Reidblog [The Reid Report blog]

Efforts in Congress and the courts to prolong Terri Schiavo's life failed because of political miscalculations, missed deadlines and misguided legal strategy, according to legal experts and some of the conservative activists who made the case a national issue.

That harsh assessment is causing recriminations and finger-pointing among social conservatives and Republican staffers on Capitol Hill, who say there's plenty of blame to go around for why efforts to reverse state court rulings fell short.
Ken Connor, the former head of the conservative Family Research Council who gave legal advice to Florida Gov. Jeb Bush as the case was moving through the courts there two years ago, said Congress' inability to agree on a bill to keep Schiavo alive before her feeding tube was removed March 18 "severely prejudiced Terri's case."

Republican leaders in the House of Representatives took credit for getting a bill passed two days later, "but that's like an arsonist claiming credit for putting out his own fire," said Connor, who worked for weeks on the Schiavo legislation. "They should have acted with more dispatch."

"Any further action by our court or the district court would be improper," wrote Judge Stanley F. Birch Jr., who was appointed by former President Bush. "While the members of her family and the members of Congress have acted in a way that is both fervent and sincere, the time has come for dispassionate discharge of duty."

Birch went on to scold President Bush and Congress for their attempts to intervene in the judicial process, by saying: "In resolving the Schiavo controversy, it is my judgment that, despite sincere and altruistic motivation, the legislative and executive branches of our government have acted in a manner demonstrably at odds with our Founding Fathers' blueprint for the governance of a free people — our Constitution."

At the most critical junctures, Gov. Bush had been a virtual no-show --willing to let the powerful judiciary define his options in ways that effectively strip him of his statutory and constitutional authority.

That's not the role of the executive under our system of government--to be a sycophant to black-robed elites. As a result, an innocent woman will likely die a horrible death.

Here's what Gov. Bush said on Sunday, in clear abdication of his defined powers: "I cannot violate a court order. "The order he had in mind was a pre-emptive usurpation by circuit judge George Greer of the governor's statutory authority under Florida law to immediately take Terri into protective custody. Had the governor simply acted as he is duly empowered, Terri would not now be threatenedwith death. Instead, Gov. Bush cowered at Greer's threat literally to arrest the governor if he proceeded under legislative statute--as though Greer had such imaginary executive clout.

What on earth is going on here? To defend his impotence, Gov. Bush told CNN after attending Easter services, "I don't have powers from the United States Constitution or--for that matter from the Florida Constitution--that would allow me to intervene after a decision has been made" by an out-of-control, arrogant judge.

So much for the assertive action needed to preserve not only an innocent woman's life, but our republic itself. As Dr. Keyes argues, imbalance of the kind described above means we really don't have law anymore. Instead, we have a judicial dictatorship, whereby the courts aggressively define and control all elements of government without regard for the Constitution, the intention of the founders, or the rights and prerogatives of the other branches.

Is Jeb really "powerless," as he claims? Can he rightfully "wash his hands" of this
whole matter and leave it in the hands of others, when he alone is the supreme executive authority in the state, empowered and responsible to protect the health, safety, and life of his state's citizens?

The parents of Terri Schiavo have authorized a conservative direct-mailing firm to sell a list of their financial supporters, making it likely that thousands of strangers moved by her plight will receive a steady stream of solicitations from anti-abortion and conservative groups.

"These compassionate pro-lifers donated toward Bob Schindler's legal battle to keep Terri's estranged husband from removing the feeding tube from Terri," says a description of the list on the Web site of the firm, Response Unlimited, which is asking $150 a month for 6,000 names and $500 a month for 4,000 e-mail addresses of people who responded last month to an e-mail plea from Ms. Schiavo's father.

"These individuals are passionate about the way they value human life, adamantly oppose euthanasia and are pro-life in every sense of the word!"

Privacy experts said the sale of the list was legal and even predictable, if ghoulish.
"I think it's amusing," said Robert Gellman, a privacy and information policy consultant. "I think it's absolutely classic America. Everything is for sale in America, every type of personal information."

