[Congressional Record Volume 162, Number 30 (Thursday, February 25, 2016)]
[House]
[Pages H938-H941]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
{time} 1830
WOMEN'S RIGHTS ARE HUMAN RIGHTS
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under the Speaker's announced policy of
January 6, 2015, the gentlewoman from New Jersey (Mrs. Watson Coleman)
is recognized for 60 minutes as the designee of the minority leader.
General Leave
Mrs. WATSON COLEMAN. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all
Members have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and
to include extraneous material on the subject of my Special Order.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentlewoman from New Jersey?
There was no objection.
Mrs. WATSON COLEMAN. Mr. Speaker, next Tuesday the Supreme Court will
take up Whole Woman's Health v. Hellerstedt, which is a case that
challenges Texas' outright offensive effort to strip women of their
right to choose.
Last night the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals allowed a similar law
to move forward in Louisiana, all but guaranteeing the closure of three
of four abortion clinics in that State unless the Supreme Court
intervenes there as well.
The men who have passed these laws--to be very clear, the Texas State
Legislature is 80 percent male, and Louisiana has just made it up from
dead last this year at 85 percent--claimed that it would increase the
medical accountability and safety of facilities that provide abortion.
That is the new message, the new veil, that covers these laws with
the air of legitimacy: We want to make your abortion safer. So every
doctor needs to have admitting privileges at a local hospital and every
clinic needs to function like an emergency center.
It sounds logical until you hear what the folks behind these laws
have to say after the laws have passed.
In Texas, then-Governor Rick Perry said: ``The ideal world is one
without abortion. Until then, we will continue to pass laws to ensure
that they are as rare as possible.''
One of the authors of the bill said that she was especially proud
that ``Texas always takes the lead in trying to turn back what started
with Roe v. Wade.''
The first problem here is the same one we have dealt with over and
over and over and over again, because Roe v. Wade isn't something you
turn back. It wasn't an executive order. It wasn't even a law passed by
Congress.
It was a legal challenge 40 years ago that required the Supreme Court
to consider whether or not women had the right to make decisions about
their bodies. They decided and set a precedent that every woman in this
Nation had the constitutional right to an abortion.
What is more, the Court made it clear that States cannot use laws to
create an undue burden for women who are seeking to exercise that
right. The Court affirmed that decision once more in 1992.
Women in Texas now have firsthand experience of what happens when
States ignore the Supreme Court. From what I can see, there is no way
that the Texas law can be considered anything other than an undue
burden, which brings us to the second problem: There is absolutely no
logical, medical reason to suddenly require these clinics to meet the
standards of a hospital.
These laws are opposed by a host of leading medical groups, including
the American Medical Association and the American College of
Obstetricians and Gynecologists, professionals who know better than
anyone what kinds of skills and resources should be necessary for an
abortion, which is one of the safest medical procedures out there.
I find it incredibly hard to believe that whole organizations of
physicians would oppose any of these laws if they really did make
clinics safer, Mr. Speaker, but I digress.
In Texas, the full implementation of the bill that is being
challenged next week would force more than 75 percent of abortion
clinics in that State to close.
In fact, with the limited implementation they have had to date, the
number of clinics has been cut in half. If it is allowed to go into
effect, only 10 clinics will remain to serve the 5.4 million Texas
women of reproductive age.
What is even worse is that, while these laws are being masqueraded as
efforts to make abortions safer, they are forcing more women down the
dangerous path of attempting to end their pregnancies on their own.
A study by the Texas Policy Evaluation Project found that women who
report barriers to abortion are more likely to self-induce an abortion,
putting their lives at risk in the process. This sounds like 1955, not
2016.
Mr. Speaker, these laws are an absolute farce, and it is time to stop
the sham. Women deserve to make the choices that work for them. If that
means having an abortion, they should be able to do it safely, without
traveling hundreds of miles or without waiting weeks to be seen.
My colleagues and I are here on the floor tonight because we stand
with the women in Texas, with the women in Louisiana, and with the
women across this country, women who want to make their own decisions
about when, where, and how to make decisions that will change their
lives, women whose voices are seldom represented in the legislative
bodies, which are filled with men who are ready to take away their
rights.
