available on the center for medical progress website and the cmp youtube channel. only edited are pardon me breaks and two breaks where no conversations took place. i just want that stated for the record, mr. chairman, as we have a lot of controversy about the videos. yet the eyes show but ears even more so, what was said. >> could i address that? >> very quickly. i want to go on to more crucial issues. >> i think it's important that we at planned parenthood asked, i think even prior to this committee, that all the original source footage be released. that has still not happened. because, again, we want all of it out there. >> we want to know too. >> i think we can agree on that.

>> what we have seen so far the ears have heard what were said. also, i would address -- the unnecessary attacks coming from some on the other side. especially on men taking an interest in the lives of people most important in our lives. if men in this society aren't allowed to defend and stand for the women and children we love, where has the country fallen to? it is a shame when we have brought into a frenzy and concern about what happens to our babies, our most defenseless. i just held in my arms my brand-new granddaughter three weeks ago in the african country where she was born. and i thanked god for that unique special life. and i told my son-in-law on the way home. i said it's amazing, prince, as we drive home today, having never met this little girl before, i would give my life for her. i love her. she's unique and special.

that's why we have this hearing today. we want to get to the truth. we want to make sure women's health care issues are dealt with and dealt with appropriately. meeting with the president of the country the next day and the speaker of parliament who is a female. they pleaded with me as a member of congress to stop hurting their women and families and children trying to change their culture with organizations like state department, usaid, and planned parenthood. let me ask some questions here. and i take this information from planned parenthood federation of america, your website. and i take it from medicare benefit policy manual. it says the qualified health care centers, a 15,000 of them in this list provide pelvic exams, std testing, manual

breast exams and birth control. both entities provide that. is that correct? >> i don't know what all the entirety of what all provide. >> but you provide all that i just mentioned? >> yes. >> but emergency first responder care, mammograms, immunizations, diabetes and tkpwhrau coma, pediatric, eye, ear, well child services, radiological services, cardiovascular, nurse on staff, bone mass measurement, all of those, according to your website, you don't provide? >> we provide in some places but it is not a core service. >> it is not a promised service. >> it's according to state. >> now, if we're talk building care for women, i would suggest that the care is there in 13,000

without the controversy of the abortions of the fetal manipulation and potential use of body parts in the wrong way. and i think for the record if we're talking about women's health care, the issue of where we find it is found in 13,000 plus centers available to women. and medicaid isn't dealing with it. by the way, your opening statement indicated rate problems with medicaid and mr. obama is supposed to fix that. i yield back. >> thank you. there is a couple -- this is very troubling to sit here as a woman and to hear some questions that are obviously insensitive. one, the continuing coverage of why don't you provide the x-rays

for a mammogram. where every woman here knows you have a primary doctor. that doctor exams you. if there is a lump, you are referred to a specialist. i wish those who would sit here and ask those questions would have the sensitivity to understand what a woman goes through with her health care. that would allow us to ask more pertinent questions. secondly, it is exhausting to keep hearing about federal dollars being spent on abortion when repeatedly the facts state, and it's not a controversy, read the facts. to your research before you ask these exhausting, sometimes i feel insulting questions. we cannot use federal dollars for abortion. this is not a lump sum budget item that we give to planned parenthood. it is reimbursement how many times does that have to be

repeated for this to become an embraced fact. if there were no citizens of the united states going to planned parenthood to receive these medical approved services that we approve as a congress, there will be no reimbursement going to planned parenthood. they would not receive any funds. for the life of me sitting here today, i know my colleagues are more intelligent than this. and it is exhausting to hear just a philosophy of of attack, to just use information that is totally incorrect, as if they keep saying it some kind of way, it will become factual. my question, ms. richards, there seems to be this continuous thought that if planned parenthood went away, that there would be these other healthcare

services from millions of women because you went away. there is a suggestion that all of these community health centers would just step in and fill in. sarah rosenbaum, a professor of health, has worked with community health centers for years. i quote, it is a gross misrepresentation. i would ask you, ms. richards, in your experience in healthcare, the question of, if you went away, it would be totally absorbed, would you respond to that? >> thank you, congresswoman. for the record, we see 2.7 million patients a year. 78% of them are at 150% of poverty or below. these are a group of women and men and young people who are often uninsured, and certainly

have less cession to care. i know there have been a lot of reports that have come out since congress has suggested eliminating access to planned parenthood. 390,000 women would lose care next year if women could no longer go to planned parenthood. i think to some of the questions that have been raised, it's really important for folks to understand, just as you talked about how women actually get breast exams and breast care in this country, in many areas we are the only provider for women. for many, in many areas, there are long waits. 60% of our clinics will see folks the same day. in some areas they won't take any more medicaid patients and

planned parenthood is the only entity. >> it is true that medicare, those who use planned parenthood, are often those who are most at risk. african-american minority women die at a higher level than any other population when it comes to breast cancer, when it makes to actually dying from having pelvic or cervical cancer. so we are actually giving opportunities. i want to interject or ask, mr. chairman, unanimous constant to enter a letter into the record from latino organizations that stated that they no for a fact in their communities, the community health centers could not absorb this. i just want to close -- >> without objection, so ordered. but the gentlewoman's time has

expired. >> i yield my time to the gentlewoman from utah. >> thank you for coming and answering questions. i want to be very clear that there are no gotcha questions here. i just want to be able to get as much information as possible. i'm not here to try and change your mind or the minds of my colleagues. i'm just trying to get as much information out to the public as we possibly can because some of these funds are taxpayer dollars and i think they deserve to have some answers. first of all, ms. richards, in the annual report, planned parenthood's annual report, says that you are providing over 489,000 breast cancer screenings. and you've stated that none of your clinics actually have the mammogram machines. how many of your affiliates have those mammogram machines? >> our health centers are part of our affiliates. we have more than 650 health

centers. so an affiliate is simply the corporate structure for those health centers. >> and how many of them have mammogram machines? >> an affiliate isn't a health center. i think i spoke earlier, we do have mammogram machines at our health centers. and we've never stated that we did. as was mentioned earlier, for womening w who go for a breast if you need a mammogram, your referred to a radiological clinic. >> so you refer them to radiological clinics? >> we have a lot of ways we refer for mammograms, such as the susan g. komen foundation. >> do you know how much you make from cancer screenings? >> how much we make? >> yes, the revenues. >> so just talking about federal funding, we don't make money off of cancer screenings. >> that's great. well, you don't get anything from mammograms either.

how much is made from abortions? >> let me just -- you're going to have to bear with me a minute so i can be responsive. >> if you can respond as quickly as possible. >> i will. there are 59 affiliates. each are completely different. they all run their own operation. and i can't tell you -- i think this question was raised earlier. >> you can't tell me how much you actually make from abortions? you can't give that number. okay. >> the national office, so you know, he did not provide health services at the national office. we've provided information for all 59 affiliates, their annual -- their audited financial statements. >> i wasn't even asking about the affiliates. >> that's why health services are provided. so i think that's relevant to your question. >> okay. but you don't have those numbers. all you're saying is that the healthcare affiliates have these numbers and you don't have them. >> certainly not with me here today. >> for the year ending in june 30th, 2014, according to planned parenthood reports, 127.1

million in revenue over expenses. from 2005 to 2013, planned parenthood reported a 53% reduction in cancer screenings and prevention services and 42% reduction in breast examines and breast care while abortions have increased 24%. can you understand a little bit of the hesitancy and trying to figure out why those numbers have gone down, where abortions have actually gone up? >> so we're talking about -- so we don't mix apples and oranges here, so federal funding pays -- medicaid funding and title x pays for specific services. federal funding does not pay for abortion except in very limited circumstances. >> why would it be offensive if we took funding and put it into clinics providing healthcare

exams, providing mammograms? >> the medicaid reimbursements, if the numbers are going up, that's because more services are being provided. as you know, many women now, because of the affordable care act and medicaid expansion, there are more patients on medicaid coming to us for healthcare. all the reimbursements are directly related to healthcare delivery services. planned parenthood is just like any other hospital or healthcare provider that provides services to patients. >> you've also made it very clear that if planned parenthood wasn't around, this would be very difficult for low income families. what is the responsibility of hospitals and other clinics that people can actually go to? you can't say that planned parenthood is the only place that is available. >> obviously it's a place that 2.7 million patients choose voluntarily to come to every year. and i think what's important is that in a lot of areas in the

country, they won't take more medicaid patients. >> what is our job here? it is to provide as many options as possible. >> i would agree. >> there is no reason why we can't provide those options elsewhere, where people can have their choice as to where they go. >> congresswoman, this may be an area where you and i agree. >> mr. chairman -- >> i would like a chance to answer the question. >> you did actually answer my questions. mr. chairman, if you could help in getting some of the information about the numbers i asked for, that would be really helpful. >> the gentleman from arizona who yielded to you, his time has spider. i would ask unanimous consent to take four pages from the annual reports, we have the documentation on the reduction in the breast exams and breast care. and so without objection, i would like to enter that into the record. no objection. so ordered. we now recognize the gentleman

from california for five minutes. >> thank you, mr. chair. thank you, ms. richards, for your testimony and the gracefulness with which you've answered the questions today. i also want to thank you for running an organization that has helped millions of men and women across america. on behalf of the majority of women and men in this great nation, i want to say thank you. having sat here for the last hour and a half, i feel like i'm in some sort of bizarre alternate universe. i think it's crazy that we're having this hearing, based on heavily edited videos that actually showed the opposite of what was happening. what was happening was that planned parenthood was following the law. i think it's also crazy that tissue research that is not only entirely legal but has bipartisan support. and i think it's insane that in my district now, because of these misleading videos, women have in some cases had to go

through two sets of bomb-proof doors just to access healthcare. and i thank you for your courage. i note the cowardliness of the maker of these videos who was too scared to come to us to testify. let's just come to reality for a few minutes. abortion is legal in the united states of america; isn't that correct, ms. richards? >> it is correct. >> and we don't live in a theocracy. the law of the land is not the old testament or the new testament or the koran or the torah. the law of the land is the constitution of the uses. isn't that correct, ms. richards? >> that's correct. >> and abortion is a constitutional right, is that correct? >> correct. >> and planned parenthood allows women to access that constitutional right, isn't that correct? >> yes, we do. >> and none of that gets federal funding? >> that is correct, except for very limited circumstances allowed by federal law. >> thank you.

