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 dollashould be used to subsidize abortion at home or abroad. h.r. 3 is that legislation. i urge my colleagues to support it. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from michigan. mr. conyers: madam speaker, i yield myself as much time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. conyers: it has been mistakenly repted at least a dozen times on -- mistaken repeated at least a dozen time on is 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 governnt 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, cathols 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 speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time the gentleman from texas. mr. smith: madam speaker, i yield one minute to the gentleman from michigan, mr. amash. the speaker pro tempore:he

gentleman from michigan is recognized for one minute. mr. amash: 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. th government authorizes and in some cases pays for the routine taking of the most innocent lives, the lives of the unborn. it is unconscionable that in a country founded explicly 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 speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the gentleman from michigan. mr. conyers: madam speaker, the minority whip from maryland, steny hoyer, is our next speaker, and i'm proud to yield him two minutes. mr. hoyer: i thank the gentleman for yielding two minutes. of course, it's not enough ti 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. 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 want you to spend it. that's what this legislation says. 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? 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 women under the constitution of the united states -- may i have one additional mnute? mr. conyers: 30 seconds additionally to our friend. the speaker pro tempore: 30 seconds. mr. hoyer: 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. the speaker pro tempore: members are advised to address their remarks to the chair. the gentleman from texas. mr. smith: i yield one minute to the gentleman from kansas, mr. huelskamp. the speaker pro tempore: jeat is recognizeone minute. mr. huelskamp: 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'sithout a doubt the american people demand they not be required to subsidize abortions. 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. mr. yer: will my friend yield? mr. huelskamp: order, madam chairman. mr. hoyer: would the gentleman yield? mr. huelskamp: 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 eld my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from michigan. mr. conyers: madam speaker, i'm pleased to yield a judiciary committee member, ted deutsch of florida, one minute. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from florida is recognized for one minute. mr. deutch: 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, the republican majority has failed to bring to the floor any measures to help create jobs. their negligence is showing and instead of working in a bipartisan way to regain america's economictrernt, we again find ourselves on the floor in a divisive debate over women's reproducti freedoms. that's right, rather than wage a war on employment, our republican colleagues are waging war on women's health. under this lgislation's logic, anyone who has government subsidized insurance coverage, ich is really everyone who has private health insurance, where we exe-employers from paying taxes, will be forbidden from abortion. where does it end? the answer is it doesn't end. even in the face of overwhelming support in women's rights among american people. even in the face eve 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 speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from texas. mr. smith: madam speaker, i yield one minute to my colleague from texas, mr. hensarling, who is also the chairman of the republican conference. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. hensarling: madam speaker, i rise to proudly support h.r. 3 for three simple reasons. number one, this stil 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 gandchildren, 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. its 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 speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from michigan. mr. conyers: madam speaker, i am pleased now to recognize the distinguhed gentlelady from connecticut, rosa delauro, for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady from connecticut is recognized for one minute. ms. delauro: 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 lega private health decisions by raising taxes on plans that offer cerages for abortion. 87% of private health plans will be impacted by this unprecedented assault. and americans will see their health insurance options restcted 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 th 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 rort that a companies this bill goes further. it tries to redefine rape and

narrow the exception for sexual assault. this bill is unconscionabl. 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 speaker o tempore: the gentlelady's time has expired. the gentlen fr texas. mr. smith: madam speaker, i yield 30 seconds to the gentleman from louisiana, mr. landry. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. landry: 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 opose taxpayer funding for abortion. we must permanently end this practice. 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 speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from michigan. mr. conyers: madam speaker, i yield to the distinguished gentleman from new jersey, rob andrews, one minute. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlen is recognized for one minute. mr. an -- mr. andrews: i ask unanimous consent to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. andrews: 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 t 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-nstitution you should vote no. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from texas. mr. smith: madam speaker, i yield one minute to the gentleman from alabama, mr. aderholt. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. aderholt: thank you. madam speaker, i rise today in support of the legislation. as of today congress prohibits the expendite of federal funds on abortions thr a patchwork of riders on our annual appropriation bills. these riders include theyde amendment in labor-hhs an 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 aborons should be forced to provide for them. madam speaker, i support this legislation and i urge my colleagues to do the same. i yid back the balance of my time. the spker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from michigan. mr. conyers: madam speaker, i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the gentlen from texas. mr. smith: i yield one minute to my colleague from texas, mr.

