Court Decision Energizes Abortion Debate on Hill

Copyright © 2009 National Public Radio®. For personal, noncommercial use only. See Terms of Use. For other uses, prior permission required.

STEVE INSKEEP, host:

It's MORNING EDITION from NPR News. I'm Steve Inskeep.

This week, we've been talking about the fallout from last week's Supreme Court decision upholding what was called the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act. We've heard from advocates on both sides of this debate. And today we have more viewpoints. In a few moments, we'll hear from an ethicist on how medical progress has changed the abortion debate over many years.

First, NPR's Julie Rovner has this story about how last week's decision may alter the abortion debate on Capitol Hill.

JULIE ROVNER: Members of Congress who support abortion rights wasted no time reacting to the court's decision. The very next day they reintroduced the bill known as the Freedom of Choice Act. New York Democrat Jerrold Nadler is the measure's House sponsor.

Representative JERROLD NADLER (Democrat, New York): This legislation would for the first time codify the rights guaranteed under the Constitution by Roe v. Wade. It would bar government at any level from interfering with a woman's fundamental right to choose to bear a child or to terminate a pregnancy.

ROVNER: Roe vs. Wade, of course, was the landmark 1973 Supreme Court decision that legalized abortion nationwide. But abortion opponents like Douglas Johnson of the National Right to Life Committee say the Freedom of Choice Act would go much further than simply writing Roe into law. It would also overturn many abortion restrictions that the court has allowed under Roe, including the law upheld last week.

Mr. DOUGLAS JOHNSON (Legislative Director, National Right to Life Committee): So it's not just Roe vs. Wade in the bill. It basically is a bill that ban any limitations on abortion either federal or state. That's way outside the mainstream of public opinion and it would not command a majority in either house of Congress.

ROVNER: Which is something even the bill's supporters, like Hawaii Democrat Mazie Hirono, acknowledged last week when the bill was introduced.

Ms. MAZIE HIRONO (Democrat, Hawaii): We obviously need to garner a lot more support in order to get this legislation passed, but our lives depend upon it.

ROVNER: Abortion rights lawmakers are hoping for the bounce in public opinion that usually comes when the Supreme Court rules in favor of the other side in the debate. Pro-life rulings tend to mobilize pro-choice forces, and vice versa. At least that's been the pattern over the past 34 years.

But Clyde Wilcox, a government professor at Georgetown University, says the public may not see last week's Supreme Court decision upholding the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act as significant enough to change many minds.

Professor CLYDE WILCOX (Political Science, Georgetown University): If this case had been more sweeping, if this ruling had really done a lot more than it actually ended up doing, then I think there wouldn't be a big backlash that could have created, you know, more sentiment for a national legislation, but I don't think right now.

ROVNER: So the Freedom of Choice Act is unlikely to go anywhere. But there could still be plenty of abortion fights in Congress this year. Douglas Johnson of National Right to Life says he'll be paying close attention to the dozen annual spending bills getting drafted in the coming weeks to make sure Democrats don't strip out anti-abortion language he's worked hard to add.

Mr. JOHNSON: These bills carry provisions that embody important pro-life policies that have been adapted over the past decades. The Hyde Amendment is the best known of these, prohibiting most federal funding of abortion, but there are a number of others.

ROVNER: For example, language banning the U.S. government from funding international family planning groups that use other funds to perform or counsel women about abortion, and language allowing workers in federally funded family planning clinics to opt out of providing abortion counseling.

Johnson says he fully expects Democrats to try to remove many of the provisions.

Mr. JOHNSON: If they do that, they're going to touch off an enormous conflict in the Congress. They may very well get into a veto confrontations with the president. They may very well end up killing some of their appropriation bills.

ROVNER: Because, Johnson said, the president would likely veto such bills and Congress would lack the votes to override those vetoes. It wouldn't be the first time. In 1989, President Bush's father vetoed the multi-billion dollar spending bill for the Department of Health and Human Services over abortion language. The president ultimately won that showdown, but only by a handful of votes.

Julie Rovner, NPR News, Washington.

Copyright ©2009 National Public Radio®. All rights reserved. No quotes from the materials contained herein may be used in any media without attribution to National Public Radio. This transcript is provided for personal, noncommercial use only, pursuant to our Terms of Use. Any other use requires NPR's prior permission. Visit our permissions page for further information.

NPR transcripts are created on a rush deadline by a contractor for NPR, and accuracy and availability may vary. This text may not be in its final form and may be updated or revised in the future. Please be aware that the authoritative record of NPR's programming is the audio.