Sen. Ben Sasse, R-Neb., kept his word Monday evening, coming to the Senate floor and giving all 100 U.S. senators the opportunity to condemn infanticide. The opportunity was declined by Senate Democrats.

Sasse asked for unanimous consent to proceed to a vote on the Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act, a bill that would protect infants born alive after attempted abortion procedures by requiring doctors to provide medical care to those — I must stress this — born-alive infants. Without these protections, an infant who survives an abortion procedure may be left to die on the table in a state like New York, where late-term abortion up to the point of delivery is now legal if an abortionist says it is necessary to “protect the mother’s health” or that the fetus is not “viable.”

“Every senator will have the opportunity to stand for human dignity – to stand for the belief that, in this country, all of us are created equal,” Sasse said. “Because if that equality means anything, surely it means that infanticide is wrong. Frankly, this shouldn’t be hard.”

Sasse moved to pass this bill after Virginia Democratic Gov. Ralph Northam, in defense of a bill introduced in his state similar to the New York law, suggested that a mother and her physician would have a “discussion” about what to do with an infant born alive after an attempted abortion.

“The infant would be delivered. The infant would be kept comfortable. The infant would be resuscitated if that’s what the mother and the family desired, and then a discussion would ensue between the physicians and the mother,” Northam said.

Sasse said Governor Northam endorsed infanticide.

No euphemisms. No weasel-words there. Infants could kept comfortable and resuscitated. And also, baby girls could be left cold and alone to die.

Just a few years ago, the abortion lobby was really clear in its talk about hoping that abortion would be “safe and legal, but rare.” This was the slogan. Abortion would be “safe, legal, and rare.” Now we’re talking about keeping a baby comfortable while the doctors have a debate about infanticide.

That is what we’re talking about here on the floor tonight. We’re not talking about second-trimester abortion; we’re not having some big, complicated discussion about a mother’s reproductive freedom, as important as all those debates are. We’re actually talking about babies that have been born. The only debate on the floor tonight is about infanticide.

Sasse’s bill, cosponsored by 42 Senate Republicans, would require those physicians to save the life of the baby born alive. He pleaded with his Democratic colleagues, asking them not to object to his unanimous consent request.

There are only two sides of the debate on the floor tonight: You’re either for babies, or you’re defending infanticide. That is actually what the legislation is that’s before us.

Please don’t block this legislation.

Please don’t let Governor Northam define you. Don’t let an extremist pro-abortion lobby and pledge hold you hostage. Please don’t protect infanticide.

Democratic Senator Patty Murray of Washington stood in objection to the bill, claiming that infanticide is already illegal and accusing the Republicans of mischaracterizing Sasse’s bill.

“We have laws against infanticide in this country. This is a gross misinterpretation of the actual language of the bill that is being asked to be considered, and therefore, I object,” Murray said.

Murray is wrong, of course. As Sasse noted, the New York abortion law removed the protections for infants born alive during an attempted abortion. National Review’s Alexandra DeSanctis points out that only 26 states have affirmative protections for infants who survive abortions. And it’s hard to understand how Sasse and others have “mischaracterized” his bill, which is only seven pages long and not difficult to understand. The bill states that Congress finds: 1) “If an abortion results in the live birth of an infant, the infant is a legal person for all purposes under the laws of the United States, and entitled to all the protections of such laws”; and 2) “Any infant born alive after an abortion or within a hospital, clinic, or other facility has the same claim to the protection of the law that would arise for any newborn, or for any person who comes to a hospital, clinic, or other facility for screening and treatment or otherwise becomes a patient within its care.”

Specifically, the bill Murray claims is grossly mischaracterized requires that a health care practitioner present when a child is born alive shall “exercise the same degree of professional skill, care, and diligence to preserve the life and health of the child as a reasonably diligent and conscientious health care practitioner would render to any other child born alive at the same gestational age.” Then it requires that health care practitioner to take the baby to a hospital for further care. The penalty for failing to follow the law would be at least five years’ imprisonment. Additionally, the intentional killing of a child born alive would be prosecuted as murder.

The bill has a mandatory reporting requirement, so people working at an abortion facility would be required to report if and when an abortionist does not work to save the life of an infant born alive. The bill also gives a mother the legal right to sue if her baby is born alive and the abortionist did not follow this law, letting the child die.

And that’s it. What exactly is Sasse mischaracterizing? His legislation protects infants born alive after attempted abortions from being left to die and clarifies that killing such an infant is murder. It’s an infanticide ban, exactly as Sasse describes.

It’s Murray and the other Democrats defending or excusing Northam’s comments and the New York abortion law who are making a gross mischaracterization. This is not hard. They are defending and excusing the murder of children born alive. By blocking the bill, Murray and the Democrats who support her protected infanticide.

