Posted on 08/02/2003 10:39:40 PM PDT by Uncle Bill
Can a PBA be performed on a baby with only the top of the head exposed?
Couldn't an abortionist drive a spike through the gap in the unfused cranial sutures, clear through the head and into the base of the skull?
as compiled through Senate LIS by the Senate Bill Clerk under the direction of the Secretary of the Senate
Question: On the Amendment (Harkin Amdt. No. 260 ) | |||
Vote Number: | 48 | Vote Date: | March 12, 2003, 04:03 PM |
Required For Majority: | 1/2 | Vote Result: | Amendment Agreed to |
Amendment Number: | S.Amdt. 260 to S. 3 (Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act of 2003 ) | ||
Statement of Purpose: | To express the sense of the Senate concerning the decision of the Supreme Court in Roe v. Wade. |
Vote Counts: | YEAs | 52 |
NAYs | 46 | |
Not Voting | 2 |
Alabama: | Sessions (R-AL), Nay | Shelby (R-AL), Nay |
Alaska: | Murkowski (R-AK), Yea | Stevens (R-AK), Yea |
Arizona: | Kyl (R-AZ), Nay | McCain (R-AZ), Nay |
Arkansas: | Lincoln (D-AR), Yea | Pryor (D-AR), Nay |
California: | Boxer (D-CA), Yea | Feinstein (D-CA), Yea |
Colorado: | Allard (R-CO), Nay | Campbell (R-CO), Yea |
Connecticut: | Dodd (D-CT), Yea | Lieberman (D-CT), Yea |
Delaware: | Biden (D-DE), Not Voting | Carper (D-DE), Yea |
Florida: | Graham (D-FL), Yea | Nelson (D-FL), Yea |
Georgia: | Chambliss (R-GA), Nay | Miller (D-GA), Nay |
Hawaii: | Akaka (D-HI), Yea | Inouye (D-HI), Yea |
Idaho: | Craig (R-ID), Nay | Crapo (R-ID), Nay |
Illinois: | Durbin (D-IL), Yea | Fitzgerald (R-IL), Nay |
Indiana: | Bayh (D-IN), Yea | Lugar (R-IN), Nay |
Iowa: | Grassley (R-IA), Nay | Harkin (D-IA), Yea |
Kansas: | Brownback (R-KS), Nay | Roberts (R-KS), Nay |
Kentucky: | Bunning (R-KY), Nay | McConnell (R-KY), Not Voting |
Louisiana: | Breaux (D-LA), Nay | Landrieu (D-LA), Yea |
Maine: | Collins (R-ME), Yea | Snowe (R-ME), Yea |
Maryland: | Mikulski (D-MD), Yea | Sarbanes (D-MD), Yea |
Massachusetts: | Kennedy (D-MA), Yea | Kerry (D-MA), Yea |
Michigan: | Levin (D-MI), Yea | Stabenow (D-MI), Yea |
Minnesota: | Coleman (R-MN), Nay | Dayton (D-MN), Yea |
Mississippi: | Cochran (R-MS), Nay | Lott (R-MS), Nay |
Missouri: | Bond (R-MO), Nay | Talent (R-MO), Nay |
Montana: | Baucus (D-MT), Yea | Burns (R-MT), Nay |
Nebraska: | Hagel (R-NE), Nay | Nelson (D-NE), Nay |
Nevada: | Ensign (R-NV), Nay | Reid (D-NV), Nay |
New Hampshire: | Gregg (R-NH), Nay | Sununu (R-NH), Nay |
New Jersey: | Corzine (D-NJ), Yea | Lautenberg (D-NJ), Yea |
New Mexico: | Bingaman (D-NM), Yea | Domenici (R-NM), Nay |
New York: | Clinton (D-NY), Yea | Schumer (D-NY), Yea |
North Carolina: | Dole (R-NC), Nay | Edwards (D-NC), Yea |
North Dakota: | Conrad (D-ND), Yea | Dorgan (D-ND), Yea |
Ohio: | DeWine (R-OH), Nay | Voinovich (R-OH), Nay |
Oklahoma: | Inhofe (R-OK), Nay | Nickles (R-OK), Nay |
Oregon: | Smith (R-OR), Nay | Wyden (D-OR), Yea |
Pennsylvania: | Santorum (R-PA), Nay | Specter (R-PA), Yea |
Rhode Island: | Chafee (R-RI), Yea | Reed (D-RI), Yea |
South Carolina: | Graham (R-SC), Nay | Hollings (D-SC), Yea |
South Dakota: | Daschle (D-SD), Yea | Johnson (D-SD), Yea |
Tennessee: | Alexander (R-TN), Nay | Frist (R-TN), Nay |
Texas: | Cornyn (R-TX), Nay | Hutchison (R-TX), Yea |
Utah: | Bennett (R-UT), Nay | Hatch (R-UT), Nay |
Vermont: | Jeffords (I-VT), Yea | Leahy (D-VT), Yea |
