Posted on 03/23/2005 9:01:53 AM PST by areafiftyone
Congressional Republicans who took extraordinary measures last weekend to prolong the life of Terri Schiavo say there are no further steps Congress can take to intervene.
A federal district-court judge declined yesterday to issue an order to reinsert Schiavo’s feeding tube. Schiavo’s parents have appealed the ruling to the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals in Atlanta.
The court ruling concerning the Florida woman whom doctors say has been in a “persistent vegetative state” for 15 years prompted a strong statement from House Majority Leader Tom DeLay (R-Texas), who said that the court violated the “clear intent of Congress,” which passed a emergency Schiavo bill last weekend.
Sen. Mel Martinez (R-Fla.), who drafted legislation that served as starting point for a narrower bill passed by the Senate, said, “I am deeply disappointed by this decision today, but I believe this matter now belongs in the hands of the judiciary.”
DeLay went further, saying, “Congress explicitly provided Terri Schiavo’s family recourse to federal court, and this decision is at odds with both the clear intent of Congress and the constitutional rights of a helpless young woman.
“Section two of the legislation we passed clearly requires the court determine de novo the merits of the case — or in layman’s terms, it requires a completely new and full review of the case.
“Section three requires the judge to grant a temporary restraining order because he cannot fulfill his or her recognized duty to review the case de novo without first keeping Terri Schiavo alive.”
DeLay did not, however, signal any further steps that Congress might take.
Section three of the Schiavo law states that the judge “shall issue such declaratory and injunctive relief as may be necessary to protect the rights” of Schiavo.
But Senate floor statements appear to contradict DeLay’s interpretation. An earlier version of the bill included language mandating that the court issue a stay. Sen. Carl Levin (D-Mich.) objected to the provision and negotiated to have it removed. GOP leaders needed the consent of Senate Democrats to move the bill in a speedy fashion, and during a House floor speech DeLay later thanked Senate Democrats for their cooperation.
During Senate consideration of the bill Sunday, Levin engaged in a colloquy, or conversation on the floor, with Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-Tenn.), stating his belief that the bill would not require the court to issue a stay.
Frist agreed, saying, “Nothing in the current bill or its legislative history mandates a stay. I would assume, however, the federal court would grant a stay based on the facts of this case because Mrs. Schiavo would need to be alive in order for the court to make its determination. Nevertheless, this bill does not change current law, under which a stay is discretionary.”
A House Judiciary Committee aide said that the final law was stronger than the initial Senate bill and that it did require the judge to issue a stay.
House Speaker Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.) also released a statement, saying that he was very disappointed by the court ruling.
Time is working against Republicans who would like to do more on Schiavo’s behalf. At best, if the case goes to the U.S. Supreme Court, lawmakers might decide to file friend-of-the-court briefs on behalf of Schiavo’s parents.
Legislative provisions negotiated by Senate Democrats during the hours before Congress acted last weekend appear to have had a substantial effect on the case.
When Frist first moved to take up a bill dealing with Schiavo in the midst of a budget debate, Democrats objected. One who objected was Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), who was concerned that the legislation could have an effect on an Oregon law dealing with assisted suicide.
As a result of negotiations with Wyden, the final law included language stating that it should not be construed to give new jurisdiction to courts regarding a state’s assisted suicide law. Wyden did not object to final action, even though he opposed the bill.
Democratic aides said their members decided to allow the bill to move forward once it was changed so that it was narrowly tailored to the Schiavo case. An ABC News poll released Monday showed that 70 percent of respondents thought the congressional intervention was inappropriate.
“Just because members oppose a bill doesn’t mean they exercise every procedural option to block it,” one Senate Democratic aide said. The bill eventually passed the Senate on a voice vote, after no senator demanded a recorded vote be taken.
Meanwhile, Frist wrote Florida Gov. Jeb Bush (R) yesterday urging quick action on the part of the state Legislature: “The extraordinary nature of this case requires that every avenue be pursued to protect her life.”
Now I don't know if all of this is all true - but there are alot of Freepers who know more about this than I do.
