Posted on January 21, 2000

The following transcripts were obtained by The Shinbone from the National Right to Life Committee. The NRLC transcribed the following exchanges from C-SPAN. The only significant deviation from the official Congressional Record involves the dispute between Sen. Feingold and Sen. Santorum, which Feingold admits to having altered in the Congressional Record. The Shinbone has omitted sections which it does not consider relevant to the infanticide controversy.

The following exchange between Sen. Rick Santorum (R-PA) and Sen. Frank Lautenberg (D-NJ) took place on the Senate floor on September 26, 1996:

Sen. Santorum: [Gesturing towards a poster depicting performance of a partial-birth abortion] If that baby at 24 weeks was delivered accidentally, just like that, but instead of the head being held in by the physician, the head was accidentally delivered, by mistake, would the doctor and the mother have a right to kill that baby?

Sen. Lautenberg: My colleague from Pennsylvania can cloak it in any terms. What I support is a ban on late-term, health conditions. And the woman...

Sen. Santorum: Answer the question.

Sen. Lautenberg: Well, no, frame your question...

Sen. Santorum: If the baby was delivered accidentally, and the head slipped out, would you allow the doctor to kill the baby?

Sen. Lautenberg: I am not making the decision. If that is...

Sen. Santorum: But that's what we are doing here, Senator, we are making decisions.

Sen. Lautenberg: You are making decisions that say a doctor doesn't have...

Sen. Santorum: So two inches make the difference as to whether you'll answer that question?

Sen. Lautenberg: No, what makes the difference is someone who has the knowledge and intelligence and experience making the decision, as opposed to a graphic demonstration that says this is the way we are going to do it. No, sir.

[End]

The following exchange between Sen. Rick Santorum (R-PA) and Sen. Russ Feingold (D-WI) took place on the Senate floor on September 26, 1996:

Sen. Santorum: Will the Senator from Wisconsin yield for a question?

Sen. Feingold: I will.

Sen. Santorum: The Senator from Wisconsin says that this decision should be left up to the mother and the doctor, as if there is absolutely no limit that could be placed on what decision that they make with respect to that. And the Senator from California [Sen. Barbara Boxer] is going up to advise you of what my question is going to be, and I will ask it anyway. And my question is this: that if that baby were delivered breech style and everything was delivered except for the head, and for some reason that that baby's head would slip out -- that the baby was completely delivered -- would it then still be up to the doctor and the mother to decide whether to kill that baby?

Sen. Feingold: I would simply answer your question by saying under the Boxer amendment, the standard of saying it has to be a determination, by a doctor, of health of the mother, is a sufficient standard that would apply to that situation. And that would be an adequate standard.

Sen. Santorum: That doesn't answer the question. Let's assume that this procedure is being performed for the reason that you've stated, and the head is accidentally delivered. Would you allow the doctor to kill the baby?

Sen. Feingold: I am not the person to be answering that question. That is a question that should be answered by a doctor, and by the woman who receives advice from the doctor. And neither I, nor is the Senator from Pennsylvania, truly competent to answer those questions. That is why we should not be making those decisions here on the floor of the Senate.

[End]

The following exchange between Sen. Russ Feingold (D-WI) and NRLC president Douglas Johnson took place in a joint hearing between the Senate Judiciary Committee and the House Judiciary Constitution Subcommittee, on March 11, 1997. The excerpts which appear here involve Feingold's accusations that the NRLC had distorted or fabricated his remarks to Sen. Santorum. Those parts of the discussion which center around the definition of "health" and whether there is a legitimate health concern involved in partial-birth abortion are omitted here.

Sen. Feingold: [L]et me just take an example of a piece of misinformation that has been circulated by the proponents of this legislation, that I don't think is particularly helpful to a truthful debate.

During last year's floor debate over the veto override, Senator Santorum from Pennsylvania and I had a brief exchange on the Senate floor which proponents of this legislation have used to suggest that I support infanticide -- that is, killing an infant after it has been fully delivered. Obviously, that is untrue. I was addressing the issue of who should decide whether the life or health of a woman was at risk. Once a child has been born, there is no conceivable argument that would suggest a woman's life or health would any longer be at risk or an issue.

This distortion of our exchange is the kind of tactic which undermines efforts to reach an agreement that would ban late-term abortions, except for the most narrow circumstances where a woman's life or health was at stake....

[section omitted, during which Sen. Feingold questions Mr. Johnson about "health" exception]

...Is it correct to say that you [Mr. Johnson] would ban this procedure even when the attending doctor believes that this procedure would best protect this woman's health or future fertility? Mr. Johnson?