Executives of Response Unlimited declined to comment. Gary McCullough, director of the Christian Communication Network and a spokesman for Ms. Schiavo's parents, confirmed that Mr. Schindler had agreed to let Response Unlimited rent out the list as part of a deal for the firm to send an e-mail solicitation raising money on the family's behalf.

[...]

On Sunday, as the Schindlers gave up on their legal battle and their daughter passed her 10th day without food, others continued to rally supporters and solicit money in an effort to restore the feeding tube.

"This time, we have a real chance to break through the 'roadblocks' that the enemies of life have been putting up in front of us," said a mass e-mailing from RightMarch.com, asking supporters to urge Gov. Jeb Bush to intervene somehow.

The message added: "We're asking you to give a donation to help with our activism efforts to save Terri's life. Battles cost money; resources cost money; media costs money; we could go on, but you get the picture."

Mr. Sheldon - whose father, the Rev. Lou Sheldon, founder of the Traditional Values Coalition, has also sent appeals urging support for Ms. Schiavo - apparently played a dual role as a partner in RightMarch.com, which is working with the anti-abortion activist Randall Terry, and as a broker for Response Unlimited*. Mr. Sheldon did not respond to phone calls yesterday.

*the firm that bought the mailing list.

Three times as many Americans think Terri Schiavo's feeding tube should be removed as think it should remain and — if in her place — most Americans say they would prefer the tube be removed. When asked to consider what action they would take if they were Schiavo's guardian, a 61 percent majority says they would remove her feeding tube and 22 percent would keep the tube inserted, according to the latest FOX News national poll conducted by Opinion Dynamics Corporation.

Under Terry's leadership, Operation Rescue staged aggressive protests of abortion clinics, including "screaming and pleading with pregnant women to turn away," "toss[ing] their bodies against car doors to keep abortion patients from getting out" and "wav[ing] crucifixes and scream[ing] 'Mommy, Mommy' at the women," according to The Washington Post. The Post further noted that Terry "described Planned Parenthood's founder, Margaret Sanger, as a 'whore' and an 'adulteress' and arranged to have a dead fetus presented to Bill Clinton at the 1992 Democratic National Convention." The New York Times reported on August 14, 1993, that "[i]n his radio appearances, Mr. Terry said of [abortion provider] Dr. [Warren] Hern: 'I hope someday he is tried for crimes against humanity, and I hope he is executed.' "

The Times added that "Coming just five months after an anti-abortion protester [Michael Griffin] shot and killed the doctor [David Gunn] in Florida, Mr. Terry's words were construed by many abortion rights groups as a call to violence." According to an August 7, 1994, report on CBS' 60 Minutes, Terry entreated his followers "to pray for either the salvation or the death" of Hern. The New York Times also noted on November 8, 1998, that Terry "filed for bankruptcy ... in an effort to avoid paying massive debts owed to women's groups and abortion clinics that have sued him."

Terry's words and personal life have also stirred controversy. As the Fort Wayne (Indiana) News Sentinel reported on August 16, 1993, at an anti-abortion rally in Fort Wayne, Terry said "Our goal is a Christian nation. ... We have a biblical duty, we are called by God to conquer this country. We don't want equal time. We don't want pluralism. ... Theocracy means God rules. I've got a hot flash. God rules." In that same speech, Terry also stated that "If a Christian voted for [former President Bill] Clinton, he sinned against God. It's that simple." According to a March 18, 2004, press release, Terry declared on his radio program that "Islam dictates followers use killing and terror to convert Western infidels."

As The Washington Post reported on February 12, 2000, in his 1995 book The Judgment of God Terry wrote that "homosexuals and lesbians are no longer content to secretly live in sin, but now want to glorify their perversions." In a May 25, 2004, interview about his gay son with The Advocate, Terry stated that homosexuality is a "sexual addiction" that shouldn't be rewarded with "special civil rights."

A man once attacked largely by abortionists is now being criticized by some of his former colleagues for what they call an unethical fundraising campaign over the past half year.