there are multiple medical clinics across america that also provide abortion services, correct? >> i'm sorry. >> there are multiple medical clinics. >> and hospitals. >> that provide abortion services. >> correct. >> they also provide services that have medicaid reimbursement? >> i believe that's correct, yes. >> and no one is saying let's shut down medical cliqunics and hospitals because they also provide abortion? >> i don't think that's been proposed. >> yet they're trying to shut you down because you actually have separate line items, that's not a new or novel concept, correct? >> correct. >> let's talk about fetal tissue research. it has made enormous lifesaving changes for millions of americans and people across the world, isn't that correct? >> that's right. >> in fact, fetal tissue research has resulted directly in the development of the polio

vaccine, vaccines for hepatitis a, rubella, chicken pox, shingles, and rabies. anyone in america that has had a family member or themselves been affected by multiple sclerosis, als, and other centrals. if -- other central nervous system diseases, diabetes, cardiovascular disease, by immune system issues, and by glaucoma on glaucoma, you can thank fetal tissue research for making advances in those areas. it's amazing that the other side wants to shut down the government because planned parenthood was following the law, because fetal tissue research is helping lots of people, and now we want to shut down the government to defund all of that. that doesn't make sense to me. let me sort of conclude now by

asking you to respond to questions about why there's been a reduction in cancer screenings. isn't it true that it's because guidelines have changed? >> that's correct. >> they've said let's do less ma'mmogram mammograms. the same thing with pap smears. >> that's correct. and we always follow the best science and medicine at planned parenthood. >> let me read a quick letter from one of my constituents who saw that planned parenthood might get defunded. she said she grew up in a small desert town, made some poor choices, left school at 15, started having sex, and didn't want to end up being pregnant so she went to the one place she knew would help her, planned parenthood. they made her feel comfortable, gave her an exam, gave her birth control pills, told her she had an std and gave her antibiotics. because of what planned

parenthood did, she corrected herself, graduated with straight a's and is now a medical doctor and thanks planned parenthood for helping her and her family. >> i'm so pleased to hear that. thanks for sharing that. >> i thank the gentleman. i would admonish members on both sides, the prescription of motivation is not something we generally allow members to push on other members. i will tell you in response to what the gentleman said, the producer of these videos was not invited to this hearing. and part of the reason we didn't do that is i think i did the responsible thing, and you heard mr. cummings in support of this, is i issued a subpoena to get all the videos. the only reason they have not been produced is there is a

temporary restraining order by a court in california. i would love to have the vide s if we're going to ferret out what the accusation is, we have to see all the videos. that's what we're trying to do. but there was never a suggestion that this gentleman, mr. delaney, was anything but cooperative. he simply wasn't invited, because without the videos, we can't have a conversation about that. >> mr. chairman, let me ask you this. with this order coming out of california, are we going to continue to try to get all of the videos? i see how we have been aggressive with regard to getting witnesses and trying to get documents. and this is such a very important issue. and as i've said to you

privately, i think that what i'm concerned about is the integrity of the process, no matter where people end up, on either end. if these videos are going to be even partially the foundation of what we're doing, i think we need to have all of them and pursue them, just as we would pursue other items and information that we need. i ask the chairman, are we going to continue to try to pursue that? >> absolutely. that's what we did. >> and we will continue to do? >> that's what we did without the support of the minority in this case. we will continue to do that. but for this restraining order, we would have had them by the time we got here, but we did not. we'll continue to pursue them. we're working closely with house legal counsel who is now representing us to try to make that indicacase to that court at client. >> let me make it very, very

clear that -- you have now said it two or three times. i want to make it clear. we will join you in a subpoena to get every single tape, period. no ands, no ifs or buts, period. and i don't know where that's coming from. as a ranking member of this committee, i'm letting you know that. >> i appreciate the clarification. i recognize the gentleman from tennessee for five minutes. >> thank you, mr. chairman. and i would like to yield to the gentleman from arizona. >> i thank the gentleman. mr. cummings, you made a comment earlier that i want to address. in the "new york times," they reported the epa unleashed a major lobbying campaign to rally comments and support for its regulation. you earlier went off on lockheed martin in regards to that application. the epa also disregarded the

antilobbying act and broke the law. i would hope that you would co-sponsor my removal of ms. mccarthy as the epa administrator. now back to those processes in here. ms. richards, i'm up here. you're a ceo, right? >> yes, sir. >> you do understand market penetration, right? >> i'm a nonprofit ceo, so -- >> you look at the numbers. all ceos are looking at how they expand and profit. >> we don't profit. i don't actually look at how to profit. we do obviously look at how to expand into areas particularly where there's unmet need. >> okay. i like that. so your market penetration in arizona is different than your market penetration in new york state, would you say? >> i'm sure it is. >> there's three in arizona and there's quite a few more in new york. and there's a pretty good web of preventive services.

your annual report said 173.6 million in excess revenues for the fiscal of 2013-2014. that number has jumped 18.5 million from its report in 2009-2010. i would like you to tell me how you got the growth of those funds. why we're seeing such a growth in that profit. >> well, it's not prompt. so let me just be really clear in terms of terminology. it's not profit. actually it's revenue that we use for services. so -- >> so would we agree it's excess of revenues over expenses? >> correct. >> i want you to explain that. >> it's from fundraising. that's what i spend a lot of my time doing. there are areas of the country where we want to expand. to your question about if you only have one health center in a state and you think that there is more need, so we are involved currently in raising money and spending it, we just opened a new health center -- >> you gave me a great answer.

you fund-raise. >> we fund-raise specifically to expand services. >> i understand that. i understand that. so what are you looking to report in 2014? >> i'm sorry. what's that? >> so what's that number in 2014? >> we've provided thousands of pages of documents. i don't have that. >> it's actually going up to 127 million in regards to -- so there's an escalating aspect. so you're a pretty good ceo. you're looking at excess revenues over expenses. that's pretty good. i'm having trouble in all this in regards to the fundraising application, particularly when i look at these numbers, the 80% reduction in prenatal care services, the 57% reduction in cancer screenings preventive services, on and on and on. and by the way, i was a dentist, so i do understand medicaid reimbursement rates. they don't pay, right? >> correct.

it depends on the state. >> you're lucky if you get reimbursed your costs. >> since you do understand medicaid, you know it various in all 50 states. we do raise money over expenses in order to supplement the costs of medicaid services. >> i understand. let me ask you a question. with a mediator, what have you been able to facilitate for a lump cost for the price of contraceptives? is there a unit price that you've been able to lower it down to get a price fixed? >> i don't know. i don't do that. >> it's been reported it's about $3 you're paying for the average contraceptive. >> actually it's very much all over the map, as you know. it depends on -- >> on the average. >> i really actually disagree with you. i don't think that's correct. >> this is a profit center. because what ends up happening, you're reimbursed by the federal government at medicaid for $35, right? if you're truly looking at

mediation and spreading the wealth of pharmaceuticals, when we get a break, you should pass it on? >> as you know -- >> no, don't you agree? because that facilitates more services, does it not, ms. richards? >> our entire is on serving as many patients as we can. so your example -- >> that's not exactly true. what you've done is you've narrowed the focus. what we end up having is, there's very few primary care docs out there because they can't afford to stay in practice. you've narrowed the scope of practice. this is my time. this is my time so don't interrupt it. from that standpoint is you've narrowed that focus so you're profiting off death. because where you're making that profit center is actually off of aborti abortions. that's appalling to me. that you very much. >> the gentlewoman from new jersey. >> thank you, mr. chairman. thank you, ms. richards, for enduring what i consider to be a

very offensive approach on the part of my colleagues on the other side of the aisle as they've badgered you with questions, as they've used rhetoric to use a question to seek information at the same time not giving you a chance to answer the questions. i'm actually a little confused why we're here. are we here because of videos and a question of planned parenthood doing something illegal related to the collection of fetal tissue? are we here simply because the ideological right wing of this republican majority in congress is bringing you here for a fourth hearing? or are we here because somebody believes that planned parenthood doesn't need federal reimbursement for the healthcare that it gives? for whatever reason, for whatever one of those reasons, those are specious reasons.

