Return to Transcripts main page
Live From...
Will House of Representatives Ban Controversial Abortion Procedure?
Aired June 04, 2003 - 15:13 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
JUDY WOODRUFF, CNN ANCHOR: Here in Washington, the House of Representatives is moving toward a vote on whether to ban a controversial abortion procedure. The measure would ban a certain type of late-term procedure opponents call partial birth abortion. It already has passed the Senate, and it is expected to pass the House by a comfortable margin.
President Bush has said he will sign the bill. Now, abortion rights groups are vowing to go to court immediately to challenge the law if it is approved. With me now to talk a little more about this expected ban are Gloria Felt -- she is with Planned Parenthood; she's joining us from New York -- and here in Washington, Sandy Rios with Concerned Women for America. Good to see both of you.
Gloria Felt, I'm going to start with you. The Senate passed this two to one overwhelmingly a few months ago. The House is supposed to pass it with a comfortable margin. This has been going on for some time. The president is going to sign it.
Are you and other pro-choice advocates really running out of options here? Where do you go from here?
GLORIA FELT, PLANNED PARENTHOOD: Well, it is important for people to understand what this legislation does. And so the first thing we want to do is make that very clear. This legislation is something that would make it impossible for women and families and doctors to make their own decisions about medical care, health care. It doesn't have an exception to deal with the situation when a woman's health is at risk.
It actually will be unconstitutional if the same Supreme Court is sitting when it gets to the Supreme Court. The proponents of this bill have not included measures that would adequately deal with women's health. And you know it would make it impossible for a doctor to know if he's going to be sent to jail just for providing the best care to his or her patient.
WOODRUFF: Let's talk about the constitutionality question. Sandy Rios, we know that courts have already opted for a broader exception to take care of the health of the woman. Isn't this a situation where you are facing a likely knock down in the courts?
SANDY RIOS, CONCERNED WOMEN FOR AMERICA: I don't think so, because this piece of legislation was drafted very carefully to prevent that. And I might add, also, Judy, this it is not controversial. It's only controversial to people like Gloria.
This is a heinous, horrible procedure, where a baby is delivered at late term up to its neck, and then delivered breach, and then scissors inserted in its neck, brain sucked out and skull crushed. It is such a horrible procedure that the American people have no controversy over this. Neither did both houses of Congress.
The House of Representatives four times passed this ban. The Senate, this is their third time. It's not controversial.
FELT: If I may say, when it has been brought to a vote of the people, as it has been in several states, the voters have rejected this kind of measure on ballot initiatives. So people really do understand; the public does understand.
(CROSSTALK)
RIOS: Gloria, if they get...
WOODRUFF: All right. Let's let...
FELT: ... it keeps doctors from being able to provide the best care to their patients.
RIOS: Gloria, your spin is really good, but it's not true. This is a horrible procedure. We would not do this to our puppies. And when people have the full truth about it, they support the position that it should be banned.
That's why the House and Senate have done it so faithfully so many times. And that's why this president will sign it. There is no defense. Even a woman's health.
And let me just say to explain to both of you, as you both know, if a partial birth abortion is performed in the way I just described, which it is, a woman whose health is not at risk will not be any safer having a full-term delivery than she would be in a partial birth abortion. Both procedures are very traumatic for a woman's body.
WOODRUFF: All right. Let me get Gloria Felt to respond to that point.
FELT: The fact is that this legislation would not prevent any abortions. And if Sandy and the other proponents of this legislation really cared about women's health and about preventing the need for abortions, they would be joining with us, with Planned Parenthood and with others, and, in fact, with senators who have tried to promote prevention programs, family planning.
They've submitted amendments to this legislation that would increase access to family planning to prevent abortions. But that's what they don't want. They want to make this a political issue when it shouldn't be a political issue. It should be a health issue for woman.
RIOS: Gloria, the brutal murder of a late-term baby dismembered is not a political issue.
FELT: It's not even about late term. This applies...
RIOS: I'm a mother, and I'm sure you are, too.
FELT: This applies at any time during pregnancy.
RIOS: So what's the difference?
