Floor Statement of Judiciary Chairman Bob Goodlatte on H.R. 36, the Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act
Chairman Goodlatte: Since the Supreme Court’s decision in Roe v. Wade, medical knowledge regarding the development of unborn babies and their capacities at various stages of growth has advanced dramatically. To give you a sense of how much technology has advanced, here’s the issue of the New York Times announcing the Roe v. Wade decision in 1973. It contained ads for the latest in advanced technology, including a computer the size of a file cabinet you could rent for $3,000 a month that only had one-thousandth the memory of a modern cell phone, and a basic AM radio that was as big as your hand.
Thirty-five years later, in the age of 3D ultrasound pictures, the same newspaper would report on the latest advanced research on the pain experienced by unborn children, focusing on the research of Dr. Sunny Anand, an Oxford-trained neonatal pediatrician who held an appointment at Harvard Medical School. As Dr. Anand has testified regarding abortions: “If the fetus is beyond 20 weeks of gestation, I would assume that there will be pain caused to the fetus. And I believe it will be severe and excruciating pain.”
A few years later, the terrifying facts uncovered in the grand jury report regarding the prosecution of late-term abortionist Kermit Gosnell would contain references to a neonatal expert who said the cutting of babies’ spinal cords intended to be late-term aborted would cause them, and I quote, “a tremendous amount of pain.”
Congress has the power, and the responsibility, to acknowledge these developments in our understanding of the ability of unborn children to feel pain by prohibiting abortions after 20 weeks of pregnancy, post-fertilization -- the point at which scientific evidence shows the unborn can experience great suffering. The bill before us would do just that. It also includes provisions to protect the life of the mother, and additional exceptions for cases of rape and incest.
Some Members, last Congress and today, have called this bill extreme. But such claims are clearly false, as evidenced by the polls, which show astounding support for this bill. A Quinnipiac poll found that 62% of people surveyed supported a ban on abortions after 20 weeks or earlier. A clear majority of men, women, whites, blacks, Hispanics, married people, and single people support a ban on abortion after 20 weeks or earlier. Among women, 68% of women support a ban on abortion at 20 weeks or earlier, including 66% of single women, and 71% of married women. Even 49% of the Democrats polled supported a ban on abortion at 20 weeks or earlier, significantly more than those who opposed it.
A Washington Post poll similarly found 66% support for this bill, and a Huffington Post poll found support at 59%.
Today, America is one of the few countries on Earth – including North Korea and China – that allows permissive late-term abortions. These polls show the American people want to change that.
In the 2007 case of Gonzales v. Carhart, the Supreme Court made clear that -- and I quote -- “The government may use its voice and its regulatory authority to show its profound respect for the life within the woman,” and that Congress may show such respect for the unborn through “specific regulation because it implicates additional ethical and moral concerns that justify a special prohibition.” As we see from the polls, a majority of just about all demographic groups surveyed shows the same profound respect for the life within the woman that this bill would protect.
As the New York Times story published 35 years after Roe v. Wade concluded, throughout history “a presumed insensitivity to pain has been used to exclude some from humanity’s privileges and protections … Over time, the charmed circle of those considered alive to pain, and therefore fully human, has widened to include members of other religions and races, the poor, the criminal, the mentally ill — and, thanks to the work of [Dr.] Sunny Anand and others, the very young.”
Today is the second anniversary of Kermit Gosnell’s conviction for first degree murder. Following the Gosnell trial, we were all reminded that when late-term babies are taken from the womb and cut with scissors, they whimper and cry and flinch from pain. And unborn babies when cut inside the womb also whimper and cry, and flinch from pain. Delivered or not, babies are babies, and they can feel pain at least by 20 weeks. It is time to welcome young children who can feel pain into the human family. And this bill, at last, will do just that.
Finally, I would note that it is rare for the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office to be so confident that a bill would save lives that it makes an estimate as to the number of lives that would be saved were the bill to be enacted. But the CBO did just that, conservatively estimating that this bill, if enacted, would save 2,500 lives each year. It could save many thousands more. Let that sink in for a moment. This bill, if enacted, would probably save, at a minimum, almost three thousand lives per year. It would give America the gift of thousands more children, and consequently thousands more mothers, and thousands more fathers, with all the wondrous human gifts they will bring to the world in so many amazing forms, including their own children, for generations to come.
I congratulate Subcommittee on the Constitution and Civil Justice Chairman Trent Franks for introducing this vital legislation, and l urge each of my colleagues to support it – if not on behalf of unborn children, then on behalf of the American voters you represent, who overwhelmingly support this bill.