being born intact in some instances. she said that sometimes we get, if someone delivers before we get to them for a procedure, then they are intact. but that is not what we go on. to ensure that babies born alive in such instances are given necessary care, the house passed the born alive abortion survivors protection act which were wires a baby surviving an abortion be given the same treatment and care that would be given to any child naturally born premature at the same age and that includes to prevent the killing of innocent babies born alive. these indicate that practitioners may have adopted new procedures to avoid the risk of violating the partial-birth abortion ban act. in the first video the senior director of services stated that

the federal abortion ban is a law and the laws are up to interpretation. today's hearing is intended to explore what interpretation has arisen. i look forward to hearing from everyone today. i now open and to mr. conyers for his statement. >> thank you, mr. chairman, and members of the committee. we want to take a moment to walk through the events that have led up to this hearing done on.

>> on july 15 of this year and others were posted online. three different committees launched simultaneous investigations. on september 9, this committee held its first hearing at which the witnesses for the majority refused to discuss this at the heart of the matter.

[inaudible] and that they are extending the so-called investigation indefinitely. we are able to draw some conclusions. but first, there is no evidence in the record whatsoever, on behalf of the 59 affiliates, the planned parenthood federation of america has provided this committee with hundreds of documents. and that includes three investigations of the house. the documents we have reviewed so far allow us to go point by point and created by the highly edited misleading video that

nominated to investigate these very determined that sincere, running his own investigation, has agreed to this conclusion. last week we asked the gentleman from utah, is there any evidence that planned parenthood has broken any law. and no, i am not suggesting that they broke the law. i would like to conclude that this hearing, much like the broader attack on planned parenthood may be a political theater. designed to rally the

conservative base of rollback. in practice, these investigations have had little to do with the videos which some went to great lengths at the last hearing. and that includes the most conservative elements of one of the parties during an interparty leadership crisis. we may have a legitimate difference of opinion but it remains the law of the land and many women in the health care

system go to planned parenthood coming back from a six in 10 women who received services at a family planning center consider their primary source and it makes up an incredibly small amount of the services it provides. [inaudible] 80% detected abnormalities that could have signaled a greater of cancer. so many others, planned parenthood saves lives.

so until they attempted a fun planned parenthood, it places each of those lives at risk. we should be grateful that the effort has been almost entirely unsuccessful, at least so far on the federal level. >> as we head into the second election season, this committee has been -- that they could do a lot more to restore an enforcement mechanism with the voting rights act. we have done little to advance comprehensive immigration reform. and the proposals remain

overwhelmingly popular and will probably easily passed the house. we have to start acting. and i feel that this time they will have to wait even longer. although the scores of gun violence has touched everyone of our districts, we have all been called to strengthen us and close this loophole. all of them are consistent with the constitutional right and the list of missed opportunities is long and our time is short. we should not spend one more

minute or one more taxpayer dollar vilifying planned parenthood without a speck of evidence to back these claims. this committee has too much important work to do and i urge my colleagues to help us put this kind of theater behind us. we can do better. i think the chairman and i appreciate the opportunity to express my views. >> thank you, gentlen. there is a minute remaining. head to the floor and we will stand in recess until these votes conclude and resume immediately thereaf

>> is imperative that abortions remain safe and legal in this country. >> thank you. now, there's some who want to push to defund planned parenthood. some have claimed that there's enough other clinics to absorb planned parenthood's patients if planned parenthood affiliates

are forced to close their doors. is that you? >> that has been described as actually ludicrous by people come experts i in public healtho see there is no way that these health centers could fill the gap that is provided by planned parenthood choose an anchor for women's health care in america. in fact, the leading health provider of reproductive health care for women. >> now, i'm just about through. is there adequate capacity in the health care system to absorb all of planned parenthood's patients? >> no. there is clearly no capacity to absorb those patients. those patients would unfortunately have their needs go unmet. they would be less likely to family planning counseling and access to contraception as well as the basic sexually transmitted disease testing and breast exams, and as the result that would be more abortions in this country and not fewer. >> thank you. finally, what kinds of patients

might be particularly harmed if those were, that wanted to defund planned parenthood were successful in their effort? >> mr. conyers, for women, low income women in this country, women in rural areas would be the ones who would suffer most from not having access to the critical services that planned parenthood provides. >> i thank you very much for your testimony, and i thank the chairman for the time. >> that are six minutes remaining in this vote so the committee will stand in recess and reconvene immediately after the votes. [inaudible conversations]