"The purveyors of abortion on demand have stripped Randall Terry of everything he owned," said the Operation Rescue founder's website, randallterry.com, as of June 5. "The home was sold, and Randall's equity and assets were given to pro-abortion activists." The site then asks visitors to "help our brother.... Please give as generously as you can to restore what the enemy took," with donations to be sent to the Terry Family Trust. Hard-copy letters and e-mail solicitations with similar appeals have since November arrived in mailboxes around the country. (WORLD agreed to rent its mailing list for a Terry Family Trust solicitation in December 2002 and then a larger chunk of the list in February 2003; the proceeds from the rentals were donated to a pro-life charity this month.)

But neither the fundraising letters nor the website disclose that Mr. Terry is set to close on a new $432,000 home near St. Augustine, Fla., in South Ponte Vedra Beach. (Mr. Terry told WORLD he plans to close this month.) Nor do they reveal that Mr. Terry contracted to purchase the home eight months before he sent donors letters
saying he'd lost everything to pro-abortion forces. Donations to the Terry Family Trust will go to pay for the house, Mr. Terry told WORLD in a February 2003 telephone interview.

Some of Mr. Terry's former allies say the fundraising appeal is unbiblical and disingenuous. "I don't think you should ask people to sort of 'pay you back' to cover your losses," Pro-life Action League President Joe Scheidler told WORLD. Minister and pro-life activist Pat Mahoney says Mr. Terry's lifestyle since filing for ankruptcy in 1998 has not been that of a man who lacks money.

Mr. Terry's critics also say many donors who receive the fundraising letters are likely to assume that the proceeds of the Terry Family Trust benefit Mr. Terry's four oldest children, along with Cindy Terry, his wife of 19 years. Instead, the Terry family Trust is to help Mr. Terry get back into ministry and to benefit his infant son and his second wife, the former Andrea Kollmorgan. She was 22 and served as Mr. Terry's personal assistant during his failed 1998 New York congressional campaign. In August 1999, Mr. Terry left Cindy Terry, and obtained a divorce in November 2000. He married Miss Kollmorgan seven months later.

I have a big problem with Randall Terry (I used to work with him on occassion, BTW) and his new marriage. However, let's not shoot the messenger. The family asked Randall to be the spokesman and lead the effort. When this is over, then we can address this problem. 24 posted on 03/24/2005 7:35:18 AM PST by 1stFreedom (1)

...A pro-life group called Crossroads agrees that Gov. Bush has done a great deal on Terri's behalf."But how will history remember him if Terri dies? Likely, as a weak, moral coward, who did not have the courage to save a helpless, dying woman from those who so vehemently wished to take her life," the group said in a press release.

Crossroad noted that nearly 2000 years ago this week, Pontius Pilate "stood by and did nothing in the face of determined evil as it took the life" of one innocent man.

"Pilate simply lacked the moral courage that is occasionally demanded of one who governs, Crossroads said.The group said Pilate was not filled with hate -- but in the end, he "chose not to risk his office to save the 'insignificant' [Christ]."

Crossroads said Bush must (ask) himself, "Is one helpless woman's life worth my political career?'""As of this writing, the tribunals have spoken against an innocent, helpless woman, and an angry, hate-filled mob has gathered to mock and ridicule those praying for a miracle near to where Terri Schiavo lies in her fatal agony," Crossroad said."And her mother, Mary, must suffer the contempt of those who are determined to see her child unjustly condemned to death. Now it is in the hands of the governor, the man who will ultimately choose either to wield the temporal powers of his office to save innocent life, or 'wash his hands' of her."

Jeb Bush said on Thursday he understands that people are "acting on their heart, and I fully appreciate their sentiments and the emotions that go with this."But, he added, "I've consistently said that I cannot go beyond what my powers are - and I'm not going to do it."

Schiavo is also being linked to the Pope in the minds of some Catholics:

From the Guardian today:

As Christians reflect on Jesus' death this solemn Good Friday, some also are giving special attention to Terri Schiavo - particularly Roman Catholics who count Schiavo as one of their own, and whose church has been increasingly vocal this week in calling for the reinsertion of a feeding tube into the brain-damaged Florida woman.

Eternal Word Television Network, an Alabama-based Catholic cable service that reaches more than 100 million homes worldwide, is interrupting previously scheduled sacred programs for a Friday evening broadcast that expects to treat the Schiavo case through interviews with a family member and a neurologist.