It is now my pleasure to yield to the illustrious Member from the
State of Texas, someone who has been a constant fighter for everyone's
rights, including women's rights, Congresswoman Jackson Lee.
Ms. JACKSON LEE. I thank the distinguished gentlewoman from New
Jersey, and I thank her for her leadership. As well, I thank my
colleagues who are here on the floor of the House who have joined us.
Mr. Speaker, let me associate myself with the comments by the
gentlewoman from New Jersey as they relate to Louisiana.
Let me be clear. As I stand here as a constituent of the State of
Texas, as a Representative of the State of Texas, and as a woman who
lives in Texas, that Texas State Law HB2 has led to the closure of more
than 20 abortion facilities in the State, taking the total number of
providers down from 40 to 19, its true purpose being to take away
women's rights to make their own healthcare decisions.
It could not be more blatant, again, to take away every woman's right
to choose. No one stands on this floor tonight to promote and coddle
abortion, but we do stand on the floor to protect a woman's right to
choose her health and to protect her sacred right of making such
decisions with her God, her family, and her physician.
How do HB2 and other bills have the right to interfere with that?
Let me also cite for you that a U.N. working group concluded that
women in the United States inexplicably lag behind international human
rights.
Pointing to data and research on public and political representation,
economic and social rights, and health and safety protections, experts
in the U.N. working group boldly acknowledged that there is a myth that
women in the United States already enjoy all of the expected standards
of rights and protections afforded under America.
Isn't that shameful? Under America, we are still denied our rights.
The reality is women in the United States are experiencing continued
discrimination and daunting disparities that prevent the true ability
for them to fully participate as equal members of society.
We stand here this evening to acknowledge one striking issue that
will
[[Page H939]]
be argued at the Supreme Court next week, and that is this case--HB2--
that has shut down clinics and has denied to women that any other
access be open to them with this particular legislation. So we are
advocating, as it goes to the Supreme Court, that this is an issue of
human rights equals women's rights.
In America, we face a real problem of hypocrisy. Isn't it interesting
that we say that we believe in the rights of families and in the
sacredness of one's religion and in one's choice between one's family,
doctor, and God, yet, Danielle Deaver was denied an abortion even as
the uterus crushed the fetus.
This family wanted children. This family wanted to be able to have
this child. Unfortunately, due to medical reasons, this young lady
needed to have this baby taken. She was 22 weeks pregnant.
The real crime is that this was not allowed to take place in a legal
manner because just 1 month earlier Nebraska had enacted the Nation's
first fetal pain legislation that banned abortions after 20 weeks. It
is not one that she wanted. It is not one that she desired.
It was because of health care and need and the fact that a tragedy
had happened to her and her family; yet, she was denied. Women's rights
equal human rights.
With respect to the Texas case, the Supreme Court is scheduled next
Tuesday to hear the case of Whole Woman's Health v. Hellerstedt, which
will challenge the Texas law that has stripped thousands of women of
access to their constitutional right.
Whole Woman's Health is the most consequential reproductive case in
the last two decades that challenges the longstanding precedent of
upholding a woman's constitutional right to access to safe and legal
abortion services.
It is not a supporting of abortion, but a supporting of the right to
choose. It is protective of women's health, of the life of the mother,
and of the fact that you engage with your family, with your God, and
with your physician.
Ever since the landmark Roe v. Wade decision, which was affirmed
again in 1992 in Planned Parenthood v. Casey, the U.S. Supreme Court
has made clear that women have a constitutional right to safe, legal
abortion care and that States do not have a right to unduly interfere.
The Casey decision explained these matters involving the most
intimate and personal choices a person may make in a lifetime, choices
that are central to personal dignity and autonomy and that are central
to the liberty protected by the 14th Amendment.
The so-called experts who testified in favor of HB2 have been
discredited by multiple Federal courts and have been exposed for
submitting testimony written by an anti-abortion activist with no
medical training.
Texas' HB2 has led to the closure of more than 20 abortion facilities
in the State, taking the total number of providers down from 40 to 19.
