Abortion Veto
- Share via
* I take exception to Helen Alvare’s commentary (April 12), regarding the president’s veto of HR 1833, a bill that would ban a safe surgical method used in some later abortions. I was present when the president met with the women who had had this procedure and listened to their stories. The president was genuinely moved by the losses these families had suffered and by their courage in coming forward. Alvare’s assertion that the president “used” these five women is particularly insulting to all those who came forward voluntarily when they heard how this procedure was being misrepresented.
President Clinton vetoed the bill because, as these women’s cases demonstrated, the procedure it would have banned can be medically necessary to protect a woman’s health. He and members of Congress heard from leading physicians in opposition to this legislation.
I wish the proponents of the bill would deal with the facts, instead of trying to ignore, demean and trivialize the tragedies faced by the families who spoke out after the veto. They know the truth about the procedure--that it is compassionate, humane and medically necessary.
VICKI SAPORTA
Executive Director
National Abortion Federation
Washington
Get the L.A. Times Politics newsletter
Deeply reported insights into legislation, politics and policy from Sacramento, Washington and beyond. In your inbox twice per week.
You may occasionally receive promotional content from the Los Angeles Times.