News Director Raymond Arroyo said the network's ``extraordinary'' programming switch was driven by the public outpouring of concern over both Schiavo's plight and the frail health of Pope John Paul II.

``You have a collusion of events that I think only the spiritually blind would ignore,'' Arroyo said. ``It's not hard to see the similarities between the pope and what Terri Schiavo is going through, to some extent, and the sufferings of Christ that we commemorate Good Friday.''

And you thought this was just about the heartless exploitation of a dying woman and the perversion of her final days into public, political theater...

“Karl Rove started talking to me again,” John Roberts, CBS News’ White House correspondent, said of President Bush’s chief political advisor and deputy chief of staff for policy at the White House.

That was fast.

Dan Rather left the CBS Evening News March 10, and now that the White House has gotten what it wanted, history has started over. Kind of.

...

“With the departure of Dan Rather, this is a good opportunity for CBS to reach out,” said Ari Fleischer, the former White House press spokesman. “This is almost a curtains-up for CBS to improve relationships.” Mr. Fleischer—the former Presidential press secretary who has published his Bush explication memoir, Taking Heat: The President, the Press, and My Years in the White House—was considering CBS News now that Mr. Rather, the bête noir of the conservative class, has departed the CBS Evening News.

Mr. Rather’s early retirement was good, Mr. Fleischer said. But it wasn’t quite enough. “

Dan Rather became a symbol,” said Mr. Fleischer, who remains close to President Bush. “That’s why this is a new opportunity for CBS. But there’s a lot more to it besides who was in the anchor chair. There’s CBS as a larger organization. There is still largely a Democratic tilt that goes in their journalism.”

Dan Rather was a good start. But the White House wanted more.

“A new chapter has opened up at CBS,” Mr. Fleischer said on March 22, “but we don’t know what’s in it yet.”

...

Adam Levine, who was the assistant White House secretary in charge of television news until January 2004—and who, like Mr. Fleischer, remains close to the Bush administration press office—said CBS News still had “a lot of work to do.”

To measure the relative credibility of news networks with press officials at the White House, Mr. Levine suggested a scale of one to 100: he put Fox News at 90, NBC News at 80 and CBS News at “about 10.”

Asked about that assessment, a current White House official, who declined to be named, said that figure was “probably generous given what happened.”

“It depends on where they go from here,” said the official. “Contrition is always nice, but it all depends on what gets on the air. That’s the true test.”

“Bowing and scraping is not going to please this White House,” said Mr. Levine. “Results are going to please the White House.”

In any case, at least one 60 Minutes employee was still in good stead with the White House: Scott Pelley, the silver-haired newsmagazine correspondent and a dark horse candidate to replace Mr. Rather as anchor of the CBS Evening News. Mr. Levine said Mr. Pelley had remained well-liked, especially given his longtime friendship with Karen P. Hughes, who was recently named Under Secretary of State for Public Diplomacy in the White House. Since 2000, Mr. Pelley has had three sit-down interviews with the President; by contrast, Mr. Rather has had none.

“It’s human nature that if someone was unfair or biased, they wouldn’t get access to the President,” said Mr. Fleischer. But even Mr. Pelley had challenges with access that were beyond his control. The calculus for the White House in granting interviews, said Mr. Levine, was more than just the fairness and balance of the network—it was a combination of “reach, fairness and enjoyability.”

He described the latter as “the respect factor,” in which an interviewer showed due deference to the office of the Presidency, thereby making it a more appealing experience for Mr. Bush.

By this calculation, Mr. Schieffer, the CBS Evening News interim anchor, had “the respect factor” going for him, said Mr. Levine.

Mr. Levine said that during his tenure, “NBC was a much more effective tool for us.” He said press officials in the White House liked Meet the Press host Russert, but not because he tossed softball questions.

“Nobody is going to tell you that Tim Russert is easiest,” said Mr. Levine. “He’s by far and away the toughest. But he’s fair.”

Mr. Levine declined to comment on the present standing of Mr. Roberts, as did the White House source. But Mr. Fleischer commented: “John is feisty. John is smart. And I had a good relationship with John.”