>> the committee when outcome in order and i will recognize that gentlemen from virginia for five minutes. >> chairman, thank you. at the end of the classic movie casablanca, the inspector issues an order to round up the usual suspects. and every time my friends on the other side of the aisle have a horrific act is done or alleged to be done by one of their allies, the issue of similar order, to round up the usual usl excuses. we've heard them all here today. i don't believe your eyes and your ears and what you hear on video, look somewhere else. and for goodness sake, don't focus on this horrific act when you could be focusing on some other horrific act that people we like or don't like might have committed. this is just political theater. somehow the other if you're sensitive and the like the fact that an unborn child is torn apart limb by limb you really don't talk about that.

you have some kind of massive attack on women in general. and a look at the horrific act that this group might have done because after all they might have done some of the good acts that were not horrific, and excuses go on and on. the reality is ver there is simy no point. there is nothing that our friends on the other side of the aisle would look at this organization and say, we might like you, but that's just too far and we can't condone the. mr. chairman, i would like to now show a video of things -- if we could roll that.

>> now, trying to avert a lot today about editing the biggest. there is no evidence, and i think of it all, this figure has been edited or anything has been added to the. so the procedures that were discussed in there, crushing an unborn child in more than one place, and import called by the way that has a hard come along and deliver that is so well developed that planned parenthood would want to save the heart, the long and deliver but does not want to save the life, is that procedure too brutal for you? >> i would like to respond by saying that as you started describing his political that i like to reiterate the -- >> you can do what you want come if you don't answer the question but you're not going to run the clock out on me. yes or no, is it too brutal? i know you don't want to answer

spent ultimate this is an attack -- >> i have five minutes. do you do the procedure is too brutal? i understand if you wan want to answer but can you say what you feel is to brew or not? >> yes or no speakers i believe the -- >> is about to girls because i'm not a doctor and i cannot comment. >> you get a small dog entered to put the dog to sleep what you think would be too brutal for the veterinarian to crush the dog into different places? >> i trust women and the doctors tdetermine what are the best -- >> let the record show she would not answer the question. dr. levatino, is that too brutal? >> every abortion, every abortion and also the destruction of human life. i get frustrated sometimes with the, it's not a baby, it's a fetus. i think we must of gotten beyond the old blob of cells argument. do you know what that is? that is your son. that's your daughter.

every abortion results in a dead son or daughter. i think it's absolute gruesome and i thought the example you just gave a minute ago is perfect. if i abused the dog in my town i would be arrested. if i did abortions again, first trimester, second trimester, i would be a hero to so many people. it's absurd. >> mr. chairman, just for the record, the point that if they just are so many of us is the exact response went from ms. fredrickson. they won't say that any procedure is too far or not in of all it's too brutal. that's the purpose of these hearings because there's a big difference between sangha may not be allowed to protect against something that may not be illegal and he said there was no wrongdoing done because i think what we heard on the tape was wrongdoing. with that, mr. chairman, i yield back.

>> i thank the gentleman to not recognize the gentleman from new york for five minutes. >> thank you, mr. chairman. we've heard a lot today about saving lives. after 23 years in congress i am still shocked by the hypocrisy we continue here for my friends on the other side of the aisle. since 2013 there been over 900 massive shootings across the country, putting 300 mass shootings in 2015. an average of more than one mass shootings every day this year. 10,128 people have been killed this year alone. americans are 20 times more likely to be killed by gun violence. although we are just 30% of the world population the u.s. is 90% of the world's firearm homicides. i think that's 3% of the world's population but how many hearings have my republican colleagues

held on gun violence? none. since sandy hook their been 142 school shootings, the most recent tragedy occurring in oregon. since the oregon shooting 146 people have been killed and 120 shootings in the 20. not one hearing. not one vote on gun violence. for comparison sake two months ago and extremist liar released aces appellate edited and probably illegal videos filled with lies about planned parenthood, an organization that has been providing health care to women for centuries. in the last 30 days the house has opened three official investigainvestiga tions can spend countless hours in committee hearings, it is yesterday go to establish a fourth investigation to a special select committee. we have taken 20 votes this year alone restricting women's access to health care. this their hearing is the committee second in 30 days on planned parenthood despite the fact this entire -- based on lies.

