[Congressional Record Volume 161, Number 142 (Wednesday, September 30, 2015)]
[House]
[Pages H6738-H6742]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




DIRECTING THE CLERK OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TO MAKE CORRECTIONS 
                     IN THE ENROLLMENT OF H.R. 719

  Mrs. ROBY. Mr. Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 448, I call up 
the concurrent resolution (H. Con. Res. 79) directing the Clerk of the 
House of Representatives to make corrections in the enrollment of H.R. 
719, and ask for its immediate consideration in the House.
  The Clerk read the title of the concurrent resolution.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 448, the 
concurrent resolution is considered read.
  The text of the concurrent resolution is as follows:

                            H. Con. Res. 79

       Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate 
     concurring), That in the enrollment of the bill H.R. 719, the 
     Clerk of the House of Representatives shall make the 
     following corrections:
       (1) Insert after the enacting clause (before section 1) the 
     following:

  ``DIVISION A--TSA OFFICE OF INSPECTION ACCOUNTABILITY ACT OF 2015''.

       (2) Insert after section 8 (before the statement of 
     appropriations) the following:

      ``DIVISION B--CONTINUING APPROPRIATIONS RESOLUTION, 2015''.

       (3) Insert after section 150 (before the short title) the 
     following new section:
       ``Sec. 151.  Except as expressly provided otherwise, any 
     reference in this division to `this Act' shall be treated as 
     referring only to the provisions of this division.''.
       (4) Add at the end the following new division:

          ``DIVISION C--DEFUND PLANNED PARENTHOOD ACT OF 2015

     ``SEC. 1. SHORT TITLE.

       ``This division may be cited as the `Defund Planned 
     Parenthood Act of 2015'.

     ``SEC. 2. FINDINGS.

       ``Congress finds the following:
       ``(1) State and county health departments, community health 
     centers, hospitals, physicians offices, and other entities 
     currently provide, and will continue to provide, health 
     services to women. Such health services include relevant 
     diagnostic laboratory and radiology services, well-child 
     care, prenatal and postpartum care, immunization, family 
     planning services (including contraception), cervical and 
     breast cancer screenings and referrals, and sexually 
     transmitted disease testing.
       ``(2) Many such entities provide services to all persons, 
     regardless of the person's ability to pay, and provide 
     services in medically underserved areas and to medically 
     underserved populations.
       ``(3) All funds that are no longer available to Planned 
     Parenthood Federation of America, Inc., and its affiliates 
     and clinics pursuant to this division will continue to be 
     made available to other eligible entities to provide women's 
     health care services.
       ``(4) Funds authorized to be appropriated, and 
     appropriated, by section 4 are offset by the funding 
     limitation under section 3(a).

     ``SEC. 3. MORATORIUM ON FEDERAL FUNDING TO PLANNED PARENTHOOD 
                   FEDERATION OF AMERICA, INC.

       ``(a) In General.--For the one-year period beginning on the 
     date of the enactment of this division, subject to subsection 
     (b), no funds authorized or appropriated by Federal law may 
     be made available for any purpose to Planned Parenthood 
     Federation of America, Inc., or any affiliate or clinic of 
     Planned Parenthood Federation of America, Inc., unless such 
     entities certify that Planned Parenthood Federation of 
     America affiliates and clinics will not perform, and will not 
     provide any funds to any other entity that performs, an 
     abortion during such period.
       ``(b) Exception.--Subsection (a) shall not apply to an 
     abortion--
       ``(1) if the pregnancy is the result of an act of rape or 
     incest; or
       ``(2) in the case where a woman suffers from a physical 
     disorder, physical injury, or physical illness that would, as 
     certified by a physician, place the woman in danger of death 
     unless an abortion is performed, including a life-endangering 
     physical condition caused by or arising from the pregnancy 
     itself.
       ``(c) Repayment.--The Secretary of Health and Human 
     Services and the Secretary of Agriculture shall seek 
     repayment of any Federal assistance received by Planned 
     Parenthood Federation of America, Inc., or any affiliate or 
     clinic of Planned Parenthood Federation of America, Inc., if 
     it violates the terms of the certification required by 
     subsection (a) during the period specified in subsection (a).