FELT: It is not about a particular time in pregnancy.
RIOS: All right. So it's better if we do it at three weeks, if we take this baby and crush its skull and suck its brains out?
FELT: So you're acknowledging that you don't want women to have access to safe abortion at any time during pregnancy, is that correct?
RIOS: Yes, I would, Gloria.
FELT: I thought so.
RIOS: I think life is sacred.
FELT: But that's not where the American public is at all?
RIOS: (UNINTELLIGIBLE) life is sacred?
FELT: Well, I think the public has been misinformed. And, by the way, the public -- the "Newsweek" poll you saw, 48 percent of them believe that life begins at conception or at least at fertilization. So the American public really is not on the same page with you, Gloria.
WOODRUFF: Let's get back to the court argument. Gloria Felt, what about this notion? Are you hanging all of your hope at this point on the idea that the courts are going to overturn what Congress is doing?
FELT: Well, we will certainly be in court probably the very same day that the president signs this bill. And we believe that, based on the (UNINTELLIGIBLE) decision of the Supreme Court several years ago, that this bill will be found unconstitutional for two reasons.
First, because it does not contain an adequate provision for the health of the woman. And, second, because the language is so broad that a doctor doesn't know what would send him or her to jail. But, that's with the existing Supreme Court.
What the proponents of this bill would like to see is that, by the time it comes to the U.S. Supreme Court, there will be a new Supreme Court. And that Supreme Court might just find it constitutional.
WOODRUFF: And, Sandy Rios, that has to be a hope of yours?
RIOS: Well, absolutely. And I think Gloria is being overly optimistic about her hopes in the court. This is a heinous procedure, and I really think, Gloria, even in your quiet moments, you must have to admit that this is not something that a civilized society must allow. I don't believe you believe that.
WOODRUFF: We are going to have to leave it there. Sandy Rios, Concerned Women for America, Gloria Felt with Planned Parenthood, thank you both.
FELT: Thank you, Judy.
RIOS: Thank you, Judy.
WOODRUFF: A very difficult topic, and clearly not much agreement at all in this discussion on it.
TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com
Procedure?>
Aired June 4, 2003 - 15:13 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
JUDY WOODRUFF, CNN ANCHOR: Here in Washington, the House of Representatives is moving toward a vote on whether to ban a controversial abortion procedure. The measure would ban a certain type of late-term procedure opponents call partial birth abortion. It already has passed the Senate, and it is expected to pass the House by a comfortable margin.
President Bush has said he will sign the bill. Now, abortion rights groups are vowing to go to court immediately to challenge the law if it is approved. With me now to talk a little more about this expected ban are Gloria Felt -- she is with Planned Parenthood; she's joining us from New York -- and here in Washington, Sandy Rios with Concerned Women for America. Good to see both of you.
Gloria Felt, I'm going to start with you. The Senate passed this two to one overwhelmingly a few months ago. The House is supposed to pass it with a comfortable margin. This has been going on for some time. The president is going to sign it.
Are you and other pro-choice advocates really running out of options here? Where do you go from here?
GLORIA FELT, PLANNED PARENTHOOD: Well, it is important for people to understand what this legislation does. And so the first thing we want to do is make that very clear. This legislation is something that would make it impossible for women and families and doctors to make their own decisions about medical care, health care. It doesn't have an exception to deal with the situation when a woman's health is at risk.
It actually will be unconstitutional if the same Supreme Court is sitting when it gets to the Supreme Court. The proponents of this bill have not included measures that would adequately deal with women's health. And you know it would make it impossible for a doctor to know if he's going to be sent to jail just for providing the best care to his or her patient.
WOODRUFF: Let's talk about the constitutionality question. Sandy Rios, we know that courts have already opted for a broader exception to take care of the health of the woman. Isn't this a situation where you are facing a likely knock down in the courts?
SANDY RIOS, CONCERNED WOMEN FOR AMERICA: I don't think so, because this piece of legislation was drafted very carefully to prevent that. And I might add, also, Judy, this it is not controversial. It's only controversial to people like Gloria.