if my colleagues at 100 evidence of that planned parenthood had broken any law they would've woe gone to the state or federal prosecutor right away but they didn't and they don't. perhaps that's why one of my republican colleagues, mr. chabot's come announced on tv just last week there was no evidence planned parenthood has broken any laws. imagine how many lives we could save if my colleagues devote even one half of that attention to stopping the epidemic that is an epidemic of gun violence in this country. my colleagues who claim we cannot possibly taking action on gun violence because the right to own a gun is protected by the constitution. it's a very funny argument coming from the other side in light of this shameful hearing. do you know what else is protected by the constitution? a woman's right to access abortion and to make her own choices about her health care and whether to get an abortion. the same colleagues refused to take action on gun violence have no problem tossing the constitution out the window to impose their own moral opinions

on all american women. measures passed at the state or local level put unbelievable restrictions on a woman's right to access an abortion. women must endure invasive tests and exams, wait 48 hours, take time off from work to visit the windowsill in a state where abortion is still available and a dork endless badgering and assaults anytime they tried to enter a clinic. they must face shaming from republicans on this committee. almost all mankind and for making sure to exercise their constitutional right. yet there are no restrictions requiring again. you can walk into gun join in and walk out 15 minutes later with a high-capacity magazine and a semi automatic rifle in your hands. imagine if we make people jump to the same hoops to buy a firearm as they do for having an abortion imagine the invasive questions about why are you areu

getting the gun and weapon that you considered all their options. imagine a way to get a gun was to approve have been raped or assaulted in the past. think about being shamed and shattered to look at graphic images of gun violence as you walk into a gun show. that outrage you feel, that nagging feeling to govern own right to put restrictions on your constitutional rights. that is why the hell one feels every time she tries to make a decision about her health, about whether or not to access her constitutional right to an abortion. until this committee is ready to face a real crisis of gun violence to take a firm stand that enough is enough and it's time to relax in the preceding remain an integral part. is fredrickson, are you what the center focenter for medical prod its nonprofit status on the irs by on the irs to represent itself as a nonprofit based in biomedical research and it did not indicate the political indication on the application?

>> mr. nadler, they did indeed speak future mic. >> they did indeed make that application i believe it is a fraud and illegal. >> my last question is at the moment the house committees and one senate committee on investigating planned parenthood. the majority is using taxpayer's dollars to select a panel. what to make that affect the majority has committed these resources to attacking planned parenthood and almost none to investigating alleged illegal activity at the center for medical progress? >> i think it indicates the true agenda here is to undermine women's right to make personal decisions in consultation with her doctor and her family at exercise her constitutional rights to choose her own health care. >> as do the testing or three witnesses who have nothing to say about planned parenthood but have things to say about abortion generally. thank you. i yield back.

>> now recognize the gentleman from ottawa. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i thank the witnesses for your testimony. just listening to the gentleman from new york about that same hoops to buy a firearm as we seek an abortion. i suggest in the city for example, probably much easier to get an abortion that it is to buy a gun or to possess one or to transport one. that are also in many cities including chicago, for example, where we've seen a lot of deaths and the desecration that comes from violence there that doesn't seem to be troubling the minority party either. but i'm looking for your testimony, ms. fredrickson, and i noticed in your testimony you say that you list the numbers of life-saving breast exams, number of women whose cancer was detected early, 500,000 exams, 80,000 women whose cancer was detected early very likely did to save lives and to do. i did notice, also have

prevented an estimated 516,000 unintended pregnancies and 270,000 abortions every year. i had not seemed planned parenthood produced a number that actually took credit for the number of abortions prevented comics you think of the number, yeah, the number of abortions prevented. did they see in his testimony the number of abortions that planned parenthood does in a normal year. could you tell me what that number would be? >> i believe the number is about 350,000 per year. year. >> what with the typical price before tip who abortion? >> i do not know. i do not work for planned parenthood. >> could i just instead, i will come off the website, $1500. and what i punch that feel like i could it was 340,000 was the number i used rather than 350 but where in the ballpark at $1500 each that turned out to be

$510 million. $510 billion happens to be very close identical to the exact number of the appropriations that would go into planned parenthood should the appropriation go forward which it has out of this house at least for a couple of months. it's hard for me to accept the idea that this is a nonprofit organization and i returned to ms. thayer. your testimony spoke to that. singh those kinds of numbers, ms. thayer, could you be convinced planned parenthood is nonprofit? >> officially planned parenthood is a nonprofit, but their main concern is really their bottom line. we would have monthly managers meetings via the very webcam system that they installed to do the abortions, and on a spreadsheet they would have our goals, our quotas for every single service, supply that we

have to. if we met our goal that square would be green to if we were 5% below it would be yellow and if we're 10% below it would be read and we would have to have a corrective action plan on how to correct that. and abortion was one of those items. if we didn't abortions at that center then we had a goal for abortion referrals. >> could use declared in your testimony with confidence that in your years working for planned parenthood that h even though planned parenthood islam as a nonprofit that they are profit driven? >> welcome they are all about the profit. for example, they purchase birth control pills for $2.98 a cycle, building iowa taxpayers $3 $35 r cycle, are reimbursed a little over $26 then they solicit from the very women as low income, at

