House Session 2011 - 05 - 04 - 14 - 01 - 26 - 15 - 02 - 31

GOOD FOR THEM. CONGRESS SHOULD PASS H.R. 3 TO CODIFY THE LONG-STANDING BAN ON THE FEDERAL FUNDING OF ABORTIONS. I RESERVE THE BALANCE OF MY TIME. THE GENTLEMAN RESERVES THE BALANCE OF HIS TIME. THE GENTLEMAN FROM MICHIGAN IS RECOGNIZED. THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER. I YIELD MYSELF THREE MINUTES. THE GENTLEMAN IS RECOGNIZED. MEMBERS OF THE HOUSE, THE PROBLEM WITH THIS BILL IS THAT IT REACHES FAR BEYOND FEDERAL FUNDING AND THAT IT SUBJECTS WOMEN TO PROFOUND GOVERNMENT INTRUSION, THAT IT RESTRICTS WOMEN'S ACCESS TO HEALTH CARE, AND THAT IT TARGETS SMALL BUSINESSES FOR DISPARATE TREATMENT UNDER THE TAX CODE. AND THAT'S WHY I HAVE MORE THAN A DOZEN ORGANIZATIONS RANGING FROM THE AMERICAN NURSES ASSOCIATION TO THE YWCA, ALL OPPOSED TO THIS LEGISLATION. IN ADDITION, THIS BILL WILL PUNISH WOMEN FOR THEIR PRIVATE HEALTH CARE DECISIONS AND WILL SUBJECT THEM TO PROFOUND GOVERNMENT INTRUSION. SO THIS IS NOT A DEMOCRATIC VERSUS REPUBLICAN ISSUE. IT'S A VERY IMPORTANT PERSONAL DECISION. NOW, THE GOAL OF THIS BILL, AND I'D LIKE TO SUGGEST IT FROM THE OUTSET OF THIS DISCUSSION, IS TO MAKE IT IMPOSSIBLE TO OBTAIN ABORTION SERVICES EVEN WHEN PAID FOR WITH PURELY PRIVATE, NONFEDERAL FUNDS. AND IF THERE'S ANYONE THAT HAS A DIFFERENT VIEW ABOUT THIS, I HOPE IT GETS EXPRESSED THIS AFTERNOON. AND FINALLY, H.R. 3 SUBJECTS SMALL BUSINESSES TO DISPARATE TREATMENT UNDER THE TAX LAWS. AND AS ONE WHO SUPPORTS SMALL BUSINESS AND WORKERS IN THIS COUNTRY, THAT ALONE WOULD TURN MY SUPPORT AGAINST THIS MEASURE. MADAM SPEAKER, I RESERVE THE BALANCE OF MY TIME. THE GENTLEMAN RESERVES THE BALANCE OF HIS TIME. THE GENTLEMAN FROM TEXAS. MADAM SPEAKER, I YIELD TWO MINUTES TO THE GENTLEMAN FROM WISCONSIN, MR. SENSENBRENNER, FORMER CHAIRMAN OF THE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE, AND THE CURRENT CHAIRMAN OF THE CRIME SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE JUDICIARY. THE GENTLEMAN FROM WISCONSIN IS RECOGNIZED. THANK YOU. MADAM SPEAKER, TODAY WE ARE PRESENTED WITH AN OPPORTUNITY TO TAKE A GIANT STEP TOWARD PROTECTING THE UNBORN. FOR ALMOST 35 YEARS RESTRICTIONS ON THE USE OF FEDERAL FUNDS FOR ABORTION HAVE BEEN ENACTED SEPARATELY AND HAVE BEEN CONTAINED IN ANNUALLY RENEWED CONGRESSIONAL TEMPORARY FUNDING RESTRICTIONS, REGULATIONS, AND EXECUTIVE ORDERS. SUCH POLICIES HAVE SOUGHT TO ENSURE THAT AMERICAN TAXPAYER DOES NOT FUND THE DESTRUCTION OF INNOCENT HUMAN LIFE THROUGH ABORTION. THE LEGISLATION ON THE FLOOR TODAY WILL END THE NEED FOR NUMEROUS SEPARATE ABORTION FUNDING POLICIES. FINALLY PUT INTO PLACE A PERMANENT BAN ON ANY U.S. GOVERNMENT FINANCIAL SUPPORT FOR ABORTION. EACH YEAR THE ABORTION INDUSTRY HAS ALLOCATED MILLIONS OF TAX DOLLARS TO ADVANCE ITS AGENDA. LAST YEAR ALONE THE PLANNED PARENTHOOD FEDERATION OF AMERICA COLLECTED MORE THAN 360 MILLION TAXPAYER FUNDED DOLLARS. BECAUSE ALL MONEY IS FUNCTIONIBLE WHEN TAXPAYERS PAY AN ORGANIZATION LIKE PLANNED PARENTHOOD, MILLIONS OF DOLLARS, WE CANNOT HELP BUT EMPOWER AND PROMOTE ALL OF THAT ORGANIZATION'S ACTIVITIES. TAX-PAYING AMERICANS ARE FED UP. THEY ARE TIRED OF THEIR HARD EARNED MONEY BEING SPENT ON SUPPORTING AND PROMOTING THE ABORTION INDUSTRY. UNDER H.R. 3, FEDERAL FUNDS WILL BE PROHIBITED FOR ELECTIVE ABORTION COVERAGE THROUGH ANY PROGRAM IN THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES. THE LEGISLATION PREVENTS FUNDING FOR ABORTION AS A METHOD OF FAMILY PLANNING OVERSEAS, PROHIBITS FUNDING FOR ELECTIVE ABORTION COVERAGE FOR FEDERAL EMPLOYEES, AND PREVENTS TAXPAYER FUNDING ABORTIONS IN WASHINGTON, D.C. IMPORTANTLY H.R. 3 WOULD ALSO PROTECT THE CONSCIOUS DRIVEN HEALTH CARE PROVIDERS FROM BEING FORCED BY THE GOVERNMENT TO PARTICIPATE IN ABORTIONS. THE CONSCIENCE CLAUSE IS CRITICALLY NEEDED IN ORDER TO PROTECT HEALTH CARE PROVIDERS WHO DO NOT WANT TO TAKE PART IN THE ABORTION BUSINESS. WITHOUT IT, PEOPLE COULD BE FORCED TO PARTICIPATE IN SOMETHING THEY STRONGLY BELIEVE TO BE MORALLY WRONG. THESE HOSPITALS COULD LOSE FUNDING AND BE FORCED TO CLOSE. IT'S TIME TO END TAXPAYER FUNDED ABORTIONS. I STRONGLY SUPPORT THIS IMPORTANT AND NEEDED APPROACH TO PRESERVE AND PROMOTE THE SANCTITY OF LIFE. MY TIME HAS EXPIRED. WHO WISHES TO BE RECOGNIZED? THE GENTLEMAN FROM MICHIGAN. MADAM SPEAKER, I WOULD LIKE NOW TO YIELD TO THE FORMER CHAIRMAN OF THE SUBCOMMITTEE ON THE CONSTITUTION, GERRY NADLER OF NEW YORK, THREE MINUTES. THE GENTLEMAN FROM NEW YORK IS RECOGNIZED FOR THREE MINUTES. I THANK THE GENTLEMAN. MADAM SPEAKER, THIS BILL HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH CREATING JOBS, REDUCING OUR DEFICITTERS OR BOLSTERING OUR ECONOMY. IT ADDRESSES THE FICTITIOUS CLAIM THAT LEGISLATION IS NEEDED TO PREVENT FEDERAL FUNDING OF ABORTION SERVICES. THIS BILL HAS BEEN FALSELY ADVERTISED AS A MERE CODIFICATION OF EXISTING LAW ABORTION. PROHIBITING FEDERAL FUNDING I HAVE ALWAYS OPPOSED THE UNFAIR RESTRICTIONS ON FEDERAL FUNDING FOR PERFECTLY LEGAL HEALTH CARE PROCEDURE, BUT THIS BILL GOES FAR BEYOND PROHIBITING FEDERAL FUNDING. THE REAL PURPOSE AND EFFECT OF THIS BILL IS TO ELIMINATE PRIVATE HEALTH CARE CHOICES FOR WOMEN BY IMPOSING SIGNIFICANT TAX PENALTIESES ON FAMILIES AND SMALL BUSINESS WHEN IS THEY USE THEIR OWN MONEY TO PAY FOR CARE. HEALTH INSURANCE OR MEDICAL THIS TAX PENALTY IS INTENDED TO DRIVE INSURANCE COMPANIES INTO DROPPING ABORTION SERVICES FROM EXISTING PRIVATE HEALTH CARE POLICIES THAT WOMEN AND FAMILIES NOW HAVE AND RELY UPON. THE REPUBLICANS CLAIM A TAX CREDIT, THIS BILL CLAIMS A TAX CREDIT OR DEDUCTION IS A FORM OF GOVERNMENT FUNDING. IT FOLLOWS THE TAX DEDUCTIBLE CHARITABLE CONTRIBUTIONS TO A CHURCH, SYNAGOGUE, OUR OTHER INSTITUTIONS ARE ALSO GOVERNMENT FUNDING. A POSITION MY REPUBLICAN COLLEAGUES HAVE NEVER TAKEN AND THAT IF TAKEN WOULD PROHIBIT TAX DEDUNGSES FOR -- DEDUCTIONS FOR CHARITABLE CONTRIBUTIONS TO RELIGIOUS ORGANIZATIONS BECAUSE THEY WOULD BE VIOLATIONS OF THE ESTABLISHMENT CLAUSE OF THE FIRST AMENDMENT. YOU CAN'T HAVE IT BOTH WAYS. EITHER TAX EXEMPTIONS OR DEDUCTIONS OR CREDITS FOR PRIVATE SPENDING OR GOVERNMENTP FUNDER OR THEY ARE NOT. IF THEY ARE NOT, THIS BILL MAKES NO SENSE. IF THEY ARE, THEN TAX DEDUCTIBLE PRIVATE CONTRIBUTIONS TO RELIGIOUS INSTITUTIONS PROHIBITED BY THE CONSTITUTION. THE POWER TO TAX IS THE POWER