On September 26, the House passed, 380-15, a bill (H.R. 4292) that would change the definition of an individual under the United States Criminal Code. Three Members—Reps. Maurice Hinchey (D-NY), Jan Schakowsky (D-IL), and Louise Slaughter (D-NY)—voted present. The measure was considered under suspension of the rules, an expedited floor procedure that requires a two-thirds majority vote and prohibits amendments.
Sponsored by Rep. Charles Canady (R-FL), the bill states that “the words ‘person,’ ‘human being,’ ‘child,’ and ‘individual’ shall include every infant member of the species homo sapiens who is born at any stage of development.” During a subcommittee hearing on the bill, Rep. Canady said that he was partly motivated by the stories of two nurses from Illinois who had witnessed babies survive therapeutic abortions but receive no medical care to enable long-term survival (see The Source, 7/21/00, p. 6).
Rep. Canady argued, “We may ask why such legislation is necessary. Has it not been long accepted as a legal principle that infants who are born alive are persons who are entitled to the protections of the law? Indeed it has. But the corrupting influence of a seemingly illimitable right to abortion has brought this well-settled principle into question.”
Rep. John Conyers (D-MI) stated, “Most of us believe that this bill is probably unnecessary for the simple reason that born-alive infants are already protected by existing law….The sponsor has indicated that the bill would only protect an infant who is completely separated from its mother….I must wholeheartedly applaud the majority for realizing at last that there are different stages of life and that, at each stage, a mother’s right to privacy must be balanced against a state’s interest and fetal life.”