a below poverty level, a 10-dollar donation for each cycle of bills that goes out spent as good a distinct profit that most businesses would like to see the margins. i'd like to turn the ms. fredrickson. i recall in your testimony you talked about a cat that would be created if we didn't find planned parenthood. would you say there's no way to build a gap of sources that you testified there's not a way to fill that gap, some other way? >> i think we have evidence it is nearly impossible i if not impossible to fill that gap in the example from texas and even in louisiana where they've tried to cut back on planned parenthood service and find they couldn't simply not serve the population that needed those services. >> tell me how to planned parenthood go into this quote service and into this gap that can't be created another way? are you submitting them that

free enterprise of demanding transportation and funding and resources would not grow another entity or two or three or four or five that would fill the same demand that you're saying that planned parenthood can political? >> with all due respect were talking about medicaid patients primarily t to get the serviceso no, i don't think they could be filled by the free enterprise system. >> what do you think would have been? >> unfortunately, for unattended pregnancy and, unfortunately, more abortions spent i just suspect the witness hasn't considered how this comes together, how free enterprise moves and accepts medicaid checks, et cetera, have the clinic system works, how health care providers are able to take a look at the marketplace and supply and demand. and i suggest that would be supplied without any great concern, and i would yield back. >> i thank the gentleman and a recognize myself for five minutes for questions. forgive me, i will recognize now

ms. jackson played for five minutes. >> -- ms. jackson lee. >> we know the sacrifice that you made to come. let me also say this is a judiciary committee and it is important for us to be fact-finding but also to maintain and adhere to current stated statutory or court of law that has the president for the actions that may be in place now. as lettuces where the right to make determination. let me also say that i respect and appreciate the differences of opinion that are in this room and among those anybody's been on the panel as well. i'm interested in the truth but i am one who has known people and have lived through the back alley abortions and seen so many people suffer and die because of

choices at the intelligently wanted to make, desperately had to make, it didn't have the adequate medical care, consultation that was needed. let me thank you, doctor, anytime i see a doctor, i want to thank you for taking the oath and recognizing the need for good care. but i do want to go back to what the team is all about. are you representing a video that you showed was a planned parenthood video? >> no, ma'am, i am not. the reason i brought that they give -- >> i have a short period of time. that is not a planned parenthood video? >> that is not. >> the hearing is a planned parenthood expose them examine abortions and procedures and medical ethics at the nation's largest abortion provider. ms. thayer, are you a lawyer? >> no, ma'am. >> are you drinking nonprofit

law? >> no, ma'am. >> would you have illegal understanding of the rights, responsibilities of a nonprofit and what they are allowed to be? >> i ran a nonprofit -- >> are you a lawyer who understands the law of nonprofit 501(c)(3)? >> no, but i did have an understanding that speedy but not from a legal perspective what you would not be able to discern the appropriate response to federal funding being used for medicaid, health care matters versus the things you've now become a poster which is your right to do, not from a legal perspective speak with one of my biggest concerns was why they were soliciting donations can requiring donations are medicaid eligible women. i knew that wasn't right. >> is that something you are submitting into the record? do you have statements from the medicaid women that were soliciting? >> i do that every day that it worked there. the pills are $35, the donation is $10, will that be cash or

credit? >> were you able to discern from the understanding of the bible a planned parenthood of what those requests might be? they have every right to engage, i'm not saying it's true, in a voluntary perspective. in a voluntary request that someone voluntarily may decide to do but let me go to ms. fredrickson. and set the tone for this particular hearing. it has been said by congressman chaffetz, the chairman of the oversight committee among many things that planned parenthood, if i may quote correctly, violated no law. is roe v. wade the law of the land? >> yes, it is. >> is that the right for women to choose? >> yes. >> it's no billboard pronouncement that were promoting abortion. is that the case was a law simply isn't the right to privacy speak with under the constitution women have the right to make personal decisions

is back not an advertisement and billboard for abortion. it is a privacy? >> yes speed and let me also say that the political agenda that has been framed, and if you have seen, i'm not going to ask you that question but i'd like to focus on understanding of what planned parenthood does. do they legitimately have health care for women? >> planned parenthood is the nations leading provider of reproductive health care for women. they provide a critical service. one in five american women go to a planned parenthood clinic in their life -- >> let me pursue another line of questioning. inertia make sure that in order to make sure planned parenthood has a medical structure, as i understand it abortion care is included in medical care and, medical education. city shall abortion has 99% safe record but more important than 57,000 members of the american congress of obstetrician and gynecologist maintains the high standard of clinical practice

