Mr. Speaker, this substitute is identical to H.R. 809, and that bill is a phony ban which would grant a giant loophole that allows abortionists to perform partial-birth and third-trimester abortions at will. The substitute, which would prohibit the performance of an abortion after the unborn infant became viable, would not prohibit any abortion, from the substitute, 'if, in the medical judgment of the attending physician, the abortion is necessary to preserve the life of the woman or to avert serious adverse health consequences to the woman.' The proponents of this substitute admit that their measure would allow any abortion at any stage of pregnancy if the mother's mental health is at risk. Thus, by its own term, this bill would not prohibit partial-birth abortions, nor would it prohibit late-term abortions because it grants the abortionist, who has a financial interest in performing as many abortions as possible, unbridled discretion to determine whether a partial-birth or third-trimester abortion may be performed.
Jim Sensenbrenner: “Mr. Speaker, this substitute is identical to H.R. 809, and that bill is a phony ban which would grant a giant loophole…”
Editor's note · Context
Debating a substitute bill related to abortion restrictions.
Share
More from Jim Sensenbrenner
Wouldn't that be up to somebody on the other side of the issue to say that this is not proven?
I did not, and there is no system that I know of that provides artists with compensation when their work is used.
But obstruction of Congress, when there is no referee, there is no adjudication, there is nothing but a majority that says, 'You give us what we want until we find a crime, or we are going to throw you out of office,' that is so…
I appeal the decision of the Chair. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The terms of House Resolution 842 are unambiguous and so, consistent with the ruling of the Chair on September 16, 1977, to permit an appeal in this case would be tantamount to…