and for my colleagues on the other side of the aisle to act like they don't understand and to suggest that they're ill-informed, if they have ill-informed, it's because they choose to be. i couldn't hardly get into this room today with all of the people on the outside, in the hallways, that were trying to get in here to be supportive of planned parenthood, because we know and recognize the impact that planned parenthood has had on healthy lives, not just women's lives, but including men's lives. we know in new jersey, in my state, where this governor, chris christie, spent so much of his leverage defunding planned parenthood, and then suggesting that the federally qualified healthcare centers would be able to pick up the slack, they came in and testified that they couldn't possibly accommodate all of the deficiencies that would occur without planned parenthood. we know about the work that you

do. i want to acknowledge all the young women and men in the overflow room. i want to talk to you a little about mr. deleiden, whoever the mystery man is, who is trying to discredit planned parenthood. you had a forensic report that revealed there were so many discrepancies, that there were so many inaccuracies, and that it would be impossible to characterize the extent to which cmp's undisclosed edits and cuts distort the meanings of the content. the manipulation of the video means they have no evidentiary value in a legal context and can't be relied upon. i want to put that report in the record and ask for unanimous consent to include that report.

mr. chairman? >> before i rule on that, i place a temporary objection in place. let me look at the report prior to entering it into the record. >> then i guess i should register my temporary objection to the fact that we have one witness here and we haven't even trying to get mr. deleiden here or anyone else to question with regard to the accuracy of all the allegations that we are moving on right now. and also i wanted to say, before i give you an opportunity to answer any question that was left out there in the universe hovering over us, so that you can put things that you think that are on the record, that this is another very poor illustration of our deflecting our attention away from the work that the people have elected us to do. we need to have an export import bank that creates jobs. we need an infrastructure program that creates jobs. we need to be reauthorizing the

appropriate aspects of the voting rights act. we've got so much good work to do. but instead what do we do? we harp on a woman's right to make choices that are hers to make. and that to me is very offensive. and with that, ms. richards, i would like to yield to you the balance of my time to answer any unanswered question that you might have. thank you. >> thank you so much, congresswoman. i would mention to the chair that i believe we've given the forensic report to you a while back. we can follow up if there's any questions. i appreciate your comments. i think we have now had, either today, for the 14th vote on restricting women's access to healthcare in this country. i think going back to one of the questions on the other side, this is about women's choice to me. this isn't about planned parenthood. it's about allowing women in this country and particularly women of low income or live in areas that are underserved by other healthcare providers, it's

allowing them to make other decisions about their pregnancies, their healthcare, where they get their services. many women come to us even if they have other options because frankly, we're the best at women's health. and i think they deserve the right to make their own decisions about why they access the doctors and clinicians of their choice. >> reclaiming the last 25 seconds of my time -- the gentlewoman's time has spider. >> i'm sorry. would you indulge me? >> if i do that, i would have to do both. >> with all due respect, mr. chairman, you have done it. >> ten seconds. >> it seems to me this is not the appropriate time to be making decisions about defunding planned parenthood when we don't even know why we want to do it. >> thank you. so the gentlewoman had asked unanimous consent to enter into the record this gps fusion

analysis. i would also like to add the report prepared by coalfire systems. i ask unanimous consent that both of these be entered bointo the record. without objection, so ordered. the gentleman from texas for five minutes. >> thank you, mr. chairman. one of the reasons we need to take a closer look at the funding of planned parenthood, not just as a result of these videos, but as a result of some financial issues that are coming up, as president of planned parenthood, you're aware, of course, that planned parenthood of the gulf coast, last year paid a $4.3 million settlement for false claims made to medicaid and the texas women's healthcare program. is that not correct? >> that's correct. >> and you're also aware that the obama administration's department of justice contend that planned parenthood had submitted false claims against the women's health program?

>> i'm not aware of that. i do know that we've been the target of the same group that has filed many, many, many lawsuits. and that's the one area i know that was settled in order to allow us to get back to healthcare. >> the united states contends the planned parenthood of the gulf coast submitted false claims to the united states in conjunction with claims submitted to the united states. mr. chairman, without objection, i would like to have this settlement agreement entered into the record. >> without objection, so ordered. >> so as a consequence, planned parenthood paid $4.3 million to settle those claims two years ago. are you aware that this spring, another office by the office of the inspector general concluded that planned parenthood had overbilled taxpayers another $128,000 in medicaid and the texas women's health program? >> i'm not aware of what you're referring to. i'm happy to look at it.

>> thank you. are you aware that the planned parenthood affiliate in el paso failed to reimburses its subcontractors for half a million dollars in claims? >> i'm not aware of that. that organization doesn't exist and hasn't for years. >> that's another issue i would like to bring up. one of the things that we're talking about today is taking some of the money that's going to planned parenthood and sending it to community health centers. do you know how many facilities in texas you have? >> i don't. but i can certainly -- actually, bear with me one minute. i'll just make sure i give you the right number. this may be -- i know we just opened one in plano. i think we have 38 health centers. there may be 39 now. >> so we've got 732 community health centers. admittedly some of those focus on pediatrics or men's healthcare or other specialists. but wouldn't you admit there are substantially more facilities,

federally qualified facilities that offer women's healthcare than there are planned parenthood facilities in texas? >> actually, congressman, there be a drop in access by women to healthcare, particularly after planned parenthood was for political reasons, i believe, taken out of the health program. particularly in some areas like the rio grande border that are vastly underserved. >> there are three or four facilities down in the rio grande valley, if i'm a mistaken. i also promised to ask you a couple of questions that constituents and focuses on social media asked me to ask. lauren wanted me to ask you what efforts and what steps does planned parenthood take to guarantee their providers follow state laws requiring reporting of child sex abuse? >> we have very rigorous standards that we apply. the health and wellbeing of our

patients is our number one concern and we certainly comply with all state and federal laws. if there is ever an issue, we take quick action. >> peg expressed concern about the activities of the 501(c)(4) organization that planned parenthood has helped fund, you've helped manage, and funds have been transferred into for lobbying in almost exclusively democrat political campaigns. one of my concerns is, with your purported goal of making access to women's healthcare more available, isn't the money that you are diverting to lobbying effort in politics money that could better be spent actually delivering healthcare to women? >> well, congressman, as you know, in the state of texas, the number of laws that the state legislature has passed to restrict access to women to almost every kind of healthcare

has caused many organizations to have to lobby. >> you spoke earlier about how you have doctors providing women's healthcare, funded by taxpayer money under title x or other reimbursement. are some of those doctors also providing abortion? would you be able to afford to have those doctors and keep them entirely busy but for the federal funds coming in? >> that's a kind of long, complicated question. i want to be responsive. obviously federal funds, the most important thing, i think, out of all of that is, federal funds do not pay for abortions at all except in very limited circumstance of when the woman has been raped, has been the victim of incest or her life is endanger endangered. >> i would contend they help facilitate it. that's one of the reasons i support defunding. i see i'm out of time. i appreciate it. thank you, mr. chairman. >> i thank the gentleman. before i recognize the gentleman

from california, after he does his questioning, we're going to do a brief four to five-minute break, sort of a humanitarian break for a moment, then we will continue on for the rest of the panel. for those in the audience, i suggest remaining in your seats, if you want to continue to witness the hearing. for those members who have yet to ask questions, hang tight. we'll go to the gentleman from california for five minutes and then break. >> i don't know quite how to take that break after my questioning. usually people take a break before i ask questions. anyway, i want to thank you, ms. richards, for being here, the way you've carried yourself through this hearing and through this recent history, and the wonderful work your organization does. i want to sort of ask two lines of questioning. the latter part, very specific on the bipartisan history of support for fetal tissue research. but the first part is just in my experience, in state government in california, local government,

particularly in local government, and in california and the counties that provide healthcare for disadvantaged communities, low income communities, it was always my experience that the clients chose planned parenthood when they had the opportunity, because they wanted to, whether they were a private pay or not. and we developed relationships between the county system and you, because the clients clearly preferred you, at least in our community. so in the spirit of local control, it seems to me, within the federal guidance, you competed very well in the open marketplace, whether it was private pay or reimbursed clients. is that no trut true? >> i appreciate that. absolutely, providing quality healthcare is our entire mission. we are pleased that many women and men, about 10% of our patients are men, they choose planned parenthood over other healthcare providers. we believe we provide an excellent service that's

affordable. and we do a lot of outreach in the community to provide education as well. >> that was my experience, was that in local government you are more efficient and effective than, with all due respect to my friends in the county system, than the county system. it's a little odd listening here, without being judgmental, it reminds me of the old saying, when the law is not with you, you pound the table. 1988, maybe you could just respond after i go through a series of these observations, if this is correct or not, and if you have any other comments, so in 1988 there was a panel called the human fetal tissue transplantation panel established under president reagan. the chairman was a republican. the panel came together and studied the science behind fetal tissue research and issued this

conclusion: it was acceptable public policy to support research using transplanted fetal tissue. that was under president reagan. is that correct? >> that's correct. i've learned more about the history. it was a committee that had both supporters of abortion rights, opponents of abortion rights. it was a very bipartisan effort to come to what seems like a very good conclusion that was passed over womwhelmingly by th united states senate. >> that was the revitalization act of 1993, setting forth rules of how fetal tissue research was done in this country, passed with republican and democratic support; is that correct? >> that's correct. >> so the bipartisan line for decades has been that fetal tissue research has had

significant bipartisan support. one of the reasons this research has had some strong support, and mr. lu alluded to this, is because it helps millions of people. recently the new england journal of medicine published an article and its observations in this regard were, and i quote, virtually every person in this country has benefitted from research using fetal tissue. every child who has been spared the misery oflh chicken pox, rubella, or polio can thank the scientists who used fetal tissue. >> that's correct. i think probably everyone in this room has benefitted in some way. >> just in conclusion, again, thank you for the work you do. mr. chairman, while i appreciate your initial comments, particularly as we evaluate, as always, the best and most efficient use of taxpayers' money, at least from my perspective and my opinion, both from a local level of 14 years of overseeing the relationship in the bay area with affiliates

there, at least at that level, we did our due diligence, and this was the most effective and efficient way of meeting our clients' needs. thank you. >> just one quick question, ms. richards. what do you like most about your job? >> getting to see the patients that we serve every day and the young people who are frankly going to i think more opportunities than we ever did. it's great. >> thank you. >> the gentleman's time has expired. as i noted prior, we are going to recess for roughly five minutes. we intend to start back up again at 12:35. we stand in recess until then.