Mr. Speaker, as I close, let me give an additional personal anecdote
that has taken place in the State of Texas. That is, of course, the
masquerading of going into the Planned Parenthood offices that have
provided these clinics and that have provided health care to college
students and to those in rural communities where there are no doctors,
OB/GYNs, or facilities to handle the medical needs of these women.
Remember what I said. Women's rights are human rights, and human
rights are women's rights, so said by then-First Lady Hillary Rodham
Clinton. It is true today.
As I have shown in documents, the United Nations working group has
challenged whether or not we are providing women the same rights in
America as men. That is a daunting question and an unfortunate answer
because the U.N. working group has said no.
In the backdrop of this great discussion and of the Texas HB2, we had
the circumstances of people falsifying who they were, stealing the ID
of this person's high school classmates and imitating that he was
looking for fetuses for research.
Interestingly enough, all of them were calling for the indictment of
the Planned Parenthood personnel. Yet, an unbiased grand jury in Texas
did not indict those innocent persons who were having a discussion
about what was legal, but they indicted those who falsified their
documents and tried to mislead people.
Again, this case will be argued in the backdrop of so many who are
trying to undermine women's rights. I will continue to work with my
colleagues to find ways to address the illogical, unfair, and unjust
disparity by reviewing and responding to unwarranted restrictions that
result in the disparate access to these constitutionally protected
rights.
One day I hope that we will learn and have as our constitutional
premise that the Constitution works and that women's rights are human
rights.
Mr. Speaker, I thank the Gentlelady for yielding, and I commend the
Progressive Caucus for standing firm in defense of our hard-fought
women's rights, which in truth, are constitutionally protected American
rights.
We face a real problem in America with hypocrisy.
As a country founded on principles of liberty, justice and equality,
and a global leader in formulating international human rights
standards, the United States fails to meet these basic standards for
women who are denied equal access to legal rights and protections.
The United Nations Working Group on Discrimination against Women in
Law and Practice (U.N. Working Group) recently issued a sobering
statement and assessment detailing a picture of women's missing rights
in America.
Upon visiting several states throughout the country, including my
home state of Texas, the U.N. Working Group concluded that women in the
United States inexplicably lag behind international human rights
standards.
Pointing to data and research on public and political representation,
economic and social rights, and health and safety protections, experts
in the U.N. Working Group boldly acknowledged that there is a myth that
women in the United States already enjoy all of the expected standards
of rights and protections afforded under America.
The reality is women in the United States are experiencing continued
discrimination and daunting disparities that prevent the true ability
for them to fully participate as equal members of society.
One of the most alarming deficiencies for women in America is the
inability to access basic health care and the imposition of devastating
barriers to reproductive health and rights.
Too many women are suffering dire and deadly consequences.
Between 1990 and 2013, the maternal mortality rate for women in the
U.S. has increased by 136%.
Black women are nearly 4 times more likely to die in childbirth, and
states with high poverty rates have a 77% higher maternal mortality
rate.
Our global experts and allies acknowledge that even though women's
reproductive rights in America are constitutionally protected, access
to reproductive health services are severely abridged by states
imposition of sweeping barriers and restrictions.
For instance, in many states, women must undergo unjustified and
invasive medical procedures; endure groundless waiting periods; be
subjected to harassment, violence or other threatening conditions that
remain constant throughout all reproductive health care clinics; and
forced to forgo treatment or engage in lengthy and costly travel due to
closure of clinics faced with burdensome licensing conditions.
These restrictions disproportionately discriminate against poor
women.
The United States can and should do better!
It is unacceptable that women in America are facing a health care
crisis so dire that the global community is denouncing it as a human
rights violation.
Sadly, the direction States are taking will only further dismantle
women's access to affordable and trustworthy reproductive healthcare.
While clinics are shutting down at drastic rates throughout the
country, devastating restrictions and barriers imposed throughout Texas
strike at the core of this abomination.
A Texas statute known as HB2 (House Bill 2), was enacted several
years ago under false claims to promote women's health, when in fact it
only set in motion dangerous restrictions on women's access to
reproductive health care.
In addition to constant attacks on funding for reproductive health
care clinics, abortion providers in Texas were forced to undergo
impossible million dollar renovations and upgrades.
