Posted on 03/20/2005 2:52:24 PM PST by Jean S
WASHINGTON (AP) - The Senate passed a bill that could prolong Terri Schiavo's life while a federal court considers her case while House Republicans, stymied by Democrats, scrambled to bring enough lawmakers back to the Capitol for an emergency vote early Monday.
GOP leaders planned a House vote just past midnight, hours after the Senate approved the bill by voice vote. President Bush rushed back from his Texas for a chance to sign the measure.
The plan had been for the House to act first and then the Senate to pass the House version. But with Democrats forcing a delay in the House, the Senate went ahead and passed its own, identical, version by unrecorded voice vote.
That means the House will be acting on the Senate-passed bill, still enabling the legislation to be hurried to Bush for signature into law.
The White House said the president would act as soon as the measure reaches him.
"We ought to err on the side of life in a case like this," said White House spokesman Scott McClellan. Asked about a bill that would cover a single person, he said, "I think most people recognize that this case involves some extraordinary circumstances."
Lawmakers who left Washington on Friday for the two-week Easter recess had to make abrupt changes in plans, backtracking for a dramatic and politically contentious vote.
Democrats expressed sympathy for the severely brain-damaged Florida woman and for the plight of her family. But they also accused Republicans of ramming through constitutionally questionable legislation to satisfy the agenda of their conservative allies.
In a special session Sunday afternoon, Democrats refused to allow the bill to be passed without a roll call vote.
Under House rules, such a vote could not occur until Monday, thus the plans for a vote at 12:01 a.m. Monday at which at least 218 of the 435-member House must appear. Also, because it was an expedited vote, the measure needed votes from two-thirds of those present for passage.
The House has 232 Republicans, 202 Democrats and one independent.
The legislation would give Schiavo's parents the right to file suit in federal court over the withdrawal of food and medical treatment needed to sustain the life of their daughter.
It says the court, after determining the merits of the suit, "shall issue such declaratory and injunctive relief as may be necessary to protect the rights" of the woman. Injunctive relief in this case could mean the reinserting of feeding tubes.
"It gives Terri Schiavo another chance," Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, R-Tenn., said after the late-afternoon voice vote in a near-empty Senate chamber. "It guarantees a process to help Terri, but does not guarantee a particular outcome."
Frist also noted that the bill, responding to some Democratic objections, does not affect state assisted suicide laws or serve as a precedent for future legislation.
Rep. Chris Smith, R-N.J., said members scattered across the globe were being summoned back to Washington by aides to House Majority Whip Roy Blunt, R-Mo.
Blunt's office sent a notice to members on their handheld computers Friday to be prepared to return to Washington on Sunday, said spokeswoman Burson Taylor.
In emergencies, when that does not work, the whip's office activates a phone tree, where one member is charged with calling the next. "We do anticipate a quorum," she said.
Smith added, "It should come as no surprise to any members reading a newspaper or watching TV. Smith canceled an official trip to Albania to escort Schiavo's brother, Bobby Schindler, to Capitol Hill press conferences Sunday.
The Democratic whip, Rep. Steny Hoyer, D-Md., said his office was informing members of the vote and not discouraging them from returning to the capital. But he said the party was not counting votes and was telling members to vote their conscience on the issue.
Schiavo has been in a persistent vegetative state for 15 years. Her feeding tubes were removed Friday afternoon at the request of her husband, who says that his wife expressed to him before she fell ill that she did not want to be kept alive under such circumstances.
House and Senate committees at the end of the week issued subpoenas seeking to force the continuation of treatment, but that move was rejected by a Florida court.
Schiavo could linger for one or two weeks if the tube is not reinserted, as has happened twice before.
Republicans defined their extraordinary efforts in the context of the sanctity of life: "A society is judged by the way that it treats its most vulnerable citizens," said Rep. Mike Pence, R-Ind.
"No person in America should be deprived of the right to life without due process of law and Terri Schiavo is no different," Pence said.
But Rep. Barney Frank, D-Mass., spoke of "the manifestation of a constitutional crisis" where Congress, for ideological reasons, was ignoring the separations of power written into the Constitution.
Republicans distanced themselves from a memo suggesting GOP lawmakers could use the case to appeal to Christian conservative voters and to force Democrats into a difficult vote.
"I hope we're not ... making this human tragedy a political issue," Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., told ABC's "This Week." "We've got plenty of other issues that are political in nature for us to fight about."
AP-ES-03-20-05 1721EST
This story can be found at: http://ap.tbo.com/ap/breaking/MGBPGFETJ6E.html
Not terribly modern. No more modern than aspirin.
Besides, Michael forbids even efforts to feed Terri by mouth. Even if there's a 95% certainty that she would be unable to receive food or water orally, is there any legitimate reason to deny that 5% chance if the only other alternative would be certain death?
No, the previous orders allowed the guardian to starve her to death. This court order to starve a U.S. citizen to death was given by the judge, himself ACTING AS TERRI'S PROXY.
Cordially,
I looked out the window and the sky did not appear to be falling.
Actually I'd be willing to bet most people aren't really aware of this case.
I don't understand the distinction you are making.
A court order had to be given in order to have her feeding tube removed in every case correct?
Who gives a court order but a judge?
Technically speaking the one removing the feeding tube is a doctor or the medical staff at hospice not her gaurdian or a judge.
Sorry I'm not understanding you.
The first two times, Greer allowed Michael to order the tube removed. The last time, Greer decreed that the tube must be removed even if by some chance Michael decided he no longer wanted to do so.
First time I heard of that so if MS has a change of heart in the next few days it wont matter?
Democrats
D ark
E vil
M ean
O afs
C retins
R epublican envy
A ntagonistic
T errible
S hameful
All that's left is to hold Judge Greer in contempt of congress. Without his obstinance, this bill would not have been necessary.
Right. I think Greer did that so he could try to enforce DCF to starve Terri even if they took her into protective custody.
I do hope Delay can bring a big strong hammer down on Greer. If he does it within the next few days, Greer's contempt of congress won't set too much of a precedent, but the longer Greer remains unpunished the harder it will be to avoid losing Congress' ability to hold judges accountable for their actions.
The best resolution would have been for Jeb Bush to take command of the Terri and respectfully tell Greer that he had overstepped his authority. Jeb does not have the stomach for that so Terri's husband and the culture of death will get their way.
Oh stop for heaven's sakes!!!!!!!!! Read the article on Newsmax for cryin' out loud. Stop blaming Jeb Bush.
It may seem like a distinction without a difference, especially from Terri's point of view, but think about it. It was not one individual doing it, at his discretion with a court's permission, as bad as that is; it was the State of Florida doing it, and I would like to know what the source of authority is that allows a state judge to order the starvation of a U.S. citizen.
Cordially,
No, I would say this is a huge difference.
Did the judge order this as a result of Terri's Law being declared unconstitutional?
Kinda just picking up where they last left off?
It would be a constitutional crisis if the lawyers were found to have violated a fiduciary responsibility and had to cough all the funds back up - and were disbarred on top of it all.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.