the committee will come to order. the next person to be recognized is the gentleman from north carolina, mr. democrmeadows for minutes. >> thank you, mr. chairman. let me take the emotion out of it. earlier you said you need to consider the source. everything i'll be quoting comes from planned parenthood. it is my understanding that 3%, according to your website and your testimony today, 3% of the services that planned parenthood offers are abortion services. is that correct? of your total services, 3%. >> i'm sorry, my mike wasn't on. 3% of the services delivered, of the total services. >> yet you say that you don't

have the total amount of money, you can't give this committee the total amount of money that you make or receive for abortions; is that correct? >> it's because the national office doesn't, as you know, or may not know, the national office doesn't provide healthcare services. 59 affiliates provide a variety of healthcare services. that would be every single organization. >> your affiliates gather that information. so you would have access to that? >> i'm sure they have it. i don't have it myself. >> how do you come up with 3%? >> because -- >> let me ask the question. 2.7 million women and men are served by planned parenthood, according to your testimony; is that correct? >> that's correct. >> annually you provide, according to your report, 327,000 plus abortions last year, according to your annual report. i do the math. 2.7 million people, 327,000 abortions.

that comes up to 12%. so how do you get 3%? and these are your numbers. why is it not 12%? >> because people come to us for -- some people come to us more than once and they come to us for different services. some people come to us and they need a pap smear or they need a variety of services. >> i'm having real trouble coming to this. if you would put up the graph on -- this is a tax return from one of your affiliates in rochester, syracuse region. if you could read for me line 2-b. what does that say? what is the designation there? >> pregnancy termination. >> and the dollar amount next to pregnancy termination there is how much? >> again, i've never seen this before.

i'm simply reading what you're asking me to read. 1,424,275. i'm assuming -- >> so $1,424,000 for pregnancy termination, according to your affiliate's tax return. >> one affiliate, correct. >> do you have tax returns for all your affiliates where we could get this information? >> well, i know that we have provided -- >> because here's my concern. if you take the number, that 1.4 million, and divide it into the total revenue of a little over 5 million, that would indicate revenues of almost 28% for abortions. >> i think we're mixes services -- i think you're mixing services and revenue. obviously the above line says family planning, 3,718,474.

>> isn't the 3% a little misleading? >> no. we are i would say the most highly regulated organization in this country. >> i would disagree with that. >> but we're very transparent about our numbers. >> i got this for one of your affiliates. will you provide this same kind of documentation for all your affiliates to this committee? >> i believe we actually already have. >> no, you haven't. >> i am happy to speak to the chairman. because i believe -- >> this is the only one that had it. will you today, yes or no, provide this for all your affiliates? >> we have produced all -- okay. we just have a disagreement of opinion, and i'm happy to talk to the chair -- >> it's not a disagreement. will you provide -- >> we've already provided the 990s for all our affiliates. >> you haven't outlined it like this. are you saying you don't keep track of it? >> you said that. i didn't say that.

>> i'm asking, are you keeping track of it? >> the affiliates provide their 990s. >> that's a great question that i didn't ask. will you provide it to this committee? >> i don't know what "it" is. we've provided -- >> the revenue that planned parenthood is provided from abortions. >> he ha >> i have said to you, we have been extremely cooperative with this committee and the other three committees. we have provided all the 990s, the audited annual statements of our affiliates. if there's anything after, i'm happy to talk to the staff here about what else is needed that we're not providing. i really believe we have gone above and beyond in providing anything that's requested of us. >> my time has expired. >> i recognize the gentleman from pennsylvania, mr. boyle. >> thank you, mr. chairman.

i also want to thank ms. richards for the manner in which you've conducted yourself today. there was one answer you've given that surprised me, when ranking member cummings asked what the favorite part of your job here. i assumed you were going to say, sitting here for three hours, answering questions from members of congress. a couple of of these statistics have been cited before, a couple have not, but let me just briefly go through, as has been cited, there are exactly 2.7 million women and men that planned parenthood see every year, correct? >> correct. >> and of that, 1.5 million of those patients received services through title x, the nation's family planning program, right? >> i think that -- and i'm

not -- let me make sure i answer you correctly. about 1.6 million of our patients are either coming to us through some federal program, either title x or the medicaid program. but a number of them are title x, yes, title x recipients. >> contraceptive services prevent 1.2 million unintended pregnancies, which would result significantly in 590,000 unplanned births, 400,000 abortions, and 190,000 miscarriages. so in a country with approximately a million abortions a year, what we're talking about is, without such title x services that planned parenthood provides and clearly constitutes the majority of your work, the number of abortions each year in the u.s. would be approximately 40% higher. i think the consequences of what

we're talking about haven't fully been laid out, not just in terms of cancer screenings and the treatment of stds, but also, ironically, in what would inevitably be an increase in the number of unintended pregnancies and abortions. >> that's correct. right now there's such exciting research happening with better contraceptives. young women now can get long acting, reversible contraceptives. i've been questioned about why in some cases we have fewer visits in some areas. now you don't have to come back to planned parenthood provide them for six months or you can get a longer acting method and in the states that have pioneered this work to provide women any birth control, we're seeing drops in pregnancy rate and abortion rates. >> i think that's something we

can all celebrate and maybe the focus should be on how best to provide women the health care they need and this is something where we can build common ground. i did also want to point out, i think you cited this before and it's only been mentioned once in these three hours, according to the non-partisan congressional budget office, if this legislation goes through, 390,000 women would lose their access to health care. >> that's correct. >> where else could they turn? >> i think that's the difficulty. i appreciate you bringing back up the cbo study because it's important. there are some areas where we are the only safety net family planning provider. other areas, folks who are taking medicaid patients won't take anymore because as discussed by everyone medicaid payments don't pay for services but the other thing i'd like to emphasize is that there are women and young people that choose planned parenthood even though they have other options

because we provide very high quality health care, particularly family planning services, that they may not be able to get anywhere else without judgment, without shame. >> one of the points you were making, the statistic i have, and i think you cited, is that at least 78% of planned parenthood's health care patients have incomes of 150% of poverty level or less. >> that's correct. that's correct. >> so it's pretty clear we're talking about people who don't have a great deal of options given their income? >> and to me that is the point is that i believe low income women in this country should have all the same options to have high-quality affordable health care as every other woman. >> thank you. and with 11 seconds left i'll yield back. >> i now recognize the gentleman from florida for five minutes. >> thank you, mr. chairman. miss richards, if a child

survives an abortion attempt should bit given nourishment and medical care? >> i've never heard of such a circumstance happening. >> really? >> yes, i mean i -- >> so if it happened you would say -- >> i can say of planned parenthood i'm aware of no instance where -- we don't provide abortions after viability so but in my experienced of planned parenthood we haven't ever had that kind of circumstance. >> but you would say that there could be -- medical care would be in order at that point? forget about planned parenthood? just generally. >> again, i want to be responsible for planned parenthood and what we do there certainly in this situation which, again has never occurred that i know of of a baby born, that baby should, as the mother

should, get appropriate medical care from the physician and would. >> have you watched all the videos released by the center for medical progress. >> i haven't watched the multihour edited videos but i have read all of the written transcripts. >> so the ones that are on youtube you haven't watched those? >> well, there have been hours and hours and hours so i haven't -- i did read through the all the -- i've watched many videos and read through the transcripts that have been provided by, again. i would say that it's important that my position i would like to see all of the videos that are not edited and those that have been provided by. >> i understand. what about -- there was one specific one that there was a technician, holly o'donnell, she was describing harvesting the brain of a late-term boy, she said she wasn't sure if the baby was alive since its heart was still beating and she harvest it had brain by cutting his head open starting with the chin, do recall that. >> that woman does not work for planned parenthood so i cannot speak to anything she said.