TO DESTROY. AND HERE THE TAXING POWER IS BEING USED TO DESTROY THE RIGHT OF EVERY AMERICAN TO MAKE PRIVATE HEALTH CARE DECISIONS FREE FROM GOVERNMENT INTERFERENCE. THIS BILL IS AN UNPRECEDENTED ATTACK ON THE USE OF PRIVATE FUNDS TO MAKE PRIVATE HEALTH CARE CHOICES AND IS PART OF THE NEW HOUSE MAJORITY'S BROADER AND DISTURBING ATTACK ON WOMEN'S ACCESS TO HEALTH CARE. AFTER TWO YEARS OF HEARING MY REPUBLICAN COLLEAGUES COMPLAIN THAT GOVERNMENT SHOULD NOT MEDDLE IN THE PRIVATE INSURANCE MARKET OR PRIVATE HEALTH CARE CHOICES, I AM ASTOUNDED BY THIS LEGISLATION WHICH IS SO OBVIOUSLY DESIGNED TO DO JUST THAT. IT SEEMS MANY REPUBLICANS BELIEVE IN FREEDOM PROVIDED NO ONE USES THAT FREEDOM PEOPLE FIND OBJECTIONABLE. THERE'S ALSO A PROVISION IN THE BILL THAT MIGHT ALLOW A HEALTH CARE PROVIDER OR INSTITUTION TO REFUSE TO PROVIDE AN ABORTION TO A WOMAN WHOSE LIFE DEPENDS ON THAT ABORTION. THEY COULD LET HER DIE IN THE EMERGENCY ROOM AND THE GOVERNMENT WOULD BE POWERLESS TO DO ANYTHING. IF THE GOVERNMENT INSISTED THE HOSPITAL NOT LET THE WOMAN DIE, THE BILL WOULD ALLOW THE HOSPITAL TO SUE THE GOVERNMENT AND IN THE CASE OF A STATE OR LOCALITY STRIP THE COMMUNITY OF THAT FUNDING. DESPITE THE FACT THAT REPUBLICANS MADE A BIG SHOW OF TAKING OUT LANGUAGE RELATING -- LIMITING *** TO FORCIBLE ***, THE COMMITTEE REPORT NOW SAYS THAT THE BILL STILL EXCLUDES VICTIMS OF STATUTORY *** IN ORDER TO CLOSE THE, QUOTE, LOOPHOLE. THAT'S RIGHT, YOUNG WOMEN WHO HAVE BEEN SEXUALIZE VICTIMIZED DISGUSTING. IS A LOOPHOLE. A VOTE FOR THIS BILL IS A VOTE FOR TAX INCREASE ON WOMEN, FAMILIES, AND SMALL BUSINESSES. IT'S A VOTE FOR TAKING AWAY THE EXISTING HEALTH INSURANCE WOMEN AND FAMILIES NOW HAVE AND PAY FOR WITH THEIR OWN FUNDS. TO REFUSE CARE OVER THE OBLIGATION TO PROVIDE LIFESAVING CARE. IT DESERVES TO BE DEFEATED. I YIELD BACK THE BALANCE OF MY TIME. THE GENTLEMAN FROM TEXAS. I YIELD TWO MINUTES TO THE GENTLEMAN FROM ARIZONA, MR. FRANKS, WHO IS THE CHAIRMAN OF THE CONSTITUTIONAL SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE. THE GENTLEMAN FROM ARIZONA IS RECOGNIZED FOR TWO MINUTES. I THANK THE GENTLEMAN. MADAM SPEAKER, IT IS SAID THAT A GOVERNMENT IS WHAT IT SPENDS. THIS BILL IS REALLY ABOUT WHETHER THE ROLE OF AMERICA'S GOVERNMENT IS TO FUND A PRACTICE THAT TAKES THE LIVES OF OVER ONE MILLION UNBORN AMERICAN BABIES EVERY YEAR. DESPITE THE FACT THAT THE OVERWHELMING MAJORITY OF AMERICANS, EVEN SOME OF THOSE WHO CONSIDER THEMSELVES PRO-CHOICE, STRONGLY OBJECT TO THEIR TAXPAYER DOLLARS BEING USED TO PAY FOR ABORTIONS. IN 1973, MADAM SPEAKER, THE UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT SAID THE UNBORN CHILD WAS NOT A PERSON UNDER THE CONSTITUTION. AND WE HAVE SINCE WITNESSED THE TRAGIC DEATHS OF OVER 50 MILLION INNOCENT LITTLE BABY BOYS AND GIRLS WHO DIED WITHOUT THE PROTECTION WE IN THIS CHAMBER SHOULD HAVE GIVE THEM. SOME OF THIS WAS CARRIED OUT WITH TAXPAYER DOLLARS BEFORE THE HYDE AMENDMENT AND OTHER SUCH LAWS WERE IN PLACE. AND TAXPAYER FUNDING OF ABORTION COULD RECOMMENCE IN THE FUTURE UNDER OBAMACARE. SO BEFORE WE VOTE ON THIS BILL IT IS IMPORTANT FOR MEMBERS TO ASK THEMSELVES THE REAL QUESTION. DOES ABORTION TAKE THE LIFE OF A CHILD? IF IT DOES NOT, THEN THIS IS SIMPLY A BUDGETARY ISSUE. BUT IF ABORTION REALLY DOES KILL A LITTLE BABY, THEN THOSE OF US SITTING HERE IN THESE CHAMBERS OF FREEDOM ARE PRESIDING OVER THE GREATEST HUMAN GENOCIDE IN THE HISTORY OF HUMANITY. SOME OF IT MAY BE FINANCED IN THE FUTURE, MADAM SPEAKER, WITH TAXPAYER DOLLARS OVER WHICH WE WILL HAVE HAD DIRECT CONTROL. MADAM SPEAKER, OUR FOUNDING FATHERS BELIEVED THERE WERE CERTAIN SELF-EVIDENT TRUTHS WORTH HOLDING ON TO. THE GREATEST OF THOSE IN THEIR MIND WAS THE TRANSCENDENT MEANING OF THIS GIFT OF GOD CALLED HUMAN LIFE. OUR CONSTITUTION SAYS NO PERSON SHALL BE DEPRIVED OF LIFE, LIBERTY, OR PROPERTY WITHOUT DUE PROCESS OF LAW. THE CARE OF HUMAN LIFE AND ITS HAPPINESS AND NOT ITS DESTRUCTION IS THE CHIEF AND ONLY OBJECT OF GOOD GOVERNMENT. MADAM SPEAKER, PROTECTING THE LIVES AND CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS OF OUR FELLOW AMERICANS IS WHY WE ARE ALL HERE. AND FORCING TAXPAYERS TO PAY FOR THE INDISCRIMINATE KILLING OF HELPLESS LITTLE BABY AMERICANS IS NOT GOOD GOVERNMENT AND IT SHOULD BE ENDED ONCE AND FOR ALL. THE GENTLEMAN'S TIME HAS EXPIRED. THE GENTLEMAN FROM NEW YORK. MICHIGAN, I'M SORRY. MADAM SPEAKER, I'M PLEASED TO RECOGNIZE THE DISTINGUISHED MEMBER OF THE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE, DR. JUDY CHU, OF CALIFORNIA, FOR ONE MINUTE. THE GENTLEWOMAN IS RECOGNIZED FOR ONE MINUTE. IMAGINE WHAT LIFE WOULD BE LIKE FOR WOMEN UNDER H.R. 3. IMAGINE YOU ARE PREGNANT AND CANCER. THEN DIAGNOSED WITH BREAST YOUR DOCTOR SAYS THAT CHEMOTHERAPY COULD SAVE YOUR LIFE BUT WILL PERMANENTLY HARM THE BABY. THE DIAGNOSIS IS DEVASTATING. BUT TO ADD TO YOUR GRIEF BECAUSE OF H.R. 3 AN ABORTION WILL NOT BE COVERED BY YOUR PRIVATE HEALTH INSURANCE. YOU MUST PAY OUT OF POCKET EVEN THOUGH IT IS NECESSARY TO SAVE YOUR LIFE. ABORTION COPS. IMAGINE I.R.S. AGENTS AS UNDER H.R. 3 YOU COULDN'T DEDUCT AN ABORTION AS A MEDICAL EXPENSE UNLESS IT WERE THE RESULT OF *** OR ***, EVEN THOUGH YOU ARE USING YOUR OWN MONEY AND EVEN THOUGH YOU CAN DEDUCT EVERY OTHER MEDICAL PROCEDURE. IMAGINE THE I.R.S. KNOCKING AT YOUR DOOR DEMANDING RECEIPTS AND GRILLING YOU ABOUT YOUR ***. THIS BILL FORCES WOMEN TO LIVE THEIR LIVES AS IF AMERICA WAS BIG BROTHER WASHINGTON BUREAUCRATS DICTATE THE PERSONAL PRIVATE HEALTH FAMILIES. INDECISION OF AMERICAN STOP THESE ATTACKS ON WOMEN, OPPOSE H.R. 3. THE GENTLELADY YIELDS BACK. THE GENTLEMAN FROM TEXAS. I YIELD ONE MINUTE TO THE GENTLEMAN FROM VIRGINIA, MR. GOODLATTE, WHO IS THE CHAIRMAN OF THE INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE. THE GENTLEMAN FROM VIRGINIA IS RECOGNIZED FOR ONE MINUTE. I THANK THE CHAIRMAN FOR YIELDING. MADAM SPEAKER, AS THE CO-SPONSOR I RISE TODAY IN SUPPORT OF H.R. 3, THE NO ACT. TAXPAYER FUNDING FOR ABORTION ITCH LONG BELIEVED THAT THE RIGHT TO LIFE IS ONE WE MUST VIGOROUSLY PROTECT AND I HAVE CO-SPONSORED MANY BILLS TO DO THAT, INCLUDING THE RIGHT TO LIFE ACT LAST CONGRESS. WHILE THERE ARE MANY DIVERGENT VIEWS ON THIS TOPIC, ONE THING THEY MOST AGREE ON IS THAT IT IS WHOLLY IMPROPER FOR THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT TO USE