What Congress did in the Schiavo Case and why - By Reps. Simpson and Otter

What Congress did in the Schiavo Case and why - By Reps. Simpson and Otter

Washington, D.C. - There are few more ardent advocates of the 10th Amendment than Idaho's two members of the U.S. House of Representatives. We are staunch supporters of state sovereignty, and of minimizing the federal government's influence on our lives. However, it is individual rights - not those of states - that are at the heart of the U.S. Constitution.

History has shown us that, on extraordinarily rare occasions, it becomes necessary for the federal government to intervene on behalf of individuals whose 14th Amendment rights to legal due process and equal protection may be violated by a state. Such was the case in the 1960s when some states sought to deny citizens their civil rights based on race. Such was the case shortly after midnight on March 21 as Congress passed legislation authorizing a review of Terri Schiavo's case in federal court.

This was not a decision made lightly or without regard for its implications. However, it also was not - as some have characterized it - a case of Congress seeking to impose its will on what should be a personal and private matter. Allowing the diminution of anyone's basic civil rights, the disabled no less than the unborn, puts us all at risk. There can be no greater purpose for government than protecting life, liberty and property. If a state fails in its duty to do so, the Constitution empowers Congress to act.

Indeed, the Constitution gives Congress complete authority over the jurisdiction of federal courts. The bill that was adopted 203-58 early Monday, with our support, is an appropriate exercise of congressional authority directing that a federal court should hear Mrs. Schiavo's case solely to ensure none of her federal rights were denied by the state court.

The bill did not direct the restoration of feeding tubes for Terri Schiavo. It did not overturn or direct the reversal of state court rulings. All it did was provide a double check in federal court to make sure none of her constitutional rights were violated.

Beyond the tragic facts of Mrs. Schiavo's circumstances and the legal issues involved, her case provides an important reminder of the need for individuals to establish and maintain a living will and assign durable power of attorney for health care before the need arises. There are many resources available online or through physicians, attorneys, hospitals or nursing homes for inexpensive or no-cost forms and instructions to meet these critical planning goals.

We urge everyone to take advantage of this opportunity to avoid the kind of turmoil and misery that now is surrounding Mrs. Schiavo and her loved ones. Legally document your wishes in the event of terminal illness or other conditions under which medical care decisions must be made on your behalf.

Death is inevitable. We all face it eventually. It is vital that each of us takes the time, before it becomes imperative, to decide how we will face death or prolong life. Such decisions should be based on our own conscience and beliefs, with advice from our doctors and clergy, not on hearsay, the persuasiveness of lawyers or even the wisdom of judges.

It is the responsibility of government to be the arbiter of conflicts between individuals when other means of mediation fail. In the case of Terri Schiavo, or anyone else lacking the ability to represent their own best interests, it is incumbent upon government not to force a particular result but to ensure individual rights are protected.

Each of us has it within our power to forestall government's undue involvement in our lives when we are at our most vulnerable. Please avail yourselves of that opportunity, so that the most personal of decisions about life and death is yours alone to make.

http://www.house.gov/apps/list/press/id02_simpson/schiavo_case.html