i'm not responsible for her. >> do you deny that her description of what happened is something that does occur in planned parenthood clinics? >> there is nothing she has ever described that i could attest to has ever happened. >> so you can categorically testify to that? >> categorically testify to what? i want to be very careful. >> that what she described -- >> well, i don't remember that particular video of holly o'donnell but i will tell you she has never worked at planned parenthood -- >> she was a technician for stem express but i think it was something that was very, very troubling to sit there and read that or watch that video. let me ask you this. do you admit that planned parenthood or its afill yai can tell -- affiliate harvest and sell fetal body parts for profit? >> we have a very clear policy on fetal tissue donation. it's done with the full consent of the patient and as i said

earlier in my statements it is only only currently done in fewer than 1% of planned parenthood health centers -- >> but no profit. >> excuse me. the one affiliate in washington state that does not receive any reimbursement for their cost and there's only one other one which is in california and they have assured us that whatever reimbursement they receive it is less than what the costs are for providing fetal issue to that organization. >> that's the case, then, the video with dr. gutter negotiating over the price of the parts. if there's no profit being made, why would you be negotiating over how much the parts are going to be sold? >> well, with respect, i completely disagree with your characterization of that and that is why i read all of the transcript, not these edited sensationalized videos and what i read -- well there is -- >> we take this very

seriously -- >> there is negotiation. i understand -- >> i just disagree with your characterization. >> that's fine and people can judge. let me ask you this. do you deny that planned parenthood and/or its affiliates will alter abortion procedures in order to better harvest fetal body parts? >> we have a very clear policy which i'm happy to read to you about how we allow patients to make fetal tissue donations. would you like me to -- >> since the release of the videos have you or the planned parenthood federation issued any updated guidance to the companies to whom you provide fetal tissue regarding the sale of fetal body parts for profit and/or the manipulation of abortion procedures. >> well there's no way to answer that because i disagree with your formulation. we allow women voluntarily -- >> have you issued new guidance within the past three months. >> no, although as i said in my letter to congress i've asked our chief medical officer and

our medical team to review all the work we do and, again, it's very limited in fetal tissue donation to ensure that if there are anythings we could be doing better we would like to do that. >> my time has expired. >> thank you, we'll recognize the gentleman from vermont, mr. welsh, for five minutes. >> thank you very much. a couple of things preliminarily. number one, there is a sharp disagreement on members of this committee about abortion and i think each side is entitled to mutual respect. there is a significant disagreement about fetal tissue research and each side is entitled to respect. what is clear is the law says abortion is legal and the law has limited authorize for fetal tissue research. that's the law. what planned parenthood is doing is completely consistent with the law. we're now having an argument about a video that has been

redacted and doctored, there's no dispute about that. all of us would like to get the entire video and in a prudent investigatory process we would get the evidence before we argue about the evidence we don't have. so that is a limitation on our ability to get "to the truth." second, i'm just going to speak for vermont, 16,000 women voluntarily choose to get their primary health care from planned parenthood. these are individuals of free will acting on the basis of what they believe is in the best interest of them getting the health care they need. second, the proposal here that we could transfer the services that planned parenthood provides to our community health centers doesn't stand up in vermont. we have community health centers that we're very proud of. senator sanders, senator leahy and i have been big promoters

but its kleclientele is a significantly different population than women who have made a choice to go to a planned parenthood for women's health care issues. so this proposed remedy would have an incredibly negative impact on the choice that vermont women make about getting their basic health care. and, by the way, that health care that's important to the woman who decides to go to planned parenthood is appreciated by her family, their partners and the community so what is congress doing here? we're having an argument that's never going to end about abortion but we're proposing to proceed in a way that where the affect of our "investigation" is going to have collateral consequences that compromises is ability of women to get access

to basic health care needs. and it's also in the context where it's indisputed that the services that planned parenthood provides have helped reduce dramatically teen pregnancies and other pregnancies. so i think we should all take a step back here and think about what we do before we act the first medical principal that all doctors follow, do no harm. ms. richards i do want to ask you a couple of questions. this alarming inquiry about whether you are selling -- planned parenthood is selling for profit, body parts. we've seen a proposed contract to send planned parenthood affiliate offering to buy tissue samples and that included a compensation clause. were you familiar with that document? >> yes, i am. >> and in response your affiliate removed the word

"compensation" and added the following text "the payments shall not under any circumstances be calculated in such a way as to generate a profit for source." so miss richards, is that what the affiliate did and is that the strict policy of planned parenthood? >> that's a very good example of what happened akoss the country. this group who as i said are committed to -- they weren't really committed to rooting out any misdeeds, they were actually trying to entrap doctors and clinicians into signing bogus contracts and breaking the law. so this example is a very good one of where they were completely rebuffed and yet they continued to badger and badger and badger our doctors to get them to commit to something that was unethical or illegal. >> and after your affiliate sent the deletion of the term compensation did he lose interest? >> there was never a contract

that i know of that was actually sent back. >> let me ask another question about a failed attempt. on july 20 he sent a letter to chairman up -- you sent a letter to chairman upton, you said this "in another instance, biomax offered to pay much more, sending the affiliate a procurement agreement that offered a payment of $1600. "a your letter said this was a "astronomical amount" compared to the reasonable cost affiliates are allowed to recoup under federal law. is that right? >> i don't have that in front of m me. >> i'm out of time. a thank you. >> thank you mr. chairman, appreciate your testimony. i am also married to a strong lady, a family nurse practitioner, helped launch the sexual assault nurse exam inner

program at wake forest baptist medical center many years ago. but we stand together. we have done work in inner cities, places like cleveland and baltimore and new york and i'm troubled with some of the statistics that we've even seen out of new york and maybe you can address that. i don't want to talk over you. i want to give you a chance to respond but according to the, no health department statistic we know there are more african-american babies aborted in new york than born alive. are you aware of that statistic? >> i'm not aware of that statistic. >> if that is correct, would that concern you? obviously planned parenthood has more clinics in new york state than any other state. >> actually, that's not true. we do not. >> what is the number one leading state that you have? >> i believe it's california. i'll have to look to make sure. >> but if you know that's not true -- >> it's not only -- planned parenthood, there are a number of health care providers in the state of new york beyond planned parenthood. it's one of the better served -- >> i understand. but we've already established

somewhere between 30% and 40% of all abortions come from your organization so if we're going to put out stat wes want to make sure we're talking cent on the numbers. >> and i think mr. walker it's an important point because one of the other -- i don't know what all the statistics are that you have but of course the lack of access for african-american women in particular to basic preventative health care, including family planning, is a huge problem in this country as well. >> it is and i agree with you. as aforementioned time in places that we've served in worked in african-american population is 13% yet they're being aborted three times percent of the population at 35%. that should concern all of us, i'm sure it concerns you as well. i have a specific question regarding the $32 million sent over seas. does planned parenthood send any funds to the democrat republic of congo is. >> this was asked earlier. >> we touched on it but i want to get back to it. >> honestly i didn't bring materials about our international global program. i would have to get back to you.

i'm not trying to evade it, it's not something i thought was a topic of the committee meeting. >> i hope you would because we have laws in this country that prohibit us from sending money to places where we have sanctions on and if we're -- if planned parenthood is doing that i would imagine that would be something that would concern you, would it not? >> we certainly comply with all the laws globally and domestically and that's why i commit to you i will get information and work with the committee to get information. >> fair enough. i have a question. as a former pastor 15 years in a couple large churches there are many times where we counseled women of different age, various ages, for different things they were going through. sometimes 15, 20, 25 years later after going through an abortion there were still some struggle there. i don't disparage these women for making tough choices as you talk about. many came from underprivileged community, didn't feel like they had options but of the $500 million of taxpayer money that goes to your organization, how much is set aside to offer counselling to some of those

women who are still struggling with that issue? >> well, we don't -- this is what it's really hard to explain to you because i feel like we're just -- maybe we're talking past each other. we don't get a big check from the federal government. we're reimbursed for direct services. they're all family planning, std testing, well women visits. i will say though, one area i think we might agree, i would love in this country if we would fully fund for planned parenthood or anywhere else comprehensive counseling services for women on a whole host of issues. it is very underfunded and it'll really important to us as well because we do counseling with women every single day. >> i understand that and i i agree there are legitimate services offered but this is something that i'm -- i saw for 15 years so of the $1.3 billion in revenue even if doesn't come from taxpayers how much is set aside to offer services of women seeking counseling? >> we counsel -- i don't know -- i could get the numbers for you. we counsel women and young people and men every single day

at planned parenthood health centers across the country and most of it, as you probably know, is uncompensated care. >> well, i look at your numbers and i would tell you this, it is amazing as far as the amount of revenue that exists and i wanted to talk a bit about how much you're sending overseas but i have one final question. if -- this is a big if -- there is proven to be criminal activity through an investigation would you have any problem redirecting the $500 million or the $60 million of the 20% that's not medicaid, would you have any problem redirecting that to other women's health care organizations who offer genuine health care? >> well, i'm not going to answer to a hypothetical and, again, i -- we follow all the laws at planned parenthood, the health and safety of our patients is our number one concern. if there is any issue ever, the state or local national level we will address it and we do so swiftly is and we always have. >> thank you, i yield back.