indicated that that isn't the case and that there's misinformation about how abortions today are handled purses can remember what i said, back alley in coathanger. our youth mode with what women went through 20, 30 years ago versus what they are going to get a? >> yes. before roe v. wade many women died and back alley abortions and that the tremendous advance in the country that safe and legal abortions available for women. >> looking at the fourth amendment. but let me just ask this question as i close. on this video argument with the name -- [inaudible] spin from the videos, yes. >> do you really see is not publicly release the entire unedited video? >> i understand no member of this committee have seen the entire unedited videos. >> he relies has taken the fifth

amendment'? >> yes. >> do understand he sold the id of a fellow classmate in high school weapon to be a feminist and order to portray these distorted, political and biased video? >> yes, i understand that is the case speed if we are here to find the facts, is it not factual that all the theories would not heard of any statement about planned parenthood in essence violating the law, roe v. wade, constitutional and nimitz and the bill of rights? have you heard that? >> no. no one has been able to substantiate any allegations of wrongdoing against planned parenthood and, indeed, mr. chaffetz has agreed that there is no wrongdoing. >> the jungles ladies time has expired spent point of parliamentary inquiry? >> state your point. >> i'd like to know what the proper procedure would be, i think this witness has just

testified companies hearing isn't high on planned parenthood expose them examine abortion practices and medical ethics at the nation's largest abortion provider. this witness has played the tape is now admitted under oath was not prepared in connection with planned parenthood at all until i would ask that it be stricken from the record of this hearing. >> the chair is the judge of relevancy and the children had never suggested -- >> that it was presented the committee having a hearing on planned parenthood with the clear implication that it was relevant to the hearing. it's not. i make a motion to strike it from the record speed would also include in your motion adjustment from new york testimony on gun control? is that relevant? >> my motion is on the recording that dr. levatino admitted has nothing to do with planned parenthood i've made a motion. >> dr. levatino made his comments about guns almost entirely -- >> point of order that i made a motion that be stricken and

evelyn twittering on planned parenthood and ask for a vote on my request. >> i will second the motion. spent all those in favor? will the gentleman restate his motion stick with the motion is to strike from the record that the of dr. levatino which is not prepared or connected -- >> mr. chairman, there was already a vote. >> reserving the right to object to come in with unanimous consent to enter the fray in the of record. the gentleman had time to object spend that is not true. >> his motion is out of order spent it was not unanimous consent. >> all those in favor? spirit of my motion? aye. >> all those opposed? no. >> in the opinion of the chair the no's have it. >> i ask for a recorded vote space i wonder if we can strike that video from your memory

stick was i just ask that be stricken from the record of history. it out to -- spin as for a recorded vote, mr. chairman. >> recorded vote has been asked. the clerk will call the roll. [inaudible conversations] >> mr. chairman, regular order. can the clerk call the roll? mr. chairman? [roll call]

[roll call] [roll call]

[roll call] [roll call]

[roll call] [roll call] [roll call]

[roll call] >> regular order. can we have the results? >> mr. chairman? [inaudible conversations] >> mr. chairman? >> the clerk will no -- >> mr. chairman? >> report the vote.

>> mr. forbes? >> as i understand this is a -- >> parliamentary inquiry spent i will ask the ruling for the chair to take time to ask with the parliamentarian. >> just report the vote spent the chairman can consider that. >> stager inquiry. >> mr. chairman, i just want to ask if this was a motion to strike testimony of a witness or a video, and if we had such a motion because i don't recall ever having one in this committee when we are striking testimony of witnesses that have been made in here. >> pakistan, mr. forbes, the minority is asking to strike the video which, of course, was given to them days ago and is not a surprise to them in any way. is that correct? >> given to us yesterday morning spent that's the motion, yes. >> regular order can we have the

vote speak with this is regular order to have the parliamentarian spent i will wait until they be quite undeniable statement parliamentary procedure once they have gotten quiet. okay, they are finally quiet. mr. chairman, have we had a procedure before and are parliamentary rules to strike evidence of a witness? i don't ever remember one taking place in this speed is we've already taken a vote. >> i'm told and not in this committee. >> okay. >> pleased to announce the vote. >> mr. chairman? >> mr. chabot. >> -- mr. chaffetz. >> nine -- >> the motion is agreed to. >> thank you.

