Congressional Record, Volume 164 Issue 45 (Wednesday, March 14, 2018)

[Congressional Record Volume 164, Number 45 (Wednesday, March 14, 2018)]
[House]
[Pages H1588-H1595]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

NIFLA V. BECERRA

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under the Speaker's announced policy of
January 3, 2017, the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Harris) is recognized
for 60 minutes as the designee of the majority leader.

General Leave

Mr. HARRIS. Mr. Speaker, before I begin, I ask unanimous consent that
all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend
their remarks and include extraneous material on the topic of my
Special Order.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from Maryland?
There was no objection.
Mr. HARRIS. Mr. Speaker, next Tuesday, March 20, the Supreme Court
will hear oral arguments for the case NIFLA v. Becerra. At issue is a
California law that requires medically licensed pro-life pregnancy
centers to advertise for and to promote the abortion industry by
posting notices alerting clients that the State of California provides
free or low-cost abortions.

[[Page H1589]]

This law blatantly violates the Free Speech Clause of the First
Amendment. The government may never compel anyone, including pregnancy
centers, to make statements with which they disagree. This is clearly
and blatantly unconstitutional, and courts across the Nation agree.
When abortionists sought to compel the speech of pregnancy centers in
other jurisdictions, their laws were not allowed to stand. In fact, in
2009, in my home State of Maryland, a Baltimore city ordinance required
pregnancy centers to post signs in their waiting rooms stating that
they do not refer for abortions. This January, the Fourth Circuit Court
of Appeals ruled unanimously that this law is unconstitutional. Judge
Wilkinson said that the ordinance compels ``a politically and
religiously motivated group to convey a message fundamentally at odds
with its core belief and its mission.''
Similar laws have been tried in Austin, Texas; Montgomery County,
Maryland; and New York City. These laws, too, have been partially or
fully invalidated. Even the California law in question has already been
found to violate freedom of speech.
While the Federal case was advancing to the Supreme Court, a parallel
track was being pursued at the State level. In October of last year,
Judge Gloria Trask found that the law violated article I, section 2 of
the California Constitution. In fact, she granted an injunction that
prevents California from enforcing the law. She said the ``speech
required by the FACT Act is unquestionably compelled and content
based.'' It forces the clinic to point the way to the abortion clinic
and can leave patients with the belief that they were referred to an
abortion clinic provider by that pro-life pregnancy center.