There is something to starving and killing a woman in holy week. She suffers and dies because a judge ordered it to be carried out. Good Lord.
Perhaps the Pope could pronounce him anathema and excommunicate? If the Archbishop could do it to King Henry II, why not?
Yes.
I am getting more and more disenchanted with the GOP everyday.
Especially considering some of the 'conservative' comments I've read on here against protecting Terri.
I always thought that it was conservatives who were for protecting the 'sanctity of life', and the democrats who were the ones out for 'personal gain'.
I guess the line just gets more blurred as the years go by.
This is just exactly the nonsense that sets the Republican party back. The welfare of our society is directly proportional to the freedom we are allowed to possess. Why should you be able to claim economic freedom, if you do not allow people to claim personal freedom.
It is the joy that so many "conservatives" take in snuffing out everything they think is strange, freaky or weird that makes otherwise amiable people to the conservative moment go run in hide.
You social "conservatives" are nothing more than Marxists who believe in god.
In case you haven't read any of the writings of the founders of this, the greatest nation in history, it was founded to secure the blessing of liberty, not to be bridled by the yoke of yet another tyranny.
I will always err on the side of personal liberty. And in the Shiavo case, her personal liberty is being spit upon because it is more convenient to the soft sensibilities of people to think of her as a thing as opposed to a person.
The sphere is really (and should be) more narrow than that. A Husband can't force a wife to take or not take medicine. Medical care is each person's own individual decision. The law is supposed to operate on exactly this premise, and nothing more. If you take the time to read the legal papers, you will find a sharp focus on TERRI's wishes.
I think the court erred on the matter that TERRI wishes or wished to die by starvation. That is a factual inquiry.
My nomination for Free Republic post of the year. It certainly reveals something about this forum that I would never have guessed before the Schiavo case came up.
The woman was NOT dying until her feeding tube was REMOVED!
This fact trumps all other arguments on either side. An innocent woman is being put to death by her husband in the name of the law. Doesn't this bother you?
Didn't they give themselves at least 2 raises in 2004? Greedy pigs!
Hospice care is normally $80,000/year. Since this case has achieved such notoriety, the hospice has agreed to waive most of its costs for care. What this means in practice is that the expense will be passed on to other patients and indirectly to the government.
Medicaid pays for Terri's medications.
It's in today's Washington Post.
If they were married in the Church, they must obtain a civil divorce before applying for an annulment.
the polls are shifting, as more information seeps through the MSM filter, the polls will shift further. Most people being polled still think this is a woman in a coma on a respirator. Its the Dems who are concerned on this issue, normally they would be chortling if they had a 2:1 public opinion in their favor on any issue. But they aren't, why? It the SCOTUS refuses to get involved (likely outcome), there will be weeks of media coverage of her death as she is slowly starved. And this issue will point out the imperial nature of the judiciary.
I can't blame Congress and the president for not going into "constitutional crisis" mode to save her, they have done the right thing so far in making this attempt, it was a noble effort (win or lose).
If people think about this rationally, they'll realize that for most of us, the R's did the best they could; in certain cases, there is not much that can be done. Calling out the military was never an option, for example.
In a few months the D's will do something that'll rile everyone up, and those saying they'll never vote Republican again over this will realize how silly an emotional reaction that is, which in practical terms would only make things worse.
Sure, some will stick with the Libertarians and say they'll never vote for a Republican again, but I suspect those folks say that a lot of the time.
People are feeling this crime white-hot now. But before the election, even Libertarians like Boston talk host Jay Severin were saying they'd never support Bush because of some decision or other; most, when they think about it, realize a R is better than a D, and will skip the temper tantrum and vote for the better of the two choices. All it will take is some crisis, or the Dems being Dems again.
Feeding tubes are removed hundreds of times a day in this country. And for people who don't have living wills.
This was discussed on the floor of the House. Over 70% of the people in this country don't have Living Wills. And yet families remove patients from life support and feeding tubes every day. It happens all the time in nursing homes, too.
I agree wholeheartedly. This has caused me to remove the bumper sticker "Proud Republican" from my truck.
And change my tagline for the first time in a year.
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.