This is a heinous, horrible procedure, where a baby is delivered at late term up to its neck, and then delivered breach, and then scissors inserted in its neck, brain sucked out and skull crushed. It is such a horrible procedure that the American people have no controversy over this. Neither did both houses of Congress.
The House of Representatives four times passed this ban. The Senate, this is their third time. It's not controversial.
FELT: If I may say, when it has been brought to a vote of the people, as it has been in several states, the voters have rejected this kind of measure on ballot initiatives. So people really do understand; the public does understand.
(CROSSTALK)
RIOS: Gloria, if they get...
WOODRUFF: All right. Let's let...
FELT: ... it keeps doctors from being able to provide the best care to their patients.
RIOS: Gloria, your spin is really good, but it's not true. This is a horrible procedure. We would not do this to our puppies. And when people have the full truth about it, they support the position that it should be banned.
That's why the House and Senate have done it so faithfully so many times. And that's why this president will sign it. There is no defense. Even a woman's health.
And let me just say to explain to both of you, as you both know, if a partial birth abortion is performed in the way I just described, which it is, a woman whose health is not at risk will not be any safer having a full-term delivery than she would be in a partial birth abortion. Both procedures are very traumatic for a woman's body.
WOODRUFF: All right. Let me get Gloria Felt to respond to that point.
FELT: The fact is that this legislation would not prevent any abortions. And if Sandy and the other proponents of this legislation really cared about women's health and about preventing the need for abortions, they would be joining with us, with Planned Parenthood and with others, and, in fact, with senators who have tried to promote prevention programs, family planning.
They've submitted amendments to this legislation that would increase access to family planning to prevent abortions. But that's what they don't want. They want to make this a political issue when it shouldn't be a political issue. It should be a health issue for woman.
RIOS: Gloria, the brutal murder of a late-term baby dismembered is not a political issue.
FELT: It's not even about late term. This applies...
RIOS: I'm a mother, and I'm sure you are, too.
FELT: This applies at any time during pregnancy.
RIOS: So what's the difference?
FELT: It is not about a particular time in pregnancy.
RIOS: All right. So it's better if we do it at three weeks, if we take this baby and crush its skull and suck its brains out?
FELT: So you're acknowledging that you don't want women to have access to safe abortion at any time during pregnancy, is that correct?
RIOS: Yes, I would, Gloria.
FELT: I thought so.
RIOS: I think life is sacred.
FELT: But that's not where the American public is at all?
RIOS: (UNINTELLIGIBLE) life is sacred?
FELT: Well, I think the public has been misinformed. And, by the way, the public -- the "Newsweek" poll you saw, 48 percent of them believe that life begins at conception or at least at fertilization. So the American public really is not on the same page with you, Gloria.
WOODRUFF: Let's get back to the court argument. Gloria Felt, what about this notion? Are you hanging all of your hope at this point on the idea that the courts are going to overturn what Congress is doing?
FELT: Well, we will certainly be in court probably the very same day that the president signs this bill. And we believe that, based on the (UNINTELLIGIBLE) decision of the Supreme Court several years ago, that this bill will be found unconstitutional for two reasons.
First, because it does not contain an adequate provision for the health of the woman. And, second, because the language is so broad that a doctor doesn't know what would send him or her to jail. But, that's with the existing Supreme Court.
What the proponents of this bill would like to see is that, by the time it comes to the U.S. Supreme Court, there will be a new Supreme Court. And that Supreme Court might just find it constitutional.
WOODRUFF: And, Sandy Rios, that has to be a hope of yours?
RIOS: Well, absolutely. And I think Gloria is being overly optimistic about her hopes in the court. This is a heinous procedure, and I really think, Gloria, even in your quiet moments, you must have to admit that this is not something that a civilized society must allow. I don't believe you believe that.
WOODRUFF: We are going to have to leave it there. Sandy Rios, Concerned Women for America, Gloria Felt with Planned Parenthood, thank you both.
FELT: Thank you, Judy.
RIOS: Thank you, Judy.
WOODRUFF: A very difficult topic, and clearly not much agreement at all in this discussion on it.
TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com
Procedure?>