>> now we'll recognize the gentlewoman from the virgin islands for five minutes. >> thank you mr. chairman and ranking member mr. cummings. thank you miss richards for being here for the inordinate amount of time that you have and i reiterate so much of what my colleagues here on this side of the aisle have said regarding this hearing and some of the concerns. you and your office know that i have vocalized to you privately the fact that i'm displeased that planned parenthood is not present in my own district in the virgin islands or any of the territories where we have approximately four million people. and the reason i'm displeased about that is because i know the good work that planned parenthood does in preventative health for women with the virgin islands having 141 unplanned teen pregnancies per 1,000 when the national rate is 29 pregnancies per 1,000.

i see how important the work that you guys do is to different areas and the chairman has seven clinics in his area in utah and, mr. chairman, we'd be glad to take any one of them in the virgin islands to be able to support women's health and the work that you do knowing that 78% of those seven clinics are in rural areas. and i know this committee is searching for truth and that's the purpose of the oversight and government reform committee and i believe we need to do that in a neutral and even handed matter that reflects the integrity of this committee which is why i think this is a premature committee hearing if not the fact that the other side, the individual that the minority has requested to be here is not here and while i understand mr. dayleiden has had restrictions on the videos being produced, he has not produced one document

that has been requested by this committee from either side. dealiden. >> will the gentlewoman yield? >> no, not at this time, sir. afterwards i will leave you some time. >> i know thousands and thousands of pages of documents. >> i think it's 20,000 pages and i know that the ranking member cummings has sent a request for documents and the chairman, chaffetz and representative jordan have sent their own requests for documents. but -- and a subpoena was issued and not one page of documents. although i understand from the testimony that the videos is were, in fact, there was a question regarding that. so miss richards i want to ask you some questions since we only have planned parenthood here and we only have your documents that we're able to put up and put up on screens and for you to be questioned about, not the other side which assen attorn ean att

problematic for me to get to the truth if i don't see both sides of the evidence being presented to me. i understand that there are several states that have launched investigations against planned parenthood, is that correct? >> well, there have been a variety of -- we're constantly being -- overseen, our health care services and yes as a result of this recent campaign there have been various state inquiries. >> and i understand several of those states have cleared parenthood of any wrongdoing? >> that's correct. that's correct. >> and that there has not been produced any credible evidence that your organization has broken a single law, is that correct? >> i believe that's true. >> however there's plenty of evidence that mr. daleiden and his associates have violated federal and state laws. one example is his group obtaining tax-exempt status and apparently solicited charitable contributions under false

pretension tense. are you obtained that obtained a 501(c)(3) status as a biomedical organization? >> all i know is what i've read. >> and this is a fake organization that filed official paperwork with the state of california to create a sham tissue procurement company called biomax procurement services llc? miss richards, as far as i know illegally filing false paperwork with a state agency the against the law, right? >> it may be, i don't know. i know there's a lawsuit pending and i think the attorney general of california indicated there will be an investigation. >> so for us to have this discussion with you without having the balance of the other side becomes problematic. mr. chairman, did you want to say something at this point? >> yes, i thank the gentlewoman for yielding. she made a suggest that mr.

daleiden had not been responsive. that's not true. we issued a subpoena, he responded within the time, that package that arrived has not been opened. it's in our safe. he's unable to provide all of the documents given that there is temporary restraining order. we understand that, house counsel is involve. mr. cummings and i agree that we're trying to get all that information but towd ip suggest was not responsive is not true because he responded within the time allocated under the subpoena. >> it's my. mr. chairman, that until you're table to open those documents and receive all of them and we're able to balance them against the documents, the 20,000 pages of documents produced by planned parenthood that this is an unfair hearing and that we're not getting the information. >> i agree. that's why mr. daleiden was not invited to this hearing. the subject is what i said in opening comments and statements.

it's the funding component. this does not -- we did not title this hearing as a hearing on the videos. it caused some controversy but we have in the essence of time some legitimate discussion about a continuing resolution and ongoing funding for planned parenthood and we've laid that out but my comments were not about the video, it's about the funding. that's where my concern lies. >> mr. chairman -- >> and we will get to hopefully see those videos but we have to get past the restraining order that opinihas been put in place >> if we're going to discuss funding and knowing that members of congress can sit here and ask questions that run the gamut and that funding question is related to those videos that are the genesis of the question of whether to defund then i think it's naive of us to think that that discussion can be done in a vacuum without the videos and the other documents from the other side. >> if the gentlewoman would yield -- >> my time is up.

>> would you yield? in fairness to the gentlelady, i'm looking at the memorandum from the majority and it talks about background for this hearing and the first sentence says "recently released video demonstrates the planned parenthood federation of america participates in transactions involving transferring fetal tissue for remuneration." then it goes on. but let me very briefly so that the record is clear the jay lady referred to documents we had not received and i'd like to clear phi one point on record. on friday afternoon the republican staff informed democratic staff that mr. daleiden sent them a package, a

fed ex-box that they said they didn't want to open until this week. we thought this was strange because if the republicans delayed opening this package members would not have had enough time to refute whatever was inside before today's hearing. so our staff also made it clear that if the republicans wanted to use any of this material at today's hearing it should be opened immediately on friday so we would begin to -- could begin reviewing it as soon as possible through the weekend but the republican staff told us that they wanted to just keep the box closed. they said they would not open it and they would not use it at the hearing. so as of this moment we still do not know for sure what is inside that box from mr. daleiden, however, we did receive a copy of minutes from a recent hearing in a lawsuit in california whether mr. daleiden's attorney

said they delivered additional footage so even more footage that mr. daleiden cut from the videos he released publicly. so we went to open the package, we want members to have equal access to the videos that are apparently inside and we definitely want to see what the other footage mr. daleiden was concealing from the public. i'll yield back. >> i want to see all the videos, too. that's why we issued a subpoena. i wish you supported us when we issuedish. >> again, mr. chairman, i've said it before. >> i'm glad to have your support now. >> we've been -- we've supported it and i can show you the documents to show you that we consistently have asked that we get all of the tapes and if you give me a few minutes while others are asking questions i'll give you the very documents we sent you showing that. >> we're going to go to the gentleman for from south

carolina mr. mulvaney. >> i'll thank you the chairman and try and make my democrat colleagues happy and ask funding questions that have nothing to do with the videos. which is more important to you, miss richards? actually pr lly providing women health care services or lobbying? >> well, i think these two things go hand in hand and certainly what we have learned over the years is that in order to be able to provide health care services to women you have to also be able to advocate for women who are underserved so the two things go hand in hand. >> fair enough. you spent $21 million on lobbying, you spent zero dollars on mammograms, why is that? >> well, i think we've discussed mammograms repeatedly and how women's health care works. so when i go to my doctor i get a breast exam -- >> you get a referral. i get that. why don't you do that? >> we're not a radiological clinic and i don't think that's an -- >> why not? that's a women's service. >> i guess we could take it up but we never have provided by mammograms because we work in

concert with folks who do provide radiological services. we do a number of breast exams -- >> you're aware there's people running for president saying you provide mammograms, that's not accurate. >> well, there are a number of people running for president saying a lot of things that i can't. >> you said earlier you don't make money from federal funds, right? you don't make profit off the federal funds? is that correct. >> planned parenthood is a national office. we have one source of federal funding right now, it's a $21,000 roughly grant for a birth control clinical trial where we're reimbursed for costs alone and that's the only source of federal resources that come to the national office so we couldn't make a profit off that. >> where's the $532 million going? >> medicaid and title x -- >> so when you said you don't make money off the federal funds you were talking about the parent, not your operations? >> i was trying to explain the national office and then we have 59 affiliates, we have 650 to

700 health centers that provide health care services. >> is it your testimony that none of those make profits off of federal funds? >> well i would have to -- they're all reimbursed for services they provide. >> and that provides a profit, right? >> excuse me? >> that provides a profit. >> well, we're a nonprofit. >> you're a non-flooft made $127 million. >> we didn't make money. we don't make money. we reinvest money in health care service and education and a lot of other things. but i wanted to answer your first question -- >> no, let's go on to this one. you just mentioned you don't make money but you had revenues in excess of your expenses of $127 million last year. that's right. that's your testimony. so here's my question. i'm going to get to the question. where does the $127 million go? >> like any organization of our size and scale, a lot of our

resources are in what is a board-designated endowment or reserve. we are a 99-year-old organization so we've built our endowment. but also -- >> but you retain those earnings? in a private sense you would retain those earnings? you put them the bank. >> well, i hope they here in the bank and not just laying around. but negotiation that -- some are in reserves and the other is expanding health care services and building new clinics in a variety of states across the country. >> how is that not an expense? >> well it is an expense. >> but your books reflect revenues in excess of expenses of $127 million. >> i'm sorry, they're not all out the door but i've made commitments to opening new up health centers in new orleans, in dallas, in other states in the south, opening in other states that i won't mention here probably because it will draw more attention -- >> so let's say the money goes towards expanding the service, one of the proposals here miss

richards is to defund planned parenthood which includes taking $60 million, roughly $60 million of what you get out of discretionary fund. if we took $60 million away from you you could still perform every service you gave last year, can't you? >> i can't say that. >> well you made -- you said you have revenues in excess of expenses of $127 million. you told me what you do with $127 million, you're spending, investing, expanding, i get that. but if you had $60 million less last year, you could have provided by every single service to every single woman that you did last year. >> well, i constantly raise money to expand services to the patients that look to us. >> and god bless you, i think that's great. but answer my question. please. you could have provided by every single service to every single woman last year if you did not get a penny from the discretionary fund from the united states congress. >> i disagree and there's no way i could agree to that. these are services spread out all across the country and i can't president account for how

each dollar that i raise -- >> you still would have to -- >> it's committed to other services and expansion of services could replace federal dollars. >> not expansion of services. i'm talking about services you provided by. you would have had $67 million -- >> well we're expanding services beyond what we provide. >> got that. my question is if we had not funded you you would have been able to provide the services and i think the answer is unequivocally yes. you might not have been able to expand your services but every single woman that walked into every single clinic would have been served if you had not received that money. . thank you, mr. chairman. >> i disagree. >> we're just trying to figure out why you would disagree with that. revenues would still exceed expenses. even with $60 million less. >> are we now having a conversation? i'm sorry, i wasn't sure if we're finishing this. >> sure. >> i raise money every single day to expand services and education services to people in america, that's what we do at planned parenthood. and like any other nonprofit we

