Transcription
Professor Myers, um, you are here at the invitation of my Democratic colleagues. Is that right?
>> That's correct.
>> Okay. Um, in his opening statement, my good friend, Senator White House said, I want to quote, "Reproductive justice is economic justice." Close quote. Do you agree with that?
I might as an economist use the word rights, but yeah, I do agree with that.
>> Okay, that's not true for the baby, is it?
>> Well, first of all, I would refer to a fetus, not
>> Yeah, but that's Well, a fetus I refer to it as a baby. That's not true as a for the baby, is it? The evidence that I presented to you, Senator Kennedy, was evidence about measurable effects on the lives of women, families.
>> I got that part, but that's not true for the baby, is it?
>> I I'm I'm sorry. I don't really understand.
>> Well, it's not true. Let me put it Let me be
>> Let me back up. As an as an economist, I measure effects using data. I'm not here to talk about ethics, assignment of personhood. That's not my
>> Well, but you said you agreed with the chairman's statement that reproductive justice is economic justice. There is no economic justice for the baby because the baby's dead, right?
>> I wouldn't refer I I I don't really know how to answer your question. I would I would refer to
>> Was the baby dead or alive?
>> I'm we're referring to a fetus.
>> Okay. Is the fetus dead or alive
>> after an abortion? the fetus would be dead after an abortion,
>> right? Do if the if the mother is healthy and the baby is healthy, do do you support abortion up to the moment of birth?
>> So I, you know, I think that's that's a really hard question to answer because that just doesn't happen. You're asking me about something that simply doesn't happen.
>> Well, it's legal. It's legal in uh Vermont, New Jersey, Oregon, Colorado, New Mexico, Alaska, and the District of Columbia. And and uh the lon wing of the Democratic Party supports abortion up to the moment of birth. So, do you support that or or oppose it?
>> I don't think Let me say I'm here to talk about the economics of abortion. You're here as an expert and I think you're asking me a question as a person which I'll answer as a person.
>> Okay, tell me as a
>> um I I will tell you as a person that I have ambivalence about abortion. I will tell you as a person, I haven't personally had an abortion. And I will also tell you as a person looking at the evidence around me and understanding how complex the decisions are that people face, okay, I'm just simply uncomfortable thinking that there's a answer to every question.
>> I trust women and their healthcare providers.
>> It's real simple. You either support abortion for a healthy mother and baby up to the moment of birth or you don't. And I I don't think it's a difficult question. H how about you, doctor? Do you support if the mother is healthy and the baby's healthy, do you support abortion up to the moment of birth?
>> So, Senator, you're using really inflammatory language to talk about a medical procedure and it's not a simple yes or no. Not to mention, when you make statements like that, you're erasing the grief and the trauma that my patient
>> You're not going to answer my question. Neither are you.
>> It's not a question that
>> I think I think I know your answer. I think I think I know your answer.
>> Um, Ms.
>> Ford. Okay. Let's take a baby at 21 weeks. Hold up. M. This is a baby at 21 weeks. Okay.
>> Um, the baby can feel pain, right?
>> Yes.
>> And the baby's pretty developed, right?
>> Yes.
>> And do you know the name of the procedure that the doctor would use to abort that baby at 21 weeks?
>> I'm not a doctor, but I believe it's a DNR.
>> It's called dilation and evacuation. Is that right?
>> As far as I understand. Yes.
>> Yeah. And first, uh, the doctor would would would dilate, um, the cervix and then the doctor would take what's called they the doctor would call it a sofur clamp. It's really a pair of pliers with sharp teeth on the end. And without giving the baby any pain medication, the doctor would go through the vagina, through the uterus and start tearing the baby apart. Is that right?
>> As far as I understand the procedure.
>> Yeah. And she might start with the legs and pull them out and the arms and pull them out. Right. And then she might go for the for the heart or the spine and just pull the baby out piece by piece. Is that right? Without giving the baby pain medication.
>> That's what I understand the procedure to be.
>> Okay. But then you got to get the head out. The baby's dead, but maybe not. Maybe it's still in pain. But then you you got to get the head out. And even with the cervix dilated, you got to get the head out, which is hard. So then the doctor would go in and and and use those pliers to crush the baby's head. Is that right?
>> As far as I understand.
>> And then she'd pull the head out, the crust skull out, right?
>> Mhm.
>> Senator Kennedy, your time has expired here. You gave the others plenty of time, Mr. Chairman.
>> Just letting you know your time's expired. You have other senators waiting.
>> Well, you also I was waiting when you were letting others. You I'm sorry you don't want to hear about what happened. No, I don't think anybody
>> in an actual abortion, but that's I thought that was what we were here to talk about.
>> No one else has gone over. Some of the witnesses went a little bit long, but on both sides. So,
>> I thought we were here about protecting mothers and killing babies.
>> I'm going to turn to Senator Stabin now. And
>> I'm sorry you don't hear roster here.
>> My apologies.
>> I know it's ugly, but it's
>> Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Um, it's a simple question. Senator Kennedy isn't debating abstractions. He's challenging a worldview that frames abortion exclusively through eupheanism, reproductive justice, economic outcomes, health care decisions, while deliberately avoiding the unavoidable consequence. A living human being is destroyed. When asked whether abortion should be legal up to the that avoidance is the story. This moment exposes how progressive ideology often substitutes language for limits. Experts claim neutrality, data, and compassion, yet recoil when forced to acknowledge what their position actually permits. If abortion truly were just another medical procedure, there would be no hesitation in answering yes or no. The discomfort arises because the Kennedy's approach reflects a core conservative principle. Law must be grounded in moral truth, not rhetorical fog. Rights are not meaningful if they erase responsibility, and justice cannot exist if it refuses to recognize the most vulnerable human life. A society that cannot define when life deserves. This exchange forces viewers to confront a deeper question. Can a society claim moral seriousness if its laws cannot be described honestly? Progress depends on open debate, not semantic shelter. Whether one supports or opposes abortion rights, intellectual integrity