them and their situation. But I just do not agree with them that society is going to choose to authorize killing them all as a way of solving the problem.

Mr. MORGAN. And, one other thing, Senator. It seems to me that in a society where, the section I come from, let me phrase it this way, 50 percent of the poor people of the United States live below the Mason-Dixon line. And, when we talk about allowing people to die, a great number of people in this country right now do not have enough

to eat.

They do not have enough, by the time they are 5 years old, they are already behind. They do not have protein. They cannot move. Their whole life is stunted before they move forward in that life, simply because of their race or their economic status.

I think that is one of the real problems that we face in this country. and in the world. Those who concern themselves with questions such as euthanasia, and govern their lives with respect to that kind of question and the political approach which is an important question for us to have in mind, could better spend their lives on glorifying the kinds of circumstances under which people today live all across this country.

I find a great number of people who are very much for the right to life who are quite willing to allow those who are living to die day by day in an economic and social system that has taken a great number of lives.

Senator BAYH. I wish there were a consistency, for example, in the voting pattern in some of our colleagues who vote against funds for abortion, and yet those same pelple have a rather consistent voting record as far as voting for funds for health and education to provide alternatives to this. I find it difficult to reconcile.

Mr. MORGAN. I find one of the greatest anomalies are of those who

Senator BAYH. You ought to be concerned about live life as you are about life prior to traditional birth.

Mr. MORGAN. Sure; and I have noticed a number of State legislators, who have opposed every effort for aid for dependent children, every effort for welfare for parents that is based on the number of children that they have.

Senator BAYH. For adoption programs.

Mr. MORGAN. Sure. And also for a parent who has an illegitimate child in our society.

Senator BAYH. Foster parents, and the whole works are the kinds of alternatives I would prefer, frankly, to the abortion. But there are a lot of people who absolutely refuse to provide resources for acceptable alternatives to sustain life once it is born and for other reasons they are very concerned about life prior to traditional birth.

Let me ask you another question here. I am a little concerned about your position in some aspects on the Missouri cases. I guess you gathered that from my problem with viability. You know, you have 210, 212, 213 million Americans and we all have certain basic inalienable rights that the three of us, fortunately, and a number of other Americans have been willing to do all we can in our capacity to protect those.

We also have an ongoing effort to try to live together and not be continually warring against one other. We have tried to reconcile

competing rights. The old story about the right to swing your arm is limited to the time it comes in proximity to my nose. That is an old one, you know. I have not been involved in a legislative issue in 20 years where I have felt not only the intensity of feeling on both sides, but what I have to feel as a very conscientious, deeply based, moral conviction on both sides. I am just struggling as a legislator to see if there is not some way we can just reconcile some of those differences, realizing from my personal standpoint that may end up making everybody angry. And I do that not from the standpoint of being practical politically, because I do not know how you end up in a better political position that way, but from what I feel is right.

I have already touched on the viability aspects so I will not belabor that. I have not had a chance to look at every dot and every title in the Missouri statute and I am not sure I could say how I would vote as a Missouri legislator. But another aspect I would like to touch on, and to get your thoughts before we move on, is the counseling business. Now I do not believe in coercive counseling, but to a young, immature, frightened adolescent it is possible there has been in some instances almost what amounts to coercion as far as having an abortion. I do not know how you write voice inflection and countenance and all of that in a State statute, but is it really unreasonable to suggest that before an abortion is permitted, that all alternatives are explored and that the woman, whether she is young or older, realizes the gravity of this and that there are other alternatives available?

One of the things that really concerns me, and relates to this, I think, is that we quite naturally in this country have had a real outpouring of sympathy for the plight of the Vietnamese orphans. You have the President of the United States interrupting his vacation long enough to go up and carry one of these very tender, sweet young things off a plane that has just gotten in from the battle zone. There are American mothers and fathers, and would-be mothers and fathers, rushing to adopt one of these children. It is a very human quality, but you know we have 120,000 American babies that we cannot find homes for. That is a tragedy.

