Nadler Helps Defeat Cynical GOP Attempt to Limit Choice, Treat District of Columbia as Colonial Fiefdom

WASHINGTON, D.C. – Last night, Congressman Jerrold Nadler (D-NY), the Ranking Member of the House Judiciary Subcommittee on the Constitution, helped defeat yet another effort by House Republicans to curtail women’s access to reproductive rights.  H.R. 3803, the “D.C. Abortion Ban Act,” was defeated under suspension of the rules.

“This legislation is a flagrantly unconstitutional attack on the right of women to make the most fundamental decisions about their lives and their health,” said Nadler.  “It is based on radical ideology, rather than on long established Supreme Court precedent, or on sound science, and it is yet another attack on the right to self-government of the Americans who live, work, and pay taxes in our nation’s Capital.”

Below is the text of Nadler’s statement of the House floor, as prepared:

“Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to H.R. 3803, the “D.C. Abortion Ban Act.”

“Mr. Speaker, this legislation is a flagrantly unconstitutional attack on the right of women to make the most fundamental decisions about their lives and their health.  It is based on radical ideology, rather than on long established Supreme Court precedent, or on sound science, and it is yet another attack on the right to self-government of the Americans who live, work, and pay taxes in our nation’s Capital.

“It is, in short, yet another example of the Republican war on women, and of their fundamental hostility to democracy when the voters have the audacity to disagree with Republican orthodoxy.

“And why are we here today, playing abortion politics with a bill everyone knows won’t pass, when millions of Americans are out of a job and the Republican majority can’t find a moment to consider a single one of the President’s jobs bills?  Because the far right has demanded it, and the Republican majority is delivering on their social issue agenda.

“This bill would criminalize nearly all abortions after 20 weeks.  The Constitutional rule is clear: the government may not tell a woman whether or not she may have an abortion before fetal viability.  This bill prohibits abortions much earlier.

“Even after fetal viability, the Constitution – and simple human decency – requires that the law allow a woman to have an abortion when it is necessary to protect her life or her health.

“The Supreme Court’s decision in Roe v. Wade is clear:

With respect to the State’s important and legitimate interest in potential life, the ‘compelling’ point is at viability.  This is so because the fetus then presumably has the capability of meaningful life outside the mother’s womb . . . . If the State is interested in protecting fetal life after viability, it may go as far as to proscribe abortion during that period, except when it is necessary to preserve the life or health of the mother.

“This bill does not even have an exception to protect a woman’s health – another constitutional violation.  Are the sponsors really serious?  Are they really willing to elevate the welfare of a fetus over the health of the woman carrying it?

“The Sponsor has gone so far as to make clear that this bill would criminalize abortions even if the woman became suicidal.  The Republican majority on the Committee also rejected my amendment to allow for the constitutionally required life and health exceptions, and an amendment offered by the Gentleman from Illinois that would have created an exception in a case where a woman needed treatment for cancer that was inconsistent with continuing the pregnancy.

“Has the other side become so extreme that they can’t even tolerate giving a pregnant woman lifesaving cancer treatment?  Has it really come to this?  Apparently so.

“We don’t have to guess how this kind of extreme legislation plays out.  We know from states where it is already law.

“Take the case of Danielle Deaver, a Nebraska woman, who was 22-weeks pregnant when her water broke.  Doctors informed her that her fetus would likely be born with undeveloped lungs and not survive outside the womb because all the amniotic fluid had drained, the tiny growing fetus slowly would be crushed by the uterus walls.  

“During her pregnancy, Nebraska enacted a law similar to this bill.  As a result, Ms. Deaver could not obtain an abortion.  Thus, despite serious complications and enduring infections, Danielle had to continue her pregnancy.  On Dec. 8, 2010, Danielle delivered a one-pound, 10-ounce child who survived only 15 minutes outside the womb.

“Are members really willing to be that cruel in order to satisfy the fanatics of the radical right?  Apparently so.

“The question of fetal pain is a difficult one, but members need to understand that the argument being made by the proponents of this bill – that a 20 week fetus can feel pain – is a fringe one, denied bulk of the scientific community.  It is what we have come to expect from a party whose orthodoxy denies climate science, health science, and in fact, any science that doesn’t support the ideological imperative of the hour.

“As our former Republican colleague, Sherry Boehlert, who once chaired the Science Committee, has written, ‘My fellow Republicans should understand that wholesale, ideologically based or special-interest-driven rejection of science is bad policy. And that in the long run, it's also bad politics.’  It’s good advice, and I hope some Republicans are listening.

“The Majority’s own expert, Dr. Kanwaljeet Anand, testified on this issue in 2005 that he thought ‘the evidence for and against fetal pain is very uncertain at the present time.’

“A survey of available research published in the Journal of the American Medical Association in 2005 concluded that ‘[e]vidence regarding the capacity for fetal pain is limited but indicates that fetal perception of pain is unlikely before the third trimester.’

“Similarly, a detailed survey by the Royal Academy of Obstetricians and Gynecologists concluded, ‘In reviewing the neuroanatomical and physiological evidence in the fetus, it was apparent that connections from the periphery to the cortex are not intact before 24 weeks of gestation and, as most neuroscientists believe that the cortex is necessary for pain perception, it can be concluded that the fetus cannot experience pain in any sense prior to this gestation.’

“Scientists will continue to debate and study, but we should not write marginal views into the Criminal Code.

“We also need to remember that this bill targets only the District of Columbia, which some on the other side of the aisle like to treat like a colony.  It is outrageous that we would be considering a bill that members are clearly not willing to apply to their own constituents.  The people of the District of Columbia are taxpaying Americans.  They serve in the armed forces, and the serve us here in this chamber, yet some members are willing to take a page from King George’s book and impose taxation without representation on these Americans.  I thought we fought a revolution over that.

“Mr. Speaker, it is time that the Republican leadership stopped diverting the attention of this House from the business of putting people back to work by bringing up one divisive abortion bill after another.  This bill may be good politics for stirring up the extreme wing of the Republican base, but it will do nothing to help middle class Americans struggling to get by.  It will endanger women’s health, and violate their rights under the Constitution.

“I urge my colleagues to reject this cynical, dangerous, misogynist, and unconstitutional legislation, and I yield back the balance of my time.”
            
###