{time} 1815

Now, instead of seeking to silence pro-life pregnancy centers, people
in every community should celebrate and support their work. They
provide vital free or low-cost care to vulnerable women and children.
So today we are here to talk about how pro-life pregnancy centers help
mothers in our communities, giving them real choice.
Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from California (Mr. LaMalfa),
who organized this Special Order with me, for comments he might make.
Mr. LaMALFA. Mr. Speaker, I am proud and pleased to join with Dr.
Harris in this effort. Now, at this point, 130 of our colleagues have
signed on to the petition to the Supreme Court to let them know that we
believe this is morally wrong.
What we have: Again, as a California legislator, I have experience
with the efforts our State legislators have done in the past and
currently with Assembly Bill 775, which is known as the Reproductive
FACT Act--fact, indeed--as Dr. Harris mentioned, requiring licensed
medical centers that offer free pro-life help to pregnant women to then
have to post written advertisements promoting the availability of free
or low-cost abortions subsidized by the State of California.
It also requires nonmedically licensed centers to note, in multiple
languages, that they do not have a medical provider on staff, which is
kind of interesting due to the places that provide abortions having
lower standards for medical care and standards for the doctors on staff
to have to be overseen. It is very interesting, the double standard for
that type of healthcare, as you would call it, versus other healthcare
centers at abortion clinics. Yet they want to point out that there
wouldn't be a medical provider on staff at these pro-life places, which
aren't required to have them anyhow.
So the court will consider whether these disclosures required by the
Reproductive FACT Act, by the California Legislature, violate the free
speech clause of the First Amendment. Indeed, it is a blatant
violation. The government has no business forcing private citizens or
anyone else to promote an ideology that violates their beliefs.
The whole purpose of these pregnancy centers is to provide free pro-
life help to prospective mothers, not to serve as a billboard for
abortions. If anyone needed further proof of the moral degradation in
California's State government, this is exhibit A.
The Supreme Court must set a precedent, as lower courts have already
done, as Dr. Harris mentioned. They must set a precedent that we will
not watch, we will not stand by and watch as California's liberal
elites bully anyone into giving up their constitutionally protected
freedoms under the First Amendment.
Indeed, I want to thank Dr. Harris and all of the rest of my
colleagues you will hear from here tonight for standing up on this
issue, helping to not only bail out California's irresponsibility, but,
more importantly, to stand up for the rights of people who are trying
to save lives and provide positive counseling to those who find
themselves in crisis.
Mr. Speaker, I thank Dr. Harris for this Special Order.
Mr. HARRIS. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from California for
his comments.
Mr. Speaker, we need to remind people that these pro-life pregnancy
centers are private entities. They run on private donations. They
provide services at no charge to these mothers. In some pregnancy
centers--a lot of them, for instance--they will have a room that is
just full of supplies, supplies to help a mother, to help a mother in a
crisis pregnancy get through the pregnancy, take care of that child,
and to give that child the very precious gift of life.
Mr. Speaker, I would next yield to the gentleman from Michigan for
comments he might make on the importance of pregnancy centers. While he
is getting to the microphone, let me just tell you a story that one of
the pregnancy crisis centers told me. Again, these are centers that
frequently now provide ultrasound exams.
And they tell me the story of a woman who called the helpline seeking
an abortion, actually. She called the pregnancy center helpline. She
knew very little about the emotional, physical, or spiritual
repercussions of the choice she was considering. She felt alone, told
by her boyfriend to ``get rid of it'' or he was gone.
But the pregnancy center gave her a choice. They scheduled an
appointment. She came for the appointment. And after seeing her 9-week-
old baby's heartbeat and it move about playfully in her womb, she
decided to give this child the gift of life.
Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Huizenga).
Mr. HUIZENGA. Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend from Maryland for his
leadership and my friend from California on this.
Mr. Speaker, I can't think of anything that is more important than
what we are talking about here in Washington. There are three critical
foundations which our Nation was built upon: the freedom of speech, the
freedom of conscience, and the right to life.
Thomas Jefferson, the author of the Declaration of Independence and
our third President, said: ``No provision in our Constitution ought to
be dearer to man than that which protects the rights of conscience
against the enterprises of the civil authority.''
What he means by civil authority is government.
Mr. Speaker, as I stand here today in the well of the House Chamber,
Americans' freedom of conscience and our right to life is, once again,
under attack, and this time in California. This law at issue in
California is a classic example of government using its power to force
citizens to promote messages that conflict with their personal beliefs.
Pro-life pregnancy centers are a valuable asset to women, to men, to
the families, and certainly to those babies. Not only around the
country but certainly in Michigan, these centers provide, at no charge,
practical advice and resources, information, emotional support for
expecting mothers and those fathers and families in need. As leaders of
this Nation, we should be offering support, resources, and praises for
their efforts, not forcibly targeting these PRCs with unconstitutional
government mandates.

Through the work of my wife, Natalie, who served for a number of
years on the board of a local pregnancy resource center in west
Michigan, I have seen firsthand the overwhelming positive impact that
they have on the community. My sister-in-law still serves on that
board. This is real impact in real lives, to women and certainly to
their babies.

[[Page H1590]]