TAXPAYERS' HARD-EARNED DOLLARS TO FUND ABORTIONS. THIS IS A MORAL ISSUE OF THE HIGHENS IMPORTANCE TO MANY TAXPAYERS AND TO FORCE THEM TO FUND THESE ACTIVITIES IS COMPLETELY UNACCEPTABLE. FOR MANY AMERICANS, TAXPAYER FUNDED ABORTIONS WOULD CONSTITUTE AN EXTREME VIOLATION OF CONSCIENCE THAT SHOULD NOT BE SANCTIONED BY THIS CONGRESS. I URGE MY COLLEAGUES TO SUPPORT H.R. 3 AND I WANT TO THANK THE GENTLEMAN FROM NEW JERSEY, MR. SMITH, AND THE GENTLEMAN FROM TEXAS, MR. SMITH, FOR FIRST INTRODUCING AND THEN ADVANCING . THIS LEGISLATION. I YIELD BACK. MADAM SPEAKER, I AM PROUD TO YIELD TO LYNN WOOLSEY OF CALIFORNIA, A STRONG PROGRESSIVE IN THIS CONGRESS, ONE MINUTE. THE GENTLEWOMAN FROM CALIFORNIA IS RECOGNIZED FOR ONE MINUTE. THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER, AND THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN. MADAM SPEAKER, FOR THE LAST 18 YEARS AS A MEMBER OF THIS BODY I'VE LISTENED TO REPUBLICANS GO ON AND ON ABOUT KEEPING GOVERNMENT OUT OF THE HEALTH CARE SYSTEM. THAT AND TAKING AWAY THE VOICE OF WOMEN ACTUALLY PUTS THE GOVERNMENT BETWEEN THAT WOMAN AND HER MOST PRIVATE HEALTH CARE DECISIONS AND IS THE BIGGEST, THE MOST INTRUSIVE GOVERNMENT OF ALL. I THOUGHT MY REPUBLICAN FRIENDS HATED TAXES, BUT APPARENTLY THEY HATE REPRODUCTIVE FREEDOM AND WOMEN'S RIGHTS EVEN MORE, BECAUSE THIS BILL WOULD RAISE TAXES ON SMALL BUSINESSES THAT PROVIDE THEIR EMPLOYEES WITH HEALTH PLANS THAT INCLUDE ABORTION COVERAGE. AND IN ONE OF ITS MOST EGREGIOUS PROVISIONS, THIS BILL COULD LEAD TO I.R.S. AUDITS OF WOMEN WHO SEEK ABORTION CARE AFTER THEY HAD BEEN -- A *** ASSAULT. ABSOLUTELY UNCONSCIONABLE. VOTE NO ON H.R. 3. I YIELD BACK. THE GENTLEMAN FROM TEXAS. MADAM SPEAKER, I YIELD 30 SECONDS TO THE GENTLEMAN FROM OHIO, MR. JORDAN, WHO IS A MEMBER OF THE CHAIRMAN OF THE REPUBLICAN JUDICIARY COMMITTEE AND ALSO STUDY COMMITTEE. THE GENTLEMAN IS RECOGNIZED FOR 30 I THANK THE SECONDS. GENTLELADY AND THANK THE CHAIRMAN OF THE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE. LOOK, LIFE IS PRECIOUS, LIFE IS SACRED, AND GOVERNMENT SHOULD PROTECT THAT BASIC FACT. WE DON'T GET OUR -- THIS -- IT'S NOT SOME GRANT FROM GOVERNMENT. IT'S A GIFT FROM GOD. OUR FOUNDERS UNDERSTOOD THAT WHEN THEY TALKED ABOUT THE CREATOR GIVING US THIS INALIENABLE RIGHT. AND THE FACT WE LIVE IN THE GREATEST NATION IN HISTORY AND THE TAX DOLLARS ARE USED TO DESTROY THE LIFE OF UNBORN -- THE LIVES OF THE UNBORN CHILDREN IS WRONG. THIS BILL IS CONSISTENT WITH THE GREAT NATION FOUNDED ON THE PURSUIT OF LIFE, LIBERTY AND HAPPINESS. I URGE A YES VOTE ON THE LEGISLATION. THE GENTLEMAN FROM MICHIGAN. I YIELD TO THE GENTLEMAN FROM OHIO, MR. BRALEY, TWO MINUTES. THE GENTLEMAN FROM OHIO IS RECOGNIZED FOR WO MINUTES. I THANK THE GENTLEMAN FOR YIELDING AND I THANK THE SPEAKER FOR RECOGNIZING ME. IF YOU REMEMBER ONLY ONE THING ABOUT THIS BILL, REMEMBER THIS -- IT'S A SOLUTION IN SEARCH OF A PROBLEM. THE SIMPLE TRUTH IS THAT THERE ARE NO TAXPAYER DOLLARS BEING NONE. USED TO PAY FOR ABORTIONS. ZERO. NADA. DON'T BE FOOLED BY THIS BILL. IT ISN'T ABOUT FUNDING. IT'S ABOUT PREVENTING WOMEN FROM BEING ABLE TO ACCESS COMPREHENSIVE HEALTH CARE. THAT'S WHAT THIS BILL IS ABOUT. THE DEBATE IS ABOUT WHETHER POLITICIANS SITTING IN CONGRESS SHOULD DICTATE THE PERSONAL, PRIVATE MEDICAL DECISIONS OF THE AMERICAN PEOPLE. IT AIMS TO IMPOSE INTRUSIVE GOVERNMENT RULES ON PERSONAL MEDICAL DECISIONS. THE BILL SUPPORTERS DON'T WANT ABORTION, ANY ABORTION TO BE LEGAL IN THE UNITED STATES, AND SO THEY ARE ADDING AS MANY BUREAUCRATIC RULES AS THEY CAN COME UP WITH. THIS BILL WOULD NOT ALLOW AN EXCEPTION FOR *** AND *** FOR WOMEN IN THE MILITARY AND MILITARY DEPENDENCE. THINK ABOUT THAT. MILITARY STUDIES AND NEWS REPORTS SUGGEST THAT THE RATE OF *** ASSAULT IN THE MILITARY IS UNCONSCIONABLY HIGH. CBS NEWS REPORTED THAT 1-3 MILITARY WOMEN EXPERIENCE *** ASSAULT DURING THEIR CAREER IN THE SERVICE. 1-3. THIS IS OUTRAGEOUS, AND YET UNDER THIS BILL THOSE BRAVE WOMEN WHO TOOK AN OATH TO DEFEND AND SUPPORT THE CONSTITUTION OF THIS COUNTRY AND PUT THEIR LIVES ON THE LINE EVERY DAY, IF THEY ARE SEXUALLY ASSAULTED BY A PEER AND BECOME PREGNANT WOULD NOT HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO GET AN ABORTION UNDER THIS RULE. THAT'S WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT TODAY, AND THAT IS THE CONTRAST BETWEEN THESE TWO PHILOSOPHIES OF THE ROLE OF GOVERNMENT AND THE PERSONAL, PRIVATE MEDICAL DECISIONS OF WOMEN, AND THAT IS WHY I ASK MY COLLEAGUES TO REJECT THIS BILL. THE GENTLEMAN FROM TEXAS. MADAM SPEAKER, I YIELD ONE MINUTE TO THE GENTLEWOMAN OHIO, MRS. SCHMIDT. THE GENTLEWOMAN FROM OHIO IS RECOGNIZED FOR ONE MINUTE. THANK YOU. I WANT TO THANK CHRIS SMITH FOR THIS BILL. LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, ALL THIS BILL DOES IS ENDING TAXPAYER FUNDING OF PUBLIC ABORTION. H.R. 3 IS TO UPDATE LONG STANDING HYDE AMENDMENT AND PLY IT TO PROGRAMS THAT ARE FUNDAMENTALLY FUNDED AND REPLACE THE PATCHWORK SYSTEM INTO PERMANENT LAW. IT TAKES THE HYDE AMENDMENT, THE HELMS AMENDMENT, THE HYDE-WELDON AMENDMENT AS WELL AS OTHERS AND MAKES THEM PERMANENT. H.R. 3 ENJOYS GREAT BIPARTISAN THAT'S WHAT THE BILL DOES. SUPPORT AND HAD OVER 227 CO-SPONSORS. SO SUPPORT OF THIS BILL IS IN THE PUBLIC'S HANDS. A CNN POLL RECENTLY TAKEN LAST MONTH SAID 61 OF THE RESPONDENTS DO NOT WANT THEIR TAX DOLLARS USED TO PAY FOR ABORTION AND THAT'S WHAT THIS BILL DOES. IT ENDS THE PUBLIC FUNDING OF ABORTION. THERE IS A HOST OF OTHER POLLS THAT CLEARLY STATES THE SAME THE HYDE AMENDMENT IS IN THING. CURRENT LAW, BUT IT SIMPLY -- NEEDS TO BE BROADENED FOR ALL THE THINGS WE DO HERE IN CONGRESS. I ASK MY COLLEAGUES TO VOTE ON THIS VERY IMPORTANT BILL. THE GENTLEMAN FROM MICHIGAN. MADAM SPEAKER, I AM PROUD TO YIELD TO THE FORMER CHAIR OF THE CONGRESSIONAL BLACK CAUCUS, THE GENTLELADY FROM CALIFORNIA, BARBARA LEE, ONE MINUTE. THE GENTLELADY FROM CALIFORNIA IS RECOGNIZED FOR ONE MINUTE. THANK YOU VERY MUCH, AND I WANT TO THANK OUR RANKING FOR LEADING FOR SO MANY YEARS MEMBER FOR HIS LEADERSHIP AND ON SO MANY IMPORTANT ISSUES. MADAM SPEAKER, HERE WE GO AGAIN. INSTEAD ON WORKING ON CREATING JOBS AND JUMP-STARTING THE ECONOMY, WE ARE DEBATING ANOTHER CYNICAL AND DIVISIVE ATTEMPT TO STRIP AWAY THE RIGHTS OF WOMEN. REPUBLICANS CONTINUE TO PERPETRATE THEIR WAR ON WOMEN WHILE MILLIONS OF PEOPLE AROUND THE COUNTRY ARE DESPERATE, MIND YOU, FOR JOBS TO HELP PROVIDE FOR THEIR FAMILIES. LET ME REMIND YOU, CURRENT LAW ALREADY BANS FEDERAL FUNDS BEING USED FOR ABORTIONS. THAT IS A FACT, EVEN THOUGH I PERSONALLY THINK WE SHOULD GET RID OF THAT BAN. WHAT'S NEXT? ARE WE GOING TO BLOCK TRANSPORTATION FUNDING BECAUSE IT MIGHT BE USED TO BUILD A HOSPITAL -- ROAD TO HOSPITALS THAT MIGHT BE PERFORMING ABORTIONS? COME ON. THAT'S A CYNICAL PLOY ON THE AND THIS BILL SPECIFICALLY MAJORITY'S SIDE. ATTACKS LOW-INCOME WOMEN IN THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA BY PERMANENTLY PROHIBITING THE DISTRICT FROM SPENDING ITS PURELY LOCAL FUNDS ON ABORTIONS FOR LOW-INCOME WOMEN. MAY I HAVE AN ADDITIONAL 30 SECONDS? 