reserve money for all kinds of services that need to be expanded, assistance that needs to be provided by and that's what we do with our money. we're a nonprofit, we don't do anything else with our money other than put it back into the services, the education and sometimes the advocacy we provide. >> i'll now recognize the gentlewoman from new mexico for five minutes. >> thank you, mr. chairman. and thank you miss richards. and if this committee is going to undertake how medicaid money is used and not used by every health care provider in every state and every local government in the united states it might be a very interesting hearing about how we can asure the medicaid funds that are not reaching so many still even with the progress of the affordable care act, so many women and so many families, that would be a hearing that i think would be well worth having. i'm going to go back to the

funding aspect, the unintended consequences and i appreciate the comments of all of my colleagues but mr. welch and mr. boyle. i served as the new mexico secretary of health and one of my challenges was certainly to deal with teen pregnancy. but also make sure we had the right partnerships and viable access in the public health system where women and their families could get access to health care services of high quality and services they trust. i can tell you something you already know, that without planned parenthood we could not meet those access points and quite frankly even in the public health system. there are many women, particularly in rural air frontier areas of the state who, a, did not have access or would absolutely under no circumstances choose that access where i'd like to tell you that our record about prevention and preventing pregnancy was better in the public health system and that was in a world we didn't

have the 2008 budget issues where our state now is not putting money into public health or expanding public health or working on women's health care. and without the affordable care act our rural hospitals and community health centers would all but be closed and we now have the highest teen pregnancy rate in the country. with efforts at looking at what we can do for 15-year-olds to prevent the second and third pregnancy. women need and deserve unfettered high quality confidential access to comprehensive health services. and i'm hearing from hundreds of constituents -- and i also know that thousands of new mexico women and their families will not have that access to these services because it is all connected -- and even if it wasn't would still want them to have the choices that they make and that are right for them with all of the funding issues that we debate in this congress i

know unequivocally they don't have access in many of the places that they should and under the equal protection clause they certain ly ought to with medicaid funding. can you talk about states like new mexico with these high teen pregnancy rate, without those rural access points, where would those 21,000 women go? >> well i thank you for your service in the public health arena and for your question. i think it's incredibly important that we're constantly looking at new ways to help particularly young people access information and services and it guess back to the chairman's question earlier which is one of the things we do at planned parenthood in addition to providing medicaid family planning services is we now run education programs across the country and through the weapon that have an average of six million visitors every month, visited by young people and their families, english and

spanish because many people don't have access to adequate sex education in their communities. in addition, we are looking at more ways to provide birth control virtually so you can order it online and don't have to be in a clinic because for many rural americans it's difficult to access a family planning provider in your community. >> they're just not there. i have a pastor in my district who's let me know he refers women to planned parenthood because he know there is aren't the right community access points and i know it's been touched on in this committee but i have personal experience and no many of my constituents in their 20s and 30s and 40s who without the comprehensive health care services would have died from cervical cancer and i know exactly how important in a state that has higher per capita averages in many of these cancer areas for these populations and

particularly for moor know for populations that we want to do a much better job in investing in comprehensive health simply do not have it. and the notion we would continue to discriminate against those populations by not providing adequate federal funding access makes no sense if we're trying to maintain my choice about my high quality confidential provider. thank you for being here. i appreciate your testimony. >> thanks for letting me be here. >> we have two votes on the floor, there are approximately eight minutes left in this first previous question vote. it's the intention of the chair to recognize mr. heiss for his five minutes of questioning then we'll go to recess and come back. we thought we could get through it but we have a number of members who have questions so we'll rise mr. highs and have convene after the votes. >> thank you, mr. chairman. ms. richards, just a point of clirfication, it's already been established that planned

parenthood serves a lot of underprivileged people and i just want to be clear in your testimony you stated that it is significantly more difficult for individuals on medicaid to access a provider as opposed to someone with a private insurance because so many providers now are not accepting medicaid, is that correct? >> it varies across the country. but certainly there are some states where it's very difficult. >> and that's one reason you would say planned parenthood is needed because there's a gap there, is that correct? >> well, i think we're -- i think we have tried to demonstrate that we are important provider of medicaid services to a lot of folks in this country. >> but particularly the underprivileged. >> well, that's who -- i guess by definition, yes. that's who's on medicaid. >> you also said in your testimony that the government account ability office found two-thirds of the states are challenged recruiting ob-gyns

and that according to the cbo -- according to your testimony -- that by next year obamacare is expected to reduce the uninsured and nearly half of those will be on medicaid. from these testimonies from -- these statements in your testimony is medicaid in your opinion a substandard insurance? >> in my opinion, no? >> is it an inferior product? >> well, i'm not sure exact -- i'm not exactly sure how to answer. i think it's important that medicaid patients -- >> this is according to your testimony. >> no, no, i don't think i said that so i want to make sure i'm clear what you're asking. it's important medicaid patients be able to get the same kind of quality of care as other people. >> but you said they can't, they're not able to because so

many providers are not -- let's go on to other things. i'm just curious and those were questions i jotted down. it seems to me there's a question mark there, you praise it on one end, medicaid. >> it's very important. >> and then say it's a problem on the other. >> no, it's not -- i hope i didn't misstate that. i don't think medicaid is a problem. i think the challenge is because the reimbursement rates are very, very low there are not enough doctors and health care providers that will take new medicaid patients. that's something everyone struggles with. >> we've also established that there has been excess revenue as you describe it other than saying profit. excess revenue, nearly the three quarters of a billion in the last 10 years, $127 million last year. we can break that down in a number of different ways. yet at the same time dramatic reduction in prenatal care, preventative services, cancer screening and so far r forth and do you have any idea, by the

way, how many planned parenthood clinics have closed over the last ten years? >> i don't have those exact numbers and you're preferring to things i have to look at charts for i think we've addressed why some women's health care services aren't needed on an annual basis anymore. but many of the planned parenthood health centers have merged to be more efficient. we started 99 years ago and i will be candid there's not always total efficiencies in the system. >> let me go on. there's been over 100 that have closed. >> or merged? >> closed and merged. >> whatever. but the bottom line is you stated a few moments ago that this $127 million, three quarters of a billion over the last ten years that you're largely holding it and using it for investment purposes. why is it on the taxpayers' hook to provide for your investments in expansion when you were declining your services and

clinics are closing? >> i don't think the -- the federal government isn't investing in our expansion. >> the taxpayers are according to -- >> the federal government -- >> you have $127 billion over the last year that's excess. >> that was -- none of that is federal dollars. that's all raised by -- >> all right, we have $60 million that are federal that comes through the discretionary fund. why is the taxpayer providing $60 million when you have $127 million a year? i'm just going back to the question already asked. i'm trying to find why is the taxpayer responsible for your expansion. >> i'm not holding the taxpayers responsible for our expansion. that money paid for by the federal government through medicaid, title x, through cdc grants, through hiv/aids programs all pay for services directly provided by to patients and there's strict accountability and we are accountable by -- hhs looks at

medicaid payments. so we are grateful for the opportunity to serve patients who come into us. i think we provide high quality and that's why patients continue to come to us. i think patients regardless of whether they're on medicaid or not should have the option to go to the health care provider of their choice. >> the committee will stand in recess and reconvene no sooner than 2:00 p.m. but we'll be behold on the the conclusion of these votes. committee stands in recess.

we will resume our hearing regarding planned parenthood. we are now going to recognize that the gentlewoman would -- we need her to -- we'll now recognize the gentleman from missouri for five months. >> ms. richards, welcome. and thank you for your patience, for being here so long. let me start with the point that

a lot of republicans have relied on, these doctored videos. to accuse planned parenthood physicians of violating federal laws. just yesterday, the missouri attorney general just completed his investigation of planned parenthood and found no wrong doing. however, i want to walk through some of these accusations and ask you to give us the facts. just as a preliminary matter, does planned parenthood receive any federal funding for its tissue donation program? >> no, not that i'm aware of. >> okay, let me ask about the accusations that physicians are illegally altering abortion methods to harvest fetal tissue

in violation of federal law? what the law says, doctors must certify, and i quote, no alteration of the timing method or procedures used to terminate the pregnancy was made solely for the purposes of obtaining tissue. this provision applies to federally funded research involving the transplantation of human fetal tissue for the therapeutic purposes. this has been confirmed by the department of health and human services, which wrote that the department, and i quote, has not funded or conducted this specific type of research in recent years. so even though this law does not apply to planned parenthood affiliates. you have still issued guidance that is consistent with the law. is that right? >> that's correct. so just to be perfectly clear,

the federal lawyer citing doesn't apply to planned parenthood because as you said, it only applies to donations for related transplantation research funded by the nih. one other thing i would like to mention. that when all of this came up, i actually wrote to the nih and said if it's time to review the way fetal tissue research is done in this country, we welcome that. it's a very small part of what we do. only 1% of our health centers even allow for tissue donation. but it seems it would be inappropriate forum for biomedical emphasis and research and doctors to do that, and we welcome that if the nih chooses to do so. >> wonderful, wonderful. okay. let's turn to these accusations. the republicans accused planned parenthood physicians of changing the timing method and procedure of abortion slowly for the purpose of obtaining fetal

