iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Laura Bassett
GET UPDATES FROM Laura:

Abortion Ban Proposed For D.C. Sparks Fierce Debate In Congress

Posted: Updated: 05/18/2012 12:16 am

Dc Abortion Ban
Rep. Trent Franks (R-Ariz.)

A nationwide ban on abortions after 20 weeks of pregnancy would be difficult to push through both chambers of Congress, but Rep. Trent Franks (R-Ariz.) is taking his chances on a consolation prize: a 20-week abortion ban in the District of Columbia.

The District of Columbia Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act (H.R. 3803) would ban abortions after 20 weeks of pregnancy in Washington, D.C., unless the mother's life is in danger. Franks, the sponsor of the bill, held a congressional hearing on the bill on Thursday in which he called abortions after 20 weeks "the greatest human rights atrocity occurring on U.S soil."

Supreme Court precedent prevents U.S. states from banning abortions before the fetus is viable outside the womb, which doctors estimate to occur between 22 and 24 weeks of gestation. So far, seven conservative states have banned abortions after 20 weeks based on the highly contested claim that fetuses feel pain at that point.

The law has sparked more than just an abortion rights debate, because it allows representatives who were not elected by D.C. residents to write a law that affects their constitutionally protected right to have an abortion up until the fetus is viable outside of the womb. D.C.'s one elected representative, Delegate Eleanor Holmes Norton, has no vote in Congress and was denied the chance to testify against the bill at the hearing on behalf of her constituents, who she says are overwhelmingly opposed to the bill.

Franks, chairman of the House Judiciary Subcommittee on the Constitution, said the usual protocol is for the minority party to offer one witness and the majority to offer three. While Democrats were given the opportunity to choose Norton as their witness, to do so would have sacrificed the opportunity to put forth a medical expert on the issue of fetal pain or a woman with a personal experience to share.

Democratic lawmakers were furious that Norton was not given a second slot in which to testify, as most other committees allow. Rep. Jerry Nadler (D-N.Y.) said it has been a tradition in Congress for decades to allow members of Congress to testify, especially on bills that directly affect their constituents, without using up a witness spot. "It's highly obnoxious and violates all customs in Congress," he said. "Never have I seen a colleague treated so contentiously. It is unconscionable that she is not able to testify."

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) also weighed in on the controversy at a press conference Thursday morning. "What are they afraid of? The facts? The impact on the District of Columbia? The persuasiveness of the congresswoman to represent her people?" she asked. "I don't even know whose idea that was."

Before the hearing, Norton did speak at a press conference, where she made it clear that she and most of D.C.'s residents oppose the abortion ban.

"It is difficult to approach today's hearing with anything short of disgust and anger, because this is the second time in the 112th Congress that this very same subcommittee has targeted our city, its women and its health care providers," she said. "There's been a debate as to whether Republicans are waging a war on women. Well, I can tell you this: It feels like a war on women in the District of Columbia. We will never accept second-class treatment of our city."

House Republicans brought three doctors and medical experts to the hearing as witnesses, all of whom claimed that fetuses can feel pain at 20 weeks.

The Democrats chose as their witness Christy Zink, a George Washington University professor who chose to have an abortion at 21 weeks of pregnancy after doctors discovered her baby was missing half of his brain and would likely have spent most of his life having seizures. She said if the 20-week ban had been in place in D.C. at the time of her pregnancy, she would have been forced to carry the baby to term, which would have inflicted pain and hardship on her family.

"The decision I made to have an abortion at almost 22 weeks was made out of love and to spare my son's pain and suffering," she said. "I am horrified to think that the doctors who compassionately but objectively explained to us the prognosis and our options for medical treatment, and the doctor who helped us terminate the pregnancy, would be prosecuted as criminals under this law for providing basic medical care and expertise."

Jennifer Bendery contributed reporting.

Also on HuffPost:

FOLLOW POLITICS
Subscribe to the HuffPost Hill newsletter!
A nationwide ban on abortions after 20 weeks of pregnancy would be difficult to push through both chambers of Congress, but Rep. Trent Franks (R-Ariz.) is taking his chances on a consolation prize: a ...
A nationwide ban on abortions after 20 weeks of pregnancy would be difficult to push through both chambers of Congress, but Rep. Trent Franks (R-Ariz.) is taking his chances on a consolation prize: a ...
 
 
  • Comments
  • 1,973
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Post Comment Preview Comment
To reply to a Comment: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to.
View All
Favorites
Highlights
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (30 total)
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
John Hazelton Smith
Don't get caught...
05:02 PM on 05/27/2012
I'm very much for abortion and I am in the minority of my right winged republican brothers but after 20 weeks, you should know if you want a child or it the child will have some crazy birth defects. i also think abortion should be mandatory for any woman under the age of 18 who isn't married. that would stop all of this teenage pregnancy.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
notatowniegirl
03:07 PM on 05/28/2012
If it's not your uterus, it's not your business.
photo
ColinFromLasVegas
Bang the cowbell LOUDER, rightwingers!
02:11 PM on 05/27/2012
I recently saw demonstrations comprised of women shouting out in unison, "We will remember...in November."