gohmert, who is also a member of t judiciary committee. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. gohmert: 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 speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the gentleman from michigan. mr. conyers: madamspeaker, i continue to reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the gentleman from texas. mr. smith: madam speaker, we are prepared to close. the speaker pro tempore: gentleman from michigan, are you prepared to close? do you have any more speakers?

mr. conyers: madam speaker, i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. conyers: i want to urge all of the members of the house to please consider th 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 speaker pro tempore: the distinguished leader is recognized for one minute. pelosi -- ms. pelosi: thank you, madam speaker. i thank the gentleman for yielding. i want to thank him for his leadersh 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 rape, incest and life of the money. federal fding 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 insuran. 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 u'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 insurnce. 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 keing 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 americ college of

obstetricians and gynecologists wrote in opposition to this effort, we oppose legislative proposals to limit women's access to any needed medical ca. 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 to limit the care. let us expand it. 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 speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from texas.

mr. smith: madam speaker, i yield one minute to the gentleman from ohio, mr. boehner, the speaker of the united states house of representatives. t speaker pro tempore: the speaker is recognized for one minute. the speaker: 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 listenedo 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. the speaker pro tempore: does the ntleman -- the gentleman from texas. is recognized. you have 3 1/2 minutes. mr. smith: madam speaker, we're prepared to close and wait for the gentleman from michigan to yield back the balance of his time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from michigan's time has expired. mr. conyers: i yield back.

the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. mr. smith: madam speaker, i yield the balance of my time to the gentleman from new jersey, mr. smith, who is the chief sponsor of this leslation. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is yielded 3 1/2 minutes. mr. smith: 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 alpublic 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 rape, incest 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 taayer 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 protectionermanent 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 heth 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 policymars, 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 r. 3, the no taxpayer -- no taxpayer money for aboron act. thank you. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from texas rise? mr. brady: madam speaker, i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. brady: madam speaker,n

behalf of dave camp, the chairman of the ways and mea committee, and i stand in support of h.r. 3, the no taxpayer funding for abortion act, a bill that restrictthe 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 speaker pro tempore: the majority leader is recognized for one minute. mr. cantor: 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, ouefforts 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 fundin 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 dollars falls squarely in this camp. madam speaker, i ge my colleagues to suppt h.r. 3 and ensure that no taxpayer dollars go toward the funding of abortion, and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the gentleman from michigan. mr. levin: i yield myself two minutes.

the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman isecognized. mr. levin: we here need to talk straight to the american people. this bill does not cdify the hyde amendment. it goes well beyond it. we don't need to codify the hyde amendment. it's the law o 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 everywhe 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 speaker pro tempore: the

gentleman reserves. the gentleman from texas. >> i yield myself a minute and a half. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman isecognized. >> this is about -- mr. brady: 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 andoes 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 orrovide for an entity to providebortion, it does not apply in the cases of rape, incest or life-threatening condition of the mother, nor does it refer to any injuries resulting from abortion. th 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. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. brady: this legislation makes specific and narrow changes to the tax code so funds in f.s.a. or health code are used to pay for abortion, as the will not -- those will not get tax treatment. and moneys made available under the health law cannot be used to cover abortion. h.r. 3 is a pro-life, pro-family and it's a step toward setting into law a long-standing precedent that republicans have supported for decades. i urge my colleagues to support this bill. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlemanrom michigan. mr. levin: could i ask the balance of our time. the speaker pro tempore: three minutes. mr. he vip: i used my full --

mr. levin: i used my full two minutes? i did. i yield another minute to mr. -- a minute and a half to mr. blumenauer of oregon. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. blumenauer: the gentleman said it right. there are no federal funds for abortion under the hyde amendment except in the case of rape and incest. what this is about is how families spen their money and small business deals with insurance. it's part of a continuing republican assault against people with whom they disagree. it continues to -- continues the sad spectacle of using the internal revenue service, not just the use but abuse of the i.r. stomplet attack people with whom they disagree. remember the spectacle of the ways and means hearing where they drug aarp before them and tried to have an investigation because they disagreed with them on health insurance. yes this would put government between doctors and american

