Republican Senator James Lankford of Oklahoma spoke before the Senate on September 18 to emphasize the need for the “Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act,” a measure that would ensure infants who survive botched abortion attempts receive immediate medical attention and penalize medical professionals who flout the law.
Though Lankford called for action on the bill (S. 204) — which, as he reiterated, does not restrict abortion in any way — he was met with opposition, as one senator twisted the bill’s meaning to say it impacted women’s “reproductive healthcare” choices.
What is America going to do with a fully delivered, crying baby on the table? Will they get healthcare or will they not get healthcare?
Today, Democrats blocked my Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act, which would make sure babies born alive after a botched abortion… pic.twitter.com/YddyxnEhOj
— Sen. James Lankford (@SenatorLankford) September 18, 2024
Though the bill was first introduced in February 2023, it has gained little traction, and has been blocked by Democrats each time it has been presented. “Democrats are apparently so determined to ensure that the supposed right to kill unborn children is protected that they are willing to oppose a law to protect born children,” said the bill’s primary sponsor, Sen. John Thune, in June.
In this instance, Sen. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) claimed the bill would “target and intimidate reproductive healthcare providers and make it harder for women to access comprehensive, compassionate healthcare.” Durbin also said the bill would only “put politicians into private healthcare decisions.”
Durbin’s comments are nonsensical, and they echo those of other Democrats who have made outlandish claims to explain away their opposition to born-alive protection bills. In 2023, Rep. Jerry Nadler (D-N.Y.) voted against a similar bill, saying (emphasis added), “The problem with this bill is that it endangers some infants by stating that that infant must immediately be brought to the hospital. It directs and mandates certain medical care that may not be appropriate.”
Rep. Jan Schakowsky (D-Ill.) voted against the same bill with the bizarre claim that the legislation “requires immediately taking a struggling baby to a hospital. That hospital could be hours away and could be detrimental to the life of that baby.”
The alternative, of course, is leaving those babies to die. Death is more detrimental to the life of a baby than anything else.
Many notable members of the Democratic party, including Vice President Kamala Harris and Minnesota Governor Tim Walz, have voted against born alive measures, while Walz repealed abortion reporting legislation in his state to ensure that the number of babies born due to botched abortions would not be tracked. In their repeated dismissal of legislation that has nothing to do with regulating abortion but only seeks to care for infants already born, critics have charged that many members of the Democratic party have shown their true colors: they don’t care about women and children.
Carol Tobias, president of National Right to Life, responded to Lankford’s effort.
“We thank Senator Lankford for championing the ‘Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act’ and working to protect babies born alive following an abortion,” she said. “The evidence is shocking. A baby born alive following an abortion is considered a ‘complication’ by abortionists, but she is a living baby deserving the full protection of the law. This bill is not about abortion but pro-abortion groups and their allies in the Senate have tried to make it about abortion. Purposely abandoning a child to die after birth is infanticide.”
