Rick Santorum

Mr. SANTORUM

Mr. SANTORUM. Mr. President, I rise today to call attention to provisions in the recently approved omnibus appropriations bill dealing with electronic benefits transfer [EBT]. In the waning hours of the negotiations on the omnibus appropriations bill, legislative language was inserted--sections 664 and 665-- providing for the delivery of EBT services by the Federal Government. In effect, the provision nullified an August 13, 1996, D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals decision involving the procurement process in an EBT initiative under the direction of the U.S. Department of the Treasury. While I supported passage of the omnibus appropriations bill, I have very serious concerns with the impact of the EBT language and, as a result of these provisions becoming law, remain concerned with the direction of EBT. The financial ramifications and impact associated with providing benefits through EBT are enormous. The fact these provisions were added to the bill and became law with virtually no congressional oversight is extremely troublesome. I am uncomfortable with Congress overturning court decisions and ultimately directing multimillion dollar contracts without review. These provisions on EBT have not been reviewed in detail by the committees of jurisdiction nor have they been subject to hearings. Mr. President, throughout my service in Congress, I have focused considerable legislative effort in the area of social policy, and I'm very pleased to have played a role in the development and direction of the landmark welfare policies that became law earlier this year. The efficiencies associated with delivering social service benefits through EBT have been an integral part of welfare reform discussions over the past 5 years. And with the enactment of the landmark welfare reform law, the need to develop a comprehensive EBT policy becomes all the more important. If Congress is to better manage the delivery of Federal services and benefits, we must start with EBT. Throughout the remainder of this year and into the next Congress, I intend to address this issue, not only with the Secretary of the Treasury, but also with the leadership of the committees of jurisdiction. It is imperative that Congress develop a comprehensive EBT policy with comment and direction from the Banking, Agriculture, Finance, and Governmental Affairs Committees, all who have major interests in this area. Mr. President, with the recent passage of the omnibus appropriations bill, I wanted to take a moment of Senate business to express my very serious concerns with the language on EBT and the impact that this will have on the future delivery of social service benefits. I appreciate the attention of my colleagues today and encourage your interest and involvement.

Mr. SANTORUM

Mr. SANTORUM. I ask unanimous consent that the next sentence be considered as read.

Mr. SANTORUM. I ask unanimous consent that the next page be considered as read.

Mr. SANTORUM. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the next title be considered as read.

Mr. SANTORUM

Mr. SANTORUM. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. SANTORUM

Mr. SANTORUM. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. SANTORUM

Mr. SANTORUM. If the baby was delivered and the head slipped out, would you allow the doctor to kill the baby?

Mr. SANTORUM. But that's what we are doing here, we are making decisions.

Mr. SANTORUM. Mr. President, 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?

Mr. SANTORUM. Three inches doesn't make the difference as to whether you answer the question?

Mr. SANTORUM

Mr. SANTORUM. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Foreign Relations be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Thursday, September 26, 1996, at 10 a.m. to hold a hearing.

Mr. SANTORUM. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent on behalf of the Governmental Affairs Committee to meet on Thursday, September 26, 1996, at 10 a.m. for a hearing on the annual report of the Postmaster General.

Mr. SANTORUM. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on the Judiciary be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Thursday, September 26, 1996, at 2 p.m. to hold a hearing on annual refugee consultation.

Mr. SANTORUM. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations of the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources be granted permission to meet during the session of the Senate on Thursday, September 26, 1996, for purposes of conducing a subcommittee hearing which is scheduled to begin at 2 p.m. The purpose of this oversight hearing is to examine the NEPA decisionmaking process including the role of the Council on Environmental Quality.

Mr. SANTORUM

Mr. SANTORUM. I yield to the Senator from Michigan 3 minutes.

Mr. SANTORUM. Madam President, I yield 2 minutes to the Senator from Missouri.

Mr. SANTORUM. Is a doctor.

Mr. SANTORUM. I object.

Mr. SANTORUM. Reserving the right to object.