families. but it's not just about abortion urn the hyde amendment. remember, there are some people who are against the rape and incest exemption. there are some people who had a shocking proposal to redefine the very definition of rape. there is a continuing effort to erode basic, fundamental reproductive freedom and this shows a tactic of using the i.r.s. that i think is very dangerous. it does in fact raise the complexity and taxes on individuals who y in fact need these procedures and they -- and may be lifesaving, they may not agree but their doctor disagrees. this is a specter of ing th tax code and investigating power in ways that no one should support. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expire. the gentleman from texas. mr. brady: i yield two minutes to a nurse an mber of the ways and means, the

distinguished gentlelady from tennessee, mrs. black. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady recognized for two minutes. mrs. black: we have heard many misrepresentations of the true nature of this bill. i want to boil it down to the simple facts of what this bill does. no hyperbole, no scare tactics. this bill codifies the hyde amendment that no taxpayer dollars will go to abortion. this is a long standing policy of the federal government since 1976. we already know how medical expenses of all sorts are treated urn the tax code. tax payers who use itemized deductns for medical expenses, who have h.s.a.'s or f.s.a.'s or m.s.a.'s, do not, and i want to highlight that, do not identify each medical expense on an individual tax return. that is not the case today, nor will it be the case if this bill is signed into law.

to be clear what this bill does not do, a woman would not have list on a tax form tha a specific medical expense was for an abortion. that's simply not how the process works. it's not how it works today. nor will it be how it works if this is signed into law. it's important to make clear that no one would ever be audited because of an abortion. they would have to already be under an audit for some other reason before, and i want to emphasize that, before the i.r.s. would even consider asking for any -- information about any medical procedure. many types of medical care are very private and as a nurse for over 40 years, i fully understand how personal medical issues can be. taxpayers who don't want to tell the i.r.s. about medical procedures, they wish to be kept private, can do so by not claiming those tax credits for

such care. now, even if this issue did arise in an audit, other federal encies that already use taxpayer dollars such as medicaid and the federal employee health benefit program -- the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady's time has expired. mr. brady: i yield the gentlelady 30 seconds. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady is recognized. mrs. black: have no problem distinguishing between abortion for rape or incest or those that are elective. they ask the provider, basically a doctor's te. that doesn't mean this is not a difficult situation for that small group of women and i understand it is incredibly difficult and my heart gos out to them but if we claim a tax benefit for a medical procedure like an abortion and you get audited you can either choose to forgo the tax benefit or ask

the provider to verify that tax benefit. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from michigan. mr. levin: it's my pleasure to yield the balance of our time to mr. crowley. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for a minute and a half. mr. crowley: i thank the speaker fer yielding me the time and the gentleman from michigan for doing so as well. with all due respect to my colleague, mrs. black, when someone comes to the floor and says i'm going to speak free of hyperbole, it'll be so high up to your neck, you don't have to worry about geing it off your shoe. if what we were doing was codifying existing law, there would be very little angst on this side of the aisle. but that's not what we're doing. this goes so much further, it only speaks to the ideological

purge that you're on right now. madam speaker, on the 100th day of the republican rule of the house, i see speeches on the floor, after their failed campaign promise to focus on jobs and economic growth. it said actions speak louder than words an that's true. for all the republicans' talk about putting americans back to work, their actions demonstrate this is the least of their prrities. instead, they have cut jobs, raised taxes and reduced americans' access to health care. the bill being debated today also has no jo component whatsoever. not a single job will be created because of this bill today. in fact, it will raise taxes and hamper the ability of small business men and women to hire people. in their ideological zeal to restrict a woman's right to choose, the republicans have prioritized a measure south carolina small business chamber

of commerce calls, and i quote, a slap in the face to small business owners. we just a few weeks ago removed the 1099 onerous provisions and now we're going to further burden small business men and women with this provision. it will burden them. it will not create a single job. will further burden the ability of small business men and women to create jobs in america. with that, i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. >> madam speaker -- mr. brady: madam speaker, how much time is remaining? the speaker pro tempore: the time for the committee on ways and means has expired.