>> i want to recognize myself for five minutes for questions. you know, one of the hallmarks of humanity throughout history is out astonishing proclivity as human things to obscure -- in their own minds or before others to achieve some solidarity are temporary acceptance with their own insular. group. it's always astonished me to what lengths we go on this issue. i think i know why. because we never asked this essential question, and the central question is, does abortion kill a little baby? if abortion doesn't kill a baby and i am here to pretty much suggest that we shouldn't be

having such a hearing or anything like that. but if abortion really does kill a little baby, then those of us seated in the greatest nation in history of the world, the land of the free and the home of the brave, are sitting in the midst of the greatest human genocide in history of humanity. and the victims are the most helpless of all children. we recently had a vote in the house of representatives to protect born alive children. there was not one person to my left that voted for that bill. born alive children. and i would just suggest that if we've come to the moment in america where we no longer unwilling to protect born alive children, then it is time to reassess who we are and whether not the founding fathers dream

still has any place in our society. dr. levatino, if a child is born alive during an abortion procedure, a doctor has an ethical duty to say that child, correct? >> he does. he has an ethical duty to provide care, whether it's life-saving or palliative. >> the president of planned parenthood cecil richards said she never heard of such a circumstance happening in planned parenthood clinics. do you believe that among the hundreds of thousands of abortion planned parenthood commits every year that are, in fact, children born alive at the gutime because you do not receie appropriate care? >> i can't speak specifically experience. the reason i introduced the video was because planned parenthood as they would understand.edu perform late-term abortions. as did i believe i missed which

is a perform late-term abortions quote up to viability but that was never defined. foo-foo going to be taugh tought late-term abortions in terms of planned parenthood you need to know what the techniques are. that's why introduced the testimony that i did. >> based on your experience what is your assessment of how low income women's health care could be met without planned parenthood? >> with all respect to ms. fredrickson, her assertion and backing it up with statements from other people that it is quote ludicrous were her words, that other providers could adequate take on planned parenthood patients is a statement itself is ludicrous. it's interesting if you want to learn about low-income women health care you should come to southern new mexico where i've worked for over 13 years. here's a map.

the planned parenthood facilities in new mexico are in albuquerque, santa fe and farmington, the three richest areas in the state. there isn't a single planned parenthood south and has been in over a decade. the fairy that i work. the countywide work is one of the poorest counties in the country and if you want to understand about indigent care, income, please. ms. richardson talk this is about the health care that planned parenthood provides, specifically family planning counseling and contraception, pregnancy tests, pap smears and breast exams. oh, and std testing. she did not mention but was in her written testimony. those of the services they provide. for poor people in my area get contraceptive counseling, pap smears, breast exams and truly comprehensive health care from our health care clinics.

you've heard, this committee has heard i know there are over 16,000 health care clinics across the country to look at my map again. this is covered in new mexico in terms of those very same health clinics. unlike planned parenthood they are not a nine to five basis monday through friday. they are there 24 hours a day to serve their women. their women get taken care of not only if they need just pap smears or breast exams, they get taken care of if they have a headache or noshing or a stroke or a heart attack or all the other things that happen. that's a we called comprehensive health care and that's what is available at these clinics. $500 million come as a doctor i would give you my opinion that $500 million poured into planned parenthood would be far better served, those women across the country would be far better served if that money was put into community health centers where women could get truly comprehensive care. not just pap smears and breast

exams. >> i thank the gentleman, and now i would recognize i believe mr. cohen from tennessee for five minutes. >> thank you, sir. spent ms. lofgren, forgiving. >> thank you, mr. chairman. -- forgive me. spent this hearing is to support in so many ways to truly hard to begin. but let me just say it is a myth to think that if we were to able to defund planned parenthood, which i think legally we couldn't do, i mean, that there is the capacity to provide the medical services to the women who are being served. the last time we had a hearing in this committee on the same subject i put a letter into the record of adhering from the california nonprofit clinic saying they did not have the capacity to pick up the caseload of planned parenthood, just flat

out they could not do it. there's been a lot of discussion about abortion here today. and abortion is a very emotional subject for people in this country and i think that is why we have ended up in the situation we have which is there is no federal funding for abortions, no federal funding for abortion. so if the effort to cut off funding for planned parenthood would succeed, we would cut off contraception but we would not cut off abortion, which is an absurd result i must say. i have known women who have had of abortion, and i've never met a woman who felt happy about it. this is not a festive occasion to its the situation where women find themselves and they make a choice instead of the government telling them what to do. i think of the daughter-in-law

of a dear friend of mine who had an abortion late in her pregnancy when she found out that the much wanted child she was carrying had all of her brains had form outside of the cranium. this child was not going to live and she and her husband were devastated by she was told by her physician that if she carried this child to term, not only with a child die, but she might die. answered we should never have the chance of having another child. we think about the women all over the country who struggle with this decision and make a decision, but one of the important things is to provide contraception so that women don't have to be faced with that terrible decision. i do think one of the most important things that planned parenthood does is to provide

birth control to women who want to control their own fertility. and if we were to cut off funding for planned parenthood that would not be available to the women, many women, who live in my community in san jose. that which is not be available and i think that would be a very wrong thing. i think there's been a lot of dirt in the air about the planned parenthood as execution. i will just say that planned parenthood in san jose is a well respected organization. i know thousands of women who have told me how much they rely on planned parenthood, not only for pap smears and for birth control and for cancer screenings, but they even do some pediatric care tha that thy are full-service and it's really important institution and well trusted institution in my

