Providing for Consideration of H.R. 1997 Unborn Victims of Violence Act of 2004

PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF H.R. 1997, UNBORN VICTIMS OF VIOLENCE ACT OF 2004 -- (House of Representatives - February 25, 2004)

Mr. LINDER. Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 529 and ask for its immediate consideration.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Ms. BALDWIN. Mr. Speaker, I rise to register my opposition to this rule and the underlying bill, and I rise to ask my colleagues to look at this legislation for what it is, not for what it claims to be.

We all agree that acts of violence against pregnant women are tragic, and our criminal justice system should respond decisively to them. Those committing these abhorrent crimes should be punished to the full extent of the law.

Unfortunately, the bill we will be considering under this rule has another agenda, and that is to erode and undermine the Roe v. Wade decision by treating an embryo or fetus at any stage of development as an individual with extensive legal rights, distinct from the mother. But if we really want to punish crimes that are committed against pregnant women, we can do so in ways that do not tangle this issue with the abortion debate.

As a member of the Committee on the Judiciary, I was joined by several of my colleagues during the markup of this bill in offering amendments that would have extricated this issue from abortion politics by clarifying its purpose. My amendment, along with amendments offered by the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Lofgren) and the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Scott), sought to focus squarely on the issue of preventing and punishing violence against women and particularly pregnant women. The rejection of these amendments clearly reveals that supporters of this bill have another objective, and that is to legislate fetal personhood as a foundation for depriving women of their right to make their own reproductive decisions.

Violence against women remains a huge problem in today's society; and, yes, we absolutely should focus our efforts on addressing this issue. According to a Commonwealth Fund survey, nearly one in every three adult women experiences at least one physical assault by a partner during adulthood. That is a staggering figure: one out of every three women. And the risk of violence does increase for pregnant women. In fact, murder is the number one cause of death to pregnant women. But this bill will do nothing to protect pregnant women from violence. In fact, the bill makes no mention of the primary victim of violence, the pregnant woman, and instead creates a new cause of action on behalf of the unborn. This is a step backwards for victims of domestic violence. Once again, the attention of the legal system is being turned away from efforts to punish violence against women. Instead of protecting women, this bill lays the groundwork for establishing fetal personhood and eroding the foundation of a woman's right to choose.

I have long been a strong supporter of the Violence Against Women Act, which expanded protections for women against callous acts of violence. I believe we are better served by laws that protect women, pregnant and nonpregnant alike, from the violence than we are by creating a whole new legal framework to establish and protect fetal rights. By switching the focus of the crime from the pregnant woman to the unborn child, we are diverting attention from the problem we should be focused upon, violence against women. Think about it. You cannot do this sort of harm or cause these sorts of injuries to a fetus without harming and injuring the mother.

If we are sincere in our desire to punish crimes committed against pregnant women, then we should be addressing that issue without tangling it in abortion politics. Let us abandon this thinly veiled attack on abortion rights that is the Unborn Victims of Violence Act and address the true issue by providing real punishments for criminals who attack pregnant women.

I urge my colleagues to vote against this rule and underlying bill.