Louise Slaughter: “here we are again, considering the rule for the same unconstitutional bill. I must voice my grave concern with H.R. 760…”

“here we are again, considering the rule for the same unconstitutional bill. I must voice my grave concern with H.R. 760, the so-called Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act of 2003. Today The New York Times says in an editorial, ``Partial Birth Mendacity,'' which means lie, that although promoted as narrowly focused on a single late-term abortion procedure, the measure's wording adds up to a sweeping prohibition that would, in effect, overturn Roe v. Wade by criminalizing the most common procedures used after the first trimester, but well before fetal viability. My constituents are facing unemployment. They are losing out on child tax credit. They need more funding for our first responders, they need the promised health care for our veterans; but here we are debating a rule on legislation that violates fundamental constitutional rights and threatens women's health. Mr. Speaker, 3 years ago the United States Supreme Court struck down similar legislation that banned safe and effective abortion procedures. They confirmed again a woman's reproductive rights as recognized in Roe v. Wade and reaffirmed 2 decades later in Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey. H.R. 760 suffers from the same constitutional flaws as the Nebraska statute thrown out by the Court. The ban on medical procedures is vague and overbroad, and it does not contain an exception from the procedure ban when a woman's health is threatened.”