Mr. SANTORUM. If the Senator will yield, I apologize for making such an error, and I appreciate the Senator pointing that out.

Mr. SANTORUM. Mr. President, I yield myself 5 minutes. Mr. President, I look and see the Senator from West Virginia, who represents as much the U.S. Senate to this country as probably any individual here, the dignity of this institution as the greatest deliberative body in the world. I have been saying for the last few days that I have tremendous faith that this body, as a deliberative body, will listen to the facts and live up to its reputation as a body that, when presented with all the evidence, can judge not only about this procedure, which is important, but what the consequence are of this action on the future of the nation, on the future of a civilization. And so I ask Members, before they come down, to think and look inwardly as to their own conscience. Yes, to look outwardly around to this Chamber and remember that we have a standard to uphold and that today we are going to be making the decision about whether in this country it will be legal to allow a viable baby to be delivered outside of the mother and then killed inches before its first breath. I have asked the question of almost every person who spoke on this issue opposing my position: What would be the case if the baby's head was to, for some reason, slip out? Would the doctor and the mother then have the right, the choice to kill that baby? No one has ever answered that question. The Senator from Wisconsin came the closest. He said, ``I don't think we should interfere with that,'' which I guess means yes. How far do we go? Where do we draw the line? Have we stopped saying here in this body that there are no more lines, that everything is OK for anyone to do as long as you feel it's right, it's your right to do whatever you feel is right? Don't we have any more lines? What are the facts? That is a factually accurate description of the procedure, as so stated by the person who performs it. Some have likened this chart to a depiction of an appendicitis operation. My God. Appendicitis. That is not an appendix. That is not a blob of tissue. It is a baby. It's a baby. Did you ever really think that this could actually be happening on the floor of the U.S. Senate? When you came here, the people in the audience--maybe you are just visiting Washington or just wandered in-- did you actually believe that we could be actually contemplating allowing thousands of these kinds of procedures to continue? I sometimes just have to sit here and pinch myself and wonder whether this is all real, whether this really is the United States of America. The Senator from California said she hears the cries of the women outside this Chamber. We would be deafened by the cries of the children who are not here to cry because of this procedure. I cry with these women. This is a difficult decision to make, but there are alternative measures available. No woman will be denied access to abortion, late-term as they are, if we ban this procedure. That is a fact. The leading writer on abortions, Dr. Hern from Colorado, says that he thinks this is a dangerous procedure and should not be done. The Senator from Colorado--and my best wishes go out to him in his hospital bed in Colorado--made the most poignant statement today when he said he has been in a hospital looking at all that is being done to preserve life. I have to hearken back to another Lincoln quote which is: ``A house divided against itself cannot stand.'' In one operating room when there is a baby being delivered and everything is being done to save that baby; in the next room, one is being delivered to be killed. That cannot continue to happen in this country. The Senator from Colorado is right. What are we to become? What will we be like if we allow this, and then maybe if the baby is born and it is not quite perfect enough for us, maybe it has some problems, that it won't live as long as we would like. Cardinal Bevilacqua spoke today, and there are many religious leaders here. The cardinal is up in the gallery, and he said, ``If this procedure is allowed to continue, I fear that legal infanticide will not be far behind. If partial-birth abortion is allowed to continue, surely it will mark the beginning of the end of our Nation, of our civilization. No Nation, no civilization that abandons its moral foundations, its spiritual beliefs by legally destroying its own unborn children in this barbaric procedure can possibly survive.'' Please, I ask my colleagues, I plead with my colleagues, don't let this happen on our watch. Mr. President, I have a series of newspaper articles and letters. I ask unanimous consent that they be printed in the Record.

Mr. SANTORUM. I yield the Senator 1 additional minute.

Mr. SANTORUM. I yield 5 minutes to the Senator from Indiana.

Mr. SANTORUM. I ask unanimous consent that we have 10 additional minutes equally divided. I am swamped with speakers and do not have enough time to even get my own statement in.

Mr. SANTORUM. Mr. President, I yield 5 minutes to the Senator from Tennessee, Dr. Frist.