district, and that's what i hear from families and from women. this is in contrast to some other things that have been said in washington. earlier in the oversight and government reform committee there was a chart indicating that planned parenthood performed more abortions than life-saving procedures in 2013. i wonder, ms. fredrickson, did you look at that chart? dgc veering? >> i didn't see that chart. >> i don't think that's an accurate chart and, in fact, i think it has since been proven that that is not correct. let me ask you about, with all these hearings about planned parenthood. there's nothing any evidence that planned parenthood has violated the law in any way. are you aware of any hearings that event held about this cmp group, about whether they filed false tax returns, whether they

were operating in compliance with the law students so far i don't think there been any impartial inquiries. inquiries. i believe there is a court case proceeding, however. >> i know our justin tucker is looking into it since the incorporated there. of which is close, mr. chairman, by saying i hope that this is the end of the persecution of planned parenthood. it is important, the service they provided to the women of america, and hope that we will stop trying to smear this wonderful institution. i yield back. >> the gentleman from virginia, mr. forbes, is recognized spent to make a motion that is a figure that is part of dr.

levatino's testimony that was pretty stricken from the record be made part of the record spent all those in favor of the motion respond by saying aye? those opposed? independent of the chair the ayes have it and that it is made part of the record. i thank the gentleman and the gentleman is now recognized for his questions. >> the gentleman from california, ms. walters come is recognized for five minutes. your next. you want to pass? okay. the gentleman from ohio is recognized for his questions. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i want to thank you for holding this hearing. the generally from california, i

have great respect for come indicated that this hearing is disappointing. and it is certainly disappointing that we have to hold a hearing like this about an organization that ever you brutally kills hundreds of thousands of unborn innocent babies and sells their body parts, and does it for profit. i happen to represent most of the city of cincinnati. and planned parenthood does approximate 330,000 abortions from the largest abortion provider in this country. they basically wipe out the population of the city of cincinnati every year, it's about 300,000 people in that particular community. and so it is very disappointing that we have to have a hearing like this and hear the testimony.

ms. fredrickson, you early said that i think your comment about mr. chaffetz saying something along the lines of it isn't against the law. and if that's the case, what the organization that you are here testifying on their behalf here today, if it's accurate that what you were doing, just one little innocent unborn lives and selling their body parts for profit, if that's not against the law, then we damn well better change the law and make it against the law. because we're supposed to be a civilized society in a civilized country and to think that that kind of behavior is occurring in these modern times, it's come it makes one wonder what the hell is going on in this country. it's disgusting pig and when i saw the figures come and i know the excuses, welcome we didn't know we were being taped. i mean, what a defense, we

didn't know that somebody might actually find out what's going on in planned parenthood facilities all over the country are that it might get out what's going on. that's a heck of a defense. some of the people that are here, all three of the other witnesses in particular, i think it takes a lot of courage to have experienced some of the things he experienced over the years and to be willing to come and testify about what has happened. and thank god you are willing to do that. all three, all the stories are dr. levatino, i go to testify in this committee in the past and, you know, thank you for coming forward and doing what you're doing now to expose what has occurred. i guess, i'd probably have used up all my time poverty, but doctor, i guess if you could

take an enemy already sent it but i think it bears hearing it a second time, you know, in your past obviously you did perform abortions and then at some point in your life decided that i'm not going to do that anymore. could you share again why that, what it was that made that change for you? >> congressman, and with the loss of my own adopted daughter that made military service of what i was doing with abortions. >> thank you. ms. stoltenberg, you indicated you know you have a whole bunch of other women that were in your circumstances, that their lives have been changed, would you want to share some of the stories about the women you don't necessary have to give their names but which differ from others and how this has affected their lives others actually two victims here, the

unborn child and there's also the woman who's been a victim often times in a planned parenthood facility since their largest abortion provider, but could you share every time i've left anything you'd like to say about the other women you have talked to over the years about the? >> i've heard a lot year--date about safe abortion come and all of these women's stories refute safe abortion. we are not having safe abortion in this country. women are being maimed. they are being harmed. then not being able to their own children because of it. their children are dying on tables. they are turning to alcohol and drugs and suicide. i do post abortion counts and i just counsel a woman in the prior month that a try to kill her is to try to kill herself three different times that almost succeeded. why are we talking about why, this is not safe.

