¶ Overview
- In 2022, Stauber praised the Supreme Court’s decision to overturn Roe V. Wade. On Stauber’s old campaign website he also said he believed life began at conception and claimed he would always be a “voice for the right to life.” When he got to congress he even co-sponsored a nationwide abortion ban. He spent several years advocating for the so-called “Born-Alive” bills and voted against the Women’s Health Protection Act, which sought to codify Roe V. Wade.
¶ Stauber Was An Anti-Choice Extremist Who Wanted To Restrict Minnesota Women’s Reproductive Freedom
¶ 2022: stauber celebrated the overturning of roe v. wade
Stauber Claimed The Dobbs Decision Was A “Win For The Sanctity Of Life.”
[Press Release – Rep. Pete Stauber, 6/24/22]
- HEADLINE: “Supreme Court Overturns Roe V. Wade, Ending Right To Abortion Upheld For Decades” [National Public Radio, 6/24/22]
- HEADLINE: “13 States Have Passed So-Called ‘Trigger Laws,’ Bans Designed To Go Into Effect If Roe V. Wade Is Overturned [CNN, 5/3/22]
¶ Stauber believed life began at conception and co-sponsored a nationwide abortion ban
2018: Stauber Said He Supported “Life From Conception” And Would Always Be A Constant Voice “For The Right To Life.”
[Pete Stauber for Congress, Issues, 8/11/18 via archive.org]
¶ Stauber Repeatedly Co-Sponsored A Nationwide Abortion Ban
2024: Stauber Cosponsored The Life At Conception Act. [H.R. 431, “Life at Conception Act,” Introduced 1/20/23, Cosponsored 4/27/23]
- The Life At Conception Act Would Have Banned Nearly All Abortions Nationwide. According to the Washington Post, "The congressional proposal, known as the Life at Conception Act, defines a ‘human being’ to ‘include each member of the species homo sapiens at all stages of life, including the moment of fertilization or cloning, or other moment at which an individual member of the human species comes into being.’ The bill would also provide equal protection under the 14th Amendment ‘for the right to life of each born and preborn human person.’ The measure has no provisions for processes like IVF, meaning access to the procedure would not be protected. It would ban nearly all abortions nationwide." [Washington Post, 2/25/24]
2021: Stauber Cosponsored The Life At Conception Act. [H.R. 1011, “Life at Conception Act,” Introduced 2/11/21, Cosponsored 6/22/21]
2019: Stauber Cosponsored The Life At Conception Act. [H.R. 616, “Life at Conception Act,” Introduced 1/16/19, Cosponsored 1/16/19]
¶ Stauber supported The so-called “Born-Alive” bill, Which Could Discourage Women From Seeking Abortion Care And Dissuade Doctors From Performing Them
Stauber Said He “Proudly” Signed A Discharge Petition To Force A Vote On A So-Called “Born Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act.”
[Twitter, @RepPeteStauber, 4/2/19]
- HEADLINE: ‘Scalise Moves Forward With Plan To Force Vote On ‘Abortion Survivors’ Act’ [The Hill, 3/25/19]
6/19/19: Stauber Advocated For The So-Called “Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Act” On The House Floor.
[Twitter, @RepPeteStauber, 6/19/19]
2/26/20: Stauber Said He Was Disappointed The So-Called “Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act” Was Blocked In Congress.
[Twitter, @RepPeteStauber, 2/26/20]
2023: Stauber Voted For The So-Called “Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act,” Which Would Allow Criminal Fines And Penalties For Clinic Practitioners And Hospital Employees For Failing To Meet Certain Requirements. In January 2023, according to Congressional Quarterly, Stauber voted for Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act, which would ‘require health care practitioners to provide the same care to a child that is ‘born alive’ after an abortion or attempted abortion as they would for a child born at the same gestational age and to ensure the child is immediately transported and admitted to a hospital; require hospital and clinic practitioners and employees to report any knowledge of failures to provide such care; and impose criminal fines and penalties for failures to meet these requirements. It would state that a child born alive under these conditions is a legal person under U.S. law, entitled to the protections of U.S. law, and it would specifically make any act that kills or attempts to kill such a child punishable as murder or attempted murder. The bill would also prohibit the prosecution of the mother of a child born alive after an abortion or attempted abortion and permit such mothers to seek relief through civil action against any person who violates the bill’s requirements, including monetary and punitive damages.” The vote was on passage. The House passed the bill by a vote of 220-210, thus the bill was sent to the Senate. [House Vote 29, 1/11/23; Congressional Quarterly, 1/11/23; Congressional Actions, H.R. 26]
¶ The So-Called “Born Alive” Bills Attempted To Discourage Women From Seeking Abortions Or Doctors From Performing Them
KFF: “Claims Of Abortions Occurring ‘Moments Before Birth’ Or Even ‘After Birth’ Are False. These Scenarios Do Not Occur, Nor Are They Legal In The United States." According to KFF, "Claims of abortions occurring ‘moments before birth’ or even ‘after birth’ are false. These scenarios do not occur, nor are they legal in the United States." [KFF, 2/21/24]
CNN: “It Is Already Considered Homicide In The US To Intentionally Kill An Infant That Is Born Alive.” According to CNN, “Opponents have argued that such measures restrict abortion access by threatening health care providers. It is already considered homicide in the US to intentionally kill an infant that is born alive.” [CNN, 1/12/23]
Policy Organizations Supporting Abortion Rights Said The So-Called “Born Alive” Bill Was “An Effort To Discourage Women From Seeking Abortions And Doctors From Performing Them.” According to the New York Times, "Republicans have routinely brought up what they call the ‘Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act’ when they are in control of Congress, presenting it as something that should not be debatable. […] The surgical method typically used to perform an abortion after the first trimester, known as dilation and evacuation, makes the odds of a live birth negligible. A vast majority of abortions in the United States occur in the first trimester, before the point of fetal viability, which is currently at about 23 weeks. Policy organizations supporting abortion rights said the measure was an effort to discourage women from seeking abortions and doctors from performing them." [New York Times, 1/22/25]
