Senate Approves Ban on Partial Birth Abortions
By David Tamasi
WASHINGTON – The Senate voted Tuesday to ban what opponents call partial-birth abortions, clearing the way for the first ban on a type of abortion since the Supreme Court legalized abortions in its seminal Roe v. Wade decision 30 years ago.
President Bush has said he will sign the bill, which the House passed three weeks ago. But opponents are prepared to challenge the constitutionality of the legislation in court as soon as the president signs it, according to an attorney with the Center for Reproductive Rights, which won a similar lawsuit three years ago.
The Senate voted 64-34 to approve the ban. New Hampshire Republican Senators Judd Gregg and John Sununu voted in support of the ban, while Massachusetts Democrats Edward M. Kennedy and John Kerry voted against it. Kerry, a candidate for president, was campaigning in New Hampshire and flew back to Washington for the vote.
Kennedy decried the Bush administration for “constantly attempting to undermine” Roe v. Wade.
“Proposals such as the partial-birth abortion bill are blatantly unconstitutional,” he said in a statement. “Women have a constitutional right to choose, and Congress should respect that right.”
Senators Gregg, Sununu and Kerry did not return phone calls seeking comment on their vote.
Partial-birth abortion is not a medical term, but refers to a controversial procedure that opponents say is generally performed late in a pregnancy on a partially delivered fetus. Abortion-rights advocates argue that the procedure is extremely rare, and that the legislation passed by Congress is so vaguely worded that it will outlaw other, more common procedures performed as early as 12 weeks into a pregnancy.
In 2000, there were 2,200 partial-birth abortions out of 1.3 million abortions performed nationally, according to the Alan Guttmacher Institute, a non-profit organization that conducts reproductive health research. Figures were not available by state for partial-birth abortions. But in Massachusetts, 30,410 women obtained abortions in 2000, equal to the national average, while 3,010 women in New Hampshire had abortions, 10% below the national average, the Guttmacher Institute reported.
Passage of the legislation has long been a goal of social conservatives, who expressed renewed hope when Republican’s took control of the Senate last year. President Clinton twice vetoed similar bills, in 1996 and 1997, because they did not include exceptions to protect the health of the woman. Abortion-rights supporters argue the latest bill also does not offer a health exception.
As the battle shifts from Congress to the courts, abortion-rights advocates are rallying around a 5-4 Supreme Court decision in 2000 that struck down a Nebraska state law that also banned partial-birth abortions. The court ruled that the Nebraska law was unconstitutional because it did not clearly define what procedure was prohibited and did not provide a health exception for the woman.
Supporters of the ban say they have addressed the legal issues raised in the Nebraska case by tightening definitions and offering findings that show the procedure has not been used to protect women’s health.
Priscilla Smith, director of the Domestic Legal Program at the Center for Reproductive Rights, said the issues before the Supreme Court in the Nebraska case were identical to the bill that is headed to Bush. The bill is slated to become law the day after Bush signs it.