the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from pennsylvania is recognized. >> thank you, madam speaker. i yield myself such time as i may consume. madam speaker, the bill before us today should be a no brainer. americans overwhelmingly reject the use of taxpayer funds for abortion.

in several polls over the last few years, anywhere from 60% to 70% of the public oppose using taxpayer funds for abortion. h.r. 3 puts into statute the will of the american people. mr. pitts: since 1976, the hyde amendment has been included in appropriations bills to ensure that federal funds are not used to provide abortions. this policy provision has passed year in and year out with bipartisan support. h.r. 3 would just take that provision and put it into law. this may make sense to most americans, but for some rson, this idea receives great pushback in washington. health care refo also placed abortion funding at the center of its debate. in their haste toass

obamacare last congress, the democrat leadership in washington neglected to include any adequate prohibition on abortion funding. the president did issue an executive order to support the intentions of hyde, unfortunately, the order merely reiterated the accounting gimmick in the health care bill. the esident's own chief of staff at that time wou later comment on how he thought the idea for this executive order so that they could, quote, allow the stupak amendment not to exist by law but by executive order, end quote. wh the president signed that bill into law, he allowed a massive expansion in federal funding for abortion. in a time of great federal debt, the last thing the american people want is to have their taxpayer dollars used on the morally objectionable practice of abortion.

according to a 2007 report, if the hyde amendment was removed from law, the number of abortions would likely increase by 25%. the study reveals what is common sense. an increase in funding for abortions will directly lead to an increase in the number of abortions. many of my colleagues on the other side of the sle have expressed their desire to reduce abortions. if that is truly their desire and not just a talking point, then they should have no problem at all voting in favor of this bill. i urge my colleagues to support this bill and i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempor the gentleman reserves his time. the gentlelady from lorado. >> i rise in strong opposition to this extreme legislation and yield two minutes to the distinguished gentlelady from illinois, ms. schakowsky. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady is recognized for two minutes.

ms. sh cause could he, madam speaker, i rise in opposition toh.r. 3, the so-called no taxpayer funding for abortion act. but don't be confused. h.r. 3 goes far beyond current law which is already highly restrictive and frankly which oppose. the hyde amendment already prohibits women enrolled in medicaid, medicare, federal emoyees, women serving in the military, women in prisons, women in peace corps and those under the indian health services act from getting the care they need. in other words, there is no federal funding for abortion. actually, what it does do, among other things, is attack small businesses. let's hear the words of frank map jr., president and c.e.o. of the south carolina small business chamber of commerce with 5,000 members. here's ate said, "h.r. 3 is an attempt to roll back the small business health insurance

tax credit created by the affordable care act." when the house voted to eliminate and defeat the entire affordable care act, we, he means small businesses, could rationize this was collateral damage. small businesses can no longer think of themselves as collateral damage. mr. knapp says, let me make this very clear. a vote for h.r. 3 is a direct attack on small business. every representative who loudly proclaims their love for small businesses because we are the backbone, you know -- they are the backbone of the economy -- now can put their vote where their mouth is. their support for small business will be judged by a no vote on h.r. 3. i urge all my colleagues not to

let this use of the -- phony use of the tax code to take away the rights of small business to get tax credits or individuals to pay for abortions with their own money. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from pennsylvania. mr. pitts: for the information of members, the hyde amendment only applies in the labor-h bill. it's offered every year as a writer. similar language is offered to indian health, federal employee health benefits acts. we've done these amendments or writers to these bills for years. so when you speak about the hyde amendment, we should speak about it accurately. i yield at this time to the gentlelady from missouri, ms. hertzler, such time as she may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady is recognized for such time as she may consume. ms. hartzler: thank you, madam speake i rise in support of h.r. 3.

