On the recordSeptember 26, 1996
today I will support the President in his veto of the late-term abortion bill. But I want to make several points about this debate. Mr. President, this bill does not clearly define which procedures would be banned because the term ``partial birth'' is not a medical term. The bill defines ``partial birth'' abortion as ``an abortion in which the person performing the abortion partially vaginally delivers a living fetus before killing the fetus and completing the delivery.'' This vague definition in the bill would, for the first time, impose limits on the Roe versus Wade right of a woman to choose an abortion. This language easily could be interpreted to ban other medical procedures used in the second trimester which are--and should remain-- completely legal. The bill would also ban procedures used in the third trimester to save the health or future fertility of the mother. This would overturn the Supreme Court ruling in Roe versus Wade that states in the third trimester can ban abortion procedures except those saving the life or protecting the health of the mother. Mr. President, I am personally opposed to abortion in the third trimester--except when the life or health of the woman is at risk. But that is the law of the land today. There is no question that late-term abortion procedures are gruesome. But this procedure is considered safer and less traumatic in some cases than alternative late-term procedures.
Source
govinfo.gov