Let me ask you another question here. I am a little concerned about your position in some aspects on the Missouri cases. I guess you gathered that from my problem with viability. You know, you have. Ms. MEARS. And you do not see people beating down the doors

to

Senator BAYH. It is a real tragedy and it seems to me I must say I would feel much more comfortable about this whole thing if we were being absolutely certain that a woman who had made that critical decision knew that the adoption alternative was a real one. To me, it seems the Missouri statute, as you describe it, is a good faith effort to try to do that.

Now tell me why I am wrong.

MS. MEARS. Now I am just really struck by the dichotomy between your saying that you do not believe in coerced counseling, but the thought of trying to write into a statute a suggestion that the woman have it. I mean what force is that, a suggestion that she have it? Is that not a more hortatory expression of good intent? Yes, we believe you should have counseling. I mean that is not the kind of thing you write into a law, is it?

And certainly, you have far more legislative experience than I, for I have none. But I am just telling you that it is virtually impossible to include that kind of suggestion. We believe, and the responsible people who run abortion clinics by and large make it a point that they just do not provide medical services in a vacuum but they do provide counselors who spend time with women individually and do tell them what their alternatives are.

Senator BAYH. Then, if that is happening in the statute, is it not almost like a Supreme Court definition if it is being done anyway? What harm is it?

MS. MEARS. What harm is it to order them or what harm is it to suggest to them that they do it?

Senator BAYH. Well, State legislators are not inclined to suggest

MS. MEARS. That is right.

Senator BAYH. Neither are Federal legislators.

MS. MEARS. But if the statute says that a doctor can be criminally charged for failing to have advised the woman of the alternatives to abortion before he performs the abortion-that is serious business. Why are we compelling the doctor to counsel her as to adoption when he probably does not know a whole lot about adoption before he performs an abortion that she has decided she wants.

I think there is a great place and a need for counseling and the abortion clinics in this country do it day in and day out.

I suggest to you when you think of the frightened girl who is pressured into an abortion, I keep thinking of the poor, frightened girls who, because of parental consent laws-these girls cannot get abortions because their parents will not permit it, or who will not even approach their parents about it until it is too late virtually to get an abortion or must have to have a second trimester abortion. I agree with you for the need for counseling but I do not think it is the kind of thing you can write into a bill. I think it has got to be the kind of thing that responsible clinics and responsible nurses, physicians, and other health personnel do, but I do not think you can mandate it legislatively.

Senator BAYH. Well, one of the concerns I have about this whole business, particularly in the early stages of pregnancy, where I have come to the conclusion we are talking about life, I feel strong enough about individual rights that I do not want to see that imposed on others at a stage when there may be reasonable room to doubt.

When you get beyond that stage of viability, I think there is no reasonable room to doubt. You disagree with me, but I had concern earlier on because we have institutionalized this in the government process. And like it or not, it is there, and I do not think it is really recognizing the facts as they really are, to suggest that there is any way we can keep the abortion issue out of the pulic forum, out of the State statutes. And as long as we are going to have State statutes, then I feel more comfortable about reasonable guidelines prior to exercising what the Supreme Court has ruled is right.

I mean I am sure there are bunareds, thousands, I do not know how many people involved advising in these abortion clinics. I am sure that most of them are well intentioned, most of them are giving information. But I am sure tnat abortion clinics are like Senators and businessmen,

lawyers and doctors. Sometimes there are those that slip below the standards we would like to have. Maybe they feel that in order to get their budget. Unfortunately, decisions are made that way that that has to be rationalized on a number of abortions. If you do not have more abortions next year than you had this year, then you are not going to be able to keep up with inflation-and all of those ideas.

And it seems to me that those decisions ought to be made and I am sure that you concur on a very personal basis, on a case-by-case basis.

MS. MEARS. Well, Senator, the analogy that comes to my mind is the hundreds of birthright offices around the country which say they offer all kinds of counseling for problem pregnancies but never mention abortion. I think that is just as great a problem as the problem you mentioned of clinics that may not tell people about adoption. The street goes both ways.

Senator BAYH. Birthright clinics?

MS. MEARS. Birthright offices, those kind of things.
Senator BAYH. How are those financed?

MS. MEARS. I wish I knew.

