-abortion lawmakers will try to nullify the Hyde-Weldon Amendment, a law enacted last November that prohibits federal, state, or local government agencies from discriminating against health care providers that do not wish to participate in abortions. The Senate will vote before May 1 on a measure proposed by Senator Barbara Boxer (D-Ca.) that would repeal the new law.

(For more information on this issue, see "Congress Approves Broad Shield to Protect Pro-Life Health Care Providers," December 2004 NRL News, page 1.)

Pro-life forces will renew their efforts to enact legislation to ban the creation of human embryos by cloning. Senator Brownback, the chief Senate sponsor of the legislation, is expected to reintroduce it sometime in March.

Lawmakers and advocacy groups that support using human embryos in medical research will continue to oppose Brownback's bill, and will also push bills of their own that would overturn President Bush's policy against using federal funds for research that harms human embryos.

Judicial Confirmations

There will also be critical battles in the Senate over the confirmation of President Bush's nominees to important federal courts. During the 2003-04 Congress, Senate Democrats used filibusters and other methods to prevent up-or-down votes on 16 of the President's nominees to federal courts of appeals.

President Bush recently renominated most of the blocked court of appeals nominees, and some of those nominations could be ripe for Senate floor action as early as March.

Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid (Nv.) said, "If they bring back the same judges we are going to do the same thing." Reid said that the only complaint he has heard from other Senate Democrats is that not enough of the President's judicial nominees were blocked, so, Reid said, he is prepared "to go behind the pool hall and see who wins this one," the Washington Post reported on February 2.

Senate Majority Leader Frist, among others, said that using the filibuster in this manner violates the Senate's constitutional responsibility to confirm or reject nominees by majority vote. Frist has vowed that he will move to end the practice this year. In a speech to the Federalist Society on November 11, Frist said, "One way or another, the filibuster of judicial nominees must end. The Senate must do what is good, what is right, what is reasonable, and what is honorable. The Senate must do its duty."

However, any such move will require the backing of at least 50 Republican senators. The Senate is currently made up of 55 Republicans, 44 Democrats, and Sen. Jim Jeffords of Vermont, an independent who caucuses with the Democrats.

Senate Democrats say that if Frist tries to deny their ability to filibuster judicial nominees, they will tie up the Senate in procedural knots.

Up-to-Date Congressional Information and Congressional Scorecards on NRLC Website "Legislative Action Center"

In order to help pro-life lobbying efforts in Congress, use your computer to frequently visit the NRLC website at http://www.nrlc.org.

The website features a Legislative Action Center that provides up-to-date alerts and background information on pro-life issues under consideration in Congress. The Legislative Action Center includes easy-to-use tools for sending timely e-mail messages to your federal representatives in support of specific pro-life legislative goals, and provides guidance on other things you can do locally to advance pro-life legislation.

The Legislative Action Center also includes always-current listings of which members of Congress have cosponsored major pro-life and anti-life bills. In addition, you can refer to complete NRLC "scorecards" on the voting records of members of Congress from 1997 through 2004. New congressional votes are added to the scorecards soon after they occur, and they are also published in NRL News.