30 SECONDS, THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THESE WOMEN IN THE DISTRICT HAVE ALREADY BEGUN TO FEEL THE TERRIBLE EFFECTS OF THE WRITER PASSED IN THE C.R. IT'S DANGEROUS. IT'S IDEOLOGICALLY DRIVEN AND SO LET'S REJECT THIS BILL AND THIS ATTACK AND THIS DANGEROUS WAR ON WOMEN, ESPECIALLY LOW-INCOME WOMEN. VOTE NO ON H.R. 3. THANK YOU AGAIN. THE GENTLEMAN FROM TEXAS. MADAM SPEAKER, I YIELD 1 1/2 MINUTES TO THE GENTLEMAN FROM INDIANA, MR. PENCE, THE VICE CHAIR OF THE CONSTITUTION SUBCOMMITTEE. THE GENTLEMAN FROM INDIANA IS HALF. RECOGNIZED FOR A MINUTE AND A I ASK UNANIMOUS CONSENT TO REVISE AND EXTEND MY REMARKS, MADAM SPEAKER. YES, WITHOUT OBJECTION. I THANK THE GENTLEMAN FOR YIELDING, AND I RISE IN STRONG SUPPORT OF H.R. 3, THE TO TAXPAYER FUNDING FOR ABORTION ACT. I BELIEVE THAT ENDING AN INNOCENT LIFE IS MORALALLY WRONG BUT I BELIEVE IT'S MORALALLY WRONG TO TAKE THE FUNDS OF TAXPAYERS AND USE IT TO FUND A PROCEDURE THAT THEY FIND MORALLY OFFENSIVE. OVER 30 YEARS THE PATCHWORK OF POLICIES HAVE DENIED FEDERAL FUNDING FOR ABORTION IN AMERICA, BUT TODAY, THAT EXTO THE YEOMAN'S WORK OF CONGRESSMAN SMITH OF NEW JERSEY AND CONGRESSMAN DAN LIPINSKI, WE'RE BRINGING A STRONG AND CODIFIED MESSAGE THAT THE AMERICAN PEOPLE DON'T WANT TO ALLOW PUBLIC FUNDING OF ABORTION AT THE FEDERAL LEVEL, AND I STRONGLY SUPPORT IT. THE MAN WHO FIRST BROUGHT THIS IDEA BEFORE THE CONGRESS WAS THE LATE HENRY HYDE. I HAD THE PRIVILEGE OF SERVING WITH HIM. HIS ELOQUENCE CANNOT BE MATCHED BUT IT CAN BE PETED. HENRY SAID, QUOTE, I BELIEVE NOTHING IN THIS WORLD OF THE INNOCENCE OF A CHILD AND WONDERS IS MORE BEAUTIFUL THAN THAT LITTLE, ALMOST BORN INFANT STRUGGLING TO LIVE AS A MEMBER OF THE HUMAN FAMILY. AN ABORTION IS A LETHAL ASSAULT AGAINST THE VERY IDEA OF HUMAN RIGHTS AND DESTROYS, ALONG WITH THE DEFENSIVE BABY, THE MORAL FOUNDATION OF OUR DEMOCRACY, CLOSED QUOTE. TODAY, WE SAY YES TO LIFE BUT WE ALSO SAY YES TO RESPECTING THE MORAL SENSIBILITIES OF MILLIONS OF AMERICANS WHO, WHEREVER THEY STAND ON THIS DECISIVE SOCIAL QUESTION STAND BROADLY FOR THE PRINCIPLE THAT NO TAXPAYER DOLLAR SHOULD BE USED TO SUBSIDIZE ABORTION AT HOME OR ABROAD. H.R. 3 IS THAT LEGISLATION. I URGE MY COLLEAGUES TO SUPPORT IT. THE GENTLEMAN FROM MICHIGAN. MADAM SPEAKER, I YIELD MYSELF AS MUCH TIME AS I MAY CONSUME. THE GENTLEMAN IS RECOGNIZED. IT HAS BEEN MISTAKENLY REPEATED AT LEAST A DOZEN TIMES ON -- MISTAKENLY REPEATED AT LEAST A DOZEN TIME ON THIS FLOOR THAT WITHOUT THIS BILL FEDERAL FUNDS COULD BE USED FOR ABORTIONS. I WANT TO BE CLEAR ON THE RECORD THAT THAT IS INCORRECT, AND I'M SORRY THAT I HAVE TO MAKE THE STATEMENT. THIS LEGISLATION SUBJECTS WOMEN TO PROFOUND GOVERNMENT INTRUSION. IT RESTRICTS WOMEN'S ACCESS TO HEALTH CARE, AND IT TARGETS SMALL BUSINESSES FOR ADDITIONAL TAXING UNDER OUR I.R.S. CODE. NOW, THERE ARE MANY, MANY ORGANIZATIONS THAT ARE OPPOSED TO THIS LEGISLATION. THE AMERICAN NURSES ASSOCIATION , THE AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION, THE AMERICAN CONGRESS OF OBSTETRICIANS AND GYNECOLOGISTS, CATHOLICS FOR CHOICE, THE EQUAL HEALTH NETWORK, THE HUMAN RIGHTS CAMPAIGN, THE NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF NURSE PRACTITIONERS, AND THE NATIONAL ORGANIZATION OF WOMEN, THE NATIONAL WOMEN'S LAW CENTER, PEOPLE FOR THE AMERICAN WAY, THE UNION FOR REFORM JUDISM. THE UNITED CHURCH OF CHRIST, THE UNITED METHODIST CHURCH AND THE YWCA, PLUS NUMEROUS OTHERS. MADAM SPEAKER, I RESERVE THE BALANCE OF MY TIME. THANK YOU. THE GENTLEMAN RESERVES THE BALANCE OF HIS TIME. THE GENTLEMAN FROM TEXAS. MADAM SPEAKER, I YIELD ONE MINUTE TO THE GENTLEMAN FROM MICHIGAN, MR. AMASH. THE GENTLEMAN FROM MICHIGAN IS RECOGNIZED FOR ONE MINUTE. THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER. FREE SOCIETIES ARE FOUNDED ON A CORSET OF RIGHTS, RIGHTS THAT ARE BEYOND THE REACH OF GOVERNMENT AND THAT NO OTHER PERSON OR GROUP CAN TAKE AWAY. THE FOUNDERS CREATED OUR GOVERNMENT TO SECURE THESE UNALIENABLE RIGHTS AND CHIEF AMONG THEM IS THE RIGHT TO LIFE. PRESIDENTS RECOGNIZE THIS RIGHT WHEN THEY WAKE CAREFULLY WHETHER TO PUT OUR SOLDIERS IN HARM'S WAY. OUR JUDICIARY RESPECTS THIS RIGHT WHEN THEY REVIEW EACH AND EVERY CAPITAL PUNISHMENT CASE. IN SOME CASES PAYS FOR THE THIS GOVERNMENT AUTHORIZES AND ROUTINE TAKING OF THE MOST INNOCENT LIVES, THE LIVES OF THE UNBORN. IT IS UNCONSCIONABLE THAT IN A COUNTRY FOUNDED EXPLICITLY TO PROTECT INDIVIDUALS' FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS WE ALLOW THE REGULAR VIOLATION OF THE RIGHT TO LIFE. WORSE YET, THE GOVERNMENT FORCES EACH OF US TO PAY FOR THE KILLING OF INNOCENT LIFE. I URGE YOU TO VOTE FOR H.R. 3 TO STRENGTHEN OUR PROTECTION OF THE RIGHT TO LIFE. I YIELD BACK THE BALANCE OF MY TIME. THE GENTLEMAN YIELDS BACK. THE GENTLEMAN FROM MICHIGAN. MADAM SPEAKER, THE MINORITY WHIP FROM MARYLAND, STENY HOYER, IS OUR NEXT SPEAKER, AND I'M PROUD TO YIELD HIM TWO MINUTES. I THANK THE GENTLEMAN FOR YIELDING TWO MINUTES. OF COURSE, IT'S NOT ENOUGH TIME TO DISCUSS THIS ISSUE, BUT I RISE IN OPPOSITION TO THIS PIECE OF LEGISLATION. WITH MILLIONS OUT OF WORK, THE AMERICAN PEOPLE SENT CONGRESS A STRONG MANDATE IN THE LAST ELECTION, TAKE ACTION ON JOBS. YET, AFTER FOUR MONTHS THE HOUSE MAJORITY REPUBLICANS HAVE YET TO PUT FORWARD A JOBS . AGENDA. WHAT ARE THEY DOING? THEY ARE PURSUING A CONTROVERSIAL SOCIAL ADIVIDENDA ONE THAT IS FAR TOO EXTREME FOR MOST AMERICANS. LET ME SAY SOMETHING TO MY COLLEAGUES ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE AISLE. MY FRIENDS ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE AISLE. SOME OF YOU I THINK PROBABLY CHARACTERIZE YOURSELF AS LIBERTARIANS OR CLOSE TO IT. YOU BELIEVE THE GOVERNMENT OUGHT TO STAY OUT OF PEOPLE'S LIVES. I THINK THAT'S A WORTHWHILE PREMISE. AND I HAVE BEEN HERE FOR, AS SOME OF YOU KNOW, A LONG TIME, SOME 30 YEARS. AND I HAVE HEARD REPUBLICANS SAY SO OFTEN IT'S THEIR MONEY. LET THEM KEEP THEIR MONEY. THEY KNOW BETTER HOW TO SPEND THEIR MONEY. SO WHAT DO YOU DO TODAY, MY FRIENDS? WHAT YOU SAY IS, WELL, IT'S YOUR MONEY. AND, YES, WE'LL GIVE YOU A TAX CREDIT IF YOU SPEND IT THE WAY WE WANT YOU TO SPEND IT. SAYS. THAT'S WHAT THIS LEGISLATION IT'S YOUR MONEY, BUT IF YOU DON'T SPEND IT THE WAY WE WANT YOU TO SPEND IT, WE WILL NOT GIVE YOU THE TAX CREDIT THAT EVERY OTHER AMERICAN CAN GET. HOW FAR CAN YOU TAKE THAT, MY FRIENDS? IN TAX PREFERENCE AFTER TAX PREFERENCE AFTER TAX PREFERENCE WE CAN SAY YOU DON'T GET IT IF YOU DON'T SPEND IT THE WAY WE WANT YOU TO SPEND IT. I WANT YOU TO THINK ABOUT THAT. I WANT YOU TO THINK ABOUT THE PRECEDENT THAT YOU'RE SETTING HERE. THAT THE SOCIAL ACTIVISM YOU ARE EMBARKING UPON. ON THE IMPOSITION OF YOUR VIEWS ON OTHERS THROUGH THE TAX CODE. MY FRIENDS, THIS BILL UNDERMINES MORE THAN ANY BILL THAT I HAVE SEEN THE RIGHTS OF THE UNITED STATES -- MAY I HAVE WOMEN UNDER THE CONSTITUTION OF ONE ADDITIONAL MINUTE? 30 SECONDS ADDITIONALLY TO OUR FRIEND. 30 SECONDS. STINGY, AREN'T YOU? I MISSED BY ONE MINUTE, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, I'LL TELL YOU THAT. THE PUBLIC WON'T KNOW WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT. THE FACT OF THE MATTER IS THIS BILL IS BAD PUBLIC POLICY, IT'S BAD FOR WOMEN'S HEALTH, IT'S BAD FOR AMERICA, VOTE NO ON THIS BILL. LET FREEDOM RING. MEMBERS ARE ADVISED TO ADDRESS THEIR REMARKS TO THE CHAIR. THE GENTLEMAN FROM TEXAS. I YIELD ONE MINUTE TO THE GENTLEMAN FROM KANSAS, MR. HUELSKAMP. JEAT IS RECOGNIZED ONE MINUTE. I APPRECIATE THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK TODAY. AND CLEARLY THERE IS ONE CLEAR ISSUE BEFORE US IN H.R. 3. AND IT'S WHETHER OR NOT AMERICANS SHALL BE REQUIRED TO FUND THE TAKING OF INNOCENT HUMAN LIFE. AND IT HAS BEEN INDICATED THIS IS CONTROVERSIAL AND IT CERTAINLY IS. IT'S WITHOUT A DOUBT THE AMERICAN PEOPLE DEMAND THEY NOT ABORTIONS. BE REQUIRED TO SUBSIDIZE THE SECOND ISSUE HERE, MADAM CHAIRMAN, IS THE QUESTION OVER AND OVER WE HAVE HEARD FROM MY COLLEAGUES. THE ISSUE THAT THEY WOULD LIKE TO SEE ABORTION RARE. THAT IS WHAT THIS BILL DOES. THIS BILL WILL LIMIT THE PAYMENTS AND RESTRICT AND PROHIBIT THE USE OF FEDERAL TAXPAYER DOLLARS FOR THE FUNDING OF ABORTIONS. THAT'S WHAT THIS BILL DOES. WILL MY FRIEND YIELD? ORDER, MADAM CHAIRMAN. WOULD THE GENTLEMAN YIELD? I WOULD NOT YIELD. MADAM CHAIRMAN, AGAIN IT'S VERY CLEAR CONTRARY TO THE CLAIMS. AMERICANS SHOULD NOT BE REQUIRED TO PAY FOR ABORTIONS, H.R. 3 ACCOMPLISHES THIS OBJECTIVE. I ENCOURAGE MY COLLEAGUES TO SUPPORT THE BILL. I YIELD MY TIME. THE GENTLEMAN FROM MICHIGAN. MADAM SPEAKER, I'M PLEASED TO YIELD A JUDICIARY COMMITTEE MEMBER, TED DEUTSCH OF FLORIDA, ONE MINUTE. THE GENTLEMAN FROM FLORIDA IS RECOGNIZED FOR ONE MINUTE. I RISE TODAY IN OPPOSITION TO H.R. 3, BUT I ALSO RISE IN GREAT DISAPPOINTMENT THAT THE PEOPLE'S HOUSE IS AGAIN ENGAGING IN A DEBATE ABOUT THE RIGHTS OF WOMEN RATHER THAN A DISCUSSION ABOUT THE CHALLENGES THAT OUR NATION FACES. FOR MONTHS DEMOCRATS HAVE URGED THIS BODY TO REFOCUS ITS EFFORTS ON JOBS, YET SINCE THE CONGRESS CONVENED IN JANUARY, FAILED TO BRING TO THE FLOOR THE REPUBLICAN MAJORITY HAS ANY MEASURES TO HELP CREATE JOBS. THEIR NEGLIGENCE IS SHOWING AND INSTEAD OF WORKING IN A BIPARTISAN WAY TO REGAIN AMERICA'S ECONOMIC STRERNT, WE AGAIN FIND OURSELVES ON THE FLOOR IN A DIVISIVE DEBATE OVER WOMEN'S REPRODUCTIVE FREEDOMS. THAT'S RIGHT, RATHER THAN WAGE A WAR ON EMPLOYMENT, OUR REPUBLICAN COLLEAGUES ARE WAGING A WAR ON WOMEN'S HEALTH. UNDER THIS LEGISLATION'S LOGIC, ANYONE WHO HAS GOVERNMENT SUBSIDIZED INSURANCE COVERAGE, WHICH IS REALLY EVERYONE WHO HAS PRIVATE HEALTH INSURANCE, WHERE WE EXE-EMPLOYERS FROM PAYING TAXES, WILL BE FORBIDDEN FROM ABORTION. WHERE DOES IT END? EVEN IN THE FACE OF THE ANSWER IS IT DOESN'T END. OVERWHELMING SUPPORT IN WOMEN'S RIGHTS AMONG AMERICAN PEOPLE. EVEN IN THE FACE EVER PRESSING CHALLENGES, REAL CHALLENGES LIKE THE JOB CRISIS, NOTHING STOPS MY REPUBLICAN COLLEAGUES FROM THEIR ASSAULTS ON A WOMAN'S RIGHT TO CHOOSE. I URGE A NO VOTE. I YIELD BACK. THE GENTLEMAN FROM TEXAS. MADAM SPEAKER, I YIELD ONE MINUTE TO MY COLLEAGUE FROM TEXAS, MR. HENSARLING, WHO IS ALSO THE CHAIRMAN OF THE REPUBLICAN CONFERENCE. THE GENTLEMAN IS RECOGNIZED FOR ONE MINUTE. MADAM SPEAKER, I RISE TO PROUDLY SUPPORT H.R. 3 FOR THREE SIMPLE REASONS. NUMBER ONE, THIS STILL JUST SIMPLY HELPS CODIFY WHAT HAS DE FACTO BEEN OUR POLICY FOR 35 YEARS THROUGH THE HYDE AMENDMENT. AND THAT IS A WHOCY THAT NO WAY, SHAPE, OR FORM OUTLAWS ABORTION. IT SIMPLY SAYS FEDERAL TAXPAYERS WILL NOT BE COMPELLED TO SUBSIDIZE THEM. SECOND OF ALL, MADAM SPEAKER, AT A TIME WHEN OUR NATION IS GOING BROKE, WHERE WE ARE BORROWING 42 CENTS ON THE DOLLAR, MUCH OF IT FROM THE CHINESE AND SENDING THE BILL TO OUR CHILDREN AND GRANDCHILDREN, MAYBE, MAYBE THOSE PROGRAMS THAT HAD THE LEAST CONSENSIVE AND MOST DIVISIVE AMONG US OUGHT TO BE THE FIRST TO LOSE THEIR TAXPAYER SUBSIDIES. THIRD, AND MOST IMPORTANTLY, AND PROFOUNDLY FOR ME, MADAM SPEAKER, IN MY HEART AND IN MY HEAD I CAN COME TO NO OTHER CONCLUSION BUT THAT LIFE BEGINS AT CONCEPTION. IT IS OUR MOST FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT ENSHRINED IN THE CONSTITUTION, NO TAXPAYER SHOULD BE COMPELLED AGAINST THEIR WILL TO SUBSIDIZE THE LOSS OF HUMAN LIFE, TRULY THE LEAST OF THIS. I YIELD BACK THE BALANCE OF MY TIME. THE GENTLEMAN FROM MICHIGAN. MADAM SPEAKER, I AM PLEASED NOW TO RECOGNIZE THE DISTINGUISHED GENTLELADY FROM CONNECTICUT, ROSA DELAURO, FOR ONE MINUTE. THE GENTLELADY FROM CONNECTICUT IS RECOGNIZED FOR ONE MINUTE. MADAM SPEAKER, I RISE IN STRONG OPPOSITION TO THIS OVERREACHING LEGISLATION. IT RAISES TAXES, THREATENS THE HEALTH OF OUR ECONOMY, AND ENDANGERS WOMEN'S HEALTH. THIS BILL WILL RAISE TAXES ON SMALL BUSINESS THAT IS OFFER COMPREHENSIVE HEALTH COVERAGE FOR WOMEN. IT WILL PUNISH PERFECTLY LEGAL PRIVATE HEALTH DECISIONS BY RAISING TAXES ON PLANS THAT OFFER COVERAGES FOR ABORTION. 