Rick Santorum

Mr. SANTORUM

Mr. SANTORUM. I yield 1 minute to the Senator from Alabama.

Mr. SANTORUM. The question I have asked other Members who have argued your position--I have to ask it again--is that if this procedure were being done on a 24-week-old baby, which is often done, the procedure were done correctly, the baby was not taken out with the exception of the head, and for some reason the head slipped out and the baby was born, will the doctor and mother have a choice to kill the baby?

Mr. SANTORUM. Mr. President, will the Senator from South Dakota yield for a question?

Mr. SANTORUM. I yield the Senator from Idaho 2 minutes.

Mr. SANTORUM. That doesn't answer the question. Let's assume the procedure is being performed for the reason you stated.

Mr. SANTORUM. The Senator from Wisconsin says that this decision should be left up to the mother and doctor, as if there is absolutely no limit that can be placed on what decision they make with respect to that. The Senator from California is going to go up to advise you of what my question is going to be, and I will ask it anyway. My question is this: If that baby were delivered breech style and the head--everything was delivered except for the head, and for some reason that that baby's head would slip out so 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?

Mr. SANTORUM. Will the Senator from Wisconsin yield for a question?

Mr. SANTORUM

Mr. SANTORUM. I thought we did, but I have just been informed to wait a second. Have you seen the unanimous consent?

Mr. SANTORUM. I will hand a copy to my colleague.

Mr. SANTORUM. Will the Senator yield for 1 second?

Mr. SANTORUM. I just wanted to recognize the Senator from New Hampshire. I have been informed that the hour of 10 o'clock will be the 100th hour of the Senator from New Hampshire presiding in the Chair. He will be awarded a golden gavel for doing so. I just wanted to commend him for his work in that regard. My understanding is he is the first Senator from the State of New Hampshire to receive such an award. I congratulate the distinguished Senator.

Mr. SANTORUM. If the Senator will yield, I will propound the unanimous-consent agreement. I ask unanimous consent there now be 4 hours for debate on the veto message to accompany H.R. 1833, the partial-birth abortion bill, with the time equally divided in the usual form. Further, that the Senate recess between the hours of 12:30 and 1:30 today, and that when the Senate reconvenes at 1:30, there be a period of morning business until 2 p.m., with the Senators permitted to speak for up to 5 minutes, during which time statements relating to the veto message will be prohibited. I further ask that, at the hour of 2 o'clock, the Senate resume consideration of the veto message with the remaining time limitations still in effect. And, finally, following the expiration or yielding back of time, the Senate proceed to a vote on the question, ``Shall the Senate pass the bill, the objections of the President to the contrary notwithstanding?"

Mr. SANTORUM. I add that to the request.

Mr. SANTORUM. Thank you, Mr. President.

Mr. SANTORUM. Reserving the right to object. I say to the Senator from California that, first off, we had an opportunity to debate this issue, and we did debate this issue when the bill originally came up. The issue was debated at length. The Senator from California lost. The Senate worked its will. The Senator's amendment was defeated. In addition, obviously, we have already had a veto override in the House, including dozens of Members who were pro-choice supporting the override of this, what you would term, extreme provision, this extreme law. I suggest that the health of the mother exception that you want to include is unnecessary, and the reason it is unnecessary is because, according to physicians, not according to the Senator from Pennsylvania--I am not an obstetrician; I am not using my words in responding to the Senator from California, I will use the words of a Dr. Harlan Giles, a professor of high-risk obstetrics and perinatology at the Medical College of Pennsylvania. He performs abortions by a variety of procedures. I say to the Senator from California that even if this bill were to become law, there are still a variety of other abortion procedures available to women to have late-term abortions. This outlaws one which many of us believe is the most barbaric. His testimony was as follows: After 23 weeks, I do not think there are any maternal conditions-- I repeat that. there are any maternal conditions that I'm aware of that mandate ending the pregnancy that also require that the fetus be dead or that fetal life be terminated. In my experience for 20 years, one can deliver these fetuses either vaginally or by cesarean section, for that matter, depending on the choice of the parents, with informed consent. But there's no reason these fetuses cannot be delivered intact vaginally after a miniature labor, if you will, and be at least accessed at birth and given the benefit of the doubt. This is someone who performs abortions. Senator Brown from Colorado quoted a doctor from Boulder, CO, a Dr. Hern, who performs late-term abortions. He is the only one in Colorado, according to the Senator from Colorado, who performs these procedures, performs lots of abortions and has said identical things: that there is no reason to perform this procedure; that this procedure is not to benefit the health of the mother; and that the women who have this procedure done, the women who were trotted out to the White House, were misinformed about what health consequences beset them at the time of their abortion. So I object because the premise that the health of the mother is somehow improved by this procedure is a false premise, and that is not pro-life doctors talking, although we have many of them who are, that is not just pro-choice doctors talking, although we have many of them that do, but I am talking about people who perform late-term abortions talking. So to stand up and give credibility to this idea that there is a health reason to perform this abortion is factually incorrect, according to a very broad spectrum of physicians who don't and who do perform late-term abortions and abortions at other points in time. So I do object on the fact that the premise underlying the Senator's amendment is a faulty premise and is not appropriate for this legislation.