these other stories. they would be more up your if women were not too ashamed and too afraid to come out and talk about this. sometimes it doesn't happen four years. i wasn't able to talk about this for five years. there are women who will not be able to talk about for 10 and 20 years. and i've heard multiple stories, hundreds of how they've been maimed and wounded in every way. i can't even come it was hard for me to even bond with my own child that i adopted because of this procedure. i'm just begging for you people to protect women. this is not a good choice for women. protect us. do the right thing instead of looking at possible -- i would like to ask the committee how many people are making, are receiving donations from planned parenthood on their campaigns,

and that saddens my heart because, would you choose that over protecting women? >> thank you very much. i yield back my time. >> the gentleman from tennessee is recognized for five minutes. >> when mr. franks made a comment about a bill that was on the floor about three or four weeks ago, born alive children bill, on that same day there was another bill on the floor to defund planned parenthood. and nobody on this side voted for it. he's right. and it didn't come to the subcommittee and it didn't go to the full committee for a markup or for a hearing because regular order did not apply because the pope was going to be here and we wanted to put the focus on this issue because it was positive. we are supposed to go to committee for hearings like we're having today, and if

there's a bill, and there is no builder, then there's supposed to be a markup. there was none of that. it went straight to the floor. now and in the allowed, rules committee. the protocol was just done away with because politics. just like benghazi with politics and kevin mccarthy told it was politics. accomplish his purpose of hurting the one who's going to lead the democratic party and -- >> will the gentleman yield? >> no, i vote. just like that. he admitted that's what you're doing and is planned parenthood is the same to you. they are having a special committee that now set up and get congressman chaffetz said is not in evidence there's been any law violated, and is intended we are having a special committee. let me ask dr. levatino. you admitted that your video had nothing to do, nothing to do with planned parenthood, correct speak with the media that bush was not shot at planned parenthood but may be relevant

to speak don't tell me about relevance. had nothing to do with planned parenthood spent the video was not shot at planned parenthood student did you ever work at planned parenthood speak with yes, sir another resident. >> not when you are in private practice. so he didn't eight years working in planned parenthood? >> sorry speak with do you what infidels know, this is type of medical ethics, examining abortion procedures. does anybody know one person who lost their medical license because of activity at planned parenthood? ms. stoltenberg, you know anyone who lost their medical license? >> no. stimp ms. berrigan you know anyone who lost their medical license? >> no. >> dr. levatino can denote any but a loss of their medical license? >> i do not. >> medical ethics, case closed. second question. ms. stoltenberg, and i'm sorry for your problems that you had in your history.

your first abortion was at planned parenthood to was that where was your second abortion? [inaudible] spent where was your third? >> i do remember spending not planned parenthood, bright? >> they do the same types of procedures of there. spent a lot of place to do the same procedure but this hearing is about planned parenthood. so your second and third abortions had nothing to do with planned parenthood, right? ms. thayer can you n have a not-for-profit responsible fashion what's the name of your nonprofit? >> cornerstone for like. >> do you draw a salary? >> i get a stipend spend what is the? >> $1000 a month. >> you are considered quote-unquote a christian speaker. do you get paid to make his speeches or just expensive speakers usually i don't get paid at all spent but you get paid your expensive speakers i'm not getting paid to be here. >> the government doesn't pay any of us too much. the fact is this hearing is just

like benghazi. it's just like the select committee and planned parenthood. it's politics and get we've got major problems going on in this country. the whole idea that this is about planned parenthood is wrong and dr. levatino has admitted medical ethics come everybody, there's no evidence of any medical ethic impropriety by planned parenthood. only a title that has been put up your. ms. stoltenberg as one-third of the history is a planned parenthood. it's unfortunate this is the way we're spending our time. it's really unfortunate, and i appreciate planned parenthood for what to do for lower income women, for women who need health services, the need for family planning, who need cancer exams, cervical compress, et cetera and that are performed by planned parenthood, and i'm happy that medicaid reverses them and that's good. i yield back the balance of my time. >> the chair recognizes the

gentleman from utah. >> thank you, mr. chairman. and i would just caution members. i've heard my name several times. members, please be careful using district the context of the comments that he made were in relationship to a hearing at the chairman of the oversight committee that i conducted. a hearing that we conducted in oversight was about the finances of planned parenthood. we didn't get into the content of what they do. we didn't get into the content of the video. we didn't get into the practices that they do. we didn't get into the fetal body tissue issues. we didn't do that. we were narrowly focused on the finances. the point where making is that planned parenthood had revenue of $127 million more than their expenses. we started to look at the nonprofit organization on what people were making how they're spending that money. they were spending money overseas. they were spending money and

giving it to political organizations. they have a lot of shared services. i think that's a legitimate question as we look at the finances of an organization that is structured as a nonprofit organization. i was asking a direct question about the finances. aestimate i took the question given that's what the direction and the drive of the hearing was about. ..