Now, maybe even more importantly, even after that baby is born, these
resource centers will oftentimes provide care and clothing and
education and emotional support. I know in my own church in west
Michigan we regularly have those dresser drives where we fill a dresser
for that pregnancy center, and we are providing those diapers and
providing that formula. We are there to help those mothers make it
through.
Well, the Federal Government should never force or attempt to coerce
medical professionals, employers, or resource centers to perform or
promote abortions against their beliefs. Our basic freedoms and
founding principles were established to protect us from that exact sort
of intimidation.
Mr. Speaker, I want to again thank my friends for leading this
effort, but these pregnancy resource centers work. We know that. They
offer compassionate care to those who need it the most and should be
treasured by the government and not targeted by them.
Mr. HARRIS. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Michigan for his
comments. He brings up a good point. These pregnancy centers don't only
help mothers and give them choices; they actually help the fathers as
well. A lot of times these fathers just don't know what fatherhood will
be like, and they mentor these fathers and, again, begin to give that
couple the ability to create a loving household for that child.
Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Arkansas (Mr. Westerman)
to also speak on this topic.
Mr. WESTERMAN. Mr. Speaker, I, too, rise in support of pro-life
pregnancy centers, not only in the Fourth District of Arkansas but all
across our country.
Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Maryland, Dr. Harris, and my
colleague Mr. LaMalfa from California for hosting this important time
so that we can come together and talk about the great work that these
crisis pregnancy centers do.
In my hometown of Hot Springs, Arkansas, in 1988, a crisis pregnancy
center was formed to assist young parents and to protect innocent
lives. In the last 30 years, Change Point Pregnancy Center has saved
the lives of 2,821 babies by offering and advocating for alternatives
to abortion. This center is comprised of compassionate volunteers and
staff who invest significant time and energy in our posterity, making a
positive difference for our future.
Mr. Speaker, I know firsthand the quality of these volunteers because
my own mother was one of them in the early years of the crisis
pregnancy center, when it was just getting off the ground.
In addition to free pregnancy testing and ultrasounds, Change Point
offers diapers, wipes, and formula through their Earn While You Learn
program, which offers supplies to families who attend parenting classes
at the center. Families and churches like mine have been vital in
supporting Change Point Pregnancy Center, not only by volunteering but
also by donating supplies and baby bottles full of change to help fund
the center.
Change Point has taught more than 10,000 classes for both mothers and
fathers. As Mr. Harris mentioned, these centers are not only for
mothers, but they also help fathers and they help parents and families.
They give families the tools to succeed rather than the stigma that
burdens them.
Mr. Speaker, I am proud to support Change Point in their continued
mission to provide care and support to families in the Fourth District
of Arkansas, and I applaud these centers not only from my home State
but all across the country for the great work that they are doing.
Mr. HARRIS. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Arkansas for
those words in support of these pro-life pregnancy centers. Tonight we
are going to hear, during this hour, from some of the real leaders of
the pro-life movement; but, in this case, we should really call this
the pro-choice movement because that is what these pregnancy centers
actually do: they give women a real choice.
A lot of women who come to these pregnancy centers, of course, are
pressured or expect that they can't bring these pregnancies to
fulfillment, to the birth of a new life. And these pregnancy centers
give them the choice to do that. They provide the resources, the
support, the mentoring, the prayers that these difficult pregnancies
need.
Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Iowa (Mr. King), a pro-
life leader, to speak about these crisis pregnancy centers.
Mr. KING of Iowa. Mr. Speaker, I thank Dr. Harris for leading on this
Special Order here this evening and appreciate the opportunity to be
recognized.
There are a number of things that I would point out. For starters, I
chair the Constitution Committee for a reason, and the delivery by Mr.
LaMalfa on California's horrible Reproductive FACT Act law--it is not
facts, by the way, but it forces pro-life pregnancy centers to provide
free advertising for the abortion industry.
I don't think there is any question, if you coerce people to
advertise for something that, in the first place, is immoral and
directly runs against the convictions of the people who are
volunteering their time and those who are contributing their resources
to bring about a crisis pregnancy center, which is driven by the hearts
of the pro-life community in America--I can hardly think of anything
more important than having that happen.
Now, freedom of speech is one thing. You can't limit speech. But for
a State to impose speech, that is another level. That goes beyond. That
is beyond the pale of the constitutional First Amendment rights.

So as I think about crisis pregnancy centers and what it matters and
how it matters to me and the district that I represent: Not long after
I was elected to Congress, I went to Gabriel's Corner in Council
Bluffs, Iowa. I walked in there, a crisis pregnancy center, a building
that was built in what was an empty lot across the street from Planned
Parenthood's abortion center. As I walked in there, they had a big
picture window they had set up and a kneeler there so that you could be
there to look out through that window and pray for those mothers who
were going into the Planned Parenthood.
And they said to me in that briefing that if a mother was able to
have a 4D ultrasound then--this would be about, say, 13, 14 years ago--
that 70 percent of the mothers would decide, once they had seen the
ultrasound, to keep the baby.
As we walked through there, we finished the tour, and I said: Where
is your ultrasound?
They said: Well, we don't have one.
I said: Why not?
They said: We can't afford it.
They told me the price on it then was $100,000 for a refurbished
ultrasound. I said: Let's raise the money for the ultrasound so that
you can save 70 percent of the lives of the babies who come in here
because of their mother.
So we set about the fundraising effort. I hardly got started and an
anonymous benefactor showed up and said: Why are you waiting? Why don't
you have the ultrasound?