Mr. SANTORUM. I object.

Mr. SANTORUM. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Record a letter from a woman who had a child with a fetal defect, a fetal abnormality, and decided to go through and have the baby, and her comments about this legislation.

Mr. SANTORUM. Every time the Senator from California would bring up one of these cases, I will, unfortunately--Members on this side and maybe on the other side--have to tell the entire story about all these cases that the Senator from California would like to bring up, because, in fact, as was said earlier, there is no health or life reason to do this procedure. There is no reason. In fact, the Senator from Ohio, who I am going to yield to in a minute, will go through the case of Coreen Costello. We do not want to do this. I am sure Mrs. Costello went through some terrible things, but if the Senator from California is going to offer her up as a justification for this procedure, then the American public and the Members of the Senate have to know all the facts related to the procedure that was done and how she was misinformed about her alternatives. We have hundreds and hundreds of physicians, obstetricians, both pro-life, pro-choice, people who perform abortions, people who do not, who agree with that assessment of that. With respect to the New York Times article, I would say to the Senator from California the New York Times is the same paper that said we do not need to reform welfare because if we just change a little bit, it is a slippery slope and all of a sudden there will not be welfare. And they are the same people who criticize the National Rifle Assocation, which opposes any restriction on the second amendment, because of their slippery slope argument, and they criticize them for ``standing firm.'' And yet they are taking this position if you do one thing, even though it is reasonable, and you might argue it is reasonable, it is just a real big, sort of plot effort. That is just absolutely baloney. Baloney. My goodness, the New York Times, they are just--get a life. This is murder. Let us not call it partial-birth abortion. Call it partial-birth infanticide. That is what this is. If we think that is OK in this country, we have gone much too far. It is my pleasure to yield 15 minutes to the Senator from Ohio. Mr. DeWINE addressed the Chair.

Mr. SANTORUM. I yield 5 minutes.

Mr. SANTORUM. Mr. President, I just need to restate, we have quoted physician after physician, obstetrician after obstetrician, pro-life, pro-choice, people who have performed abortions--this is not Rick Santorum or James Inhofe or Mike DeWine or Bob Smith--these are physicians, obstetricians, who are saying that this procedure is never, never, never medically necessary to save the health or life of the mother. Never. Never. So, when we suggest we are doing this and we are denying something to women, let me also state that Dr. Hern, whom the Senator from Colorado quoted just yesterday, performs late-term abortions and will continue to perform late-term abortions if this bill passes. He believes that this is an unsafe procedure. It is not a medically recognized procedure. There is no literature on it, there is no peer review on it, there is nothing anywhere that says that this procedure is a proper procedure to use. This is not Rick Santorum talking. I wish the Members who argue would at least argue the facts. I am not speaking for me. I am quoting doctors. So let me quote doctors and describe this, because no one has described this procedure. I know, I will warn people, this is not something that I want to do. But I think the American public has to know what this procedure is and who it is performed on and at what time in the pregnancy it is performed. Guided by ultrasound, the abortionist grabs the baby's leg with forceps. This baby is anywhere from 20 weeks, into the third trimester, 30 weeks or more old. At 23 weeks, babies can survive with the new surfactant drugs and the like. It is not a high probability. Just remember a couple of years ago when that young girl in Texas was down in that well, and for 80 hours the American public was just riveted on what was going to happen to that little girl. People cried and wept when we saved that little girl. Well, these are little girls and little boys. They are not inch blobs of tissue. These are little girls and little boys. These are viable babies, not tissue--viable babies. The doctor grabs the legs and pulls it into the birth canal feet first. That is a breech delivery. It is a dangerous delivery. No physician would ever deliver a baby deliberately breech if there was an alternative. So they deliver the baby breech. It is dangerous to the mother to deliver a breech baby. The baby's entire body is delivered, with the exception of the head. Nurse Brenda Shafer, who testified here, talked about the arms and legs of the baby moving outside of the mother. At that point, the abortionist takes a pair of scissors and, by feel, jams the scissors into the base of the skull for one purpose, to kill the baby, and creates a hole and takes a suction catheter, a powerful one, and suctions the baby's brains out until the head collapses, and then the rest of the baby is delivered. This is the procedure that people say they are outraged that we are trying to stop? Can you imagine? Can you imagine that people are outraged that we want to stop this? It is outrageous that we want to stop this? I have seen many reasons for outrage, justifiable outrage. Stopping this, people are outraged? What have we become when we become outraged? I yield 10 minutes to the Senator from Oklahoma.

Mr. SANTORUM. Mr. President, I yield 10 minutes to the Senator from Vermont.

Mr. SANTORUM. I yield, first, to the Senator from Utah.

Mr. SANTORUM. Mr. President, I yield 3 minutes to the Senator from Texas.

Mr. SANTORUM. Mr. President, I yield to the Senator from Alaska 3 minutes.

Mr. SANTORUM. Mr. President, I ask the Senator from New Jersey the question I asked the Senator from California.