Denying hundreds of thousands of women health care services in Texas,
nearly half of all reproductive health care clinics were forced to shut
down, and now only 10 remain in the second largest state in the
country.
Taking an important step toward restoring the constitutional rights
of millions of women, the Supreme Court recently granted certiorari of
Whole Woman's Health v. Cole to decide the fate of these remaining
clinics and the
[[Page H940]]
lives of women in Texas, and throughout the nation.
I am proud to say that I, and a number of my colleagues, signed on to
a number of amicus briefs submitted to the Supreme Court, detailing the
hardship and injustice Whole Woman's Health v. Cole presents.
While we await the decision of the Supreme Court, in Whole Woman's
Health v. Cole, we can only hope that the court will help turn the tide
of attacks and diminution on women's rights.
No woman in America should be denied the dignity of being ability to
make choices about her body and healthcare.
Access to safe, legal and unhindered healthcare must be realized by
all women.
These simple facts can no longer be denied, and hypocrisy can no
longer be tolerated.
A woman's right to choose to have an abortion is a constitutionally
protected fundamental right.
More than 40 years ago in the landmark decision in Roe v. Wade, 410
U.S. 113, (1973), the U.S. Supreme Court ruled 7-2 that the right to
privacy under the Due Process Clause of the 14th Amendment extends to a
woman's decision to have an abortion.
More recently, in Planned Parenthood v. Casey, 505 U.S. 833 (1992),
the Supreme Court upheld Roe v. Wade and further explained that states
could not enact medically unnecessary regulations meant to create
substantial obstacles for women seeking abortion services.
Yet, fairness and access to exercise constitutionally protected
fundamental rights is trampled on and denied to millions of women.
We cannot ignore the hypocrisy of imbalanced protection and access to
fundamentally protected rights for women in America when it is easier
to purchase and lawfully possess a firearm--even for a person on the
terrorist watch list--than it is for a woman to exercise her
constitutional right to terminate a pregnancy.
Mr. Speaker, this is neither fair nor right and it should not be
rewarded.
As our nation continues to push back against horrific acts of
violence at the hands of dangerous and irresponsible gun owners and gun
dealers, and our nation's number one provider of women's healthcare
continues to experience violent and devastating attacks on its services
and facilities, it is time we find common ground as we look to resolve
these polarizing issues that have all too often collided.
A woman's right to choose to have an abortion and an individual's
right to possess a firearm are both constitutionally protected
fundamental rights.
I will be working with my colleagues to find ways to address this
illogical, unfair and unjust disparity by reviewing and responding to
unwarranted restrictions that result in disparate access to these
constitutionally protected rights.
Namely, if a woman is required to wait several days, undergo a
physical examination, receive counseling and education about
alternative options before making the decision to terminate a
pregnancy, an individual purchasing a deadly weapon should be required
to jump through the same restrictive hoops and apparent safety
measures.
I hope one day we can come to an agreement in America that it should
not be harder for a woman to exercise her fundamental right to choose
than it is for a person on the terrorist watch list to lawfully
purchase and possess firearms.
At a minimum, I urge my colleagues to take a hard look at our
constitutional protections and founding principles to resolve the
growing crisis and unacceptable conditions of inferiority in America.
Mrs. WATSON COLEMAN. I thank the Congresswoman.
Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Quigley).
Mr. QUIGLEY. Mr. Speaker, let me thank Congresswoman Watson Coleman
and my pro-choice colleagues for inviting me to participate in this
very timely and important conversation.
As we await to hear the Supreme Court's oral arguments next week in
the case of Whole Woman's Health, we must reflect on not only the
serious implications of this particular case, but on the attacks on
choice that have happened across the country this past year.
The case against Whole Woman's Health threatens to take the number of
clinics in Texas down from 19 to just 10 for the 5.4 million women of
reproductive age in Texas.
It will also set a legal precedent for years to come--perhaps
decades--and it will shape the continued debate on a woman's right to
choose.
{time} 1845
Clearly, this unacceptable assault on women's health places an undue
burden on the women of Texas when accessing abortion and family
planning services.
I was proud to sign onto the Amicus brief with 162 congressional
colleagues in support of Whole Woman's Health. This case, in
particular, is a high profile and extreme example of the attacks that
are becoming all too common across the United States.
While abortion still remains legal in the years since Roe v. Wade,
opponents of choice have attempted with varying degrees of success to
chip away at a woman's right to choose, this despite the fact that
abortions are at their lowest rates since Roe.
Last year, we saw ideological attacks against Planned Parenthood from
anti-choice activists attempting to mire the organization in scandal
and force its closing. Those attacks stemmed from the illegally
obtained and questionably edited so-called sting videos filmed by these
same anti-choice activists.
Unsurprisingly, Planned Parenthood has been cleared of any wrongdoing
in every State that has conducted an investigation. And to top it off,
a grand jury in Missouri has indicted those responsible for filming the
videos. It goes to show this campaign against Planned Parenthood has
been nothing less than a fraud.
While I fundamentally support a woman's right to choose, it is
important to point out that the clinics forced to close in Texas and
across the U.S. serve women in ways far beyond providing safe
abortions. In many cases, especially for low income and minority
communities, these clinics serve as a primary healthcare provider. The
services they provide include birth control, STD testing, cervical
screenings, mammograms, counseling, and health education.
It is crucial that we understand reproductive rights and choice is
not a women's issue. It is a civil rights issue, and it is an American
issue.
In the City of Chicago, which I represent, women have widespread
access to reproductive health services. But women in neighboring States
like Indiana are often forced to cross State lines to find a clinic
where she can have a safe abortion. This reality is unacceptable. Civil
rights should not be dependent upon your ZIP Code.
The decision in Whole Woman's Health will ultimately hold national
implications. As a man, I am proud to stand up for choice. As a male
Member of Congress, I take my responsibility to protect choice for
women very seriously.
Statistics show women's economic output is dramatically impacted for
the better when they determine the timing and spacing of their
pregnancies. When she is able to plan pregnancy, a woman is more likely
to advance in education and the workforce. Conversely, unplanned
pregnancies too often force women to leave school and to delay or
abandon career ambitions outright in order to care for children before
they are ready and with limited support and resources.
In order for our society to ever truly be equal, women must have
control of their bodies and determine with their partner if and when
they want to have children. Here in Congress, most of us were afforded
the right to plan our families. Should we deny this right to the
constituents we serve?
The future of millions of young women depend on the decision to be
handed down in cases like Whole Woman's Health, and it is my sincere
hope that the Court remains consistent in recognizing a woman's right
to privacy and protects her right to make her own choices about her
health.
Mrs. WATSON COLEMAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentlewoman from
Washington (Ms. DelBene), who is a member of the select panel that will
undoubtedly be examining some of these issues.
Ms. DelBENE. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman from New Jersey for
yielding.
Mr. Speaker, 43 years ago, the Supreme Court ruled that women have a
constitutional right to decide whether and when to have a child.
Americans overwhelmingly think that was the right decision, and I
agree.
But according to Bloomberg, at no time since 1973 has a woman's
access to reproductive health care been more dependent on her income or
ZIP Code. Politicians across the country are passing dangerous laws to
block women from exercising their constitutionally protected right to
choose, and their efforts are working.
[[Page H941]]
That is why the case before the Supreme Court is so important. As the
Justices weigh the Whole Woman's Health case, I hope they recognize
that these shameful attacks undermine Roe v. Wade, put women's health
at risk, and must be struck down. A woman's right to make her own
healthcare decisions means nothing without the ability to exercise that
right.
If the Court upholds these harmful laws, it could pave the way for
similar restrictions at the Federal level, and Republicans are already
trying. We cannot let that happen.
Women deserve better. They deserve the freedom to make their own
healthcare choices.
Mrs. WATSON COLEMAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Rhode
Island (Mr. Cicilline).
Mr. CICILLINE. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman from New Jersey
for leading this Special Order hour on this very important issue.
As my colleagues have mentioned, the Supreme Court is scheduled to
hear Whole Woman's Health v. Hellerstedt next Tuesday, challenging HB2,
a Texas law that has already led to the closing of more than 20
abortion providers in the State.
Now, this is just the most recent example of the attack which is
underway all across this country on women's health, not just in the
State of Texas, but in many other places around our country. As was
just mentioned, politicians are passing laws and enacting regulations
to deny women full reproductive health care.
In fact, just last Sunday, Ohio Governor John Kasich signed a law
defunding Planned Parenthood. During his time in office, half of Ohio's
abortion clinics have closed.
One in three women will have to make a decision in their lifetime if
an abortion is the right decision for them. I am very proud to be a
member of the Pro-Choice Caucus in the Congress. I know this is an
extremely personal decision for women, a decision that should be made
between a woman and her physician, and a decision the government has no
right to intrude upon, a constitutionally protected right as
established in our law. It is absolutely critical that women in every
part of this country have access to full reproductive health care,
including safe abortion services.
If the Court upholds Whole Woman's Health v. Hellerstedt, there will
be only ten clinics available to the women in the State of Texas. Some
would have to travel 7\1/2\ hours roundtrip to get the health care that
they need.
This is settled law in our country. The Court addressed this issue in
Roe v. Wade and again in Planned Parenthood v. Casey. It reminds us of
the importance of the decision that our Supreme Court will make in
connection with this case that they will hear on Tuesday.
Doctors are being required, under Texas provisions, to affiliate with
nearby hospitals, and it also limits abortions to ambulatory surgical
centers. These measures are designed to reduce or even eliminate, in
some circumstances, access to abortion services. Although there are
arguments made that these are medically necessary or they are, in fact,
intended to improve women's health, Nancy Northup, who is the president
of the Center for Reproductive Rights, said it best when she said, the
``laws . . . pretend to be about women's health but actually are
designed to close clinics.'' And that is exactly what they intend to
do.
These regulations and requirements are very disputed medical value.
There are things like limits on nonsurgical drug-induced abortions,
mandated building standards for clinics, or 2- or 3-day waiting
periods. All of these things are intended to infringe upon a woman's
right to choose and to make it more difficult for women to access full
reproductive health care.
We all have responsibility in the Congress to stand up against this.
I am proud to join my colleagues tonight to say that we will continue
to fight to ensure that women have access to all of the reproductive
health care they need and that we will resist any effort to infringe
upon this important constitutional protection.
Mrs. WATSON COLEMAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentlewoman from
North Carolina (Ms. Adams).
Ms. ADAMS. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman from New Jersey for
her leadership.
It frightens me that in 2016, we are still fighting the same
politically motivated battles to roll back women's rights. It has been
43 years since the landmark Supreme Court decision in Roe v. Wade made
abortion a constitutional right.
Year after year, GOP lawmakers and anti-choice extremists have tried
to tear it down. States like Texas have passed egregious laws to
disenfranchise women and infringe on their ability to access safe and
legal abortions.
Their State law has cut the number of abortion providers in Texas in
half, increasing delays and severely limiting access and, frankly,
punishing women for exercising their civil liberties.
This obvious war on women has got to stop. No law should control a
woman's right to make decisions about her own body--no government, no
legislature, no Congress. A woman's personal decision should be between
her and her doctor and nobody else. Every woman deserves equal access
to all forms of safe and affordable reproductive health.
As the Supreme Court prepares to hear this case, I will continue to
stand with women in North Carolina and women across the country in the
fight to protect a woman's right to choose.
Mrs. WATSON COLEMAN. Mr. Speaker, we thank you for this opportunity
to raise what is a very important issue in 2016. Women are being
attacked on several fronts, whether it is on cases that are being
brought before courts or whether it is in this House. We have got to
recognize that this decision, the decision for a woman to make with
regard to her reproductive rights, have already been established. And
we as Congress and we as a society of lawmakers and policymakers need
to do all that we can to facilitate those rights to ensure that we do
not discriminate against people. To discriminate against women in this
regard is illegal, and it is unacceptable.
It is time for us to recognize our responsibility to be stewards of
the laws which have been put before us and to uphold the Constitution
that we have pledged to support and to uphold and to recognize that the
abridgement of a woman's right is the abridgement of a civil right, and
that is unacceptable.
Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
____________________