During the scandal over the suspicious National Guard memos, Mr. Roberts was eager to distance himself from his role in the segment. On the morning of Sept. 8, he had been the one to confront press secretary Dan Bartlett with the documents purportedly written by Mr. Bush’s squadron commander, Lt. Col. Jerry Killian, which cast a negative light on Mr. Bush’s service.

In the panel report, Mr. Roberts was quick to point out that had he known that former National Guardsman Bill Burkett was the source of the documents, he would
have advised against using them. Mr. Roberts had interviewed Mr. Burkett for an earlier story about Mr. Bush’s service. Luckily for him, Mr. Roberts is not mentioned in a 24-person “Cast of Characters” listed in Ms. Mapes’ book proposal, which lists Mr. Rather and Mr. Bush as characters No. 1 and 2.

"One thing that God has brought to us is Terri Schiavo, to help elevate the visibility of what's going on in America. ... This is exactly the issue that's going on in America, the attacks against the conservative movement, against me and against many others," Delay said.

In their fight to keep their daughter alive, Ms. Schiavo's parents, who are Catholics, have been backed by an ad hoc coalition of Catholic and evangelical lobbyists, street organizers and legal advisers like the Rev. Frank Pavone, the Catholic priest who runs a group called Priests for Life and evangelical Protestants like Randall Terry, founder of Operation Rescue, and the Rev. Pat Mahoney of the National Clergy Council.

The struggle is only the latest indication of a strengthening religious alliance between denominations that were once bitterly divided. Evangelical leaders say they frequently lean on Catholic intellectuals like Robert George at Princeton University and the Rev. Richard John Neuhaus, editor of the journal First Things, to help them frame political issues theologically.

An increasing number of Catholics hold crucial staff positions in some of the religious conservative groups that lobby Washington. And conservative Catholics and evangelicals meet weekly in Virginia with a broad array of right-leaning lobbyists.

"The idea of building a culture that values human life is a Catholic articulation, but it echoes in the hearts of many people, evangelicals and others," said William L. Saunders Jr., director of the Center for Human Life and Bioethics at the Family Research Council in Washington.

...

The "culture of life" language has been widely adopted by conservative politicians. President Bush said in a news conference yesterday that government must "err on the side of life" in making every effort to keep Ms. Schiavo alive.

The Catholics and evangelicals first joined forces in the anti-abortion movement. And their alliance has now extended to include promoting sexual abstinence education and opposing stem-cell research and euthanasia. It is an array of issues they link under the rubric of "respect for the sanctity of life," whether that life is an "unborn baby" or an unresponsive patient lying in a hospice bed.

Americans have strong feelings about the Terri Schiavo case, and a majority says the feeding tube should not now be re-inserted. This view is shared by Americans of all political persuasions. Most think the feeding tube should have been removed, and most also do not think the U.S. Supreme Court should hear the case.

An overwhelming 82 percent of the public believes the Congress and President should stay out of the matter. There is widespread cynicism about Congress' motives for getting involved: 74 percent say Congress intervened to advance a political agenda, not because they cared what happened to Terri Schiavo. Public approval of Congress has suffered as a result; at 34 percent, it is the lowest it has been since 1997, dropping from 41 percent last month. Now at 43 percent, President Bush’s approval rating is also lower than it was a month ago.

WILL CONGRESS' ACTIONS THIS WEEK MAKE IT EASIER FOR THEM TO INTERVENE IN THE FUTURE?

Yes, and concerned about it - 68%

Yes, but not concerned about it - 9%

No - 17%

---

WHO SHOULD MAKE THE FINAL DECISION IF THE PATIENT IS IN A VEGETATIVE STATE AND DID NOT LEAVE LEGAL INSTRUCTIONS?

Spouse - 62%

Parents - 15%

Adult children - 10%

WASHINGTON - When Congress passed extraordinary legislation in the case of a brain-damaged Florida woman, it also paved the way for broader congressional debate on end-of-life issues and the rights of incapacitated people.

Some legal experts and medical ethicists, however, believe that Congress should not expand the federal role in an area that has been the realm of state lawmakers and state courts.

"We've had a framework for 30 years and this case hasn't changed it," said Jonathan Moreno, a biomedical ethicist at the University of Virginia. "There's nothing unique about the case ethically, medically or legally except it's become a political cause celebre."