     ``SEC. 4. FUNDING FOR COMMUNITY HEALTH CENTER PROGRAM.

       ``(a) In General.--There is authorized to be appropriated, 
     and appropriated, $235,000,000 for the community health 
     center program under section 330 of the Public Health Service 
     Act (42 U.S.C. 254b), in addition to any other funds made 
     available to such program, for the period for which the 
     funding limitation under section 3(a) applies.
       ``(b) Limitation.--None of the funds authorized or 
     appropriated pursuant to subsection (a) may be expended for 
     an abortion other than as described in section 3(b).

     ``SEC. 5. RULE OF CONSTRUCTION.

       ``Nothing in this division shall be construed to reduce 
     overall Federal funding available in support of women's 
     health.''.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The concurrent resolution shall be debatable 
for 20 minutes equally divided and controlled by the majority leader 
and minority leader or their designees.
  The gentlewoman from Alabama (Mrs. Roby) and the gentlewoman from 
Connecticut (Ms. DeLauro) each will control 10 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Alabama.


                             General Leave

  Mrs. ROBY. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may 
have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks, and to 
include extraneous material on H. Con. Res. 79.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentlewoman from Alabama?
  There was no objection.
  Mrs. ROBY. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  I rise today in strong support of H. Con. Res. 79, a concurrent 
resolution directing the Clerk of the House of Representatives to make 
corrections in the enrollment of H.R. 719. This resolution directs the 
Clerk of the House of Representatives to make several corrections in 
the enrollment of H.R. 719, the Continuing Appropriations Act 2016, 
including by adding at the end of the text of the House-passed version, 
H.R. 3134, the Defund Planned Parenthood Act of 2015.
  The House passed H.R. 3134 by a vote of 241-187 on September 18. The 
bill precludes any Federal funds from being authorized or appropriated 
for 1 year for any purpose to Planned Parenthood Federation of America 
or any affiliate or clinic of that organization unless entities certify 
that affiliates and clinics will not perform and will not provide any 
funds to any other entity that performs elective abortions during such 
period. The bill also redirected funding from Planned Parenthood 
facilities to federally qualified health centers to provide women's 
health services.
  This resolution and the related enrollment process sends a signal 
about

[[Page H6739]]

this House's commitment to bar funding for Planned Parenthood and gives 
the Senate the opportunity to limit funding in the continuing 
resolution.
  Mr. Speaker, this is actually the exact same language in the Defund 
Planned Parenthood Act sponsored by my friend, the gentlewoman from 
Tennessee (Mrs. Black), which the House passed earlier this month. Mrs. 
Black is a tireless defender of the unborn, and I have been privileged 
to work with her on several pro-life measures, including a very similar 
defund correction to the spending bill back in 2011.
  So why this correction? My colleagues might be wondering if I just 
saw what happened in the Senate. Why take up this bill when the votes 
just aren't there in the Senate? The answer is simple. Because I 
believe, as long as there is an opportunity before us to defund Planned 
Parenthood, we should take it because, when it comes to this fight, I 
want to leave it all on the field.
  I understand that, so far, we have lacked the votes in the Senate to 
include defund language in the continuing resolution, and I realize 
this is a last-ditch effort to do this and that the chances of this 
correction maneuver succeeding in the Senate are low. But I believe, 
Mr. Speaker, I believe that we have to fight until the very end.

                              {time}  1600

  I have always been up front with those I represent about the low 
likelihood of defunding Planned Parenthood, especially in a stopgap 
spending bill. Pro-life advocates in my State and around this country 
understand the math; and while they hope that Senate Democrats will 
change their hearts, they don't really expect them to. What they do 
expect is for us to try, to fight to the very end, and to exhaust every 
possible option in our effort to stop tax dollars from flowing to this 
organization.
  That is why, Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues in the House and in 
the Senate to support this defund correction and to join me to fight 
until the very end to defund Planned Parenthood.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 2 minutes.
  This ``enrollment correction'' is yet another procedural maneuver. It 
is designed to destroy health care for millions of American women. It 
is unacceptable, and we will not stand for it.
  The disgraceful rightwing assault on reproductive freedom has become 
an all-out war on the health and the well-being of millions of low-
income American women. Each year, Planned Parenthood provides 2.7 
million people, men and women, with lifesaving services.
  I would hope that my colleagues on the other side of the aisle would 
open their hearts--open their hearts--to healthcare services for women 
who don't have the wherewithal to go to the same kinds of private 
doctors that the men and women of the United States House of 
Representatives have the opportunity to do. Open your hearts, because 
for many, Planned Parenthood is their only way of receiving these 
healthcare services.
  The president of the American Congress of OB-GYNs has warned that, 
without Planned Parenthood, many patients will be left without a 
doctor; and that is what these attacks are designed to achieve. The 
rightwing does not want poor women to have health care, period. It is 
spiteful, it is cruel, and it is wrong.
  We know what happens when funding is taken away from Planned 
Parenthood. In Scott County, Indiana, a full-scale HIV epidemic was 
triggered that has been declared a public healthcare emergency. Do we 
want more people to die? Are we really prepared to see that picture 
repeated across the country?
  The American people have made it clear that they will not accept any 
bill that cuts funding for women's health care or compromises 
reproductive freedoms. Let us in this body respect and trust the 
healthcare decisions that women make.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Poe of Texas). The time of the 
gentlewoman has expired.
  Ms. DeLAURO. I yield myself an additional 10 seconds.
  Let's respect and trust the healthcare decisions that women make. We 
must respect their wishes. I urge my colleagues to vote against this 
disgraceful bill.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mrs. ROBY. I reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. DeLAURO. I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. 
Lowey), someone who has spent her entire career working at issues that 
help working families with their health care, and particularly women.
  Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Speaker, this resolution is more political theater: 
all sound and fury, signifying nothing and going nowhere. We are 
proceeding to debate this resolution even though there is no money--
zero money--in the CR for Planned Parenthood and even though we all 
understand that if the Senate also adopts this resolution, it will 
effectively shut down the government, slowing economic growth and job 
creation.
  Planned Parenthood provides essential preventive health services, 
including birth control, lifesaving cancer screenings, well-women 
exams, and advice on family planning to nearly 3 million women each 
year.
  Community health centers are not an alternative to Planned 
Parenthood. The California Primary Care Association noted: 
``Eliminating Planned Parenthood from our State's comprehensive network 
of care would put untenable stress on remaining providers. We do not 
have the capacity for such an increase in care.''
  I urge a ``no'' vote on the resolution.
  Mrs. ROBY. I reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from 
North Carolina (Ms. Adams)
  Ms. ADAMS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today as a woman who is angry. These 
attacks on Planned Parenthood aren't about some deceptive videos. It is 
about a woman's right to make decisions about her own body. Women's 
reproductive rights are decisions she should make. It should be between 
a woman, her doctor, and her family, not a male-dominated Congress.
  So let's be clear. Attacking Planned Parenthood is part of a ploy to 
roll back women's rights. What hypocrisy. I wish my colleagues on the 
other side of the aisle cared this much about the millions of women and 
children who go hungry every day or the educational inequities that 
exist in our most vulnerable communities.
  I stand with Planned Parenthood for the services they provide. Last 
year, they served more than 2.7 million across our Nation, and more 
than 31,000 in North Carolina just through nine centers. More than 
21,000 patients received safe contraception; more than 18,000 STI tests 
were conducted, and more than 3,500 Pap tests and more than 2,500 
breast exams. Real women getting real preventive care.
  I will continue to advocate for women's comprehensive health care and 
their right to control their own body. The war on women must stop.
  Ms. DeLAURO. I would inquire as to how much time is remaining.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentlewoman from Connecticut has 5 
minutes remaining.
  Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from 
California (Ms. Lee).
  Ms. LEE. First, I want to thank Congresswoman DeLauro for yielding 
and for her tremendous leadership on so many issues important to women 
and the entire country.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong opposition to H. Con. Res. 79, which 
once again attempts to defund Planned Parenthood for 1 year. This 
callous action would leave millions of women across the country without 
access to critical healthcare services. This shameful resolution is the 
15th anti women's health vote this year.
  We know that Planned Parenthood centers are essential to the health 
and well-being of women and their families. They serve as primary care 
facilities for women seeking birth control, comprehensive family 
planning services, and cancer and STI screenings.
  According to the Guttmacher Institute, in 21 percent of counties 
where Planned Parenthood operates health centers, it is the county's 
only family planning provider. Mr. Speaker, for these communities, 
there are no other options. Defunding Planned Parenthood would hurt the 
communities that need help the most: low-income women and women of 
color.
  Politicians have no business interfering with a woman's personal 
health

[[Page H6740]]

decisions that are best for her and her family, and she needs family 
planning centers to exercise all of her options as it relates to her 
health care.
  This resolution is deceitful and it is wrong. It is past time to end 
this war on women, and it is past time for Republicans to listen to the 
American people, develop a responsible budget, and stop their attacks 
on women's health.

  Vote ``no'' on this very backward, egregious resolution. It is going 
to harm women. It is going to hurt women. It does not protect the 
health and safety of women.
  Ms. DeLAURO. I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished gentlewoman from 
the District of Columbia (Ms. Norton).
  Ms. NORTON. I thank my good friend for her incredibly excellent work 
on this bill.
  A threat to shut down the government over funding Planned 
Parenthood's contraceptive and preventative care measures looms again 
in 3 months, although 73 percent of the public is against forcing a 
shutdown over Planned Parenthood.
  I am grateful for the high-quality coverage Planned Parenthood gives 
women's health across the board, including abortion services, not 
funded by the Federal Government. The District of Columbia is the only 
jurisdiction Congress denies the full reach of Roe v. Wade to low-
income women, by denying the local government the right to spend its 
own local funds on abortion services for poor women.
  For the Nation, to cut government funds for Medicaid, family 
planning, and preventative care would cut off our collective noses to 
spite our faces. Every public dollar spent on family planning services 
alone saves $7 in undesired births and other preventative care.
  For all the heat generated by Republicans, Planned Parenthood is 
regarded more favorably now than it was before the current fight began. 
The reason is, for nearly a century, Planned Parenthood's incredibly 
effective work for women's health has won it a strong following across 
our country from both parties.
  Ms. DeLAURO. I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. 
Jackson Lee).
  Ms. JACKSON LEE. Let me thank the gentlewoman from Connecticut for 
her kindness. As well, let me thank the chair and ranking member of the 
Appropriations Committee, because we know the work that they have done.
  Mr. Speaker, let me just simply say that I am very disappointed that 
we are now settling for a CR that continues to have a sequester that 
cuts across and denies Border Patrol agents, Customs and Border 
Protection, Secret Service, and leaves the American people vulnerable.
  So, the first order of business is that we are not doing what we are 
supposed to do in providing for the American people. Now we move to 
another unseemly legislative initiative that is attacking women's 
health. And what does that mean? We use it under the guise of Planned 
Parenthood.
  Planned Parenthood has any number of clinics in almost 50 States that 
deal with women's health, contraception, sexually transmitted disease; 
places where women who are impoverished can go when they cannot go 
anywhere else.
  In a hearing yesterday, someone was debating why they don't do 
mammograms. Women know that when we go to any doctor, the doctor refers 
mammograms.
  So this is a bad bill. It is against women's health. The sequester is 
bad. Vote down both bills.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong opposition to H. Con. Res. 79.
  We are here again wasting valuable time on measures we know are 
having no real chance of survival beyond these debates.
  I strongly oppose this continued effort to drag women's health issues 
and women's rights through this political circus.
  At what point will the Majority step back and get regal about 
substantive and genuine legislation.
  The amount of legislative time we have wasted on these offensive 
messaging bills is ridiculous and must end.
  Our constituents deserve better.
  Our legislative and public service roles demand more.
  And as we approach yet another deadline for piecemeal fiscal fixes, 
we should be focused on passing a comprehensive and cost-savings 
budget.
  Yet, we are here today debating another measure that threatens 
millions of Americans' access to preventative care and could end up 
costing taxpayers hundreds of millions of dollars.
  However, we know H. Con. Res. 79 is not a serious attempt at passing 
real legislation.
  As such, it is simply being offered here today as a shameless 
political decoy to attack the legal rights of women.
  Politicians are continuing to try to sneak around the Constitution 
and four decades of Supreme Court precedent with sham laws that do 
nothing to improve women's health care and only make it more difficult, 
if not impossible, to obtain safe and legal abortion.
   Restricting all access to reproductive and women's health services 
only exacerbates a woman's risk of an unintended pregnancy and fails to 
accomplish any meaningful overthrow of Roe v. Wade.
  In recent years, state policymakers have passed hundreds of 
restrictions on abortion care under the guise of protecting women's 
health and safety.
  Fights here in Congress have been no different.
  In my state of Texas a law that would have cut off access to 75 
percent of reproductive healthcare clinics in the state was challenged 
before the U.S. Supreme Court in 2014 and 2015.
  On October 2, 2014, the Supreme Court struck down as unconstitutional 
a Texas law that required that all reproductive healthcare clinics that 
provided the full range of services would be required to have a 
hospital-style surgery center building and staffing requirements.
  This requirement meant that only 7 clinics would be allowed to 
continue to provide a full spectrum of reproductive healthcare to 
women.
  Any woman facing an unintended pregnancy needs to be able to make her 
own decisions and weigh all her options--and these laws take those 
options away.
  Texas has 268,580 square miles only second in size to the state of 
Alaska.
  The impact of the law in implementation would have ended access to 
reproductive services for millions of women in my state.
  In 2015, the State of Texas once again threatened women's access to 
reproductive health care when it attempted to shutter all but 10 
healthcare providers in the state of Texas.
  The Supreme Court once again intervened on the behalf of Texas women 
to block the move to close clinics in my state.
  It seems every month we are faced with a new attack on women's access 
to reproductive health care, often couched in deceptive terms and 
concern for women's health and safety.
  And in fact we are here today supposedly to talk about the safety of 
women--but we know that's not really the case.
  If my colleagues were so concerned about women's health and safety, 
they would be promoting any one of the number of evidence-based 
proactive policies that improve women's health and well-being.
  Instead, they are proposing yet another attempt to ban abortion.
  That is their number one priority. This is certainly not about 
protecting women's health, it's about politics.
  We must separate the personal views of abortion from the legal issues 
and fundamental constitutional rights.
  Undisputable, every woman has the constitutional right to make 
personal health care decisions so basic that it must be equally 
protected for all.
  Restricting access to women's reproductive health care providers 
makes it increasingly difficult--and sometimes impossible--for women 
who have decided to end a pregnancy to get the safe, legal, high-
quality care they need.
  The result is not the elimination of abortions, but higher costs, 
longer delays, and extra steps for women seeking abortion care, and in 
the process punish women for their decision to exercise their 
constitutional right to end a pregnancy.
  History tells us that unsafe and late-term abortions did not cease to 
exist without adequate access to clinical service. Rather, the exact 
opposite--as we know limited and restricted access only leads to unsafe 
and dangerous practices.
  Today, countless women in states like Texas and Mississippi, 
Wisconsin, Alabama, Tennessee, and Louisiana--where state laws are 
already gravely impacting women's access to health care providers--
women are being forced to travel upwards of hundreds of miles or cross 
state lines to access their constitutional right to an abortion.
  These restrictions create sharp disparities in access to care that 
are troublingly reminiscent of the time before Roe v. Wade, when access 
depended on a woman's social status, where she lived or her ability to 
travel to another state.
  In an effort to undermine what they could not otherwise overturn, 
politicians are attempting to ``turn back the clock'' to the pre-Roe 
era

[[Page H6741]]

by shuttering reproductive health care clinics and cutting off women's 
access to safe and legal abortion care.
  Yet, far too many women who cannot afford to travel elsewhere will 
face an impossible choice between carrying an unintended pregnancy to 
term or seeking drastic options outside the law.
  A right that only exists on paper is no right at all.
  Simply, restricting a women's right and access to legal abortion 
services discriminately endangers the lives of women.
  Congress should be doing everything it can to ensure that women have 
access to preventive care, not eliminating it.
  This is a legislative assault on all progressive health care, 
service, and advocacy organizations who aim to provide vital care and 
services to women and men across this country.
  Hundreds of thousands have already spoken up, including leading 
groups and communities such as the growing voice of our millennial 
generation.
  For instance, the nearly 60,000 OB-GYN physicians and partners in 
women's health warn that this bill would scare providers away from 
providing comprehensive, compassionate care to women, in a time where 
America desperately needs more ob-gyns participating in Medicaid 
programs.
  Physicians and experts in the field have long argued that these 
damaging measures serve no medical purpose, interfere in the doctor/
patient relationship, and do nothing to promote women's health.
  My colleagues should not be closing the door to health care services.
  Rather, my colleagues should be doing more to connect our youth and 
women to services that help them reduce their risk of unintended 
pregnancies and STD's, and improve their overall health through 
preventative screenings, education and planning, and not restricting 
their access to lawfully entitled family planning and private health 
services.
  I urge all Members to vote against the continued attack on women's 
health and rights.
  Ms. DeLAURO. I yield to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Hastings) for 
the purpose of a unanimous consent request.
  (Mr. HASTINGS asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. HASTINGS. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong opposition to this 
measure.
  Mr. DeLAURO. May I inquire as to how much time is remaining.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentlewoman from Connecticut has 1\1/2\ 
minutes remaining.
  Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.
  What we are facing here today and what this is about, this so-called 
enrollment correction, is a procedural maneuver because the United 
States Senate sent over a continuing resolution that continues to fund 
Planned Parenthood. Because the majority is interested in defunding the 
opportunity for healthcare services for women, they have asked for this 
procedural maneuver to defund Planned Parenthood.
  It is simply about taking funds away from American women. Think about 
it. Think about shutting the government down because of women's health. 
The lack of care and concern, first and foremost, about the 2.7 million 
men and women that Planned Parenthood serves every year is a grave 
consequence. But in addition, shutting down the Federal Government the 
last time cost $24 billion to American taxpayers, held up disability 
checks for veterans, and, in fact, held back people's IRS rebates.
  Their preoccupation with denying women's health is cruel, it is 
spiteful, it is wrong, and it does great harm to this great Nation. 
Vote against this bad piece of legislation.
  I yield back the balance of my time.

                              {time}  1615

  Mrs. ROBY. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, not everyone, I recognize, in this country is pro-life, 
like I am. But those who are should not be forced to have their tax 
dollars fund an organization that aborts more than 350,000 unborn 
babies every year.
  Federal law has long prohibited public funds from being used to 
actually perform abortions. However, Planned Parenthood gets millions 
in grants and reimbursements for other services that they provide, like 
pregnancy tests, birth control, Pap smears, STD tests, and other 
various treatments.
  Of course, low-income women should have access to these critical 
services. But why is it necessary--why is it necessary--for those 
services to be funded at the Nation's largest abortion provider?
  It isn't actually, but the abortion industry and its supporters--it 
is what they want you to think it is. And they talk about women's 
health because they don't want to talk about abortion.
  They don't want to talk about how ugly it is and how painful it is 
not just to the mother having to make the decision, but to the unborn 
baby who doesn't have a voice, who doesn't have a say.
  When it comes to funding, they like to pretend, Mr. Speaker, that 
abortion doesn't exist and that Planned Parenthood is the only place 
where low-income women can get health care.
  Taking away Federal funding from Planned Parenthood means attacking 
women's health, they say. That is not true.
  The truth is that there are more than 13,000 federally qualified and 
rural health centers throughout this country that offer low-cost health 
care to women. In fact, these centers outnumber Planned Parenthood 
clinics 20-1.
  If those who defend Federal funding of Planned Parenthood truly just 
wanted to make sure that low-income women have access to health care 
and not abortion, then why not simply support these noncontroversial 
community health centers instead?
  If this argument is really about making sure women have access to 
health care, then we would all agree right here, right now, to support 
these community health centers.
  But you see, Mr. Speaker, that is not what this is about. You see, 
while federally qualified and rural health centers provide a wide range 
of medical services, they don't perform abortions. That is what they 
really want. They want to preserve the pipeline of funding to the 
Nation's largest abortion provider.
  This talk of women's health is nothing but a charade, a false 
pretense, that I believe more and more Americans are realizing is 
phony.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this concurrent 
resolution.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. All time for debate has expired.
  Pursuant to House Resolution 448, the previous question is ordered.
  The question is on the concurrent resolution.
  The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that 
the ayes appeared to have it.
  Mrs. ROBY. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
  The yeas and nays were ordered.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX and the 
order of the House of today, this 15-minute vote on adoption of the 
concurrent resolution will be followed by 5-minute votes on adoption of 
the motion to concur in the Senate amendment to the House amendment to 
the Senate amendment to H.R. 719, and agreeing to the Speaker's 
approval of the Journal, if ordered.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 241, 
nays 185, answered ``present'' 1, not voting 7, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 527]

                               YEAS--241

     Abraham
     Aderholt
     Allen
     Amash
     Amodei
     Babin
     Barletta
     Barr
     Barton
     Benishek
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (MI)
     Bishop (UT)
     Black
     Blackburn
     Blum
     Bost
     Boustany
     Brat
     Bridenstine
     Brooks (AL)
     Brooks (IN)
     Buchanan
     Buck
     Bucshon
     Burgess
     Byrne
     Calvert
     Carter (GA)
     Carter (TX)
     Chabot
     Chaffetz
     Clawson (FL)
     Coffman
     Cole
     Collins (GA)
     Collins (NY)
     Comstock
     Conaway
     Cook
     Costello (PA)
     Cramer
     Crawford
     Crenshaw
     Cuellar
     Curbelo (FL)
     Davis, Rodney
     Denham
     DeSantis
     DesJarlais
     Diaz-Balart
     Donovan
     Duffy
     Duncan (SC)
     Duncan (TN)
     Ellmers (NC)
     Emmer (MN)
     Farenthold
     Fincher
     Fitzpatrick
     Fleischmann
     Fleming
     Flores
     Forbes
     Fortenberry
     Foxx
     Franks (AZ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Garrett
     Gibbs
     Gibson
     Gohmert
     Goodlatte
     Gosar
     Gowdy
     Granger
     Graves (GA)
     Graves (LA)
     Graves (MO)
     Griffith
     Grothman
     Guinta
     Guthrie
     Hardy
     Harper
     Harris
     Hartzler
     Heck (NV)
     Hensarling
     Herrera Beutler
     Hice, Jody B.
     Hill
     Holding
     Huelskamp
     Huizenga (MI)
     Hultgren
     Hunter
     Hurd (TX)
     Hurt (VA)
     Issa
     Jenkins (KS)
     Jenkins (WV)
     Johnson (OH)
     Johnson, Sam
     Jolly
     Jones
     Jordan
     Joyce
     Katko
     Kelly (MS)
     Kelly (PA)
     King (NY)
     Kinzinger (IL)
     Kline

[[Page H6742]]


     Knight
     Labrador
     LaHood
     LaMalfa
     Lamborn
     Lance
     Latta
     Lipinski
     LoBiondo
     Long
     Loudermilk
     Love
     Lucas
     Luetkemeyer
     Lummis
     MacArthur
     Marchant
     Marino
     Massie
     McCarthy
     McCaul
     McClintock
     McHenry
     McKinley
     McMorris Rodgers
     McSally
     Meadows
     Meehan
     Messer
     Mica
     Miller (FL)
     Miller (MI)
     Moolenaar
     Mooney (WV)
     Mullin
     Mulvaney
     Murphy (PA)
     Neugebauer
     Newhouse
     Noem
     Nugent
     Nunes
     Olson
     Palazzo
     Palmer
     Paulsen
     Pearce
     Perry
     Peterson
     Pittenger
     Pitts
     Poe (TX)
     Poliquin
     Pompeo
     Posey
     Price, Tom
     Ratcliffe
     Reed
     Renacci
     Ribble
     Rice (SC)
     Rigell
     Roby
     Roe (TN)
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Rohrabacher
     Rokita
     Rooney (FL)
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Roskam
     Ross
     Rothfus
     Rouzer
     Royce
     Russell
     Ryan (WI)
     Salmon
     Sanford
     Scalise
     Schweikert
     Scott, Austin
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Shimkus
     Shuster
     Simpson
     Smith (MO)
     Smith (NE)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (TX)
     Stefanik
     Stewart
     Stivers
     Stutzman
     Thompson (PA)
     Thornberry
     Tiberi
     Tipton
     Trott
     Turner
     Upton
     Valadao
     Wagner
     Walberg
     Walden
     Walker
     Walorski
     Walters, Mimi
     Weber (TX)
     Webster (FL)
     Wenstrup
     Westerman
     Westmoreland
     Whitfield
     Williams
     Wilson (SC)
     Wittman
     Womack
     Woodall
     Yoder
     Yoho
     Young (AK)
     Young (IA)
     Young (IN)
     Zeldin
     Zinke

                               NAYS--185

     Adams
     Aguilar
     Ashford
     Bass
     Beatty
     Becerra
     Bera
     Beyer
     Bishop (GA)
     Blumenauer
     Bonamici
     Boyle, Brendan F.
     Brady (PA)
     Brown (FL)
     Brownley (CA)
     Bustos
     Butterfield
     Capps
     Capuano
     Cardenas
     Carney
     Carson (IN)
     Cartwright
     Castor (FL)
     Castro (TX)
     Chu, Judy
     Cicilline
     Clark (MA)
     Clarke (NY)
     Clay
     Cleaver
     Clyburn
     Cohen
     Connolly
     Conyers
     Cooper
     Costa
     Courtney
     Crowley
     Cummings
     Davis (CA)
     Davis, Danny
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     Delaney
     DeLauro
     DelBene
     Dent
     DeSaulnier
     Deutch
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Dold
     Doyle, Michael F.
     Duckworth
     Edwards
     Ellison
     Engel
     Eshoo
     Esty
     Farr
     Fattah
     Foster
     Frankel (FL)
     Fudge
     Gabbard
     Gallego
     Garamendi
     Graham
     Grayson
     Green, Al
     Green, Gene
     Grijalva
     Gutierrez
     Hahn
     Hanna
     Hastings
     Heck (WA)
     Higgins
     Himes
     Hinojosa
     Honda
     Hoyer
     Huffman
     Israel
     Jackson Lee
     Jeffries
     Johnson (GA)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Kaptur
     Keating
     Kennedy
     Kildee
     Kilmer
     Kind
     Kirkpatrick
     Kuster
     Langevin
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     Lawrence
     Lee
     Levin
     Lewis
     Lieu, Ted
     Loebsack
     Lofgren
     Lowenthal
     Lowey
     Lujan Grisham (NM)
     Lujan, Ben Ray (NM)
     Lynch
     Maloney, Carolyn
     Maloney, Sean
     Matsui
     McCollum
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McNerney
     Meng
     Moore
     Moulton
     Murphy (FL)
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal
     Nolan
     Norcross
     O'Rourke
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Payne
     Pelosi
     Perlmutter
     Peters
     Pocan
     Polis
     Price (NC)
     Quigley
     Rangel
     Rice (NY)
     Richmond
     Roybal-Allard
     Ruiz
     Ruppersberger
     Rush
     Ryan (OH)
     Sanchez, Linda T.
     Sanchez, Loretta
     Sarbanes
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Schrader
     Scott (VA)
     Scott, David
     Serrano
     Sewell (AL)
     Sherman
     Sinema
     Sires
     Slaughter
     Smith (WA)
     Speier
     Swalwell (CA)
     Takai
     Takano
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Titus
     Tonko
     Torres
     Tsongas
     Van Hollen
     Vargas
     Veasey
     Vela
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Walz
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters, Maxine
     Watson Coleman
     Welch
     Wilson (FL)
     Yarmuth

                        ANSWERED ``PRESENT''--1

       
     King (IA)
       

                             NOT VOTING--7

     Brady (TX)
     Culberson
     Hudson
     Kelly (IL)
     Meeks
     Pingree
     Reichert

                              {time}  1647

  Mr. LOEBSACK changed his vote from ``yea'' to ``nay.''
  Messrs. DUNCAN of South Carolina and PERRY changed their vote from 
``nay'' to ``yea.''
  So the concurrent resolution was agreed to.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
  A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

                          ____________________