tissue. so let me ask you directly. do planned parenthood physicians alter the timing method or procedure of an abortion solely for the purpose of obtaining fetal tissue for research in violation of federal law? >> well, first, just to go back, we've established federal law doesn't apply. our own standards and guidelines go beyond what's required. i have spoken with our chief medical officer, and she assures me that she knows of no instance where the method or the procedure or the timing of an abortion was altered in any way in order to facilitate what is the patient's desire to donate fetal tissue for fetal tissue research. >> when the physicians do make clinical adjustments during the course of the procedure, why would today do that and how does that work? >> well, i'm not a doctor so i

can't speak to everything that doctors do, but i do know that our number one goal of planned parenthood is the health and safety of our patients, and so certainly our doctors, number one goal is to make sure if it is an abortion patient, that they have a successful procedure. and i know from talking to doctors all across the country, long before any of this happened, that doctors do all kinds of things, as do all surgeons, i assume, make decisions in the middle of procedures to ensure a good outcome. >> let's move to a different accusation, which is that women are not consenting to participate in these tissue donation programs. can you speak to that, that women may not be consenting to donating the fetal tissue? >> women are fully consenting, and they consent to planned parenthood certainly prior to an abortion. and one of the interesting

things that has happened and part is a result i think of all of the press is that there are more and more women asking if they could actually donate fetal tissue because they understand the importance of the research that's done. but again, we only have two affiliates now who are able to, you know, can help women who want to make a fetal tissue donation. >> the gentleman's time has expired. the chair now recognizes the gentleman from oklahoma, mr. russell. >> thank you, madam chairman. and thank you, ms. richards for being here today. how much total revenue collected or reimbursed for planned parenthood and its affiliates comes from abortion services? >> i believe we have provided all of our financial information. i don't have that number. >> do you have a ballpark? >> no, i don't. but again, we provided -- i know there was some back and forth

about this. and i just verified it on the break. we provided all of the 990s, not only for the national organization, but our 59 affiliates and i believe their audited financial statements. >> i guess if we were to extrapolate from the planned parenthood website the cost of an abortion, the average cost, or an abortion pill, it would be at $1,500 for the service of abortion, or $800 for the pill. if you multiply that times 327,000, that would come somewhere between 40% or 22% of a figure. regardless, it's $491 million down to $261 million just from the ballpark figures we see on planned parenthood's website. >> and i have to -- i'm sorry to interrupt. >> if you would very quickly. >> that's not accurate. >> would you be willing to provide us what the accurate figure is and when could you provide that to us? >> what was inaccurate is i think what you reported in terms of the cost of an abortion.

obviously it varies state to state. >> we would await the accurate figures. and when would you provide those to us? >> i've said to the chair, we have been abundantly cooperative to this committee. we've provided thousands and thousands of pages of documents. and i'm happy to work with the committee and the staff and with my team to provide other information that you need. >> and i appreciate that. we'll continue on. absent federal funding, what effects specifically would it have on the organization's ability to provide abortion services? >> i'm sorry, could you restate that question? >> absent federal funding, what specifically would it have on the organization's ability to provide abortion services? >> well, i hope i'm answering your question correctly. no money, no federal dollars go to planned parenthood or other

hospitals or other health care providers -- >> so it would have no impact, is that your answer? >> no impact on what? >> on abortion services. >> if we were not reimbursed for family planning, for preventative care -- >> no, i'm asking specifically, absent federal funding, what specific impact would have it on abortions? >> i can't think of a specific impact. i really am trying to be responsive to your question. >> and i can see that. thank you. can federal funds be used for abortion equipment? >> federal funds are only, in my understanding, and if there's something -- there may be something i'm aware of. but federal funds can only be used for abortion services in very specific instances, which we talked about earlier. if a woman has been raped. if she's a victim of incest. >> on the equipment, on the salaries, cleaning services, rent and maintenance, the

facilities. what about that? >> on the abortion services and on federal funding for abortion services, these are -- this is actually done through the state. that's what medicaid funds come through. i can get -- we could look at the specifics on that. >> okay. we would like that. it's the federal government, though, that is making those decisions. >> well, thank you. >> for the record, mr. chairman, we've heard testimony today that 2.7 million receive services and the last reported here. that number is actually over three million when you add the 327,000 aborted children to that figure. for the record, 2.7 million received services and 327,000 receive a legal termination with no right to choose life. three of my five children are adopted. it is my firm belief and the

financial evidence substantiates that planned parenthood clearly does not need taxpayer funding to survive. we can carve up a child and call it a choice. we can destroy human life and call it health care. we can make the killing of children legal and pretend it is beneficial. we can cover acts of bar barbar but we cannot escape our accountability before the creator of life. and with that, madam chairman, i yield back my time. >> the gentleman yields back. the chair now recognizes the gentleman from pennsylvania, mr. carver. >> thank you, madam chair. ms. richards, i want to thank you for being here today. i want to ask about planned parenthood's federal funding. since that's supposed to be the topic of today's hearing. what we're hearing is that planned parenthood receives about $500 million of federal funding every year.

and it's easy to see why you hear that figure a lot, because it's an awful lot of money. and it seems like -- the way you hear it, it sounds like planned parenthood receives a big check. a big cash payment every year. i want to break down the numbers. according to the data compiled by the gao, something like 80% of planned parenthood's government-related revenue in 2012, about $400 million, came from medicaid reimbursements. i think that's the point you've been trying to make today, is that it comes in the form of medicaid reimbursements through the states, for activities such as cancer screenings and wellness exams. ms. richards, first off, is that figure correct, around 80% to the best of your knowledge? >> to the best of my knowledge, it is correct. about 1.6 million of our patients in a year receive

our -- are covered by some kind of federal program, title 10 or their medicaid patients. where there's a few other programs that we work on hiv/aids programs and the like. >> and so is that figure fairly consistent with more recent years? >> yes. and also, one thing i just wanted to make sure is clear. it's not all federal funds. a lot of state funds are combined in that figure. i don't know the exact breakdown. >> fair enough. >> so it's just not all federal dollars is all i meant to say. >> what these numbers really mean is that planned parenthood affiliates provide a massive number of health care services to medicaid patients, and then they're reimbursed on a fee for service basis. >> that's correct. and i think we provide really, really good health care for medicaid patients and we're proud of that. >> okay. i come from a district that has a lot of rural territory in

northeastern, pennsylvania. we have an awful lot of medicaid eligible patients. so it's an issue of concern to me. medicaid patients are primarily people who are poor, elderly, or have disabilities. isn't that right? >> i don't know the breakdown of all medicaid patients. i certainly don't know for your area of pennsylvania. i do know how many patients we see in pennsylvania. >> just in general, medicaid patients -- stay with me here. >> okay. >> medicaid patients tend to be poor, elderly, or have disabilities, don't they, in general? >> again, i'm just speaking -- i only know the folks we serve. so i can't speak about medicaid patients more broadly. we don't serve many elderly medicaid patient. primarily, we serve women between the ages of 18 and 44. >> of course, that's true. many medicaid patients come from medically underserved communities, right? >> that's correct. >> and that's why the $500

million figure gets thrown around so much. that's why that's so misleading. it is reimbursements for fee for service treatment. and like other medical providers, planned parenthood is reimbursed for the health care it provides to these patients and that's generally the way health care insurance works anyway, right? >> that's exactly right. just a different insurance program. >> we rely on providers to take in these patients, especially since medicaid generally reimburses at a lower rate than private insurance. >> that's correct. and i think it's really important because in so many states, as we've talked about earlier, there are not that many health care providers that will take medicaid patients. >> in fact, i think dr. gosar made that point. medicaid reimburses rather poorly. >> it does, although we're really proud at -- just looking at the state of pennsylvania, we

see 108,000 patients in the state of pennsylvania. many of them are in rural communities. >> so when we hear talk about defunding planned parenthood, a big part of that is excludeing planned parenthood affiliates from medicaid. isn't that right? >> correct. essentially -- and that's what's important. i'm so glad you made this point, because we can't make it strongly enough. as you said, we don't get an appropriate amount of money. this would actually -- what congress is proposing doing would deny people on medicaid the ability to go to the provider of their choice and many of them do choose planned parenthood for a whole host of reasons. >> thank you for being here, ms. richards. i yield back. >> the gentleman from georgia. >> ms. richards, you were kind enough to provide this committee with a list of the salaries and compensation of the officers of planned parenthood. that is correct and up to date, is that right? >> i'm sure it is if we provided it. >> okay. well, thank you.

i'm looking at this and i'm seeing an employee of planned parenthood's affiliate in north dakota and south dakota was paid $549,827 in 2013, is that correct? >> i don't have the figures. i do happen to know that affiliate -- this is a woman who has been a health care professional for decades. >> $549,000. and it is correct that you were compensated $590,000 in 2013, is that correct? >> well, i tried to address this earlier. >> i understand. >> i'm sorry -- >> yes or no? >> $520,000 was my annual salary. there was a benefit that was accrued to me -- >> and $590,000 was your compensation in 2013? >> it's set by the board of directors, and it's important to me -- >> all i need to no is yes or no. >> no federal funds go to my salary.