Register for E-mail alerts. Comment on articles. Sign up today, it's easy.
Close
The Washington Times Online Edition

JEFFREY: Debate in Obama’s past

Democratic presidential candidate Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., answers a question during a town hall-style presidential debate at Belmont University in Nashville, Tenn., Tuesday, Oct. 7, 2008. Democratic presidential candidate Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., answers a question during a town hall-style presidential debate at Belmont University in Nashville, Tenn., Tuesday, Oct. 7, 2008.

COMMENTARY:

The most telling debate Barack Obama ever had was not with John McCain but Patrick O’Malley, who served with Mr. Obama in the Illinois Senate and engaged him in a colloquy every American should read.

The Obama-O’Malley debate was a defining moment for Mr. Obama because it dealt with such a fundamental issue: The state’s duty to protect the civil rights of the young and disabled.

Some background: Eight years ago, nurse Jill Stanek went public about the “induced-labor abortions” performed at the Illinois hospital where she worked. Often done on Down syndrome babies, the procedure involved medicating the mother to cause premature labor.

Babies who survived this, Nurses Stanek testified in the U.S. Congress, were brought to a soiled linen room and left alone to die without care or comforting.

Then-Illinois state Sen. Patrick O’Malley, whom I interviewed this week, contacted the state attorney general’s office to see whether existing laws protected a newborn abortion-survivor’s rights as a U.S. citizen. He was told they did not. So, Mr. O’Malley - a lawyer, veteran lawmaker and colleague of Mr. Obama on the Illinois Senate Judiciary Committee - drafted legislation.

In 2001, he introduced three bills. SB1093 said if a doctor performing an abortion believed there was a likelihood the baby would survive, another physician must be present “to assess the child’s viability and provide medical care.” SB1094 gave the parents, or a state-appointed guardian, the right to sue to protect the child’s rights. SB1095 simply said a baby alive after “complete expulsion or extraction from its mother” would be considered a ” ‘person,’ ‘human being,’ ‘child’ and ‘individual.’ ”

The bills dealt exclusively with born children. “This legislation was about preventing conduct that allowed infanticide to take place in the state of Illinois,” Mr. O’Malley told me.

The Judiciary Committee approved the bills with Mr. Obama in opposition. On March 31, 2001, they came up on the Illinois Senate floor. Only one member spoke against them: Barack Obama.

“Nobody else said anything,” Mr. O’Malley recalls. The official transcript validates this.

“Sen. O’Malley,” Mr. Obama said near the beginning of the discussion, “the testimony during the committee indicated that one of the key concerns was - is that there was a method of abortion, an induced abortion, where the - the fetus or child, as - as some might describe it, is still temporarily alive outside the womb.” Mr. Obama made three crucial concessions here: the legislation was about (1) a human being, who was (2) “alive” and (3) “outside the womb.”

He also used an odd redundancy: “temporarily alive.” Is there another type of human?

“And one of the concerns that came out in the testimony was the fact that they were not being properly cared for during that brief period of time that they were still living,” Mr. Obama continued.

Here he made another crucial concession: The intention of the legislation was to make sure that (1) a human being, (2) alive and (3) outside the womb was (4) “properly cared for.”

“Is that correct?” Mr. Obama asked Mr. O’Malley.

Story Continues →

View Entire Story
Comments
blog comments powered by Disqus
You Might Also Like
  • (Associated Press photographs)

    Worried conservatives descend on Washington’s CPAC

    By Ralph Z. Hallow - The Washington Times

  • Retired Army Gen. Jack Keane

    General: ‘Use drones to kill’ the Taliban in Pakistan

    By Rowan Scarborough - The Washington Times

  • **FILE** An auction sign is shown outside the Fremont, Calif., headquarters for bankrupt solar company Solyndra headquarters on Oct. 31, 2011, before the auction on the following day. Solyndra received a $500 million loan guarantee from the government before filing for bankruptcy in September. (Associated Press)

    Solyndra sold assets cheap for fast cash

    By Jim McElhatton - The Washington Times

  • In Case You Missed It
    Talk of the Web
    Happening Now

          Independent voices from the TWT Communities

          Haydon's Soccer and Sports Pitch

          Covering the world of soccer, including the World Cup, Major League Soccer, D.C. United and the English Premier League and other interesting sporting events.

          Payne-Full Living

          Join Matt on weekly adventures in all forms as he pushes past his comfort levels in an attempt to stimulate the body, mind and soul.