87% OF PRIVATE HEALTH PLANS WILL BE IMPACTED BY THIS UNPRECEDENTED ASSAULT. AND AMERICANS WILL SEE THEIR HEALTH INSURANCE OPTIONS RESTRICTED OR TAKEN AWAY. WITH THIS LEGISLATION WE HAVE YET ANOTHER EXAMPLE OF THE MAJORITY'S REAL PRIORITIES, NOT TO CREATE JOBS, NOT TO GROW THE ECONOMY, NOT TO REDUCE THE DEFICIT, BUT TO ADVANCE A DIVISIVE SOCIAL AGENDA BY MANIPULATING THE TAX CODE. AND THEY ARE DOING MORE THAN JUST RAISING TAXES, RATHER THAN TRUSTING WOMEN LIKE THE MAJORITY OF AMERICANS DO, THE HOUSE MAJORITY, THEY ARE TRYING TO FORCE WOMEN BACK INTO TRADITIONAL ROLES. THEY ARE RISKING THEIR VERY HEALTH AND THE REPORT THAT A COMPANIES THIS BILL GOES FURTHER. IT TRIES TO REDEFINE *** AND ASSAULT. NARROW THE EXCEPTION FOR *** THIS BILL IS UNCONSCIONABLE. I URGE MY COLLEAGUES TO OPPOSE IT. LET'S CREATE JOBS. WE SHOULD NOT BE RAISING TAXES AND PUTTING WOMEN'S LIVES AT RISK. THE GENTLELADY'S TIME HAS EXPIRED. THE GENTLEMAN FROM TEXAS. MADAM SPEAKER, I YIELD 30 SECONDS TO THE GENTLEMAN FROM LOUISIANA, MR. LANDRY. THE GENTLEMAN IS RECOGNIZED. A LARGE MAJORITY OF AMERICANS OPPOSE TAXPAYER SUBSIDIES FOR ABORTION. THOSE WHO OPPOSE THIS BILL, INCLUDING THE PRESIDENT, CLAIM THAT IT DENIES ACCESS TO HEALTH CARE FOR WOMEN. MY MESSAGE TO THEM IS SIMPLE. THE MAJORITY OF WOMEN ARE OPPOSED TO HAVING THEIR HARD EARNED TAX DOLLARS SPENT ON ABORTION. IN A RECENT SURVEY IT WAS FOUND THAT 70% OF WOMEN OPPOSE TAXPAYER FUNDING FOR ABORTION. PRACTICE. WE MUST PERMANENTLY END THIS IT IS OUR DUTY TO ACT AND TO ACT NOW. I URGE MY COLLEAGUES TO LISTEN TO THE MAJORITY OF AMERICANS WHO STRONGLY OPPOSE PUBLIC FUNDING FOR ABORTION SERVICES AND PASS THIS BILL. I YIELD BACK THE BALANCE OF MY TIME. THE GENTLEMAN FROM MICHIGAN. MADAM SPEAKER, I YIELD TO THE DISTINGUISHED GENTLEMAN FROM NEW JERSEY, ROB ANDREWS, ONE MINUTE. THE GENTLEMAN IS RECOGNIZED FOR ONE MINUTE. MR. AN -- I ASK UNANIMOUS CONSENT TO REVISE AND EXTEND MY REMARKS. WITHOUT OBJECTION. THANK YOU. MEMBERS WHO ARE PRO-LIFE OR PRO-CHOICE SHOULD OPPOSE THIS BILL BECAUSE IT DOES VIOLENCE TO THE CONSTITUTION. THIS BILL PURPORTS TO SAY THAT THROUGH THE TAX CODE WE CAN FAVOR OR DISFAVOR THE EXERCISE OF CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS. THAT'S NOT RIGHT AND THAT'S NOT CONSTITUTIONAL. THE MEMBERS OF THE MAJORITY SIDE WOULD CERTAINLY NOT SUPPORT NOR WOULD I A PROVISION THAT SAYS YOU CAN'T TAKE A CHARITABLE CONTRIBUTION TO SUPPORT A GROUP THAT LOBBIES IN FAVOR OF PRO-LIFE CAUSES. BUT IF WE WANTED TO DISFAVOR THAT POINT OF VIEW IN THE TAX CODE, THIS IS THE WAY WE WOULD DO IT. THERE IS NO DIFFERENCE BETWEEN WHAT THE MAJORITY'S DOING HERE AND THAT ODIOUS PROVISION I JUST DESCRIBED. IT IS WRONG TO RAISE TAXES ON PEOPLE WHO EXERCISE THEIR CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS BECAUSE THEY HAVE CHOSEN TO EXERCISE THEIR CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS. WHETHER YOU ARE PRO-CHOICE OR PRO-LIFE, IF YOU ARE PRO-CONSTITUTION YOU SHOULD VOTE NO. I YIELD BACK THE BALANCE OF MY TIME. THE GENTLEMAN'S TIME HAS EXPIRED. THE GENTLEMAN FROM TEXAS. MADAM SPEAKER, I YIELD ONE MINUTE TO THE GENTLEMAN FROM ALABAMA, MR. ADERHOLT. THE GENTLEMAN IS RECOGNIZED FOR ONE MINUTE. THANK YOU. MADAM SPEAKER, I RISE TODAY IN SUPPORT OF THE LEGISLATION. AS OF TODAY CONGRESS PROHIBITS THE EXPENDITURE OF FEDERAL FUNDS ON ABORTIONS THROUGH A PATCHWORK OF RIDERS ON OUR ANNUAL APPROPRIATION BILLS. THESE RIDERS INCLUDE THE HYDE AMENDMENT IN LABOR-HHS AND OTHER PROHIBITIONS IN THE STATE AND FOREIGN OPERATIONS BILL, THE FINANCIAL SERVICES BILL, THE COMMERCE, JUSTICE, SCIENCE BILL, IN ADDITION TO THE DEFENSE BILL. SIMPLY PUT, THIS LEGISLATION WILL ELIMINATE THE NEED FOR THESE ANNUAL RIDERS TO ENSURE THESE POLICIES BECOME PERMANENT STATUTE. THIS BILL ALSO CODIFIES THE HYDE WELL AND CONSCIOUS CLAUSE THAT WOULD EXPAND THE POLICY TO INCLUDE ALL RECIPIENTS OF FEDERAL FUNDS. CONSCIOUS CLAUSE PROTECTS HEALTH CARE ENTITIES THAT CHOOSE NOT TO PROVIDE ABORTIONS FROM DISCRIMINATION BY STATE, LOCAL, OR FEDERAL AGENCIES THAT RECEIVE FEDERAL FUNDS. THEREFORE NO ONE WHO HAS DEEP RELIGIOUS OR MORAL OPPOSITION TO ABORTIONS SHOULD BE FORCED TO PROVIDE FOR THEM. MADAM SPEAKER, I SUPPORT THIS LEGISLATION AND I URGE MY COLLEAGUES TO DO THE SAME. I YIELD BACK THE BALANCE OF MY TIME. THE GENTLEMAN'S TIME HAS EXPIRED. THE GENTLEMAN FROM MICHIGAN. MADAM SPEAKER, I RESERVE THE BALANCE OF MY TIME. THE GENTLEMAN RESERVES. THE GENTLEMAN FROM TEXAS. I YIELD ONE MINUTE TO MY COLLEAGUE FROM TEXAS, MR. GOHMERT, WHO IS ALSO A MEMBER OF THE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE. THE GENTLEMAN IS RECOGNIZED FOR ONE MINUTE. THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER. MY FIRST DAUGHTER WAS BORN VERY PREMATURELY. THEY RUSHED HER OVER TO SHREVEPORT TO THE I.C.E. LEVEL INTENSIVE CARE. THE NEONAYTOLOGIST ENCOURAGED ME BECAUSE MY WIFE COULDN'T COME TO CARESS HER, TALK TO HER, THAT IT MEANT SO MUCH EVEN THOUGH SHE COULDN'T SEE ME. SHE GRABBED MY FINGER AND HELD IT FOR HOURS. SHE WANTED TO CLING TO LIFE. FOR THOSE OF US WHO THINK IT'S WRONG TO KILL CHILDREN IN UTERO , IT IS EVEN MORE WRONG TO PRY MONEY FROM OUR HANDS AT THE POINT OF AN I.R.S. GUN SO THAT OTHERS CAN USE OUR TAX DOLLARS TO PAY TO KILL THOSE CHILDREN. PLEASE LET'S STOP IT. I YIELD BACK. THE GENTLEMAN YIELDS BACK. THE GENTLEMAN FROM MICHIGAN. MADAM SPEAKER, I CONTINUE TO RESERVE. THE GENTLEMAN RESERVES. THE GENTLEMAN FROM TEXAS. MADAM SPEAKER, WE ARE PREPARED TO CLOSE. GENTLEMAN FROM MICHIGAN, ARE YOU PREPARED TO CLOSE? DO YOU HAVE ANY MORE SPEAKERS? MADAM SPEAKER, I CONSUME. YIELD MYSELF SUCH TIME AS I MAY THE GENTLEMAN IS RECOGNIZED. I WANT TO URGE ALL OF THE MEMBERS OF THE HOUSE TO PLEASE CONSIDER THIS ISSUE FROM AN UNEMOTIONAL POINT OF VIEW AS POSSIBLE, TO PLEASE DETERMINE IN YOUR HEARTS AND IN YOUR MIND ABOUT THE FACT THAT THIS BILL GOES OVER THE TOP. AND I RESERVE THE BALANCE OF MY TIME. AND I WOULD NOW LIKE TO RECOGNIZE THE DISTINGUISHED MINORITY LEADER, NANCY PELOSI, FOR ONE MINUTE. THE DISTINGUISHED LEADER IS RECOGNIZED FOR ONE MINUTE. PELOSI -- THANK YOU, MADAM I THANK THE GENTLEMAN FOR SPEAKER. YIELDING. I WANT TO THANK HIM FOR HIS LEADERSHIP ON THE HEALTH OF AMERICA'S WOMEN. THIS IS APPROXIMATELY THE 120TH DAY OF THE REPUBLICAN MAJORITY IN THE CONGRESS OF THE UNITED STATES. AND NOT -- IN ALL THOSE 120 DAYS WE