I strongly support the override of the veto. This is not an issue of choice, of privacy, of not even medical necessity. This bill provides that we will abolish this very gruesome procedure, we have all seen pictures of it today, but it still allows the exception that if the mother's life is at issue and if there is no other procedure available, it can be done under those circumstances. So this is not even an issue of medical necessity. This is an issue that says ``no'' to this type of terrible procedure. We are a country, and we are debating this issue. I cannot believe we are standing here. We are a country that spends years of due process on convicted killers, murderers who commit the most heinous of crimes, and we would not dare think about executing those types of people by this gruesome procedure. Yet we are talking on this floor today about maintaining the legality of this type of terrible procedure when there are alternatives available. I just cannot believe that. Is this an upside-down world or is it not?
Editor's note · Context
Addressing the override of a veto related to a bill banning a specific medical procedure.
Share
More from Ed Bryant
Mr. Chairman, I might also say for noncapital cases, for people who are appointed in Federal court to represent people who go to jail for life sentences, it might not be capital cases, but who go to jail for 20 or 30 years of their life…
Mr. Chairman, I come before you today behalf of the people of my district to support a balanced budget amendment with three-fifths supermajority tax increase provisions because, Mr. Chairman, most every one of them is demanding relief…
Mr. Chairman, I would pay the same compliment to the gentleman from California [Mr. Becerra]. Again, I respect him a great deal, and he is certainly a strong spokesman for these issues of immigration. We simply have a disagreement here…
Dickson has blossomed into one of Tennessee's most beautiful metropolitan areas and I am especially proud to be able to honor the city in this way.