I'm sure they will.

One thing I learned when I was young is that you don't make women mad.

They NEVER EVER forget.

You'll be ordering in an Italian restaurant and out of the blue, she'll bring up something you did that made her mad like two years ago.

I feel sorry for Tea/Republicans nationwide. You're doomed.

The women vote out here, just in and of itself, is going to crush this extreme right wing radical ideology once and for all. Not only immediately after the election, but for a few generations or so.
photo
smduib
truth is not relative
04:04 PM on 05/20/2012
As a woman and a mother, I feel the real "war on women" is not only convincing women that it's okay to kill their offspring, but that it's their right. It goes against our nature and belittles our feminity.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
giftsthatpurr
zestful life
02:10 PM on 05/27/2012
LOL - greagt satire.
photo
goatini
We are two-legged wombs, that’s all
04:04 PM on 05/28/2012
especially since "offspring" would seem to imply that something had already sprung off, as in, been BORN. It is obvious that supporters of reproductive justice want unnecessary deaths to STOP.
11:15 AM on 05/19/2012
Why is this big government intrusion acceptable?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
giftsthatpurr
zestful life
02:11 PM on 05/27/2012
It is not.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
ennis438
10:05 PM on 05/18/2012
The same Republipunk Taliban who are fine with DC not having a say in presidential elections, having no representation in Congress , and want to make sure this continues due to most residents being alien to their anti-American , terrorist agenda, now have to put up with Taliban desire to ban abortion in DC. Perhaps taking to the streets to protest Taliban policy is the only way for Dc residents to express their disdane for Republipunk Taliban policy, since they can't have any representation in Congress to protest.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
09:49 PM on 05/18/2012
Innocent babies should be protected from being killed by their mothers, including in the time between conception and birth.

Abortion needs to be outlawed.
12:10 AM on 05/19/2012
No babies, innocent or otherwise exist before birth, nor do teenagers, senior citizens or tweens.

Ignorance and idiocy need to be outlawed. See what happens when you fail to adequately educate the populace? People who don't understand the only language they speak or even the most basic facts of biology.

Babies are already protected from being killed by anyone, I'm truly puzzled that you seem to be unaware of this.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
12:25 AM on 05/19/2012
Science - specifically genetics - affirms that the life of each baby human being begins with their conception.

Not before.

Not after.
01:31 AM on 05/19/2012
This is to synergie, cwebster and killermolls: The zygote/embryo/fetus, having the DNA code necessary to make all the aspects of an individual, are present at conception. This makes the fetus a human being, without any doubt. It is a human being the entire time, just at different stages of development. This is not a subjective point, it is fact. Check out the Carnegie Stages of Human Development. And why do you keep calling it an egg CWebster? If we’re talking about eggs, then we’re talking about ovuation. Anyway, heartbeats can now be recorded at 14 days post-conception. Fetal brainwaves at 39 days post-conception. We define death as the absence of those but we refuse to define life as the presence of those? Explain that to me.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
cwebster
predominantly exasperated
12:22 AM on 05/19/2012
You signed up just to make such an inane post?
An egg is not a baby. An acorn is not an oak tree.
Study biology.
08:26 PM on 05/18/2012
I recently made the following tasteless post on this site.
Dr Caligari: "Since you’re against a woman's right to choose, do you know where I can get one of those cool plastic fetuses?"
After another pointless exchange (on my behalf) I received the following reply...

razorlaser on May 18, 2012 at 11:03:07
“You mu.rder them.
I call them br.ats.
I'll accept that.”

I'd like to let this person know something in the open
Hey there pardner.. I've written more offensive, tasteless comments on this site than analytical ones. I know I've offended people. I can never erase some of the crap that I have come up with, however, I've never flat out called an individual on this board a murderer.
Listen up. Someone very close to me had an ectopic pregnancy a few years ago.
It required an emergency abortion or this person would die. The fetus was viable and it was horrible tragedy, but this person is alive now.
So when you flat out call me a murderer when discussing this issue, I get sensitive.
I'm ashamed at some of the comments I've made here before but something good has come out of this. You've inspired me. From this post on I will never insult another person again. I may disagree with them, but no venom will be contained in the language, however, for cathartic purposes. Politicians and ideology are raw meat
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
08:55 AM on 05/19/2012
Dr....I think we all are guilty if allowing our frustration to get the best of us and making "tasteless, or angry comments" from time to time. I know I have too.

Sometimes it's so hard not to, when there are posters here who's whole point it to say things to change the subject, avoid intelligent discussion, to repeat blatant lies...or to personally attack others. I have actually had personally threatening replies from posters to my comments that were in no way personalized, just offering my opinions or factual rebuttal to an issue.

It feels like angry immature comebacks is the only kind of communication they understand. Not that that excuses my own angry frustrated senseless words.

I recently made the same decision you did..to try to only engage in reasoned discussion without personalizing my replies.