Virginia: | Allen (R-VA), Nay | Warner (R-VA), Yea |
Washington: | Cantwell (D-WA), Yea | Murray (D-WA), Yea |
West Virginia: | Byrd (D-WV), Yea | Rockefeller (D-WV), Yea |
Wisconsin: | Feingold (D-WI), Yea | Kohl (D-WI), Yea |
Wyoming: | Enzi (R-WY), Nay | Thomas (R-WY), Nay |
If you're right, then that's great. I still want to ask some doctors their thoughts on circumventing that wording. It needs to be airtight to be effective.
No, I don't believe that. I'm focusing on the text of the bill, not any conspiracy theorists or anti-GOP articles.
You're the one with the initial distrust of me. .30Carbine graciously answered my simple question in post #180, and also see my reply in #184. You can drop the political enemy crap. We're on the same side.
First, medical techniques advance all the time. Necessity being what it is to invention, I'm certain the abortionists will come up with ways around the language of this bill. Tragically. Doesn't mean the bill's no good, I confess I'm not really up to speed on the various nuances.
Second, I think you're giving Gawain a bad rap, frankly. He's asking some questions about the medical procedures involved, and not many among us are qualified to answer those questions without equivocation. That's why I flagged a couple of medical pros to my own post.
Let's say, hypothetically, that the net effect of this bill on the annual number of PBAs was zero. Would that necessarily call into question the integrity of well-intentioned legislator who voted in favor of it? Definitely not.
I'm not predicting that will be the net effect, to that I plead ignorance. I'm just suggesting that one can't presume to know Gawain's motives simply because he raised a valid question about the medical procedures involved, about which many of us are ignorant.
Fair enough?
Saber, think about what you are asking. If an abortionist wanted to get around this PBA ban, could he/she REALLY deliver just the rounded top of the baby's skull, puncture and suction it out?
Picture it. How would the abortionist prevent the pounding of the spike in the top of the head from driving the baby back up inside the mother's body?
How would the abortionist get the suction to the hole before the contents of the baby's skull started leaking back into the mother, causing serious complications, infection?
To what would the abortionist attach forceps so that once the baby's brains are out and the baby is dead he/she could extract the body?
I think you are really stretching it.
I hope that you will come to celebrate the success of the Right to Life movement with this legislation. It is a good start.
*sigh* Try sometime to write legislation that will withstand Clintonian hairsplitting. It can't be done. The drafters' aim was a tad more modest but daunting enough for mere mortals: i.e., write a PBA law that will withstand constitutional scrutiny by the current SCOTUS. If O'Connor who wrote the majority opinion in Stenberg is true to her word, they will have succeeded.
Since D and E procedures are typically performed as late as the 24th week (Taber's/Medline/various other sources), I've already stated the law wouldn't achieve as much. It also doesn't roll back rent control laws or the designated hitter rule, among other failings.
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.