Senate Votes to Lift ‘Gag’ on Abortion Counseling : Congress: The bill would require federally funded clinics to advise pregnant women of all their options.

The Senate approved legislation to cancel a “gag rule” against abortion counseling in federally funded health care clinics Wednesday but ducked a recorded vote that might have demonstrated whether a threatened presidential veto could be overturned.

The action followed a related House move last month to bar Administration enforcement of regulations that had been upheld in May by the Supreme Court. As in the Senate, House members avoided an up-or-down vote on the politically potent issue.

“Both the House and the Senate have now convincingly repudiated the Reagan-Bush Administration’s gag rule regulations and reaffirmed the right of physicians to practice medicine without government censorship,” said Sen. Edward M. Kennedy (D-Mass.), who supported the measure offered by Sen. John H. Chafee (R-R.I.).

The bill would require that federally funded clinics advise pregnant women of all their options, including abortion. If a doctor or nurse objected on moral or religious grounds, he or she would have to refer the woman to someone else who would provide the information.

In agreeing to a voice vote on final passage, each side in the Senate debate charged the other with being afraid of making an embarrassing showing on a formal roll call.

Nevertheless, abortion rights advocates claimed significant strength because the Senate, on an earlier 65-34 vote, rejected a proposal that would have broadened the Administration’s ban. The defeated measure would have forbidden all pregnancy counseling at family planning clinics.

On the other hand, anti-abortion forces said that the 34 votes they had gained on the proposal by Sen. David Durenberger (R-Minn.) indicated that they could muster the one-third Senate minority needed to sustain a veto of any bill nullifying the so-called gag rule.

“I think we demonstrated more support than people have been willing to admit we have,” said Susan Smith of the National Right to Life Committee.

As a result of the Senate action, the controversial abortion counseling issue has been put on two legislative tracks, both pointed toward a likely collision with President Bush. Bush has threatened to veto all legislation sent to him that would lift the ban, although he has said he is reviewing the counseling regulations in the wake of widespread criticism of the Supreme Court decision in May.

On one track, the House recently passed an appropriations measure with a provision barring enforcement of the regulations. The Senate is expected to ratify the move soon.

Although the House spending bill passed overwhelmingly, 353 to 74, there was no separate vote on the counseling provision and, thus, uncertainty over whether it could withstand a veto.

On another legislative track is the authorization bill approved by the Senate on Wednesday. Sponsors are eager to see it enacted because its removal of the gag rule would have more permanence than the one-year spending bill.

The House has yet to act on an authorization measure because its chief sponsor, Rep. Henry A. Waxman (D-Los Angeles), is concerned about attempts to attach a rider requiring that parents be notified before minors can receive an abortion.

In an unusual move Tuesday night, the Senate added to its gag rule bill two contradictory amendments on parental notification.

One by Sen. Dan Coats (R-Ind.) would require prior notification except in cases of incest, child abuse or child neglect. It was adopted, 52 to 47.

The other amendment, offered by Sen. George J. Mitchell (D-Me.), would provide a much wider range of exceptions, essentially leaving the decision up to the doctor performing the abortion. It was approved, 54 to 45.

Sen. John Seymour (R-Calif.) voted for only the Coats amendment, while Sen. Alan Cranston (D-Calif.) supported only the Mitchell amendment. Seven senators voted for both.

Neither measure would affect current state laws on parental notification. In California, such a law has been struck down on grounds that it violates the right to privacy in the state Constitution.

Presumably, one--or both--of the amendments would be dropped in a Senate-House conference. In an interview, Waxman, chairman of the Energy and Commerce subcommittee on health and the environment, said that he hopes that his panel will vote on his gag rule cancellation bill “within a week or two.”

He said that he is still looking for enough votes to defeat a parental notification amendment sponsored by a conservative California lawmaker, Rep. William E. Dannemeyer (R-Fullerton).

“But whatever the subcommittee does, I expect we’ll fight it out in the full committee and on the House floor,” he said.