DANG it's hard! Good Luck.
07:36 PM on 05/19/2012
Thanks, that was a nice reply...peace...
photo
smduib
truth is not relative
05:14 PM on 05/20/2012
With an ectopic pregnancy, the baby would not be viable because it cannot survive in the fallopian tube. Saving the mother is always the correct way to go in this circumstance, pro life or not.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
misterzay
Hate is not a congenital disease
03:42 PM on 05/18/2012
Once again they frame it as a "pro-life" issue, which is absolute bullchit. This is an "anti-choice" issue and no one has the right to make those choices for anyone but themselves.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Tanya OaksBrooks
Sarcastic, left-wing, science-loving rocker chick
05:46 PM on 05/18/2012
Exactly. They only care about "life" when it suits their own purposes. They don't want to help feed, clothe, shelter, or provide health care for that "life" once it is born, but they care SO much about it when it's a clump of cells. Fortunately, we're not as naive as the anti-choice people seem to think we are.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
misterzay
Hate is not a congenital disease
07:04 PM on 05/18/2012
The simple fact that this is even an issue in 2012 tells us how far we still have to go.
F&F
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
09:07 PM on 05/19/2012
It is inaccurate to claim that pro-lifers don't care about the needs of babies after birth.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
01:32 PM on 05/18/2012
These "lawmakers" actually believe they have their very own plantation to wreak havoc upon. The more I listen to republicans, the more I'm convinced that the three-fifths compromise of 1787 is their guiding light.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
cwebster
predominantly exasperated
08:14 PM on 05/18/2012
...and isn't that a scary thought?
01:22 PM on 05/18/2012
During pregnancy you have your second ultrasound between 18 and 22 weeks usually to determine the sex of the fetus. This is the first time a woman and her doctor have a clear visual of the fetus and are able to determine any complications. If a woman finds out the fetus may not be viable at 18 weeks she is now being rushed to decide whether to continue the pregnancy or not. If she doesn't have her ultrasound until 20 weeks, she now doesn't have the option to make a decision at all.
photo
smduib
truth is not relative
02:47 PM on 05/18/2012
Organ donation would be a selfless option in this terrible type of circumstance.
03:28 PM on 05/18/2012
Be that as it may organs would not be developed enough for donation. Also if a fetus is deemed nonviable it is usually because of organ defects, commonly heart, kidneys and lungs. On top of that it would still require the pregnancy to be terminated and by today's laws that would be illegal. The point is these decisions should be made by the parents and their doctors, not state or federal government.
12:13 AM on 05/19/2012
Whose organs are you talking about? You get that a fetus at 20 weeks is still developing organs right?
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
01:22 PM on 05/18/2012
Gay marriage and abortion are diversions to take away attention from an economy teetering on depression.

Where are the jobs ?

What are politicians doing about the fact that workers' share of national income is at an ALL-TIME low ?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
MarkInEugene
A blasphemy a day keeps the deities away.
01:22 PM on 05/18/2012
Stop voting against your own self interest!
Stop voting for the Party that has something negative to say about everyone!
Stop voting for the Party that wants to intefere in our personal lives!
Stop voting Republican!
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
cwebster
predominantly exasperated
08:16 PM on 05/18/2012
I cannot understand how anyone with more than 2 brain cells would vote Republican unless they are a rich, white male.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
09:10 PM on 05/19/2012
All MEN should vote pro-life.

Women being legally authorized to kill babies between conception and birth means that every man is being told by that situation that his daughters and sons can be killed over his objections with the backing of Big Government enforcing feminist theology.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
jmhprose
Proud American Liberal
01:19 PM on 05/18/2012
Repubs we are coming for you. Be warned. Women will not take this lying down. You have awakened a sleeping giant and come this November you will see. Down you will go. American woman will rise up. You my fellow Americans can go back to your caves. We will not go with you.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
09:50 PM on 05/18/2012
The REAL giant is all of the men who object to their children being killed / aborted by women.
12:17 AM on 05/19/2012
So all of these men who don't understand how biology or vocabulary work and who think that women exist to be their incubators and nothing more, are all going to assemble into one "real" giant construct of utter stupidity?

Will it be a surgical assembly?
02:26 AM on 05/19/2012
This post is even more incoherent than your others.
twodamngoon
Does a bear wear a funny hat? Wait, what did I say
01:17 PM on 05/18/2012
Once again ladies, if you cannot be trusted to make the correct decision on whether or not your life has any value at all compared to a nonviable blastocysthingy ( it doesn't, ask the church). Then why should you be allowed to speak,in public or otherwise? Regardless if you were the elected representative of the people or not? How could anyone in good conscience even let you vote?
Go Ladies!
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
giftsthatpurr
zestful life
04:43 PM on 05/27/2012
f/f
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
SuZQ22
12:57 PM on 05/18/2012
Another Neanderthal, go back to your cave, this is the 21st century!!
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
09:11 PM on 05/19/2012
Insulting Neanderthals is racist.
10:57 PM on 05/19/2012
No, it's speciesist, and comparing them to the anti-choice zealots is indeed abusive of their species of homonids.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
giftsthatpurr
zestful life
04:42 PM on 05/27/2012
f/f