Sorry to have taken so long to follow up on the Illinois Born-Alive Infants Protection Act bills.  Here is what I’ve further found.

  1. Thirteen different bills relating to the rights of infants born alive as the result of a botched abortion were proposed during the 92nd (2001-2002) and 93rd (2003-2004) Illinois General Assemblies.  See The Illinois Analogs to the Born-Alive Infants Protection Act.
  2. Five bills – 92-1095, 92-1662, 93-1082, 93-2631, and 93-2855 – were essentially copies of the federal Born-Alive Infants Protection Act of 2002 (BAIPA).  However, only the fifth bill contained a “preservation clause” similar to the federal BAIPA.

    [Update/Correction: 93-1082 was later amended to include a preservation clause; however, Obama still voted against that amended bill]

    The federal BAIPA preservation clause states, “Nothing in this section shall be construed to affirm, deny, expand, or contract any legal status or legal right applicable to any member of the species homo sapiens at any point prior to being “born alive” as defined in this section.” This clause (rather unnecessarily, I believe) is meant to preserve the legality of abortions in which the fetus is killed while still inside of the mother’s body.  Obama claimed that the only reason he voted against the Illinois BAIPAs is because, unlike the federal BAIPA, they lacked a preservation clause.

  3. Senate Bill 93-2855 did in fact contain a preservation clause identical to the federal BAIPA.  See The Illinois Analogs to the Born-Alive Infants Protection Act II.  Thus, if Obama in fact voted against that bill, or attempted to kill it by any informal means, he is misrepresenting his actions and his motivations.
  4. The two Senate Bills in the 92nd General Assembly – 92-1095 and 92-1662 – passed the Senate, but died in committee in the House.  I’ve tracked down Obama’s vote on each.  For 92-1095, he voted “present” (equivalent to a “nay” for voting purposes).  For 92-1662, he voted “nay.”
  5. None of the bills in the 93rd assembly made it to a full Senate vote.  Senate Bill 93-1082 never made it out of the Health & Human Services Committee, of which Obama was Chair.  There is no way to see online how members of that committee voted.  I could order the bill folder from Archives, but it seems unnecessary to do so, since the language was identical to that of the previous two bills, both of which Obama voted against.  Senate Bills 93-2631 and 93-2855 never made it out of the Rules Committee, of which Obama was not a member.  Thus, it would appear at first glance that Obama had no hand in killing these bills, unless there is something to be found in the transcripts of the 93rd assembly (which I have not yet gone through).
  6. This means that Senate Bill 93-2855, the only bill that contained a preservation clause, did not in fact come before Obama’s committee, and thus he never voted on it.

    [Update/Correction: 93-1082 was later amended to include a preservation clause; however, Obama still voted against that amended bill]

  7. However, several commentators have stated that Obama did play some role in killing 93-2855.  I am currently investigating this claim, and will post my findings when they are sufficiently concrete.

In Sum

It appears that the claim that Obama voted against an Illinois version of the federal BAIPA that contained an identical preservation clause is false.

[Update/Correction: 93-1082 was later amended to include a preservation clause; however, Obama still voted against that amended bill.  Therefore, the claim is in fact TRUE]

Whether it is true that Obama played in informal role in killing SB 93-2855, I cannot tell at this time.

Still – and I haven’t blogged much about this yet – even if Obama played no role whatsoever in the non-passage of SB 93-2855, I find his explanation of why he opposed the other bills to be highly dubious.  In a soon-to-come post, I will explain my reasons for this conclusion.

What’s next? (i.e., future posts)

  1. Carefully explain why a preservation clause was unnecessary to prevent the bill from infringing upon Roe, and why Obama likely already knew this.
  2. Post Obama’s statements made before the Illinois Senate when Senate Bills 92-1095 and 92-1662 were voted on.
  3. Continue to investigate the veracity of the claim that Obama played an informal role in killing Senate Bill 93-2855, [Update/Correction: ] the only bill that contained a preservation clause.
  4. Analyze the other bills relating to the provision of medical care to infants born as the result of botched abortion, compare them to the Illinois BAIPA bills, and examine Obama’s votes or other actions with respect to those bills.