this is not a controversial bill. this is a commonsense bill to rein in our runaway government spending and to spend money on things the american people don't want. certainly we should not be spending our hard-earned tax dollars on abortion. people work hard all year to send in their taxes on april 15, and they shouldn't have their money going to something that is moralally objectionable to them. takes away human life. there e many, many areas of this budget that we need to rein in, but this is noncontroversial. this is something that over 60% of the american people say, i don't want my tax dollars going to pay for abortion, the taking of a human innocent life. and so it's time to make this permanent so we don't have to as a congress come in every year and discuss these issues on all the different legislation that is out there. now is the time to make this

permanent. get off the table so we can get on to other areas of rning in the runaway spending, making government more efficient, more effective, using our tax dollars more wisely, and certainly it is not an affront to women's health. women have the opportunity to get the health care that they need now, but we don't need to be using it to take innocent human life. i certainly applaud this bill and that's why it has so many co-sponsor we need to make sure that our tax dollars are not used to pay for abortion. madam speaker, i yield back my time. thank you. the saker pro tempore: the gentlelady yields back. the gentlelady from colorado. ms. degette: i am now pleased to yield to a senior member of the energy and commerce committee, mr. engel of new york, one minute. the speaker pro tempore: . engel is recognized for one minute. mr. engel: thank you. i thank the members on t other side of the aisle if you repeat it over and over again the people will believe it. the hyde amendment already

prohibits federal funds from being used f abortion. this is not about federal funds. the other thing i don't understand is my republican friends always claim that they want smaller government they don't want the government to intrude on people's lives. so here we are about to pass a measure that expands government, intrudes on people's lives and penalize small businesses and impeds them from creating jobs. i don't believe the government should be in the business of preventing people from accessing legal medical treatment. it surprises me and worries me that this congress keeps proposing legislation that diminishes the right to access health care. abortion is legal in this country. i understand how peoe feel on both sides of the aisle. it's a very personal decision. yet, republicans seem intent on interfering with a woman's right to make her own decisions with her family and physicians using her private money. abortion is a difficult choice, to be sure, and this extreme legislation makes the decision even harder. we need to provide women and

their families with the support they need to make heal decision, not criminalize them. vote no on this bill. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from pennsylvania. mr. pitts: madam speaker, how much time remains? the speaker pro tempore: 30 seconds. mr. pitts: i yield 30 second to the gentlelady from north carolina, ms. foxx. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady is recognized for 30 seconds. ms. foxx: thank you, madam speaker. i thank my colleague from pennsylvania for his leadership on this issue and for yielding time. madam speaker, not using the hard-earned money of taxpayers to destroy innocent unborn children is not extreme. it is not radical. it is the right thing to do. the majority of americans agree with us, madam speaker, thait is the wrong thing to use their money for this issue. and i want to support my

colleagues in this legislation and say we need to pass this bill and we need to send a message to the american people that we're wise stewards of their money. thank you, madam speaker. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady from colorado. ms. degette: madam speaker, i yield myself the balance of our time. the speaker pro tempore: two minutes. ms. degette: madam speaker, sitting and listening to this debate it would bextremely easy to become confused. the proponents of this bill keep repeating the same mantra. they want to stop federal funding of abortion. they forget to mention that there is no fedal funding of abortion. what they want to do is expand restrictions on funding for the first time into tax policy. right now under current law we have the hyde amendment which every year prevents federal funds from being used for abortion except for in the cases of rape, incest or the life of the mother. i don't like the hyde amendment. lots of people don't like the hyde amendment but it's the

law. this bill, however, goes far beyond current law. now, my colleagues across the aisle want to expand these restrictions and make surehat individuals and businesses can't get complete women's health care in their health insurance with their own money without paying for a tax increase. businesses who right now get tax relief for having full health insurance now would not be able to get it. let me say this again. at a time when everybody in this house, certainly everybody onhe other side of the aisle, is saying we can't raise taxes, the leadership of ts house is supporting raising taxes to advance a social policy. i don't think, madam speaker, that this as in the republican pledge to america. madam eaker, i don't know how many times the republican leadership is going to make this congress vote to strip american women their access to

health care with their own money, but i for one would like to encourage them to spend their time getting our country back to work rather on an extreme agen that the american people didn't ask for, that they didn't want, that's going nowhere in the u.s. senate and if it did would be vetoed by the president of the united states. i yield back e balance of m >> "washington journal" is next followed by the house session. an oil drilling bill. over on c-span 3, we will have coverage of president obama's trip to manhattan. later, the state department testifies at a house foreign affairs hearing. he will be talking about security threats in