Mr. Johnson: Senator Feingold, the "misrepresentations" which you just alleged were in literature disseminated by our organization. And I'd like to inquire of the chairman [at that moment, Congressman Henry Hyde, R-IL] if I'm going to have an opportunity to respond to that.

Congressman Hyde: Yes...

Sen. Feingold: Mr. Chairman, I would like a response to my question, if I could have it. I have asked a question, and I would like a response to my question.

Congressman Hyde: In the absence of a higher authority, I agree with the Senator. Would you answer the Senator's question?

 [section omitted, during which Mr. Johnson responded to Sen. Feingold's question regarding the "health" exception. Sen. Feingold then posed similar questions to two other panelists, Helen Alvare of the National Conference of Catholic Bishops, and Kate Michelman of the National Abortion rights Action League. Following their responses, Sen. Feingold prepared to leave the hearing.]

Mr. Johnson: Mr. Chairman! Mr. Chairman!

Sen. Feingold: ...the courtesy...[rising from his chair] I have to go [inaudible]. [Sen. Feingold leaves the room.]

Mr. Johnson: Senator Feingold has impugned the integrity of the National Right to Life Committee, which is the organization that has disseminated the transcript of the exchange to which he referred. And this will just take about two minutes. But I have a verbatim transcript of the exchange. It's also very instructional, in that it speaks to the issue of what the word "health" really means in this legal context. This is a verbatim transcript from the C-SPAN tape. If the Senator wishes to dispute its accuracy, I have the videotape cued up right here. [displays videocassette in hand]

The version that appeared in the Congressional Record, I should mention, was very substantially altered. This is the exchange:

[Mr. Johnson reads the transcript of the Feingold-Santorum exchange, as it appears above.]

Close quote.

Congressman Hyde: I thank the gentleman.

[End]

The following exchange between Sen. Rick Santorum (R-PA) and Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-CA) took place on the Senate floor on October 20, 1999:

Sen. Santorum: I think the issue of where we draw the line constitutionally is very important. And I'm sure the Senator from California agrees with me. I think the senator from California would say that she and I, and the senator from Illinois and the senators from Arkansas and Kansas here, we are all protected by the Constitution with a right to life. Would you agree with that, senator from California -- [would you] answer that question?

Sen. Boxer: I support the Roe versus Wade decision.

Sen. Santorum: So you would agree any child that's born has the right to life, is protected under the Constitution? Once that child is born?

Sen. Boxer: I agree with the Roe v. Wade decision. And what you are doing goes against it and will harm the women of this country. And I will speak to that issue when I get to the floor myself.

Sen. Santorum: But I would like to ask you a question. You agree, once that child is born, is separated from the mother, that that child is protected by the Constitution and cannot be killed? Do you agree with that?

Sen. Boxer: I would make this statement: That this Constitution, as it currently is -- some of you want to amend it to say that life begins at conception. I think when you bring your baby home, when your baby is born -- and there is no such thing as partial-birth -- the baby belongs to your family and has all the rights. But I am not willing to amend the Constitution to say that a fetus is a person, which I know you would. But we will get into that later. I would prefer to address -- I know my colleague is engaging me in a colloquy on his time, and I appreciate it -- I will answer these questions.

I think what my friend is doing, by asking me these questions, is off point. My friend wants to tell the doctors in this country what to do. My friend from Pennsylvania says there are "rogue" doctors. The AMA will tell you they no longer support you. The American nurses don't support you. The obstetricians and gynecologists don't support you. So my friend can ask me my philosophy all day. On my own time I will talk about it.

Sen. Santorum: If I can reclaim my time: First of all, the AMA still believes this is bad medicine. They do not support the criminal penalties provisions in this bill, but they still believe -- I think you know that to be the case -- that this procedure is not medically necessary, and they stand by that statement.

I ask the senator from California, again: you believe, you said "once the baby comes home." Obviously, you don't mean they have to take the baby out of the hospital for it to be protected by the Constitution. Once the baby is separated from the mother, you would agree -- completely separated from the mother -- you would agree that baby is entitled to constitutional protection?

Sen. Boxer: I will tell you why I don't want to engage in this. You did the same conversation with a colleague of mine, and I never saw such a twisting of his remarks.

Sen. Santorum: Well, be clear, then. Let's be clear.

Sen. Boxer: I am going to be very clear when I get the floor. What you are trying to do is take away the rights of women and their families and their doctors to have a procedure. And now you are trying to turn the question into, "When does life begin?" I will talk about that on my own time.

Sen. Santorum: What I am trying to do is get an answer from the senator from California as to where you would draw the line? Because that really is the important part of this debate.