Senator BAYH. We have not had any Supreme Court law or Supreme Court doctrine cases of State legislators. Like it or not; it is there. And I do not think it is quite the same as Birthright.

MS. MEARS. Well, the analogy is that the clinics that are privately owned and operating, you feel, may not always tell people about adoption. I feel that Birthright offices, which are manned by people who oppose abortion and who presume and purport to offer all kinds of aid for problem pregnancies, do not tell people about abortion.

I believe in giving full options and full information to all women at all ends of the spectrum. So I am saying the problem exists on both sides of the fence.

Senator BAYH. So do I. I must say I come down on a different side than you with the argument. The actual taking of life rather than sustaining life I find is, at least, quantitatively quite different. But that is what makes life, differing opinions.

Now, look, I have prevailed on you long enough. I want to thank you for your contributions.

Mr. MORGAN. Senator, I would like to thank you also. Earlier you were talking about civil liberties and civil rights and your record over the years. The difficulty with which you approach this subject is understandable and we appreciate the open mind you have. We also appreciate that in the fields of individual and personal liberties and equal rights, over the years, when others have been reluctant to vote, you fought for them, and when others have been reluctant to fight, you led.

We know you will reach your decision in good conscience.
Senator BAYH. Thank you very much.

I should say that this committee and this Senator has been the beneficiary of your counsel and the counsel of other members of your organization. We may not agree on all things to the degree that each of us might like, but I must say that I think your organization, like a few others, has been a pride to the conscience that keeps America generally recognizing that one of the distinctions between our society and others is we are a society of some 212 million individuals, and I hope you continue to do that.

Thank you.

Mr. MORGAN. Thank you,

MS. MEARS. Thank you.

sir.

Senator BAYH. Our next witness is Hon. Sara Weddington from Austin, Tex., a member of the Texas State Legislature.

STATEMENT OF HON. SARA WEDDINGTON, TEXAS STATE
LEGISLATURE, AUSTIN, TEX.

MS. WEDDINGTON. Arguing the case of Roe v. Wade before the Supreme Court is one of the most cherished parts of my life's tapestry. Appearing here today before this committee, will also be one of my life's highlights, and I do appreciate the opportunity of testifying.

Senator BAYH. That is very kind. I appreciate your being here. Perhaps you can give some insight into the minds of State legislators as well as Supreme Court Justices.

Please proceed as you see fit.

MS. WEDDINGTON. I appear in several capacities: One, as a member of the Texas House; one, as the plaintiff's attorney in Roe v. Wade, and the other, as president of the National Abortion Rights Action League. A more complete statement about NARAL is attached to my statement. It is the only national organization whose sole purpose is to maintain the right to safe, legal abortion for all women in this country. Before I begin my formal presentation, I would like to make three asides. The first is made in my capacity as an elected official. You might find it interesting to know that I ran for the Texas House just prior to the time the Supreme Court's decision was announced but after I had argued the case twice; in spite of the efforts of my opponents to use the abortion issue against me, I won the election. I have since been reelected and am now the dean of the Travis County delegation, which is the delegation from Austin, Tex. So to those elected officials who have been through a lot of pressure on this issue, I think there are those of us who exemplify the fact that you can take a forthright stand on this issue and continue to be elected.

Second, quite aside from the abortion issue, we in Texas are very proud that we were one of the first States to ratify the National ERA. On Monday, I will be appearing before the Texas House of Representatives' Constitutional Revisions Committee in opposition to a bill introduced there for Texas to rescind its ratification of the ERA. I understand that I will have an opportunity on that day to visit with Mrs. Phyllis Schlafly. If you have any helpful hints you would like to share, I would appreciate having them.

Senator BAYH. Keep your cool.

MS. WEDDINGTON. I will try.

Senator BAYH. I appeared with that very distinguished lady in live and full color for 4 or 5 mornings running on the "Not For Women Only" program, and she presents the case very eloquently. I must say I told her to her face that she had a greater capacity than almost anybody I have seen to make gossip look like scripture.

You might tell her that I paid her that compliment.

MS. WEDDINGTON. I may quote you to the Texas House of Representatives.

Senator BAYH. If that helps your case, fine. If not,

60-577-76- -20

well