HAVE YET TO SEE A JOBS BILL BROUGHT TO THE FLOOR. WE HAVEN'T EVEN SEEN A JOBS PROPOSAL OR A JOBS AGENDA. INSTEAD, ONCE AGAIN, WE SEE A DIVERSION, A DIVERSION. WE SEE LEGISLATION WHICH IS EXTREME AND DIVISIVE AND HARMFUL TO WOMEN'S HELP. I RISE TODAY TO URGE MY REPUBLICAN COLLEAGUES IN THE HOUSE, LET US COME TOGETHER TO WORK IN A BIPARTISAN WAY TO ADDRESS THE NUMBER ONE PRIORITY OF THE AMERICAN PEOPLE, THE CREATION OF JOBS. AND I RISE TODAY AS THE REPUBLICANS BRING TO THE FLOOR THIS LEGISLATION INSTEAD OF BRINGING TO THE FLOOR A BILL TO END THE SUBSIDIES FOR BIG OIP -- OIL. THEY GAVE THE IMPRESSION DURING THE BREAK HE -- THEY WOULD DO THAT. I ASKED FOR AN END TO THE SUBSIDIES TO BIG OIL. INSTEAD OF DOING THAT, WE ARE, AGAIN, UNDERMINING WOMEN'S HEALTH. LET US BEGIN DEBATE OR THIS PART OF THE DEBATE, ANYWAY, WITH A CLEAR UNDERSTANDING OF THE FACTS. FEDERAL FUNDING FOR ABORTION IS ALREADY PERMITTED UNDER THE LAW, THE HYDE AMENDMENT, EXCEPT IN THE CASES OF ***, *** AND LIFE OF THE MONEY. FEDERAL FUNDING FOR ABORTION IS ALREADY PROHIBITED. THIS BILL IS EVEN A RADICAL DEPARTURE FROM THE HYDE AMENDMENT. IT REPRESENTS AN UNPRECEDENTED AND, AGAIN, RADICAL ASSAULT ON WOMEN'S ACCESS TO THE FULL RANGE OF REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH CARE SERVICES. FOR THE FIRST TIME, THIS BILL PLACES RESTRICTIONS ON HOW WOMEN WITH PRIVATE INSURANCE CAN SPEND THEIR PRIVATE DOLLARS IN PURCHASING HEALTH INSURANCE. THIS BILL WILL DENY TAX CREDITS FOR WOMEN WHO BUY THE TYPE OF HEALTH INSURANCE THAT THEY CURRENTLY HAVE, HEALTH INSURANCE THAT COVERS A FULL RANGE OF REPROW DUCTIVE CARE. AS A RESULT -- NOW, THIS IS ABOUT BUSINESSES. IF YOU'RE A WOMAN AND YOU HAVE A JOB AND YOUR EMPLOYER GIVES YOU HEALTH INSURANCE, THAT EMPLOYER WILL NO LONGER BE ABLE TO TAKE A TAX DEDUCTION FOR YOUR HEALTH INSURANCE. QUITE DIFFERENT FROM WHAT HAPPENS WITH THEIR MALE EMPLOYEES. IN THAT EVENT WHEN THAT HAPPENS, HEALTH INSURANCE COMPANIES WILL THEN ROLL BACK THAT COVERAGE BECAUSE THERE WON'T BE ENOUGH PEOPLE PARTICIPATING IN THE POOL TO JUSTIFY THAT INSURANCE. SO THIS IS -- MILLIONS OF WOMEN WILL NO LONGER HAVE ACCESS TO INSURANCE POLICIES FROM THEIR EMPLOYER THAT COVER ALL REPRODUCTIVE SERVICES. THE PRACTICAL RESULT OF THIS LEGISLATION FOR MANY WILL BE A TAX INCREASE. A TAX INCREASE ON SMALL BUSINESSES AND A TAX INCREASE ON WOMEN BASED ON HOW THEY CHOOSE THEIR PRIVATE DOLLARS SIMPLY FOR KEEPING THE COVERAGE THEY HAVE RIGHT NOW. EVEN MORE OF A PROBLEM, THIS LEGISLATION ALLOWS HOSPITALS TO DENY LIFE-SAVING CARE TO WOMEN IN MOMENTS OF DIRE EMERGENCIES. THE BILL WOULD PERMIT MEDICAL PROFESSIONALS TO TURN THEIR BACKS ON WOMEN DYING FROM TREATABLE CONDITIONS. THIS IS APPALLING. AS THE AMERICAN COLLEGE OF OBSTETRICIANS AND GYNECOLOGISTS WROTE IN OPPOSITION TO THIS EFFORT, WE OPPOSE LEGISLATIVE PROPOSALS TO LIMIT WOMEN'S ACCESS TO ANY NEEDED MEDICAL CARE. THESE PROPOSALS CAN JEOPARDIZE THE HEALTH AND SAFETY OF OUR PATIENTS AND PUT GOVERNMENT BETWEEN A PHYSICIAN AND A PATIENT. END OF QUOTE. MADAM SPEAKER, LET US NOT WORK LET US EXPAND IT. TO LIMIT THE CARE. LET US NOT RAISE TAXES ON SMALL BUSINESSES ON WOMEN. LET US STRENGTHEN OUR MIDDLE CLASS. LET US NEVER ATTACK THE HEALTH OF WOMEN. LET US INSTEAD CREATE JOBS. THAT'S WHAT THE AMERICAN PEOPLE EXPECT US TO DO, AND THAT IS WHY I URGE MY COLLEAGUES TO OPPOSE THIS DIVISIVE AND RADICAL LEGISLATION. I URGE -- I YIELD BACK THE BALANCE OF MY TIME. THE GENTLEMAN FROM TEXAS. MADAM SPEAKER, I YIELD ONE MINUTE TO THE GENTLEMAN FROM OHIO, MR. BOEHNER, THE SPEAKER OF THE UNITED STATES HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES. THE SPEAKER IS RECOGNIZED FOR ONE MINUTE. LET ME THANK MY COLLEAGUE FOR YIELDING AND EXPRESS MY SUPPORT FOR H.R. 3, THE NO TAXPAYER FUNDING FOR ABORTION ACT. THIS COMMONSENSE BIPARTISAN LEGISLATION CODIFIES THE HYDE AMENDMENT AND SIMILAR POLICIES BY PERMANENTLY APPLYING A BAN ON TAXPAYER FUNDING OF ABORTION ACROSS ALL FEDERAL PROGRAMS. LAST YEAR WE LISTENED TO THE AMERICAN PEOPLE THROUGH OUR AMERICA SPEAKING OUT PROJECT AND THEY SPOKE OUT ON THIS ISSUE LOUDLY AND CLEARLY. WE INCLUDED IT IN OUR PLEDGE TO AMERICA, AND TODAY WE'RE TAKING ANOTHER STEP TOWARD MEETING THAT COMMITMENT IN KEEPING OUR WORD. A BAN ON TAXPAYER FUNDING OF ABORTION IS THE WILL OF THE AMERICAN PEOPLE AND OUGHT TO BE THE LAW OF THE LAND. BUT THE LAW, PARTICULARLY AS IT IS CURRENTLY ENFORCED, DOES NOT REFLECT THE WILL OF THE AMERICAN PEOPLE. THIS HAS CREATED ADDITIONAL UNCERTAINTY, GIVEN THAT AMERICANS ARE CONCERNED, NOT JUST ABOUT HOW MUCH WE'RE SPENDING, BUT HOW WE'RE SPENDING IT. ENACTING THIS LEGISLATION WOULD PROVIDE THE AMERICAN PEOPLE WITH THE ASSURANCE THAT THEIR HARD-EARNED TAX DOLLARS WILL NOT BE USED TO FUND ABORTIONS. AND I WANT TO COMMEND THE LEADERSHIP OF THE GENTLEMAN FROM NEW JERSEY, MR. SMITH, AND THE GENTLEMAN FROM ILLINOIS, MR. LIPINSKI, AND I URGE MY COLLEAGUES TO SUPPORT THIS BILL. DOES THE GENTLEMAN -- THE GENTLEMAN FROM TEXAS. IS RECOGNIZED. YOU HAVE 3 1/2 MINUTES. MADAM SPEAKER, WE'RE PREPARED TO CLOSE AND WAIT FOR THE GENTLEMAN FROM MICHIGAN TO TIME. YIELD BACK THE BALANCE OF HIS THE GENTLEMAN FROM MICHIGAN'S TIME HAS EXPIRED. I YIELD BACK. THE GENTLEMAN YIELDS BACK. MADAM SPEAKER, I THE GENTLEMAN FROM NEW JERSEY, YIELD THE BALANCE OF MY TIME TO MR. SMITH, WHO IS THE CHIEF SPONSOR OF THIS LEGISLATION. THE GENTLEMAN IS YIELDED 3 1/2 MINUTES. I THANK THE CHAIRMAN OF THE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE, MR. SMITH, FOR HIS LEADERSHIP. I WANT TO THANK MR. LIPINSKI. I WANT TO THANK DAVE CAMP AND OUR SPEAKERS, JOHN BOEHNER, FOR HIS ELOQUENT STATEMENT AND HIS COMPASSION FOR BOTH MOTHERS AND CHILDREN WHO ARE HURT BY ABORTION AND FOR ERIC CANTOR, OUR MAJORITY LEADER, AND FOR 228 CO-SPONSORS OF THIS LEGISLATION. MADAM SPEAKER, THERE IS NO DOUBT WHATSOEVER THAT ENDING ALL PUBLIC FUNDING FOR ABORTIONS SAVES LIVES. EVEN THE PRO-ABORTION GUTTMACHER INSTITUTE SAID IN 2009, ANYONE WHO WOULD HAVE -- 25% OF WOMEN WHO WOULD HAVE MEDICAID FUNDED ABORTION, WITHOUT HYDE, INSTEAD GIVE BIRTH WHEN THIS FUNDING IS UNAVAILABLE. IF THIS IS NOT AVAILABLE, CHILDREN HAVE A GREATER CHANCE ATSUR VIFLE. I SAID EARLIER DURING THE DEBATE ON THE RULE I REMEMBER THE LATE CONGRESSMAN HENRY HYDE BEING MOVED LITERALLY TO TEARS. I WAS IN THE ROOM WHEN IT HAPPENED WHEN HE LEARNED THAT THE HYDE