Alta Charo, an ethicist at the University of Wisconsin, said courts have already determined that there is a "constitutional right to personal autonomy, including to control the manner of your death... That's been in American national law for decades."

An ABC News poll showed that most Americans disapproved of Congress's intervention. Two-thirds said they thought lawmakers were using the case of Terri Schiavo for political gain, and 70 percent deemed the congressional action inappropriate, according to the poll published on Monday.

Two congressional committees intend to hold hearings related to the case in the next week and several lawmakers -- mostly Republicans but also some Democrats -- have urged Congress to scrutinize the care of the disabled and the potential role of the federal judiciary.

"Every precaution should be taken to learn and respect their (incapacitated people) desires regarding the removal of life support," Sen. Tom Harkin, an Iowa Democrat, said this weekend.

Other lawmakers, including Florida Democrat Sen. Bill Nelson [he's up for reelection in 2006, mind you -- my note] and Indiana Republican Sen. Richard Lugar, have introduced legislation to encourage more Americans to sign advanced medical directives or living wills. Their legislation would allow Medicare to pay for elderly people to consult with their doctors in advance about end-of-life care. It would not affect how states deal with cases like that of Terri Schiavo.

Charo, for one, isn't taking any chances. "I'm going home and rewriting my advanced directive tonight," she said. "It's now going to include that I not want my case brought to federal courts, President Bush, members of Congress or the governor of my state in the case of any dispute."

In a statement released early [yesterday] morning, President Bush said he will "continue to stand on the side of those defending life for all Americans." But the facts make it hard to believe that Bush is standing on principle. In 1999, then Gov. Bush signed a law that "allows hospitals [to] discontinue life sustaining care, even if patient family members disagree." Just days ago the law permitted Texas Children's Hospital to remove the breathing tube from a 6-month-old boy named Sun Hudson. The law may soon be used to remove life support from Spiro Nikolouzos, a 68-year-old man. Bush has not commented on either case. [Source: Center for American Progress]

Political war kills all hope of dignified death

In a southwest Missouri cemetery, the tombstone over Nancy Cruzan's grave invokes a dilemma of our times. ``Born: July 10, 1957; Departed: January 11, 1983; At Peace: December 26, 1990.''

Her grave marker, with an etching of an EKG graph forming the words ''thank you'' before descending into a flatline, has become a local landmark. Tour buses stop on the way to Branson.

For nearly seven years, after a devastating brain injury, Nancy Beth Cruzan lingered in a netherworld while the courts struggled to find the legal demarcation between a horribly diminished life and death. As the case worked its way up to the U.S. Supreme Court and back, it ignited irreconcilable political and religious and philosophical clashes that seared the nation.

The case finally returned to a Jasper County, Mo., courtroom in December of 1990. Judge Charles Teel ruled that the family could have their daughter's feeding tubes disconnected. ``I suspect hundreds of thousands of people can rest free, knowing that when death beckons they can meet it face to face with dignity, free from the fear of unwanted and useless medical treatment.''

It didn't quite work out that way.

Right-to-life radicals tried to storm Cruzan's hospital a few days later. Finally, 12 days after Judge Teel's order, on Dec. 26, 1990, Nancy Cruzan's body ceased functioning. But her death hardly brought finality to the issue.

FLORIDA REPRISE

Earlier that same year, a young Florida woman collapsed from a potassium imbalance, leading to a heart attack. An interruption in the supply of oxygen to Terri Schiavo's brain caused a permanent loss of cognitive function. And the Florida case reprised the same brutal, divisive, emotional struggles that had erupted in Missouri.

Like Nancy Cruzan six years earlier, Terri Schiavo had lapsed into a perpetual, mindless repose. Her state-appointed guardian, in 2003, reiterated earlier findings: ``Highly competent, scientifically based physicians using recognized measures and standards have deduced, within a high degree of medical certainty, that Terri is in a persistent vegetative state.''

Doctors noted another condition in Schiavo that recalled the hopelessness attached to Cruzan's case. Neurological tests and brain scans indicated that her cerebral cortex, the center of human awareness, had essentially liquefied. Both women's bodies could register certain disarming physical reactions, but there was no hope for recognition, communication, thinking, knowing.