Now it is time to push for a roll call vote. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., promised this would not be the last time this bill is considered.

I’m proud to be a co-sponsor of @SenSasse’s legislation to protect the rights of all newborn babies. My full statement:https://t.co/17gEZl4ghX

— Leader McConnell (@senatemajldr) February 4, 2019

Speaking in support of Sasse’s bill, he said it is “harrowing” that this bill is necessary.

What could be more unanimous than this: That what medical professionals owe every single newborn American citizen, regardless of the circumstances of their birth, is attention and care — not neglect, and certainly not violence. Frankly, it’s harrowing that this legislation is even necessary. It was even more disturbing when, last week, a Democrat governor was unable to clearly and simply state that of course, these newborn babies have human rights that must be respected.

I’ve been co-sponsor of Senator Sasse’s legislation. And I hope that none of my colleagues on the other side of the aisle invent any reasons to block this request later today. That would make quite a disturbing statement. If they do inexplicably block Senator Sasse’s effort, I can assure them that this will not be the last time we try to ensure that all newborns are afforded this fundamental legal protection.

Likewise, Sasse promised to continue to seek a roll call vote on in the Senate on this bill. Every member of the United States Senate should go on record to oppose infanticide. This shouldn’t be a controversial position. It’s not a philosophical or scientific debate about when life begins. This is about little babies who are clearly, visibly alive and shouldn’t be killed or left to die. This is about what we, as Americans, are willing to do to protect those little babies.

Voters ought to know where their senators stand on opposing infanticide. The Senate must vote. (For more from the author of “Democrats Block Infanticide Ban, but It’s Not Over. The Senate Must Vote” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

It is ironic that the most volatile controversy in American politics—abortion—hasn’t really been a debate: it’s been more like a mystery story. The truth has been cloaked in misdirection and sugar-coated with words like choice and rights. . .

Pro-choice extremists advocate policies unheard of anywhere else in the free world—publicly financed abortion on demand, up to the moment of birth, justifiable even when the baby is a girl instead of a boy—yet they are called moderate politicians.

Let’s not beat around the bush. This cannot be explained by sympathy for “women’s reproduction rights” or the “health of the mother.” These excuses have nothing to do with the left’s barbaric support for the killing of children in America. No. It’s deliberate and calculated. They’re just lying. . .

Abortion is violence, perpetrated by the powerful against the weak and innocent, usually for a handsome profit. Every baby announcement, every sonogram image, every gender-reveal party, every baby shower, every first kick or hiccup from the womb, every tragic miscarriage, and every miraculous preemie testifies anew to what we already know: they’re babies in there, and abortion kills them dead. Abortion is legal, but it shouldn’t be, and that is the truth the pro-abortion movement must conceal and suppress at all costs.

So, after the nausea wears off, the pro-life movement should be grateful to Virginia Gov. Ralph Northam. This week Northam defended proposed legislation in the Virginia legislature that would, following New York’s lead, gut remaining restrictions on late-term abortions up through and, apparently, after the child’s birth. (Read more from “Ralph Northam’s Truth-Reveal Party Unmasked Abortion’s Evil” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

When is it time to question the power of the pro-life movement? This week the state of New York passed a law that will mean babies can be killed up to the moment of birth. Babies that feel pain, cry, and could easily survive outside the womb will be brutally killed, chopped up, and sucked out like pieces of meat. Vermont is considering a similar bill. So is Virginia.

Meanwhile, the annual March for Life had a huge turnout this year, estimated to be as high as 300,000 people. How do these two things go together? Perhaps big marches are not a sign of success.

A New York book store owner, who became somewhat famous after he shut down his store in protest of the new abortion law, put it this way: “When intense pro-life involvement is defined by going to an annual pep rally or giving five bucks to a pro-life lobbyist at a Sanctity of Life Sunday, it’s not surprising that someone hanging a sign in his window, turning off the lights and going home is viewed as heroic.”

The pro-life movement has too much bark and no bite, too much signal and too little virtue. It takes participation in a march as more significant than legal victories ending abortion. The simple truth is that the pro-life movement is stagnant, dominated by an uncritical and defeatist attitude. It needs some new life.

A friend who worked for a pro-life organization very much in the “the movement” confirms this. He became frustrated that people there ignore the evidence in front of them, and instead show excitement about the size of the marches, acting “as if our country is turning a corner and is getting closer and closer to life.” Meanwhile, they react more strongly to those who challenge their approved legal tactics or rhetoric than they do actual political defeats, as if questioning the success of the movement is some sort of heresy. (Read more from “It’s Time for Pro-Lifers to Realize They’re Losing” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE