on ways and means, mr. crowley. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from w rk rzefotwo minutes. mr. crowley: i thank my friend from rochester for yielding me this time. thank you madam speaker. if at first -- you have heard the adage before, you don't succeed, try something else again. . that's clearly what the republican colleagues are doing northern. the bill the republicans attempted to bring to the floor today would have required women to go to the police before they could even address their own health care needs. they abandoned that first line of attack on women's health because, well, it was too extreme even for members of their own party. but they weren't going to let something like that from pandering to the right-wing flank. fortunately for the republicans they have a long list of bills that attack health care and women's access to care. so it's easy for them to just swap it out for another

extremist effort. their partisan base will be happy, but at the expense of the health of many women and families in our country. this bill will have a serious impact on the family's ability to make their own health care decisions. it will raise taxes on hardworking americans, just if they happen to choose a health care that plan -- that this majority doesn't like. and for what? some of my republican colleagues can score cheap political points. this is not what the american people want. they want an agenda that lifts people up. they want us to be working on legislation that creates jobs, boost paychecks in this country and strengthens our economy. this bill will do none of these things. it is nothing but a cynical attempt to put politics where it doesn't belong. vote no on this rule and vote no on this blatant political

gambity. i know how embarrassing it is for the republicans because of their own snaffue within their own caucus, but let's get on to the real business of creating more jobs in this country and boosting a person's pay in this land. that's what the american people want and need and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentlelady omework reserves. the gentlelady from nort cara rogze ms. fo: thank you, madam speaker. i now yield two minutes to my distinguished colleague from tennessee, mrs. blackburn. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady from tennessee is recognized for two minutes. mrs. blackburn: thank you, madam chairman. i want to thank the lady from north carolina for hire diligence and efforts on this -- for her diligence and efforts on this issue. madam chairman, i think we're all pleased to have so many of our constituents in town today who are supporting life and supporting that concept of life of liberty, of freedom.

and it is such an honor today to come to the floor and to talk about an issue that 68% of the american people agree on and, you know listening to my colleagues, and they are talking about that this is partisan and just for our base, i'm glad that they think 68% of the american people are our base because they do agree with us. 71% of millennials, they agree with us on this issue and the issue is simply this. there should not be taxpayer dollars used to pay for abortions. now, the gentleman from new jersey, mr. smith has done a tremendous amount of work on this bill and i thank him for his diligence, his attention and for working to get h.r. 7 right, in the right form, ready to move forward and to bring

this issue into the light. we've got three things we want to focus on in this bill. number one, there is enormous bipartisan support. i would say near unanimous bipartisan support for the hyde amendment language. title 1 of this bi igog make that permanent. madam chairman, what that means is no longer do we have to revote this over and over and over. it will be the applied standard the hyde amendment language. in title 2 of this bill, what it will do is apply that to obamacare. if the gentlelady will yield me another minute. ms. foxx: i yield the gentlelady another minute. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady is recognized. mrs. blackburn: thank you, madam chairman. what that will do is apply it to obamacare, the affordable care act. the reason it's important to

do, the president promised on numerous occasions, madam chairman, numerous that there would be no federal funds used for abortion, no taxpayer dollars which become federal funds used for abortion. now, this was a big debate as we went through the affordable care act. what we have learned from, not us, but from the g.a.o., is that we have in the marketplace 1,036 plans. over 1,000 plans that allow those dollars into those plans. what this bill will also do is to bring transparency, not only to the plans but to the money flow. so that american taxpayers, hardworking american taxpayers who do not want their money used to pay for abortion, 68% agree with us, they will have clarity and certainty on the

issue. with that, madam chairman, i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady's time has expired. the gentlewomafr rt ca reserves. the gentlelady from new york is recognized. ms. slaughter: madam speaker, i'm pleased to yield two minutes to the gentlelady from new york, e rainmeerf appropriations, mrs. lowey. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlom fm w rks recognized. mrs. lowey: i thank the distinguished ranking member. madam speaker, i'm totally puzzled. i came to the floor thinking that we were going to be focused on creating jobs, putting people to work helping our young people go to college, reduce student loan debts. where is regular procedure that my friends on the other side of the aisle were going to bring to the house? where did this bill come from? did it come from the committee

process? no. let me make this very, very clear. i knew henry hyde. i worked with henry hyde. the hyde amendment is the law of the land. there is no public money for abortion. there is no public money for abortion. this is a radical bill that restricts women paying for private insurance with their own dollars. millions of women would lose comprehensive health care. i just don't understand it. as an appropriator we still have not brought the homeland security bill to the floor. as a resident of new york, i'm concerned by possible attacks. let's do our work. let's move on. let us -- ms. slaughter: i'd like to yield the gentlelady an extra

minute. the speaker pro tempore: the genely rogzefor an additional minute. mrs. lowey: my colleagues, i'd like to ask my friends on the other side of the aisle. this bill just came to the floor without serious discussion when there is no public money for abortion today as a result of the hyde amendment. i look forward to bringing a homeland security bill to the floor, as i began to say, as a new yorker, i'm concerned about potential threats to our country. let's get to work. let's create jobs. let's do the work that our citizens, our constituents brought us here to do. i don't understand this bill. and in closing, there is no public money for abortion. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady from new york reserves. the gentlelady from north cali is recognized. ms. foxx: thank you, madam speaker. the passage of h.r. 7 will be welcomed news for the majority of americans who do not want

their tax dollars paying for the grizzly business of abortion. this bill will make existing policies, like the hyde amendment permanent, and will rid obamacare of its massive expansion of public funding for abortion insurance plans. the president repeatedly assured americans that obamacare would quote, maintain current hyde amendment restrictions governing abortion policy and extend those restrictions to newly created health insurance exchanges. unfortunately, madam speaker, that promise didn't pan out. it now joins quote, if you like your plan you can keep it of president obama's broken promises. madam speaker, today hundreds of thousands of americans are coming to washington, d.c. to brave the cold and march for

life. participants hail from all 50 states, from various religions and all different walks of life and ages. but the one thing they have in common is the shared dedication to protecting the unborn. the march for life gives a voice to the voiceless and sends a powerful message to the representatives of the people assembled here in congress. it is heartening that so many americans of different backgrounds are willing to take a stand for life. madam speaker, this is not a partisan issue and this is not a partisan bill. h.r. 7 reflects the bipartisan, bicameral agreement that our government should not be in the business of subsidizing

abortions. this is not a radical idea. it's a commonsense proposal that codifies a long-standing compromise. therefore, i again urge my colleagues to vote for this rule and h.r. 7 and i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady reserves. the gentlelady from new york is recognized. ms. slaughter: madam speaker, i'm pleased to yield two minutes to the gentlewoman from new york, mrs. maloney. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman is recognized for two minutes. mrs. maloney: i thank the gentlelady from the great state of new york for her extraordinary leadership on the rules committee and in so many areas for this country and our state. i rise today in strong opposition to yet another closed rule. despite all the lectures from republicans about how creating jobs and growing the economy should be the number one top priority for this congress, here we are again instead, here

we are once again hammering away at a woman's right to make her own choices and control her own body and make choices about her own health care. it is insulting to women, and it does not create one single job. but what it does do, it puts government between a physician and its patient. that's what it does. yet, the other side says they want freedom and they want the government off their back. yet, on the most personal health care decisions for women, they're putting government between a woman and her doctor. this bill will not grow our economy but it will make permanent such discriminatory bans that target women in both the public and private health insurance market. republicans claim on their website -- you can look it up. you can see it on their website

that they want to, and i am quoting from the republican website, do something for the 8.7 million people in america who are still unemployed end quote. it's time to focus on creating jobs and improving the economy for americans. yet, the first bills that the republican majority puts on the floor does not create one single job but discriminates, hurts and insults women. i urge a strong, strong no vote on this rule and on the underlying bill and i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady from new york rers. the gentlelady from north carolina. ms. foxx: thank you, madam speaker. i'll reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady from north carolina reserves.

the gentlelady from new york is recognized. ms. slaughter: madam speaker m pleased to yield two minutes to the gentlewoman from california, ms. lee. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady is recognized for two minutes. ms. lee: thank you, mr. speaker. i thank the gentlelady for yielding and being vigilant and protecting women women's right to privacy and alerting us as to the really dangers in this very terrible rule and terrible bill. first of all, once again, as i said yesterday, this is just wrong. this is a horrible bill. this takes away a woman's right to privacy and, again, i thought in our country we prided ourselves on the right to privacy. women have a right to determine their own health care decisions. they can make these decisions with whomever they deem appropriate. there is no way that members of congress should intervene

should direct or superimpose views and government policies on women's health care and women's right to privacy. this bill, once again, the hyde amendment was passed i believe it was, what in the 1970's. we should be providing access to health care so low-income women could determine their own health care decisions as those women who have access. federal funds haven't been allowed for many, many years now. so i don't know why these bogus arguments are being made on this bill because we don't have federal funding of abortions, and i think women know that and see this as a real sinister move to once again deny women their right to health care and their right to privacy. also, once again we're seeing how another bill further undermines d.c.'s home rule.

this bill prohibits the district of columbia for -- from using its own funds to provide abortions. . why would we do this? d.c. has a right to determine how they want to provide health care for women and have their own ability to determine their own destiny. but once again for low-income women in washington, d.c. they are under assault with this bill. it's really a shame and disgrace once again we have to get up here and debunk the argument that federal funds are being use oed for abortions, because they are not. today -- used for abortions because they are not. today the 40th anniversary of roe vs. wade, we should be talking about expanding access to a full range of reproductive health services for anyone including low-income women. the speaker pro tempore: the

gentlelady's time has expired. ms. slaughter: let me yield the gentlelady an additional minute. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady is recognized. ms. lee: we should be talking about expanding reproductive health services for all women including low-income women. we should be talking about pay equity. we should be talking about childcare. we should be talking about paid family medical leave. we should be talking about creating jobs. but rather than that, here we go once again trying to get in the middle of a woman's decision to move forward with her own life based on the decisions that she and her physician and family members make. so the right to privacy once again is being undermined by this bill. you can't have a right to privacy and keep government out of your private life on one hand. on the other hand say government's got to interfere with your personal and private business. health care is too important for women. women need to be able to make their own health care decisions. and this bill would do the exact

opposite. it would move our country backwards. it would move women's health care backwards. i hope that members will vote no on this rule and no on the bill. we need to be expanding access to women's health care. thank you again. the speaker pro tempore: t gentlelady from nework reserves. the gentlelady from north carolina is recognized. ms. foxx: thank you madam speaker. while it's true that the hyde amendment and its companion amendments have been renewed every year, recent implementation of the affordable care a or obamacare, has ignored these restrictions. rather than renewing various amendments each year, we should be make the prohibition on federal abortion funding permanent and governmentwide. additionally, provisions contained in the abortion insurance full disclosure act have been included in h.r. 7. these provisions require the exchanges to prominently display, one, whether a plan provides for abortion coverage, and two, if it does, the amount of the abortion surcharge that the consumer's required to pay.

unfortunately for most consumers, finding out the plans on their state's exchange or the federal marketplace covers abortion is nearly impossible because the information is not consistently available. knowing whether these plans cover abortion is absolutely critical to many consumers because plans that cover elective abortion are required by law to impose a mandatory monthly abortion surcharge. these surcharges are not optional. once you sign up for a plan with abortion coverage you must pay the surcharge. this means that potentially many americans who strongly oppose elective abortion could be unknowingly contributing to the practice financially. madam speaker that simply isn't right. h.r. 7 will stop funding for plans that cover elective abortion under obamacare and ensure that abortion coverage in the accompanying surcharge are made transparent to the american

people. for these reasons i urge my colleagues to vote for the rule and h.r. 7, and i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady from north carolina reserves the gentlelady from new york recogned. ms. slaughter: i yield two minutes to the gentleman from michigan, mr. kildee. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is rogzefotw n mr. kildee: thank you madam speaker. thank you, my colleague for yielding. let me first say something about the process that we are engaged in. we have heard just in the last few weeks, even as we opened this congress, the speaker and others in the majority talk about how we will adhere to regular order. and we'll get back to the process of legislating the way it was intended to be conducted. what happened to that? why did we set that aside? what's the emergency that requires us to bring this highly ideological piece of legislation to the floor in just a few hours

after it had been brought to rules committee? what happened to the previous legislation that we were supposed to debate? this to me, this is a big problem. and it's one that i think begs the question of whether or not those offers of returning to the regular legislative process are sincere. i urge a no vote on the rule for that reason, but also because this is yet just another ideological attack on the health care rights of women in this country. who want in some cases, we know that abortion services are already prohibited from being funded through federal sources. this is simply going so far as to say that women with their own money who seek to procure insurance coverage can't seek that coverage if it includes these services. to me it goes just far too far.

it does not allow even exceptions for abortions that would be required to protect the health of the women or serious medical concerns. we can't continue at the make this a political question and political football. 42 years ago this question was decided at the supreme court. it is a right that is protected. and rather than continuing to just sort of pander to the base and satisfy the ideological extremists in our country, we ought to be thinking about the questions that people actually want us to take this precious time on the floor of the house to debate how we are going to put america back to work. how with are we going to rebuild our infrastructure, how are we going to make sure that kids want to get a good college education the way the president outlined the other night will be able to afford that. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. mr. kildee: i yield back. thank you. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from new york reserves. the gentlelady from north carolina is recognized. ms. foxx: thank you, madam speaker. i just want to say that it's

clear some of our colleagues have not read the bill or have not listened to the debate. this bill does not prohibit women from purchasing abortion coverage with their own money. now, madam speaker i'd like to yield two minutes to the distinguished the gentlewoman from florida, ms. ros-lehtinen. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady is recognized for two minutes. ms. ros-lehtinen: thank you, madam speaker. i thank the gentlelady for yielding. i also want to thank mr. smith and my colleagues and all who are in washington, d.c., today, participating in the march for life for their unwavering commitment and support to fight on behalf of those who have no voice. throughout my years in congress madam speaker and as a devoted human rights advocate, i have fought tirelessly for the fundamental rights of the innocent unborn. as pro-life members of congress we have a commitment to stand up for life and to take the necessary steps to advance

legislation to the floor. that is exactly what the u.s. house of representatives will be doing today. while the vast majority of americans can agree that we must have a lot of work in front of us to reduce the number of abortion, few legislators have taking meaningful action. pro-abortion members of congress have sought to eliminate federal protections on the use of taxpayer funds for abortions, both here and abroad. federal funds should not be used to pay for abortions, madam speaker. and congressman smith's bill would do exactly that by establishing a permanent prohibition on taxpayer subsidies for abortion and abortion coverage. this will help save lives. in addition, this bill also protects the conscience and religious views of millions of americans, the vast majority of americans also do not want their tax dollars to be used to pay for abortions. this bill would establish a permanent prohibition on taxpayer subsidies for abortion.

for many years the hyde amendment and other federal prohibitions on public funding for abortion had been enacted as appropriation riders, but they are not permanent, madam speaker. we need to get rid of this patchwork approach and enact h.r. 7 to ensure that federal funds are not used to pay for abortion. i look forward to working with mr. smith and ms. fox and others in favor of this bill and to continue working with my fellow pro-life colleagues in the house and senate to promote legislation that upholds the sanctity of innocent human life. we have a responsibility to protect the unborn, and we must remain vigilant and continue to do what is right for all americans. i thank the gentlelady for yielding me time. thank you, madam speaker. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady from tk north li reserves. the gentlelady from new york is recognized. ms. slaughter: madam speaker, i have no further requests for time and i would like to inquire from my colleague if she has requests for time. otherwise i'm pred i -- i'm

ready to close. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady fm rtcali. do you have any further speakers? ms. foxx: we have no further speakers, and we are prepared to close if the gentlewoman from new york is prepared. ms. slaughter: i am. the speaker pro tempore:he gely om n yk recog ms. slaughter: madam speaker we just heard that apparently none of us have read the bill. that's absolutely true. the bill, as i said, was dragged out of the used bill freezers at 9:00 last night. but if it's the same bill we are talking about that's been through several terms, it still has the idea, the forcible rape only -- being the only legitimate rape. and that the i.r.s. can audit to see if you were really raped when you had an abortion. to prove that again taking women back to the days when everybody said that they could not make decisions. and that they had to be made for them. and this is the same bill that was brought to us, as we pointed out, by a subcommittee of 13 men and voted to the house by a

committee of 21 men, then we don't need to read it again. my understanding is that this is the same bill. it was repugnant then and it certainly is now. on behalf of the men and women of the united states who feel that they have the right to make their own health decisions, i beg this house of representatives to turn down all of this. we he know that what they are doing literally is dismissive of not only 51% of the women's population, we are the majority population, we women in the united states, but this is certainly by any account a misuse of the chamber's attention, and we are talking taxpayer funds, believe me this is a misuse of taxpayer funds. if we defeat the previous question, i will offer an amendment to the rule that would allow us to strike the three day

layover waiver. the waiver that was given by the rules committee to not do the three-day layover but have something to do on the floor today. with 23 months left of the 11th congress, we should be able to run the house in a thoughtful manner that the rules of the house provide for. madam speaker, i ask unanimous consent to insert the text of the amendment in the record along with extraneous material immediately prior to the vote on the previous question. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. ms. slaughter: thank you. i'm going to urge again for all my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to vote no on the previous question he so no -- vote no on the rule, and by all means no on the intrusive deceptive bill that has been talked about here for 40 years. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady yields back. the gentlelady from north carolina is recognized. ms. foxx: thank you, madam speaker.

life is the most fundamental of all rights. it is sacred and god given. but millions of babies have been robt of that right -- robbed of that right in this the freest country in the world. that is a tragedy beyond words and betrayal of what we as a nation stand for. one day we hope it will be different. we hope life will cease to be valued on a sliding scale. we hope the era of elected abortions ushered in by an un-elected court will be closed and deemed one of the darkest chapters in american history, but until that day it remains the solemn duty to stand up for life. regardless of the length of this journey, we'll continue to speak for those who cannot and we'll continue to pray for the one who can change the hearts for those in desperation and those in power who equally hold the lives of the innocent in their hands. madam speaker, the commonsense measure before us restores an important long-standing bipartisan agreement that protects the unborn and prevents

taxpayers from being forced to finance thousands of elective abortions. it reflects the will of the american people and is the product of what has historically been a bipartisan bicameral consensus in congress. therefore i urge my colleagues to vote for this rule and h.r. 7. i yield back the balance of my time. i move the previous question on the resolution. the speaker pro tempore: the question is on ordering the previous question on the resolution. so many as are in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it. ms. slaughter: may i request the yeas and nays. the speaker pro tempore: the yeas and nays are requested. those favoring a vote by the yeas and nays will rise. a sufficient number having arisen, the yeas d ysre d. members will record their votes by electronidece. pursuant to clause 9 of rule 20, the chair will reduce to five minutes the minimum time for any

electronic vote on the question of adoption of the resolution. this is a 15-minute vote. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of representiv.]

the speaker pro tempore: on this vote the yeas are 239. the nays are 183. the previous question is ordered. the question is on adoption of the resolution. so many as are in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it. ms. slaughter: madam speaker. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady from new york is recognized. ms. slaughter: i request the yeas and nays. the speaker pro tempore: e yeas and naysreeqst. e favoring a vote byhe yeas and nays will rise. a sufficient number having arisen, the yeas and nays are ordered. members will record their votes by electronic dic this is a five-minute vote.

[captioning made possible by the national captioni instite,ncn opern with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of t hse proceedings for polic or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.]

the speaker pro tempore: on this vote e asre 242 and

the nays are 179. the resolution is adopted. without objection, a motion to reconsider is laid on the table.

the speaker pro tempore:ed house will be in order. please take your conversations off the floor. the house will be in order. please take your conversations off the floor and out of the

well of the house. please take your conversations out of the well of the house. please take your conversations off the floor of the house. the house will be in order.

for what purpose does the gentleman from pennsylvania, mr. pi sk recognition? mr. pitts: madam speaker, pursuant to house resolution 42, i call up h.r. -- the speaker pro tempore: the gentlanilsuen members are asked to please take their conversations off the floor. the gentleman from pennsylvania is recognized. mr. pitts: thank you madam speaker. pursuant to house resolution 42 i call up h.r. 7 and ask for its immediate consideration in the house. the speaker pro tempore: t eilrerthe title of the bill. the clerk: h.r. 7, a bill to

prohibit taxpayer funded abortions. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to house resolution 42, the bill is considered read . the gentleman from pennsylvania, mr. pitts, and the gentlewoman from colorado, ms. degette each will control 30 minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from pennsylvania, mr. pitts. mr. pitts: madam speaker, i ask unanimous consent that all members may have five legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and to include extraneous material on h.r. 7. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. pitts: madam speaker, i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. pitts: madam speaker, i come to the floor today in strong support of h.r. 7, the no taxpayer funding for abortion and abortion insurance full disclosure act. legislation that passed the house almost one year ago with bipartisan support. this bill affirms what a

majority of americans believe, that no taxpayer dollars should be spent on abortions and abortion coverage. h.r. 7 establishes a permanent government-wide prohibition on taxpayer subsidies for abortion. this bill is all the more necessary because of the president's health care law and its attack on this longstanding protection of taxpayer dollars. the bill before us would simply codify the hyde amendment, a longstanding provision that has ensured federal dollars do not subsidize abortion over the past decade. h.r. 7 also requires that information regarding abortion coverage, as well as the amount of the abortion surcharge, be displayed where consumers can easily identify which plans cover abortion. consumers should have the right

to know whether the plan they are selecting on an exchange includes abortion coverage. while the affordable care act included some notification provisions, many of our constituents are simply unable to find out whether a plan is paying for abortions. in fact, this inability to find out whether exchange plans provide abortion coverage seems to extend to the secretary of health and human services. as former secretariesy billous failed to yull -- secretary sebelius failed to uphold her commitment after testifying twice before the energy and commerce committee, promising to provide the congress and the american people a full list of exchange plans providing abortion coverage. today over a year has passed and this commitment is still left unfulfilled. the self-appointed, quote, most transparent administration end

quote, in history is simply unwilling or unable to comply with this request. in fact it took the government accountability office months to find out that taxpayer dollars went to pay for over 1,000 health insurance plans that included abortion. even though the affordable care act required through law that separate payments be made to pay for the abortion surcharge, the g.a.o. also found that none of the insurers they interviewed actually collected a separate payment. in fact, the report reveals that the administration informed insurance issuers that they didn't need two separate payments. this bill is about protecting taxpayer dollars.

and protecting life. it also ensures we have at least some transparency under the president's health care law. i urge my colleagues to support the bill and i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman fr pnsvaa reserves. the gentlewoman from colorad is gned. ms. degette: madam speaker, i yield myself one minute. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman is recoed. mst: madam speaker, i have good news for my friends on the other side of the aisle. there is no taxpayer funding for abortion. let me say that again. there is no funding for taxpayer abortion. there hasn't been for many decades because of the hyde amendment. under the affordable care act that prohibition did not change. now, some of us might disagree with the hyde amendment, but that's the law of the land and it was a carefully constructed compromise under the affordable care act. this bill would be a vast

expansion of the restriction of a woman's right to choose what type of insurance she can purchase with the consultation of her doctor and her husband. because it would prevent women from purchasinging insurance with their own money on the exchanges and that would be a restriction on their rights. so i'm going to urge my colleagues to vote no on this ill conceived piece of legislation and let's talk about some things that really matter, like jobs child care and pay equity. with that i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempor the gentlewoman's time has expired. the gentleman from pennsylvania is recognized. mr. pitts: madam speaker, at this time i'm pleased to yield one minute to the gentlelady from kansas ms. jenkins. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewom fm ns is recnid r e nu. . miss jeppingins: i rise today as a supporter and co-sponsor of

h.r. 7, the no taxpayer funding for abortion act. i was a co-sponsor of this legislation in the previous two congresses and i continue to support it after hearing from my constituents time and time again that they do not want their taxpayer dollars funding abortions. in fact, a majority of americans and the vast majority of kansans oppose their tax dollars used towards abortion. the specter of taxpayer funded abortion has been exacerbated by the president's health care law which offers subsidies to taxpayers in order to offset its high cost. these subsidized plans brought through the health care exchanges could allow for taxpayer funded abortions to occur. without this crucial legislation, we will continue to have a patchwork of provisions regarding federal funding. this creates confusion, blocks transparency, and opens up additional loopholes. long-standing provisions are re-established under h.r. 7 which would apply uniformly across federal programs including the president's

destructive health care law. i urge passage of this bipartisan bill. thank you. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady's ti h eir. the gentlewoman from colorado is recognized. ms. degette: i'm pleased to yield for the purposes of a unanimous consent request to ms. capps from california. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman is recogze cas: thank my colleague for yielding. i ask unanimous consent to have my statement inserted into the record of the house of representatives that we should be considering fair paychecks and better infrastructure instead of attacking women's access to health care. i yield back. ms. degette: madam speaker. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from colorado. ms. degette: i'm pleased now to yield to the gentlelady from california, mrs. napolitano, for the purposes of a unanimous consent request. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman is recognized. mrs. napolitano: thank you madam speaker. i ask unanimous consent to insert my statement into the record of the house of representatives that we should vote for bigger paychecks and better infrastructure instead of attacking women's access to all

health care. i yield back the balance of my time. ms. degette: madam speaker. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. ms. degette: i'm now pleased to yield to the gentlelady from new jersey, ms. watson coleman, for the purpose of a unanimous consent request. ms. watson coleman: i thank the gentlelady for yielding to me. madam speaker, i ask unanimous consent to inserty statement in the record that the house should not -- should vote for bigger paychecks, should vote for better infrastructure instead of attacking women's access to health care. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. ms. degette: madam speaker. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from colorado. .ette: i'm now pleased to yield for the purposes of a unanimous consent request the gentlelady from california, ms. loretta sanchez. ms. sanchez: i thank the gentlewoman from colorado. i ask unanimous consent to insert my statement in the record that the house should vote for bigger paychecks and better infrastructure instead of attacking women's access to health care. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. ms. degette: i'm pleased now,

madam speaker, to yield for the purposes of a unanimous consent request to the gentleman from illinois, mr. gutierrez. mr. gutierrez: i ask unanimous consent to insert my statement in the record that the house should vote for bigger paychecks and better infrastructure instead of attacking my daughter's access to health care. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. ms. degette: madam speaker i now am pleased -- for purposes of a unanimous consent request to the gentleman from texas, mr. veasey. mr. veasey: madam speaker, i ask unanimous consent to insert my statement in the record that the house should vote for bigger paychecks and better infrastructure instead of attacking women's health care. thank you. ms. degette: madam speaker, i'm now pleased to yield for the purposes of a unanimous consent request to the gentlelady from new york, mrs. maloney. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman is recognized. mrs. maloy: i ask unanimous consent to insert my statement in the record that the house should be voting on proposals

that create jobs and accelerate economic growth. instead the only thing the republicans have accelerated around here is their attacks on a woman's constitutional rights and health care. the speaker pro tempore: the chair advises members that although a unanimous consent request to insert remarks in debate may comprise a simple declarative statement of the members' attitude toward the pending measure elbellishments beyond that standard constitute debate and can become an imhe position on the time of the member who has yielded for that purpose. the chair will entertain as many requests to insert as may be necessary to accommodate members, but the chair also must ask members to cooperate by confining such remarks to the proper form. the gentlewoman from colorado. ms. degette: thank madam

speaker. i'm now pleased to yield to the democratic leader for purposes of national security council, ms. pelosi. the speaker pro tempore: gentlewoman is recognized. ms. pelosi: thank you, madam speaker. i ask unanimous consent to insert my statement in the record that the house instead of attacking women's access to health care should be voting on bigger paychecks and better infrastructure for our country. i yield back. ms. degette: i now yield for the purposes of a unanimous consent request the gentlelady from california, ms. lofgren. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewomseiz. mslon: a unanimous consent to insert my statement in the record instead of attacking women's access to health care we should vote for bigger paychecks and better infrastructure. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. ms. degette: mr. speaker, i'm now pleased to yield for purposes of a unanimous consent request the gentlelady from california, ms. waters. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewomaisecnid. ms. waters: i ask unanimous consent to insert my statement in the record that the house should vote for bigger paychecks and better infrastructure instead of constantly attacking

women's access to health care. the speaker pro tempore: with objectn. ms. degette: madam speaker i'm now pleased to yield for purposes of a unanimous consent request to the gentlelady from california, miss spehr. -- ms. speier. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady's rgiaec ms. speier: i thank the gentlelady from colorado. i, too, ask unanimous consent to insert my statement in the record that instead of attacking women's access to health care that this house should vote for bigger paychecks for women and better infrastructure for all. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. ms. degette: i'm now pleased to yield for purposes of a unanimous consent request the gentlelady from alabama, miss sule -- ms. sewell. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman is recognized. ms. sewell: isk unanimous consent to insert my statement in the record that the house should vote for bigger paychecks and better infrastructure instead of constantly attacking women's access to health care. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. ms. degette: i'm now pleased to yield for purposes of a unanimous consent request the gentleman from california, mr. huffman. the speaker pro tempore: the genem iregned mr. huma madam speaker, i

ask unanimous consent to insert my statement in the record that this house should be voting for bigger paychecks and better infrastructure instead of these relentless attacks on women's access to health care. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. ms. degette: i'm now pleased to yield for purposes of a unanimous consent request the gentleman from california, the house caucus chairman, mr. becerra. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. becea: thank you, madam speaker. i thank the gentlelady for yielding. i ask unanimous consent to insert my statement into the record that this house should start to concentrate finally on bigger paychecks for our people who are working and better infrastructure instead of attacking women's access to decent health care. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. ms. degette: i'm now pleased to yield for purposes of a national security council to the gentleman from michigan -- for the purposes of a national security council the gentm from michanmr. kildee. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. ld: ask unanimous consent to insert my statement in the house record that the house should vote for bigger paychecks and better track instead of yet another attack on

women's access to health care. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. ms. degette: i'm pleased to yield for purposes of a unanimous consent request, the gentleman from maryland mr. coupling. the the speaker pro tempo: e gelen ecnize mr. cummings: i ask unanimous consent to insert my statement in the record that the house should vote for bigger paychecks and better infrastructure instead of attacking women's access to health care. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. ms. degette: i'm now pleased to yield for purposes of a unanimous consent request the gentlelady from texas, ms. jackson lee. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman is recognized. ms. jacksoneei thank the gentlelady. i ask unanimous consent to insert my statement in the record that the house should vote for bigger paychecks and better infrastructure instead of attacking women's access to health care. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. ms. degette: now, madam speaker, i'm pleased to yield to the ranking democrat on the judiciary committee mr. conyers, three minutes. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman fromicgan is gnedorhe minutes. mr. conyers: thank you, madam

speaker. i rise in strong opposition to h.r. 7 the so-called no taxpayer funding for abortion act. today on the 4 nd anniversary -- 42nd anniversary of roe vs. wade, the majority is launching yet another attack on women's health and actually protected right to choose whether to carry a pregnancy to term. most importantly, this bill will make it virtually impossible for a woman to obtain abortion services even when paid for with purely private, nonfederal funds. though it's novel tax penalty provisions through its -- through its novel tax penalty

provisions, h.r. 7 departs radically from existing law taking away women's existing health care and placing their health and lives at risk. despite the claims of its sponsors, h.r. 7 does not codify current law and it is not about the regulation of federal funds. there's no federal funding of abortion due to the hyde amendment. and the affordable care act maintains that policy in law. for more than 30 years, congress has prohibited federal funding of abortion except in cases of rape, incest or to save the life of the mother through provisions in like the hyde amendment and annual aappropriation bills. nothing in the affordable care act changes this. finally, h.r. 7 also err rad

case the authority -- eradicates the authority of the district of columbia to make decisions about how appropriated funds are used for health care of the district's citizens. what is h.r. 7 really about? plain and simple it's an assault on women's health and freedom. it permanently blocks abortion coverage for low-income women civil servants, d.c. residents, and the military. no committee has considered this legislation. text was not even available until last night when rules met in a so-called emergency meeting. but the only emergency is that the majority didn't have the votes to pass another mean-spirited, anti-choice bill so they are rushing to the floor with this bill in time for the anniversary of roe v. wade. isn't it time to stop playing

politics with women's lives and start governing? accordingly, i urge my colleagues to oppose this egregious bill and i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman omolad res the gentleman from pennsylvania is recognized. mr. pitts: madam speaker, at this time i'm pleased to yield one minute to the gentlelady from indiana, jackie walorski. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman omndna is coiz f o minute. mrs. walorski: i rise today because i believe that all human life is worth protecting. each one is worth saving and deserves respect and protection. foreyears now proactive people have been forced to watch as their tax dollars subsidize abortion procedures they are morally opposed to. the no taxpayer funding for abortion legislation prohibits taxpayer funding of elective abortions, no matter where in the federal system these may occur. this principle is supported by a majority of americans. in fact, 56% of americans are

opposed to taxpayer funding of abortions. later today, i'll join a half million people who believe that life is a gift at the annual march for life rally. the largest ongoing march in american history. we have a responsibility as the elected body, representing our constituents, to protect the most vulnerable among us and ensure that women facing unwanted pregnancies do not face judgment or condemnation, but have positive support structures and access to health care to help them through their pregnancies. this bill is an important step in the right direction to protecting life. thank you. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewon omolado is ized. ms. degette: thank you very much, madam speaker. i would just ask my colleagues on the other side to please give me an example where federal taxpayer dollars have been used to pay for an abortion except for with the hyde amendment exception. and with that, i'm pleased to

yield to the ranking democrat on the constitution subcommittee, mr. cohen, two minutes. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from tennessee is recognized for -- the gentleman from tennessee is recognized fo two mus. mr. cohen: thank you, mr. speaker. i appreciate the time. this bill is a second bill that's been brought the last few days to show the republican side's intent to repeal roe v. wade. that's what they'd like to do. what's most important is to understand the theater that this bill has shown that the majority party has made this historic hallowed hall of congress into. today's the march for life. lots of pro-lifers here. they wanted to give them something. so they scheduled a bill when we could be legislating on jobs, on minimum wage, on infrastructure, they wanted to give them something, so they

came with a bill called fetal pain to get around the viability requirements of the supreme court. their caucus found that bill too extreme to get the votes. even their caucus. now, the leadership wouldn't listen to the democrats in the rules committee and it wouldn't listen to the democrats on the floor. and they didn't have the good sense to realize it would make them look as they are antiwoman and out of step with reality. it took some women and maybe a few men, but mostly women in their caucus, to finally go, no so they brought up a retread of a bill. that was a retread too but they brought up another one. a substitute bill. because they had to have something to give as a gift to the march for life pro-life cawculls. this is theater. this is -- caucus. this is theater. this is drama. that's what this has become. women's rights should not be theater, it shouldn't be drama. women's rights should be preserved. and if there's any question about them, it should go through regular process. go through committees.

let the members know about the bill. not have 72 -- within 72 hours a bill brought to this floor. regular order has been destroyed because of theater and messaging. and that's what you're going to see for the next two years. the american people will be very disappointed in this congress because it's become the theater of the absurd. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman fm nnlvias iz. mr. pitts: madam speaker, i'm very pleased to yield three minutes to the distinguished chairman of the judiciary committee the gentleman from virginia, mr. goodlatte. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman frorgin is zefor three minutes. mr. goodlatte: madam speaker however stark americans' differences of opinion can be on the matter of abortion, generally there has been long bipartisan agreement that federal taxpayer funds should not be used to destroy innocent life. the hyde amendment, named for its chief sponsor former house judiciary committee chairman henry hyde, has prohibited the federal funding of abortion

since 1976. when it passed a house and senate that were composed overwhelmingly of democrat members. it has been renewed each appropriations cycle with few changes for over 37 years. supported by congresses controlled by both parties and presidents from both parties, it is probably the most bipartisan pro-life proposal sustained over a longer period of time than any other. it's time the hyde amendment was codified in the united states code. h.r. 7, the no taxpayer funding for abortion act sponsored by representative chris smith of new jersey, would do just that. it would codify the two core principles of the hyde amendment throughout the operations of the federal government. namely, a ban on federal funding for abortions and a ban on the use of federal funds for health benefits coverage that includes coverage of abortion. as hundreds of thousands of people from across the country

come to washington to express their love of unborn children at the annual march for life it is a marvelous time to reflect on what could be accomplished if the bill we consider today were enacted into law. during the time the hyde amendment has been in place, probably millions and millions of innocent children and their mothers have been spared the horrors of abortion. the congressional budget office has estimated that the hyde amendment has led to as many as 675,000 fewer abortions each year. let that sink in for a few precious moments. the policy we will be discussinging today has likely given america the gift of millions more children and consequently millions more mothers and millions more fathers millions more lifetimes and trillions more loving gestures and other human gifts in all their diverse forms. what a stunningly wonderous legacy and the bill before us today would continue that

legacy permanently. i encourage all my colleagues to support this vitally important legislation and yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlemafr pnsvaa reserves. the gentlewoman from colora is cn. ms. dett i'm pleased now to yield to the distinguished ranking member of energy and commerce, mr. pallone of new jersey, two minutes. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlemafr n jsey rd r two minutes. mr. pallone: thank you madam speaker. today is a sad day for this institution. late last night when republicans failed to garner the votes for one extreme antiwoman bill, they pulled the switch and turned to another extreme antiwoman bill. in this attempt to restrict women's access to abortion care is an unprecedented radical assault on women's health care. tens of thousands of women and their families will be harmed by this policy. the bill's sponsors claim that this bill simply codifies the hyde amendment. and that is inaccurate. this bill takes unprecedented

steps far beyond the hyde amendment. this bill places restrictions on how women with private insurance can spend private dollars in purchasing health insurance. but the bill doesn't stop there. it also prohibits washington, d.c., from using its own medicaid funds to make health care coverage decisions. and the goal behind this bill is to effectively get rid of all comprehensive health care coverage in this country. antichoice republicans want to turn back the clock on women's rights. it's critical that we protect the right of every woman to make her own personal and private health care decisions. women in consultation with their doctors should remain in control of these choices and not congress. i strongly urge my colleagues to vote no on h.r. 7 and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman fm lodo reserves. the gen fnnia is recognized. mr. pitts: madam speaker, i'm very pleased to yield three minutes to the gentleman from new jersey really the pro-life

leader in the house of representatives for many years three minutes to mr. smith. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from pennsylvan- from newery is recognized for three minutes. mr. smith: thank you so very much. madam speaker, on september 9 2009 president obama stood six feet from where i stand now, right a at that podium, and told lawmakers and the american public in a especially called joint session of congress on health care reform that, i quote, under our plan, no federal dollars will be used to fund abortion. in the 11th hour ploy to garner pro-life congressional democrats, and they were convinced and they were deceived, needed for passage of the obamacare legislation, the president issued an executive order on march 24, 2010, and it said, and i quote in pertinent part, the act maintains current hyde amendment restrictions. governing abortion policy and extends those restrictions to newly created health insurance

exchanges. that is absolutely i state to my friends, untrue. despite an appalling degree of nontransparency, we finally asked the general accountability office to look into it. they came back and said 1,036 obamacare exchange plans covered abortion on demand. it also found that separate billing of the abortion surcharge required by the act is not being enforced by the administration and the abortion funding premium and again in 2015, is being illegally rolled into the total plan cost. health care consumers are therefore unaware when they buy their health insurance whether or not they're paying for abortion on demand. if the hyde amendment had been applied to obamacare, the number of obamacare plans covering abortion on demand would be zero. at its core i believe my colleagues should know this by now, some don't, this side of the aisle, and some on that do,

the hyde amendment is two indisputable parts. it prohibblets direct funding for abortion and funding for any insurance plan that includes abortion except in the cases of rape, incest or to save the life of the mother. obamacare violates the hyde amendment by funding insurance plans that pay for abortion on demand. h.r. 7 seeks to accomplish three goals. make the hyde amendment and other current abortion funding prohibitions current, and that includes the d.c. righter permanent. ensure that the affordable care act faithfully conforms with the hyde amendment as promised by the president of the united states. third, provides full disclosure, transparency and prominent display to the extent which any health insurance plan funds abortion on the exchanges. last january the house passed h.r. 7 by a vote of 227-188. it languished in the senate for a year, never took it up. this is the same bill.

it's been through regular order. hearings have been held as well as markup. the american people madam speaker strongly oppose taxpayer funding for abortion. a poll that was just released yesterday found that 68% of all respondents oppose using taxpayer funding for abortion and a whopping 69% of women are against taxpayer funding for abortion and 71% of the millennials are against taxpayer funding. mr. pitts: i yield the gentleman one more minute. mr. smith: i thank my friend. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlemaisecnid. mr. smith: we live in an age of ultrasound imaging. the ultimate window to the womb, and that precious child who resides there. we are in the midst of a fetal health care revolution, an explosion of benign interventions to diagnose, treat and cure the precious lives of these children. abortion is antithetical to that, it dismembers, chemically poisons, shots to the heart to stop the heart from beatinging. as you know and i know my

friend from new york is next to speak, at testimony before your committee, the doctor said, and he's an abortionist, he said the baby can be in any position in the uterus, you just reach in with a clamp and grasp whatever you can. you pull out an arm, he went on to say you pull out, reach in again and again and you tear out the spine and intend -- sbess tins, heart and lungs. these are gruesome procedures. that's what abortion is all about. h.r. 7 will save lives. there's no doubt about that. the hyde amendment, i remember when henry hyde was told that million -- maybe even more than a million children survived because of the hyde amendment. tears came down his face knowing that those kids are now in the world going to school, having their own families and playinging soccer and other -- doing other great things. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: members are reminded that they should direct their comments to the chair. the gentlewoman from colorado is recognized. ms. degette: madam speaker, i'm

now pleased to yield to the distinguished senior member of the judiciary committee, mr. nadler from new york, three minutes. the speaker pro tempore: e gentlefromewk rec ee minutes. mr. nadler: i thank the gentlewoman for yielding madam speaker. i rise today in opposition to h.r. 7, the so-called no taxpayer funding for abortion act. the name of the bill is a lie. there is now no taxpayer funding for abortion. i wish there were. the right of a woman to decide whether or not to become pregnant, to decide to continue her pregnancy or make the difficult decision to terminate her pregnancy is protected by the constitution. the supreme court has determined that neither congress nor a state may place an undue burden on that right. denial of medicaid or other government funding that would be available for other medical procedures should be considered an undue burden. but that is not the law, unfortunately. taxpayer funding of abortion is prohibited by the hyde amendment. this bill goes far beyond that.

this bill for the first time ever denies tax deductions and credits for women who use their own money to pay for abortions or to purchase insurance t covsrtns in so dheli majorinc tor women fs. thisilfofime denieemedax deduction that is otherwise available for medical expenses. if the medical expense is for an abortion. this bill for the first time treats as taxable income any distribution from a flexible spending account or health savings account that is used to pay for abortion expenses. this bill for the first time denies small employers the ability to use tax credits to help them to provide health coverage for their employees if that coverage includes abortion. the bill also denies income-eligible women the use of premium tax credits available under the affordable care act if the insurance coverage they select includes abortion coverage. in first opposing and then voting to repeal the affordable care act 50 times, my republican colleagues have complained that government

should not mettle in the private insurance market or private health care choices but this legislation obviously is designed to do just that. it seems that many republicans believe in freedom, provide nod one uses that freedom in the way they do not approve. that is a strange understanding of freedom. even more stunning, this bill increases taxes on families, businesses and the self-employed if they spend their own money let me repeat that, their own money on abortion coverage of services. and this tax increase is being championed by republicans, all of whom have taken a pledge not to raise taxes on individuals or businesses. the intent of the bill is clear. it is to end insurance coverage for abortions for all women, whether or not they are paying their insurance on exchange and even if they use their own money to purchase the insurance. my colleagues in the majority believe that if you like your insurance coverage, you should get to keep it, unless it is for choices that they don't like. then they have no qualms about taking your insurance coverage away. that is the intended and likely

result of this bill. currently the vast majority of insurance policies cover abortion services. but insurance companies will respond to the tax penalties this bill imposes by dropping coverage for abortions from all of their plans. this will have a significant affect on all women, not just lower income women who have long felt the brunt of federal restrictions on their health care choices. . h.r. it is neither justifiable nor necessary to prevent federal funding of abortion. it is a frontal assault on the liberty and dignity of all american women. it should be roundly rejected. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker proreth gen'ti h eir. the gentleman from pennsylvania is recogni mr. p: e hyde language does not apply to obamacare. there is not one sentence in here, in this 2700-page bill. read the bill. it applies to medicaid and annually appropriated programs.

10 seconds? quickly. mr. smith: again, one. things that people seem to forget here is that obamacare both authorizes and appropriates the money. so it's outside the purview of the h.h.s. appropriations bill. that's why this legislation is needed. mr. pitts: with that -- mr. smith: the president promised he would apply the hyde amendment but mr. pitts: i yield to the gentleman from pennsylvania, mr. rothfus. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlemafr pnsvaa is c f ous mr. rothfus: i rise in sut of-h 7 the no taxpayer funding for abortion and disclosure act. madam speaker we know from science that everyone's life begins at conception. the right to life is god given. and described in our declaration of independence as unalienable. that means something that cannot be taken away. i defend madam speaker, the right to life of everyone in this country and everyone in this chamber, even those opposed to this legislation.

this bill helps promote a culture of life. it reflects the overwhelming opinion held by americans that taxpayer dollars should not be used to pay for abortion. it also holds president obama accountable for another one of his broken promises. when he assured us that his health care law would not allow taxpayer funds to be used for abortion. we know madam speaker, from a september 15, 2014 g.a.o. report on health insurance exchanges that tax dollars are paying for more than 1,000 obamacare plans that cover elected abortions. this bill stops that. i ask unanimous consent that the g.a.o. report be added to the across-the-board -- congressional record. as hundreds of thousands march today on the anniversary of the roe v. wade decision, i urge my colleagues to join me in committing to defend the sanctity of life and vote yes on this bill. i thank you. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from pennsylvania reserves. the gentlewoman from colo is recognized. ms. degette: madam speaker, i'm now pleased to yield to the distinguished senior member of

the judiciary committee, the gentlelady from texas ms. jackson lee, two minutes. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from texas is recognized for o minutes. ms.aconeei thank the gentlelady for her courage. i stand here today refusing to surrender on behalf of millions of women, of all economic backgrounds and racial ethnic and religious who rely upon the supreme court of the united states that under the ninth amendment has indicated that roe v. wade, the right to choose, is a viable and important law of the land. how can we undermine the constitution and its premise and its articulation? so today very quickly let me say that i know there are millions who are here to disagree with me. i respect that disagreement. but i am saddened that we would take advantage of this day to misrepresent the law and pass a law that will do damage to millions of americans.

this is the face of republican women who in essence decided that h.r. 36 was too extreme. even republican men said that they could not vote on a bill that caused or asked women to report a rape before they could be able to benefit from an abortion. how sad in the trauma of rape that you must require someone to go to the police department before they could get assistance. that bill was pulled. that extreme bill was pulled. but in order not to leave us without dramatics, we come again to do what is hurting millions of women in texas, where they cannot even get health services because of the laws passed in texas that completely shuts down good health care clinics that deal in abortion and other women services for health care with this dastardly law by requiring those clinics to be within a certain mile of hospitals. never having any problem before. so now we come with another

masquerade in h.r. 7 which prohibit federal funds for being used for any health benefits coverage that includes coverage of abortion, making permanent already existing federal policies, prohibiting the inclusion of abortion in any health care service funnished by federal or district of columbia health care. again, interfering with the women in the district of columbia. and prohibiting individuals from receiving refundable tax credits, individuals interfering with projects -- the gentlelady's time has expired. ms. jackson lee: this is a bad bill. i ask my colleagues to vote against it. it undermines the constitution and ninth amendment. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady's time has expired. the gentlen omenylni iiz. mr. pis: madam speaker, at this time i'm pleased to yield two minutes to another pro-life champion from ohio, the principal sponsor of the partial-birth abortion ban steve chabot. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from ohio is

recognized for two minutes. mr. chabot: i thank the gentleman for yielding. madam speaker, a number of my colleagues from the o side of the aisle a little while ago came down and made the -- i believe ludicrous allegation that this bill is an attack, somehow an attack on women's health care and therefore we ought to be spending time on the infrastructure and a whole range of issues. you want to talk about an attack on women's health care, it's called obamacare. it's an attack on the health care of women and men and children in this country, deductibles up. premiums up. the quality of health care down. and most of the folks who came down to the mike i can't say all, i think probably all of them if they were here, voted for obamacare and the american people are having to live with the results of that. now that's an attack on the health care of american women. this legislation simply says that there ought not to be taxpayer dollars going to pay for abortions in this country.

that one person shouldn't have to pay for the abortion of another person whether it's on moral grounds conscience, their religion. you shouldn't make one person pay for another person's abortion. it's pretty simple. the american people overwhelmingly agree with that point of view. that's what this legislation is about. and it's through obamacare as well. the same thing, through assurance or otherwise you shouldn't force one person to pay for another person's abortion because they are opposed to it. today happens to be a day that's important to me. it's the day i was born. it's my birthday. it also happens to be the date that the -- i would say infamous decision roe v. wade came down. my birthday's 5 this was 1973 that roe came down. on this day i can't help but think of those millions and millions and millions of americans who do not exist today because of that decision.

this obviously is related to that, but it's mostly about the choice that a person has to make. if they make that choice, should somebody else have to pay for it? the law says no. i agree with the law. support this bill. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlemas measxped. the gentlewoman from colorado is recognized. ms. degette: i'm pleased to yield to the gentlelady from california, ms. chu, one minute. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from california is recognized r onmi. ms. chu: once again women's rights are being attacked on the floor of the house. a decision about health that should be made by a woman and her doctor is instead being made by politicians with an agenda. and despite their claims of acting for the sake of women's health this draconian bill will deny women access to medical care and drive out abortion coverage from private health plans once and for all. what would be the effect? women would be denied access to

abortion especially low-income and minority women who are buying health insurance through the marketplace. for some they'll be sent back to the days before roe vs. wade when women desperate for help were driven to unlicensed doctors and unsanitary conditions, often suffering infections hemorrhages, and at times death. we should not be in the business of endangering women's health and safety. this is why yesterday i introduced the women's health protection act. it would prevent states from restricting access to abortion if they cannot demonstrate an actual benefit to women's health. personal medical decisions belong solely to the people they impact and the medical professionals they trust. we must oppose this bill. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady'ti h eir. the gentleman from pennsylvania is recognized. mr. pitts: madam speaker, at this time i'm pleased to yield two minutes to the gentlelady from tennessee another pro-life

spokesperson diane black. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewon om tss is rezefotwo minutes. mrs. black: madam speaker, today is a somber occasion. on the 42nd anniversary of the supreme court's tragic decision on roe v. wade, our hearts ache for the 56 million unborn lives that have been lost due to the shameful practice of abortion. today there is hope because we have an opportunity to make a difference by passing the no taxpayer funding for abortion act. this commonsense, compassionate legislation will protect americans' conscience rights by assuring their hard earned tax dollars are not used to fund the destruction of human life. as a mother a grandmother, and a nurse for over 40 years, this measure is especially meaningful to me. during my years in the health care industry i saw the joy in the young parents' eyes when they met their newborn child for

the very first time. i held the hands of breathing spouses and children as they said their final goodbyes to loved ones. and sadly i witnessed a young woman lose her life due to the effects of a botched abortion. these experiences informed my life that all my life that all life is a precious gift from god and i pray that in time that this truth will be reflected in our nation's laws. until then, can't we at least do this much? i urge a yes vote on the no taxpayer funding for abortion and i thank the sponsor for his work on this deeply important legislation. i yield back the balance ti. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman fropesyan re. the gentlewoman from coloro is recognized. ms. degette: i'm now pleased to yield to the gentlelady from florida ms. wasserman schultz, two minutes. the speaker pro tempore: the the gentlewoman from florida is

recognized for two minutes. ms. wasserman schultz: thank you, madam speaker. i rise today in strong opposition to the no taxpayer funding for abortion act. the bill thoughtfully advertised as pro-family and supporting american families. if they actually care about defending the values of our nation and the well-being of american families, i ask my colleagues across the aisle to offer legislation that reflects the priorities of american families. instead of debating a bill that the republican leadership just threw on the calendar at the last minute because their original abortion bill was too extreme, even for them. today we should be discussing ways to ensure every woman can put food on the table by raising the minimum wage like 29 states have done and passing equal pay for women. we should be discussing how to ensure that every person that dreams of a higher ecaon has access to it by working with president obama on his community college proposal. we should be discussing legislation to allow 43 million workers to take time off when they are sick and to make sure parents can take time off with their new baby. these are the family centered

priorities that reflect our values of the nation. and certainly the challenges that my constituents in south florida sent me here to tackle. instead we are debating a bill with an underlying principle that has already been codified. our colleagues on the otr side of the aisle know that a regressive policy of banning taxpayer funding for abortion which only serves to punish our nation's poor and vulnerable women already exists. as the president said tuesday night, while we may not agree on choice, we can agree the best people to make these decisions for women are not politicians. building in the zeal to -- it ties women's health options to her income. a strong majority of americans agree including 62% that identify as republicans that abortion is the wrong issue for congress to be spending its time on. i agree with them. when my colleagues are prepared to work on legislation that truly addresses the concerns of the american people, we stand ready to work with them. listen to your members who sounded the alarm bell on the original bill that was pulled off this floor and get your

priorities straight. thank you. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from colorado reserves. the gentleman from pelv is recognized. mr. pitts: madam speaker, i'm very pleased to yield one minute to our distinguished majority leader in this congress the gentleman from california mr. kevin mccarthy. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california is recognizedorne mi. . mccarthy: i thank the gentleman for yielding. we are here today taking a step forward towards a simple goal. to save innocent lives from abortion and make sure no woman ever has to make that decision to end the life of her child. we all know that this is more than just some debate or social disagreement. these are human beings we are talking about. this is about pregnant mothers facing hardship and tough choices. it's about a culture telling people that human p life is expendable. most importantly, this is about human beings. more than 56 million children

since roe v. wade who have been denied a chance to live. we are here today for them to make sure every person has the most fundamental right of all, the right to life. today on the anniversary of roe v. wade and during the march for life the house will vote on a bill to stop all federal funding from being used to pay for abortion. . the american people shouldn't be forced to pay for abortions or abortion coverage with their tax dollars. i urge my colleagues to stand with the hundreds of thousands of people out on the mall right now. by voting for this bill. stand up and commit to creating an america that values every life. especially the lives of the innocent who cannot stand up for themselves. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman fm nnlvia reserves. the gentlewoman from colad is coiz. ms. degette: madam speaker, i'm now pleased to yield to the gentleman from florida, mr. murphy, one minute. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman omloda is cd for one minute.

mr. murphy: thank you madam speaker. i thank the gentlelady from colorado, ms. degette, for yielding and for her advocacy and work on this issue. today on the anniversary of roe v. wade, which changed history for women in america by allowing them to control their own bodies, i rise against the effort to roll back these rights. though we've come a long way in the last 42 years some politicians want to undo this progress and restrict access to critical medical procedures women may need. why have we been debating whether the government should seize control over a woman's health decision when the american people want us to work together to create good paying jobs, balance the budget and raise the minimum wage? instead this chamber is wasting time with a divisive argument about whether the government should jeopardize a woman's access to medically necessary procedures. politicians are not medical experts. and we should not deny a woman the ability to make her own decisions with those she trusts

the most. i ask my colleagues to focus on the economy instead of spending time on bills that divide this house and this country. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from florida yields back. the gentlewoman reserves. the gentleman from pennsylvania is recognized. mr. pitts: madam speaker i'm pleased to yield three minutes to the gentlelady from missouri ann wagner. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewomafr msoi cfor three minutes. mrs. wagner: i thank the gentleman for yielding a i thank him for his leadership on this very, very important issue. madam speaker, i rise today in support of life. today is a very joyous and hopeful day on what is a very sad anniversary. today is the 42nd anniversary of the supreme court decision roe v. wade. hundreds of thousands of pro-life advocates from across the country meands from my own hometown of st. louis, missouri, will be on the mall as we march in honor of over 56

million precious angels we have lost over the last 42 years. madam speaker i believe in the sanctity of life. i believe that life begins at conception and that every life is a gift. there is an area where most americans agree and where elected officials should all come together and that is on the federal funding of abortion. the majority of americans do not want their hard-earned tax dollars going to pay for abortions. and congress has consistently worked together other the years by attaching the hyde amendment to appropriations bills to prevent taxpayer funds from going towards abortions. that is why i am a proud -- i am proud to co-sponsor and support h.r. 7 the no taxpayer funding for abortion and abortion insurance full disclosure act. and there is no more

appropriate day than today to consider such important legislation. the bill does exactly what the name implied. it permanently ensures that no taxpayer dollars go to pay for abortion or abortion coverage. this bill codifies the hyde amendment and also addresses taxpayer funding for abortions that unfortunately the hyde amendment does not cover. for example, obamacare expressly allows funding for plans that include abortions through taxpayer subsidies. during the health care debate, the president assured the american people that no federal dollars would be used to fund abortions under obamacare. it was yet again another broken promise. however, the no taxpayer funding for abortion act not only prevents taxpayer fubbleding for abortion under -- funding for abortion under

obamacare, but it also requires transparency to ensure the consumers are fully informed about which plans on the exchanges contain abortion coverage and surcharges. madam speaker throughout my life i have worked to draw attention to the pro-life movement, to change hearts and minds and to approach this issue with love and compassion. and i will continue to work throughout my time in congress towards the day when abortion is not only illegal, but abortion is unthinkable. i urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to support this important legislation and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman's time has expired. the gentlewoman from colorado is recognized. ms. degette: madam speaker, i'm now pleased to yield to the distinguished gentleman from -- gentlelady from california, ms. speier, two minutes. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman fm lirn i

gnedorwo minutes. ms. speier: thank you madam speaker. thank you to the gentlelady from colorado. i want to first say to the other side of the aisle that i am grateful that some members of your caucus recognized that indeed extremism on this issue has got to come to an end. and that you took steps to roll back the ridiculous bill that you had intended to bring up today, but didn't have the votes for because they spoke up. and i'm grateful to them. you know, in some respects you look around this room and you think, is this a chamber of congress or is this a doctor's office? we might as well have doctor equipment here because that's what you're doing. you're trying to become between a woman and her physician. there's a lot of hoopla today because this is the anniversary

of roe v. wade and this is messaging bill, so we're here messaging. but row vs. wade was a decision by the -- roe vs. wade was a decision by the supreme court of the united states of america. and each of us, when we became members of this body this month, swore that we would uphold the constitution of the united states. but my colleagues on the other side of the aisle spend hours and hours trying to somehow find ways to undo constitutional decisions by the u.s. supreme court. so we're here again. having yet another debate. and we'll have yet another debate. when american women in this country are far more interested in equal pay for equal work for paid sick leave, for a child care tax credit that has some resemblance to what reality is in this country. but rather we will continue to

act like doctors here, and i might add there even are some hypocrites on the other side of the aisle who have counsel their own girlfriends to have abortions. it's legal members. we have a right to maintain this legality and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman's time has expired. the gentleman from pennsylvania's recognized. mr. pitts: madam speaker, i'm very pleased to yield two minutes to the distinguished gentleman from california, another eloquent pro-life force, mr. lamalfa. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california is recognized for two minutes. mr. lamalfa: thank you madam speaker. thank you to the gentleman for offering me this time here today. i'm glad to be a californian that's in favor today of h.r. 7. indeed we've heard some interesting debate on this today, where we're deflecting from the issue on things like higher pay or building more infrastructure, which we desperately need in california.

and even entering the word child care in when we're talking about paying for abortions. interesting. then there's words like access. well, abortion has been certainly accessible for 42 years. millions of times. what we're talking about here, the central point is, are the taxpayers going to be compelled to pay for it? are the american people out there, 68% in the latest poll going to be compelled to pay for something? jefferson said, to compel a man to furnish contributions of money for the propagation of opinions which he disbelieves is sinful and tyrannical. people that are pro-life as well as pro-choice might agree with the idea that abortion should be available on the pro-choice side, but many, many disagree. a super majority.

this would override a veton these o us oth cape. the mb opele drewis. t ate' fdi m ota oli interpre o obamacare, which is one of those job-killing, noninfrastructure-building items that's hurting our economy in this country, for jobs in california we're being compelled whether you're a church or a religious charity, an employer or individual, to have to have included in their insurance plans these provisions. paying for abortions. where's the freedom in that? wreals the -- where's the objection of that? where's the freedom of expression? i hear a lot from the other side of the aisle until recent years on our first amendment. this is a bureaucratic mandate with their opinion. largely done, quietly in the middle of the night, out of the public eye. now this is being put on californians. so we need this measure to send that message back, that californians should not be

compelled to have to provide this in their coverage. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has exp. the gentlewoman from colorado is recognized. ms. degette: madam speaker, i'm pleased to yield to the gentleman from michigan, mr. kildee, one minute. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlemafr mhin reze for one minute. mr. kildee: thank you madam speaker. i thank my friend for yielding. you know, i feel compelled to point out, after listening to the debate and the hyperbole, passionate thoughts of what a high priority this is for the republican leadership, to bring this bill to the floor such a high priority that they didn't think about it until late last night. didn't bring it to committee rushed it to the floor without having even thought of this legislation until late last night.

such a high priority. we know, the american people know this is political theater . and listening to the debate, it's also quite revealing in listening to some of the comments made, that this is not about taxpayer funding for the health care choices that american women legally have and the constitution supports and that the supreme court collarified 42 years ago -- clarified 42 years ago. but it's about preventing women from making that choice in the first place. that's a choice that ought to be made by women, by themselves, with consultation with their health care provider . and not by members of congress. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from pennsylvania is recognized. mr. pitts: madam speaker might i inquire of the time remaining how many speakers are -- the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from pennsylvania has 6 1/2 minutes remaining. the gentlewoman from colorado has 10 1/2 minutes remaining.

mr. pitts: i'll reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman fromnla rerv. the gentlewoman from colorado is recognized. ms. degette: madam speaker, i'm pleased now to recognize the distinguished gentlelady from the district of columbia, congresswoman norton, for 1 1/2 minutes. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewomafrom the district of luia is recognized for 1 1/2 minutes. ms. norton: my thanks to the gentlelady from colorado. is there any way to make an ty woman, anti-health -- anti-woman anti-health, anti-choice bill worse? sure, there is. add a provision that keeps a local jurisdiction, the district of columbia, from spending its own local funds on poor women exactly as 17 states of the union could to do. -- union do. how on earth could you do that in this country americans will ask laughably.

by declaring the district of columbia government to be a virtual federal agency. this bill hurts millions of women across the country who have a constitutional right to make choices about their own health. it compounds that discrimination by violating the oldest american principle, local control over local funds. the senate has repeatedly rejected this bill and i expect them to have the good sense to repeat that rejection. i thank the gentlelady. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from colorado reserves. the gentleman from pennsylvania is recognized. mr. pitts: madam speaker, i'm pleased to yield two minutes to the gentlelady from california, a new member mrs. walters. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewanrocafoias recognized for two minutes. wallet wallet wallet madam speaker, i rise --

ms. walters: madam speaker, i rise today on the -- mrs. walters: madam speaker, i rise in support of this act. this vital bill establishes that no taxpayer funds be used for abortion, including plans that cover abortion under the president's health care law. these restrictions will save lives. according to the research by the institute, policies that cut taxpayer funds towards abortion will actually prevent 25% or more of the abortions that would otherwise take place. . furthermore, recent polling has shown that americans are widely opposed to taxpayer funded abortions. 68% of the respondents oppose taxpayer funds for abortion. a cnn poll from last year shows that 56% of rerespondents oppose public funding for abortion. as a mother of four, i know

personally how precious the gift of human life is and how important it is to honor that gift. as legislators, it is both our job and responsibility to protect the innocent lives of the unborn and to serve as a voice for those who do not yet have one. today, the u.s. house of representatives -- the u.s. house has an historic opportunity to put an end to taxpayer funds for abortion. thomas jefferson so wisely penned, to compel a man to furnish contributions of money for the probable gation of opinions in which he disbelieves and abhors is simple and tyrannical. madam speaker, i emphatically agree. i yield back my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlemafr pnsvaa res. the gentlewoman from colorado's recognized. ms. degette: madam speakeri' now pleased to yield to one of our distinguished new members

the gentlelady from north carolina, ms. adams, two minutes. the speaker pro tempore: t genewanronoh rona recognized for 1 1/2 minutes -- ms. degette: two minutes. the speaker pro tempore: two minutes. ms. adams: absolutely outrageous, that's the attempt to appeal roe v. wade on the 42nd anniversary is, absolutely outrageous. a blatant attack on women and their families. their first attempt h.r. 36 failed because women of both parties spoke out to let our male republican colleagues know they've gone too far. the women of this house know that a woman cannot call herself free who does not own or control her own body. we are free, madam speaker. here we go again. h.r. 7, another attempt to attack women's rights. it especially impacts women of color. not on my watch. women of the house, let's do it again. let's prevent this legislation from moving forward and let's

vote no. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlela yldsa. the gentlewoman from colorado reserves. the gentleman from pennsylvania is recognized. mr. pitts: madam speaker, i yield myself such time as i might -- may consume. first of all, abortion is not health care. it's a brutal procedure that ends the lives of unborn children through suction dismemberment decapitation or chemical poison. it's the most violent form of death known to mankind. as the former chair of feminist for life said, abortion breaks a mother's heart. she says they're always two victims in an abortion. one's the baby one's the mother. one's dead, one's wounded.

madam speaker, this human rights abuse should not be paid for or encouraged by government taxpayer money. the women in silent no more awareness campaign, the women in operation outcry point out that abortion not only takes the lives of the unborn child, it wounds all the mothers. we should keep this in mind. i reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman fm pennsyan reserves. the gentlewoman from colorado is recognized. ms. degette: madam speaker, i'm now pleased to yield to the distinguished the gentlelady from new york mrs. maloney, two minutes. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewon omeworis rogr two minutes. mrs. maloney: i thank my good friend diana for yielding to

me. madam speaker despite the rhetoric we have heard from our republican colleagues about their commitment to focusing laser-like on what the american people care about most creating jobs and accelerating economic growth, the only thing that they have accelerated in this new congress is their attacks on a woman's constitutional rights. in just their first seven days in office our republican colleagues have introduced six anti-choice boys and brought two of them to the floor for -- bills and brought them to the floor for debate. we have a bill that's not only an assault on women it is pure political posturing that is guaranteed to be vetoed.

even if it makes it through the senate, the president has made that clear. so we need to focus on what the vast majority of the american people have asked us to do -- create greater economic opportunity for all americans. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from colorado reserves. the gentleman from pennsylv is recognized. mr. pitts: madam speaker, i yield myself such time as i may consume. the gentlelady said what the american people care about. well, a maris poll released said that 68% oppose taxpayer -- public funding for abortion. a january 2010 university poll showed 67% of the

respondents oppose federal funding for abortions. a november, 2009, "washington post" poll showed 61% of the respondents oppose government subsidies for health insurance that includes abortion. a september, 2009, international communications research poll showed that 67% of respondents opposed a measure that would require people to pay for abortion coverage with their federal taxes. we know what the american people care about. i reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlemafr pnsvaa reserves. the gentlewoman from colodo recognized. ms. degette: madam speaker, if the gentleman has no further speakers, we're prepared to close. mr. pitts: we have one further speaker. we're prepared to close. you go ahead and we'll close. ms. degette: beside you? mr. pitts: no. ms. degette: thank you. thank you very much mr. speaker -- madam speaker. i just have to end what i

started with. there is no federal taxpayer funding for abortion. there has not been for many decades. some people, like me, think this is an ill conceived public policy, but it's the -- ill-conceived public policy, but it's the law of the land. it's the law of the land as part of the appropriations bill and it was part of the compromised that was negotiated with the affordable care act. so we need to keep that in mind as we talk about what this legislation does. what this legislation will do is it will take away the ability of women in the exchanges to buy comprehensive health care insurance with their own money. now, i heard many speakers on the other side of the aisle today talk about their deep concern about abortion and unwanted pregnancies. well, i will tell you something. if you want to reduce unwanted

pregnancies, which all of us in this room do, what you need to do is give women quality health insurance with robust family planning and a full range of health care services. the gutmacher institute in a 2010 study showed happily teen pregnancy in this country was at the lowest rate in over 30 years and do you know why, two reasons. number one, birth control for these teenagers and number two, comprehensive health insurance. and so this congress, which has passed over and over again restrictions are on birth control access, not just for teens but for all women, and restrictions on comprehensive family planning is actually passing legislation that is going to stop this decrease in

unwanted teen pregnancies. it's an ill-conceived policy, it's a wrong-headed policy, and if we want to stop unwanted pregnancies the way to do it is to have comprehensive health insurance for all american women. now, the majority at the last minute pulled the bill with the egregious provisions on rape that would have required rape victims to affirmatively go to the police before they could -- they could raise the exception, but don't make any mistake about it. this bill is just as egregious as that bill and the reason it is is because in an unprecedented move it stops american women and their families from being able to get comprehensive health insurance with their own money. what would happen is, it would open up a significant divide between the coverage that large employers would give to

families and small employers and individuals. now, the other thing this does is it reopens the debate and the compromise that we had in the affordable care act. the compromise we made in that bill was that there would be no public funding for abortion under the affordable care act. it was negotiated, it was agreed upon and, as the other side admitted, the president issued an executive order saying he would enforce the current law on that. and in fact, that's what happened. the act required two separate payments for women and their families who receive premium tax credits and choose coverage that includes abortion services. the act is clear in its language. no portion of premium tax credits may be used to pay for the portion of comprehensive health coverage that is purchased in the marketplaces that relates to abortion

services. and the compromise was agreed upon by pro-life groups like the catholic health association and everybody else, and now this compromise is being thrown out the window. well, our opponents say there was a g.a.o. report last september that said that insurance companies were not segregating the funds. so they say that that means somehow federal dollars are used -- being used to pay for abortions. well, after that g.a.o. study came out madam speaker, the h.h.s. promulgated a new rule clarifying the agreement under the affordable care act that the funds had to be segregated, and they promulgated this rule on wednesday, november 26. i would ask unanimous consent to insert that proposed rule into the record madam speaker. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. ms. degette: so this compromise is being honored by the

administration. now early in this debate i asked my opponents to please give me one example where federal taxpayer dollars has been used to pay for abortions. i haven't heard that example and it's because it's not happening. this is a false issue that's being raised. so i would submit to everybody here, let's stop talking about this false issue just because there are a whole bunch of people in town who want us to pass some legislation. let's talk about some real issues. we just received a statement of administration policy from the white house not surprisingly, the administration has said that president would veto this bill. the bill is likely dead on arrival in the senate, but even if it did pass, it would be vetoed. so i have a suggestion from my colleagues on both sides of the aisle. let's take up some issues that women and families of america care about.

let's take up the issue of how we're going to give women good jobs with comprehensive health insurance so they can make their own decisions along with their family and their doctor. let's talk about legislation that will allow women of america to get jobs that have equal pay for equal work to the men. let's talk about a bill that will give tax credits for families who have to struggle every month to pay for childcare for their little kids. let's talk about that and finally, let's talk about parental leave which virtually every other country in the world has so that when families have loving children who they love so much and want to take care of they won't have to go back to work because their employer doesn't pay them for family leave. let's talk about that because, madam speaker that's what the women and families of america want us to talk about. i urge us to reject this

legislation. i urge a no vote and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman's time has expired. the gentleman from pennsylvania has 2 1/2 minutes remaining. mr. pitts: thank you, madam speaker. again, on the so-called compromise, i offered the hyde language in the committee and we won in a bipartisan vote. chairman waxman recessed, changed the votes stripped it out brought it to the floor without hyde. i was involved in the negotiation. i wrote the stupak-pitts amendment. i know what the compromise is with the so-called executive order. it's full of loopholes. the hyde amendment does not apply to the affordable care act and i yield the balance of my time to the distinguished gentleman from pennsylvania another pro-life champion, the time such as i may consume. -- he may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman om pennsylvani .lyis recognized for two minutes. .

mr. kelly: i thank the gentleman. mo dam chair, make no mistake what -- madam chair, make no mistake what this debate is about. the real debate on the floor today is about life. we're talking about life on the -- in the people's house, on the floor of the people's house. we're talking about a gift from god. we're talking about something that was so well put into our declaration of independence talking about the life liberty and pursuit of happiness, the first rule being life. i understand there's a seris debate about that and there are times that people say, listen, we're not really ready right now for this child. but mothers and unborn children have to be protected. in a nation that recoils as the news around the world -- at the news around the world at the loss of life and says this is horrible what's happening in syria this is horrible what's happening in the middle east this is horrible what's happening, we want to go there and rush to help people because there is a loss of life.

and then in our own country we have turned a blind eye and a deaf ear to the lives of 56 million unborn children. these are lives that were lost that did not have to be lost. i know there is a law that says they have the right to make that decision. it may be legal but i don't think it's right. as far as giving a gift to the half or million -- or million -- half a million or so people who are in washington today for the pro-life march this is not a gift from the republican party to these people, this is a gift from the creator himself on reproduction. how we have demeaned this and reduced it down to a political discussion is absolutely abhorrent. never, never has this country ever turned its back on the most vulnerable. i have been there for the birth of my four children. i have 10 grandchildren now.

i have also held the hands of my mother, my father and my sister as they died. there is nothing more precious than life. there is just nothing more precious than that. i ask all my colleagues to vote in favor of h.r. 7, to answer the american people who say we do not want to fund abortion. end this debate and let's move forward. i thank you and i yield back my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. all time for debate has expired. pursuant to house resolution 42, the previous question is ordered on the bill. the question is on engrossment and third reading of the bill. those in favor say aye. those opposedno. the ayes have it. third reading. the clerk: a bill to prohibit taxpayer funded abortions. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentlewoman from wisconsin seek recognition?

ms. moore: i have a motion to recommit at the desk. i am opposed to the bill in its current form. the speaker pro tempore: gewan qlies the clk will report the motion. the clerk: ms. moore of wisconsin moves to recommit the bill, h.r. 7 to the committee on the judiciary, with instructions to report the same back to the house for thewith with the following amendment. add -- forthwith with the following amendment. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpo ds the gentlewon omenss sk recognition? mrs. blackburn: i reserve a point of order against the resolution. the speaker pro tempore: a point of order has been reserved. the clerk will read. the clerk: title 3, rule of construction, section 301, protecting the medical privacy of women, including victims of rape an incest. nothing in this act shall be construed to authorize any party to violate directly or indirectly the medical privacy of any woman, including the victims of rape or incest with respect to her choice or use of comprehensive health insurance coverage.

the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to the rule, the gentlewoman from wisconsin is recognized for five minutes in support of her motion. the gentlewoman is recognizeded. -- recognized. ms. moore: thank you very much, madam speaker. this is the final amendment to the bi a iwi not kill the bill, nor send it back to committee. if this amendment is adopted, it will immediately proceed to final passage if this bill were amended. as the clerk has indicated madam speaker this motion to recommit would merely protect the medical privacy of millions of women including those who are victims of rape and incest. it would ensure that nothing in h.r. 7 the underlying legislation could be construed to allow any entity to violate the medical privacy of any

woman including these victims, when it comes to her choice of comprehensive health care services. madam speaker we have heard a great debate here today and we have heard, madam speaker, the majority party insist that we need to codify the 1976 hyde amendment prohibiting poor women from having abortions. i can assure you that as we have looked over the past 42 years here on the anniversary of roe v. wade we have seen that low income women, particularly women of color, have been disproportionately impacted by the very successful implementation of the hyde amendment. women have been forced to

choose between food and shelter . they have been forced to choose between the best interests of their health. and they have given birth on many occasions, even despite their poor health status, their poor economic status, their poor emotional status, to children who are poor. we have heard these data and statistics about the numbers of unborn persons as a result of abortion. we have not heard one single statistic about the numbers of children who are born in dire poverty. only madam chair, to be humiliated in this chamber over and over again being called products of the culture of dependency and killed by cuts,

death by a thousand cuts cuts to food stamps, cuts to w.i.c., cuts to head start, cuts to educational opportunities. death by a thousand cuts. we have not heard any on the other side speak about that misalignment. but what this legislation does, it's not enough to stop low income women, poor women, particularly women of color, african-americans asians, native american women, latinas it's not enough to prevent them from abortions, some of them who have been -- have become pregnant because of rape and incest and forced trafficking, who have diabetes and other underlying health problems, that's not enough.

this legislation is so nefarious and to try to prevent women who have been lucky enough to get a job in a small business, lucky enough to be able to afford to buy insurance, and use their own money to buy insurance, they have been lucky enough to do that, to prevent them by some extraneous nexus supposedly health care funded payments through the affordable care act , to seek this health care. this is really, really a backdoor approach to really trying to undermine the law of the land roe v. wade. many women, madam speaker, know on a personal level the history of shame and stigma that come forward when they're trying to seek the best remedy for their lives at that time. for whatever reason that they

need to have an abortion. i know personally, madam speaker, of young women who have been 13 years old and who have become victims of statutory rape. and the best solution for their lives at that time and for their health is an abortion. that their life is truly in danger. and this is the kind of bill that would prevent them from having that opportunity. madam speaker i would hope that you would accept this motion to recommit and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker p tpo: the gewan te s pid. for what purpose does the gentlewoman from tennessee seek recognition? mrs. blackburn: thank yo madam speaker. i withdraw my point of order and i claim the time in opposition to the motion. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman's point of order is withdrawn and the gentlewoman's recognized for five minutes. mrs. blackburn: thank you, madam speaker. you know, we have heard a lot of charges and accusations that

are made by some of my colleagues as they have chosen to describe the bill before us today. h.r. 7. so i want to be clear about what the bill before us does do and does accomplish. this bill follows the long standing principle, as my colleague said going back to 1976. that principle that the american people and members from both sides of the aisle in both chambers of congress have supported for decades. and that is that taxpayer dollars should not be spent on abortions and abortion coverage. the vast majority of my colleagues voted for this exact same principle in countless appropriations bills. including a bill that we passed out of this chamber last month. yet today some members are fighting the widely shared belief that taxpayer dollars

should not be used to take an innocent life. the bill before us today also provides much needed transparency regarding which health plans on the exchange pay for abortions. the obama administration promised to provide congress and the american people a list of plans in obamacare that covered abortion. yet they refuse to live up to that promise. they forced congress to act and indeed the g.a.o. has informed us 1036 plans include abortion coverage. there is no excuse no excuse to hide information about abortion coverage from the american people. 68%, a majority, vast majority of the american people believe there should be no taxpayer money used for abortion and abortion coverage.

h.h.s. has forced congress to act on this issue. the commonsense transparency requirement that is in h.r. 7 is needed and it is supported by all members. so that's what this bill is about. following an established bipartisan principle and providing transparency. i urge my colleagues, each and every one, to vote to protect life, to vote to protect taxpayer dollars and promote transparency by rejecting the motion to recommit and supporting the underlying bill. i yield back the balance of my time and urge a no vote on the recommital. the speaker pro tempore: without objecti, e pres quen ordered on the motion to recommit. the question is on the motion. those in favor say aye. those opposed, n the noes have it.

the motion is not agreed to. ms. moore: madam speaker, i ask for the yeas and nays. the speaker pro tempore: the yeas and nays are are requested. all those in favor of taking this vote t ys d ys w a raistdi untiun a sufficient number having arisen, the yeas and na a ordered. members will record their votes by electron dic pursuant to clause 9 of rule 20, the chair will reduce to five minutes the minimum time for any electronic vote on the question of passage of the bill. this is a 15-minute vote. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.]