¶ 2021 & 2022: Stauber voted against a bill to protect abortion access
Stauber Opposed The “Women’s Health Protection Act” And Called It A “Barbaric Bill” That Was A “Despicable Attack On The Sanctity Of Life.” According to a press release from Rep. Pete Stauber, “Today, Congressman Pete Stauber (MN-08) voted against the Democrats' Women's Health Protection Act (H.R. 3755), better titled the Abortion on Demand Until Birth Act. This legislation would enable abortion on demand until birth by removing nearly all pro-life protections for the unborn and mandating that every state be a late-term abortion state. Of this legislation Congressman Pete Stauber stated, ‘As the pro-life father of four and foster parent, it absolutely breaks my heart that the Democrat majority in the House chose to pass a barbaric bill that would allow abortion violence up until the moment of birth. This legislation is a despicable attack on the sanctity of life and goes directly against the will of the American people, as the overwhelming majority of the population opposes abortion with no limits. I will always stand up for life and push back on the Democrats' radical pro-abortion agenda.’” [Press Release – Rep. Pete Stauber, 9/24/21]
Stauber Referred To The “Women’s Health Protection Act” As The “Abortion On Demand Until Birth Act,” And Called The Bill “Barbaric.” According to a tweet from Rep. Pete Stauber,
[Twitter, @RepPeteStauber, 9/24/21]
¶ Stauber Voted Against The Women’s Health Protection Act, Which Sought To Codify Roe V. Wade
2022: Stauber Voted Against Codifying The Right To Receive Abortion Services And The Right For Medical Providers To Provide Abortion Services And Against Prohibiting Abortion Restrictions. In July 2022, according to Congressional Quarterly, Stauber voted against the Women’s Health Protection Act of 2022, which would “statutorily establish that health care providers have a right to provide and patients have a right to receive abortion services, and it would prohibit certain restrictions related to abortion services. The bill would specify that rights established by the bill may not be restricted by certain requirements or limitations related to abortion services, including prohibitions on abortion prior to fetal viability, or after fetal viability if a provider determines that continuation of a pregnancy would pose a risk to a patient's life or health; requirements that patients disclose reasons for seeking an abortion or make medically unnecessary in-person appointments; requirements that providers provide medically inaccurate information or perform specific medical tests or procedures in connection with the provision of abortion services; limitations on providers' ability to prescribe drugs based on good-faith medical judgment, provide services via telemedicine or provide immediate services when a delay would pose a risk to a patient's health; and requirements for facilities and personnel that would not apply to facilities providing medically comparable procedures. It would also prohibit requirements or limitations that are similar to those established by the bill or that impede access to abortion services and expressly or implicitly single out abortion services, providers or facilities.” The vote was on passage. The House passed the bill by a vote 219-210, thus the bill was sent to the Senate. The Senate did not take substantive action on the bill. [House Vote 360, 7/15/22; Congressional Quarterly, 7/15/22; Congressional Actions, H.R. 8296]
- The Women’s Health Protection Act Sought To Codify Roe V. Wade. According to ABC News, "As a leaked draft opinion of a Supreme Court ruling shows a conservative majority of justices appear poised to overturn federal protections of abortion rights, Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer said Thursday the Senate will hold a procedural vote to begin debate on the Women's Health Protection Act next week. WHPA is a bill that aims to codify Roe v. Wade, the landmark decision that grants protections for a woman's right to abortion, at the federal level. The bill prohibits governmental restrictions on access to abortion services, according to the Congressional Research Service." [ABC News, 5/7/22]
2021: Stauber Voted Against The Women's Health Protection Act Of 2021, Which Would Protect The Right To Abortion Access And Prohibit Restrictions On Abortion. In September 2021, Stauber voted against the Women's Health Protection Act of 2021 which would, according to Congressional Quarterly, “statutorily establish that health care providers have a right to provide and patients have a right to receive abortion services, and it would prohibit certain restrictions related to abortion services. The bill would specify that rights established by the bill may not be restricted by certain requirements or limitations related to abortion services, including prohibitions on abortion prior to fetal viability, or after fetal viability if a provider determines that continuation of a pregnancy would pose a risk to a patient's life or health; requirements that patients disclose reasons for seeking an abortion or make medically unnecessary in-person appointments; requirements that providers provide medically inaccurate information or perform specific medical tests or procedures in connection with the provision of abortion services; limitations on providers' ability to prescribe drugs based on good-faith medical judgment, provide services via telemedicine or provide immediate services when a delay would pose a risk to a patient's health; and requirements for facilities and personnel that would not apply to facilities providing medically comparable procedures. It would also prohibit requirements or limitations that are similar to those established by the bill or that impede access to abortion services and expressly or implicitly single out abortion services, providers or facilities.” The vote was on passage. The House passed the bill by a vote of 218-211. The Senate failed to invoke cloture on the bill in February 2022. [House Vote 295, 9/24/21; Congressional Quarterly, 9/24/21; Congressional Actions, H.R. 3755]