Neither the diagnosis nor the Cruzan precedent has been enough to staunch an endless struggle to keep Terri Schiavo breathing. Her husband and legal guardian has fought since 1998 for the right to remove the tubes that keep her alive. He's up against Terri's parents, right-to-life advocates, disability activists, the conservative media, a reactionary Legislature and a governor who courts the Christian right.

The cerebral cortex is responsible for cognition and the integration of sensation. Terri Schiavo's cerebral cortex is not only dead; it has liquified. If her cerebral cortex were still there but for some reason not working, then there might be hope that she could recover. But in her case, it's gone. In order for her to recover, it would have to be literally recreated. Here, via Alas, a blog, is a scan of Terri Schiavo's brain and a healthy brain:

My understanding is that the dark bits are spinal fluid; and thus that the fact that the scan of Terri Schiavo's brain shows huge dark areas, both in the center and elsewhere, indicates that an awful lot of her brain has been replaced by
spinal fluid. I am not a doctor, of course. But Rivka, who is, writes: "The amount of brain tissue missing is truly shocking." And PZ Meyers adds: "I am not a medical doctor, but I do have that Ph.D. in neuroscience (I am eminently qualified to analyze the brains of fish and insects), and that is one ghastly mess. That's not much of a brain, it's a balloon bobbing about in there." (In using these quotes, I mean no disrespect to Ms. Schiavo, for whom I have nothing but sympathy.)

SEC. 2. PROCEDURE.

Any parent of Theresa Marie Schiavo shall have standing to bring a suit under this Act. The suit may be brought against any other person who was a party to State court proceedings relating to the withholding or withdrawal of food, fluids, or medical treatment necessary to sustain the life of Theresa Marie Schiavo, or who may act pursuant to a State court order authorizing or directing the withholding or withdrawal of food, fluids, or medical treatment necessary to sustain her life. In such a suit, the District Court shall determine de novo any claim of a violation of any right of Theresa Marie Schiavo within the scope of this Act, notwithstanding any prior State court determination and regardless of whether such a claim has previously been raised, considered, or decided in State court proceedings.

SEC. 5. NO CHANGE OF SUBSTANTIVE RIGHTS.

Nothing in this Act shall be construed to create substantive rights not otherwise secured by the Constitution and laws of the United States or of the several States.

SEC. 6. NO EFFECT ON ASSISTING SUICIDE.

Nothing in this Act shall be construed to confer additional jurisdiction on any court to consider any claim related-- (1) to assisting suicide, or(2) a State law regarding assisting suicide.

[This next bit is positivly Bush v. Gore...]

SEC. 7. NO PRECEDENT FOR FUTURE LEGISLATION.

Nothing in this Act shall constitute a precedent with respect to future legislation, including the provision of private relief bills.

SEC. 8. NO AFFECT ON THE PATIENT SELF-DETERMINATION ACT OF 1990.

Nothing in this Act shall affect the rights of any person under the Patient Self- Determination Act of 1990.

The problem is that legislators cannot pass a law that basically says: "Feed Terri Schiavo. They tried that in 2003, and the courts tossed it out as blatantly unconstitutional.

To pass a bill that has any chance of being applied in Terri's case, the politicians have to come up with one that applies to all of us. And so legislators are working on measures that could force family members to maintain a relative in a vegetative state if they could not produce some kind of directive from that relative stating wishes to the contrary. Another proposal has vague wording about an "interested party" being allowed to intervene.

This is a frightening intrusion into the most personal and gut-wrenching decisions a family can make. Do you know how your spouse feels about being kept alive in a vegetative state? Of course you do, even if you don't have a living will to prove it. Now, imagine if you were complying with your spouse's wishes to die in peace and the government forces you to keep him alive in some under-funded Medicaid nursing home.

There is a political agenda here. Religious conservatives have filed legal challenges in the past to block parents from making end-of-life decisions about their children, even when the parents were in agreement. One of the groups that has done this, Operation Rescue, was founded by Randall Terry, who is pushing the Schiavo legislation.