CONGRESSIONAL ACTION ON EUTHANASIA BILL MAY BE CRUCIAL IN FALL.

When Congress returns to Washington after Labor Day, there are likely to be key committee votes and very possibly a floor vote on whether federally controlled drugs will continue to be used to kill patients through assisted suicide. All of the deaths so far officially reported as a result of Oregon's legalization of assisting suicide have been caused by such federally controlled substances.

The Pain Relief Promotion Act currently has 154 co-sponsors in the House and 26 in the Senate. It would both provide new measures to enhance palliative care and pain management as an alternative to euthanasia and restore the Drug Enforcement Administration's position (reversed in 1998 by Attorney General Janet Reno) that since federally controlled drugs may be prescribed only for a "legitimate medical purpose" they may not lawfully be used to kill patients.

On July 20, the Constitution Subcommittee of the House Judiciary Committee supported H.R. 2260, the House version; in a voice vote. Although the full Judiciary Committee (whose chairman, Henry J. Hyde, is the principal House sponsor) more than once scheduled the bill for consideration, delays caused by other matters prevented it from coming up before the August congressional recess. However, a vote by the full Judiciary Committee, where passage is assured, is likely soon after Labor Day.

In addition to the Judiciary Com-mittee vote, favorable consideration by the House Commerce Committee's Subcommittee on Health and Environment and then the full Commerce Committee is required before the bill can come to the House floor. At press time, 14 members of the Commerce subcommittee (including the ranking minority member, Representative Sherrod Brown of Ohio) and 23 members of the full committee (including Chairman Thomas Bliley of Virginia) had co-sponsored the bill.

Beyond those who have co-sponsored to date, two additional members of the subcommittee and four additional members of the full committee would have to support the bill for it to pass each level by majority vote.

S. 1272, the companion Senate bill, whose principal sponsor is the assistant majority leader, Senator Don Nickles of Oklahoma, has been referred to the Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions (HELP) Committee chaired by Senator Jeffords of Vermont. Under Senate rules, one or a small minority of senators may "filibuster" a bill by endlessly speaking against it.

Oregon's Senator Ron Wyden has publicly vowed to filibuster to prevent passage of the Pain Relief Promotion Act. A filibuster may be limited by adoption of a "cloture" motion, which requires 60 votes.

Even if the bill doesn't come to the Senate floor this fall, the HELP Committee could have a fall vote, which would advance the prospect of the bill coming to the Senate floor early next year.

The vital importance of passing the Pain Relief Promotion Act to stem the tide of euthanasia was recently underlined by the remarks of the leading "legal Dr. Death," Oregon's Dr. Peter Rasmussen. A July 19 article in American Medical News notes that while there are drugs other than federally controlled substances which can be used to assist suicides, they require injections by the doctor rather than simply prescriptions that can be taken by the patient, and only the latter are allowed by the Oregon law.

The article noted Rasmussen "said he supposed a physician could `play games' and put in an IV and just leave -- and the patient could self-administer a lethal dose of a non-controlled substance. `But that defeats the whole purpose of the law,' Dr. Rasmussen said, which `allows a comfortable, predictable death with the assistance of a physician.'"

The director of NRLC's Department of Medical Ethics, Burke Balch, commented, "Rasmussen's statement points out the crux of the issue. Is euthanasia to become an institutionalized, commonplace, and expected medical management option, seamlessly integrated into the fabric of contemporary medical practice?" Despite their occasional rhetoric to the contrary, Balch said, "the advocates of legalized euthanasia are not seeking solely a last resort measure for a small number of desperate cases. Their objective is rather the `mainstreaming' of chosen -- or imposed -- death whenever the `quality of life' is deemed too low, whenever life's `benefits' are considered outweighed by its `burdens.'"

"Sadly," Balch continued, "no law can completely prevent all suicides, or even all doctor-aided suicides, any more than the law can completely prevent all burglaries, rapes, or murders. What the law can do is prevent the institutionalization of legalized killing, which would massively increase the total numbers of deaths while creating enormous pressures on the vulnerable and tragically diminishing the incentives for more difficult and costly efforts to meet their needs."

Adoption of the Pain Relief Promotion Act, Balch concluded, "would both significantly advance the positive alternatives of good palliative care and pain management and put a major wrench in the works of the euthanasia juggernaut."