LATE-TERM ABORTION DEBATE HEATS UP AGAIN

And so, the nation will again revisit the subject that many sanitized mainstream media accounts refer to as "a controversial late-term abortion procedure."

Both houses of the U.S. Congress have again passed a ban on partial-birth abortions. This the House accomplished, yet again, by the veto-proof margin of 296-132. Senate action followed with approval by an overwhelming 64 votes, which means supporters are three precious votes short of the necessary two-thirds to override a presidential veto.

That veto came again from President Clinton, whose stubborn refusal to sign this bill remains one of the great scandals of his presidency, and our times. A president who campaigned pledging he wanted to make abortion "safe, legal and rare" won't even sign a bill that limits this especially gruesome form of infanticide.

One by one, all the arguments Bill Clinton and the abortion industry have thrown up against this bill have been exposed as bogus. Foremost among these is the claimed need for a "health exception." Simply put, there is no health exception for infanticide.

Still, as the debate continues, other interesting things are happening. First, the public, which we are constantly told is heavily pro-choice, overwhelmingly wants this ban enacted into law. The publicity for and debate over partial-birth abortion is enormously educative for the general public. This is why you see even pro-choice, wet-finger-in-the-wind politicians such as House Minority Leader Dick Gephardt voting for the bill. Not for him, the truly extreme pro-abortion position of this president, who need never face the voters again.

Notwithstanding the veto, it is good for both houses of Congress to send the bill to the president yet again. For one thing, the history to date finds the bill gaining more votes each time it is voted upon, as an aroused public becomes ever more aware of what is at stake. With this in mind, it should be only a matter of time before the will of the people prevails, either in a successful veto override, or a presidential signature on the bill after the election of 2000.

Republican congressional leaders promise an attempt to override the veto, but stress that they are in no hurry. They want to set that particular confrontation up for much closer to the congressional elections of November 1998. That, as was once said of a hanging at sunrise, should help "concentrate the minds" of a few wavering lawmakers.