AMENDMENT HAD LIKELY SAVED THE LIVES OF MORE THAN ONE MILLION BABIES WHO TODAY ARE GETTING ON WITH THEIR LIVES, GOING TO SCHOOL, FORGING A CAREER, PERHAPS SERVING IN THIS CHAMBER, AT LEAST SOME OF THEM, OR EVEN BEGINNING THEIR OWN FAMILIES. H.R. 3, THE TO TAXPAYER FUNDING FOR ABORTION ACT, COMPREHENSIVELY ENSURES THAT MONEY APPROPRIATED BY THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT, INCLUDING OBAMACARE, DO NOT SUBSIDIZE THE KILLING OF BABIES EXCEPT IN THE RARE CASES OF ***, *** OR THE LIFE OF THE MOTHER. H.R. 3 ENDS THE CURRENT I.R.S. POLICY OF ALLOWING TAXPAYER TREATMENT FOR ABORTION UNDER ITEMIZED DEDUCTIONS. H.M.S.'S, H.S.A.'S AND, MADAM SPEAKER, WE KNOW THAT AMERICANS ARE TAKING A GOOD, LONG, HARD SECOND LOOK AT ABORTION. THE POLLS SHOW IT. ON TAXPAYER FUNDING, THE MINIMAL MAJORITY, 60%, 61%, SOME POLLS PUT IT AS HIGH AS 68%, DO NOT WANT THEIR FUNDING BEING USED TO PAY FOR ABORTION. EARLIER IN THE DEBATE, SOME OF MY COLLEAGUES HAVE SUGGESTED THAT THIS IS A TAX INCREASE, YET, AMERICANS FOR TAX REFORM WHO DOGGEDLY PROTECT THE PUBLIC PURSE HAVE SAID AMERICANS FOR TAX REFORM HAS NO PROBLEMS OR ISSUES WITH H.R. 3. THE BILL HAS NO NET CHANGE IN TAXES WHATSOEVER. H.R. 3 ALSO MAKES THE HYDE-WELDON CONSCIENCE PROTECTION PERMANENT AND SIGNIFICANTLY AND MORE EFFECTIVELY BY AUTHORIZING THE COURTS TO PREVENT OR REDRESS THREATENED VIOLATIONS OF CONSCIENCE. WE KNOW WITHOUT ANY DOUBT THERE IS HUGE PRESSURES, PARTICULARLY IN SOME STATES LIKE CALIFORNIA, TO COERCE, PLAN AND ENSURE AND HEALTH CARE SYSTEMS, ESPECIALLY THOSE WHO ARE FAITH-BASED, TO CHANGE THEIR POLICIES AND PERMIT ABORTION ON DEMAND. LET ME JUST CONCLUDE, MADAM SPEAKER, SOMEDAY I TRULY BELIEVE FUTURE GENERATIONS OF AMERICANS WILL LOOK BACK ON US, ESPECIALLY POLICYMAKERS, AND WONDER HOW AND WHY SUCH A RICH AND ENLIGHTENED SOCIETY, SO BLESSED AND ENDOWED WITH THE CAPACITY TO PROTECT VULNERABLE HUMAN LIFE COULD HAVE INSISTED AND INSTEAD AGGRESSIVELY PROMOTED DEATH TO CHILDREN AND THE EXPLOITATION OF THEIR MOMS. THEY WILL KNOW WITH DEEP SADNESS, SOME OF OUR POLITICIANS, WHILE THEY TALKED ABOUT HUMAN RIGHTS, NEVER LIFTED A FINGER TO PROTECT THE MOST PERSECUTED MINORITY IN THE WORLD, THE CHILD IN THE WOMB. VOTE FOR H.R. 3, THE NO TAXPAYER -- NO TAXPAYER MONEY FOR ABORTION ACT. THANK YOU. FOR WHAT PURPOSE DOES THE GENTLEMAN FROM TEXAS RISE? MADAM SPEAKER, I CONSUME. YIELD MYSELF SUCH TIME AS I MAY THE GENTLEMAN IS RECOGNIZED. MADAM SPEAKER, ON BEHALF OF DAVE CAMP, THE CHAIRMAN OF THE WAYS AND MEANS COMMITTEE, AND I STAND IN SUPPORT OF H.R. 3, THE NO TAXPAYER FUNDING FOR ABORTION ACT, A BILL THAT RESTRICTS THE USE OF TAXPAYERS' FUNDS FOR ABORTION. I WILL CONTINUE MY STATEMENT, BUT AT THIS TIME WOULD LIKE TO YIELD ONE MINUTE TO THE MAJORITY LEADER OF THE U.S. HOUSE, THE GENTLEMAN, MR. ERIC CANTOR. THE FOR ONE MINUTE. MAJORITY LEADER IS RECOGNIZED THANK YOU, MADAM SPEAKER. AND I THANK THE GENTLEMAN. I'D ALSO LIKE TO CONGRATULATE AND THANK THE GENTLEMAN FROM NEW JERSEY, WHO HAD JUST SPOKEN, FOR HIS LEADERSHIP ON THIS ISSUE. MADAM SPEAKER, ABOVE ALL ELSE, WE ARE A CULTURE THAT VALUES LIFE. LIKEWISE, OUR EFFORTS AS A NATION ARE DEDICATED TO IMPROVING, PRESERVING AND CELEBRATING LIFE. THAT'S WHY IT'S NO SURPRISE THAT POLLING ROUTINELY SHOWS THAT OVER 60% OF AMERICANS OPPOSE TAXPAYER FUNDING FOR ABORTION. H.R. 3, THE NO TAXPAYER FUNDING FOR ABORTION ACT, ENFORCES A GOVERNMENTWIDE PROHIBITION ON SUBSIDIES FOR ABORTION AND ABORTION COVERAGE. AT A TIME OF FISCAL CRISIS, THIS BILL ENSURES THAT SCARCE RESOURCES ARE NOT DIVERTED TOWARDS INCREASING THE NUMBER OF ABORTIONS IN AMERICA. THIS BILL ALSO CODIFIES EXISTING CONSCIENCE PROTECTIONS AND CLOSES LOOPHOLES THAT OFFER TAX PREFERRED STATUS TO ABORTION. IN SHORT, IT COMPORTS WITH THE VALUES OF OUR PEOPLE. THOMAS JEFFERSON WARNED THAT TO COMPEL A MAN TO SUBSIDIZE WITH HIS TAXES, THE PROPAGATION OF IDEAS WHICH HE DISBELIEVES AND ABHORS IS SINFUL AND TYRANNICAL. FORCING AMERICANS TO SUBSIDIZE ELECTED ABORTION WITH THEIR TAX CAMP. DOLLARS FALLS SQUARELY IN THIS MADAM SPEAKER, I URGE MY COLLEAGUES TO SUPPORT H.R. 3 AND ENSURE THAT NO TAXPAYER DOLLARS GO TOWARD THE FUNDING OF ABORTION, AND I YIELD BACK. THE GENTLEMAN YIELDS BACK. THE GENTLEMAN FROM MICHIGAN. I YIELD MYSELF TWO MINUTES. THE GENTLEMAN IS RECOGNIZED. WE HERE NEED TO TALK STRAIGHT TO THE AMERICAN PEOPLE. THIS BILL DOES NOT CODIFY THE HYDE AMENDMENT. IT GOES WELL BEYOND IT. WE DON'T NEED TO CODIFY THE HYDE AMENDMENT. IT'S THE LAW OF THE LAND. THE PURPOSE OF THIS BILL IS TO GO BEYOND IT, AND THAT'S WHAT YOU SHOULD ACKNOWLEDGE. IN DOING SO YOU CROSS A VERY, VERY IMPORTANT LINE. THIS BILL IS GOING NOWHERE IN THE SENATE. WHERE IT CAN GO IS EVERYWHERE IN INTERFERING WITH A PERSON'S ACCESS TO HEALTH CARE OR WITH THE USE OF THEIR OWN MONEY FOR THEIR OWN PURPOSES AS THEY CHOOSE. THE LOMBIC HERE, IF IT BECOMES PRECEDENT, COULD BE USED, FOR EXAMPLE, TO PREVENT A HEALTH POLICY FALLING INTO THE TAX CODE IF THE PROCEDURE RELATES TO A DEVELOPMENT THAT OCCURRED BECAUSE OF STEM CELL RESEARCH. WE SHOULD NOT BE DOING THAT. IT TAKES AWAY THE ABILITY TO USE AN ITEMIZED DEDUCTION. WE SHOULD NOT DO THAT. WHERE DOES THIS STOP? WHERE DOES IT STOP? IT CROSSES A LINE FOR THE FIRST TIME. IT DOES NOT CODIFY, IT THREATENS CROSSING A LINE WE SHOULD NOT, IN TERMS OF THE ABILITY OF PEOPLE TO PROVIDE HEALTH CARE AND USE THEIR OWN RESOURCES. I RESERVE THE BALANCE OF MY TIME. THE GENTLEMAN RESERVES. THE GENTLEMAN FROM TEXAS. I YIELD MYSELF A MINUTE AND A HALF. THE GENTLEMAN IS RECOGNIZED. THIS IS ABOUT -- WE'RE CODIFYING THE LONG-STANDING BIPARTISAN HYDE AMENDMENT WHICH PREVENTS TAXPAYER FUNDS FROM BEING USED FOR ABORTION RELATED COSTS. I WANT TO BE CLEAR ABOUT WHAT THE LEGISLATION DOES AND DOES NOT DO. THIS LEGISLATION DOES NOT, AS CRITICS CLAIM, AFFECT THE ABILITY OF THE INDIVIDUAL TO PLAY FOR -- PAY FOR ABORTION OR ABORTION COVERAGE THROUGH PRIVATE FUNDING OR PROVIDE FOR AN ENTITY TO PROVIDE ABORTION, IT DOES NOT APPLY IN THE CASES OF ***, *** OR LIFE-THREATENING CONDITION OF THE MOTHER, NOR DOES IT REFER TO ANY INJURIES RESULTING FROM ABORTION. THIS DOES NOT INCREASE TAXES. AT THIS TIME, MADAM SPEAKER, I'D LIKE TO SUBMIT A LETTER FROM THE AMERICANS FOR TAX REFORM FOR THE RECORD TO THAT EFFECT. THIS LEGISLATION WITHOUT OBJECTION. MAKES SPECIFIC AND NARROW CHANGES TO THE TAX CODE SO