Sen. Boxer: I will repeat. I will repeat, since the senator has asked me a question I am answering the question I have been posed by the senator. And the answer to the question is, I stand by Roe v. Wade. I stand by it. I hope we have a chance to vote on it. It is very clear, Roe v. Wade. That is what I stand by. My friend doesn't.

Sen. Santorum: Are you suggesting Roe v. Wade covered the issue of a baby in the process of being born?

Sen. Boxer: I am saying what Roe v. Wade says is, that in the early stages of a pregnancy, a woman has the right to choose. In the later stages, the states have the right, yes, to come in and restrict. I support those restrictions, as long as two things happen: They respect the life of the mother and the health of the mother.

Sen. Santorum: I understand that.

Sen. Boxer: That is where I stand. And no matter how you try to twist it, that is where I stand.

Sen. Santorum: I would say to the senator from California, I am not twisting anything. I am simply asking a very straightforward question. There is no hidden question here. The question is --

Sen. Boxer: I will answer it again.

Sen. Santorum: Once the baby is born, is completely separated from the mother, you will support that that baby has, in fact, the right to life and cannot be killed? You accept that; right?

Sen. Boxer: I don't believe in killing any human being. That is absolutely correct. Nor do you, I am sure.

Sen. Santorum: So you would accept the fact that once the baby is separated from the mother, that baby cannot be killed?

Sen. Boxer: I support the right -- and I will repeat this, again, because I saw you ask the same question to another senator--

Sen. Santorum: All the person has to do is give me a straight answer, and then it will be very clear to everybody.

Sen. Boxer: And what defines "separation"? Define "separation." You answer that question. You define it.

Sen. Santorum: Well, let's define that. Okay, let's say the baby is completely separated. In other words, no part of the baby is inside of the mother.

Sen. Boxer: You mean the baby has been birthed and is now in its mother's arms? That baby is a human being.

Sen. Santorum: Well, I don't know if it's necessarily in its mother's arms. Let's say in the obstetrician's hands.

Sen. Boxer: It takes a second, it takes a minute. I had two babies, and within seconds of their birth--

Sen. Santorum: We've had six.

Sen. Boxer: Well, you didn't have any.

Sen. Santorum: My wife and I had babies together. That's the way we do things in our family.

Sen. Boxer: Your wife gave birth. I gave birth. I can tell you, I know when the baby was born.

Sen. Santorum: Good! All I am asking you is, once the baby leaves the mother's birth canal and is through the vaginal orifice and is in the hands of the obstetrician, you would agree that you cannot abort, kill the baby?

Sen. Boxer: I would say when the baby is born, the baby is born, and would then have every right of every other human being living in this country. And I don't know why this would even be a question, to be honest with you.

Sen. Santorum: Because we are talking about a situation here where the baby is almost born. So I ask the question of the senator from California, if the baby was born except for the baby's foot, if the baby's foot was inside the mother but the rest of the baby was outside, could that baby be killed?

Sen. Boxer: The baby is born when the baby is born. That is the answer to the question.

Sen. Santorum: I am asking you to define for me what that is.

Sen. Boxer: I don't think anybody but the senator from Pennsylvania has a question with it. I have never been troubled by this question. You give birth to a baby. The baby is there, and it is born. That is my answer to the question.

Sen. Santorum: What we are talking about here with partial birth, as the senator from California knows, is a baby is in the process of being born--

Sen. Boxer: "The process of being born." This is why this conversation makes no sense, because to me it is obvious when a baby is born. To you it isn't obvious.

Sen. Santorum: Maybe you can make it obvious to me. So what you are suggesting is if the baby's foot is still inside of the mother, that baby can then still be killed.

Sen. Boxer: No, I am not suggesting that in any way!

Sen. Santorum: I am asking.

Sen. Boxer: I am absolutely not suggesting that. You asked me a question, in essence, when the baby is born.

Sen. Santorum: I am asking you again. Can you answer that?

Sen. Boxer: I will answer the question when the baby is born. The baby is born when the baby is outside the mother's body. The baby is born.

Sen. Santorum: I am not going to put words in your mouth.

Sen. Boxer: I hope not.

Sen. Santorum: But, again, what you are suggesting is if the baby's toe is inside the mother, you can, in fact, kill that baby.

Sen. Boxer: Absolutely not.

Sen. Santorum: OK. So if the baby's toe is in, you can't kill the baby. How about if the baby's foot is in?

Sen. Boxer: You are the one who is making these statements.

Sen. Santorum: We are trying to draw a line here.

Sen. Boxer: I am not answering these questions! I am not answering these questions!

[End]

Return to column: "Aborted Conscience"

Return to Shinbone

 The Shinbone: The Frontier of the Free Press 

 Mailbag . Issue Index . Politimals