{time} 1830

I answered: We're raising the money.
He said: Well, go buy the ultrasound, but don't tell anybody who I
am.
So he wanted to be an anonymous benefactor. We did that; set up the
ultrasound. The annual dinner for Gabriel's Corner, the first little
baby that was saved by Gabriel's Corner that we knew was brought along
to that dinner. And I looked back in that dinner and there was that man
sitting in the table clear back at the end, not talking to anybody, but
watching. Wow. I have never forgotten what that meant.
Another occasion, an individual came to me and he said: I'm in
between careers. I need something to do.
As we discussed this, it came to the foundational idea to establish
Mary's Choice in Sioux City, Iowa. They went ahead with that, a
Catholic pregnancy center, a crisis pregnancy center. As they followed
through, they built that next to--or they developed it next to Planned
Parenthood's abortion clinic.
Planned Parenthood couldn't stand the guilt of people praying for
them, so they built a big fence, thinking that was going to block the
prayers. Well, I think it attracted them instead. The last time I was
there, I had my picture taken in front of the Planned Parenthood center
in Sioux City. There is a Century 21 real estate sign in front of
there, and you can't read ``Planned Parenthood of the Heartland'' any

[[Page H1591]]

longer on there except in the glue, where they pulled the sign off. It
is for sale, or may be sold by now.
Progress has been made, lives have been saved. The respect for
innocent, unborn human life has grown. And to muzzle them, or force a
speech, not just limiting their freedom of speech, but forcing speech--
so I just looked at my iPhone here, and there are a number of
ultrasounds that have been texted to me. I am kind of like, I guess I
would say, the number one proponent of procreation in Congress, as far
as I know.
Here is one. It says: ``Baby looked good yesterday. Moving like crazy
on the ultrasound.''
I answer: ``This is so beautiful. I'll keep my prayers going. This
ultrasound is an answer to them. God's blessings.''
Next ultrasound comes along. This is dated just last Friday. I sent
back: ``What is the heartbeat rate for this perfect little miracle?''
She answers: ``161 beats per minute.''
And then I say: ``Purring along like a finely-tuned racing motor,
that little miracle.''
``Yes, and she's moving all around'' is the answer.
And here is the conclusion of this. I just think this is so important
to implant this in our memory.
She answered this way, this mother: ``These ultrasounds are amazing.
Watching her stretch and cross her legs, curl up her hand, suck her
thumb. At 19 weeks, I can't imagine anyone contemplating abortion would
proceed with it after seeing that in their own little baby.''
That little baby is my little granddaughter, and I am going to stand
up for life so long as I live.
Mr. HARRIS. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Iowa for those
touching comments. Again, this is about giving mothers choices.
You know, one has to ask the question: Why in the world don't
abortion clinics show ultrasounds? What are they afraid of? Are they
afraid of giving a woman a real choice, of actually seeing that baby,
of denying the fact that it is not a blob of tissue, it is actually a
baby with a heartbeat?
It is a baby that moves. It is your child. But they don't get that
choice in an abortion clinic. They get it at a crisis pregnancy center.
Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Arrington) for
his remarks.
Mr. ARRINGTON. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Maryland, Dr.
Harris, for his leadership on the most sacred of issues.
Mr. Speaker, in the shadow of over 60 million precious American lives
aborted in the United States, there is light. This light shines through
the roughly 2,000 pro-life pregnancy centers in communities across our
Nation, including mine in west Texas. These pregnancy centers are
dedicated to serving 2.3 million women a year. That is 6,500 a day.
Because of their good work, providing ultrasounds, medical services,
and parenting classes, and even ministering to their deeper emotional
and spiritual needs, these pregnancy centers save lives, hundreds of
thousands of lives.
You see, Mr. Speaker, they believe, like a lot of us do, that all
life is a gift from God and deserves their constitutional right to
life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. But now these pro-life
pregnancy centers in California are being forced by law to advertise in
a way that goes directly against their mission and, more importantly,
their conscience.
The State of California mandates that these pregnancy centers
disclose how patients can obtain a State-sponsored abortion.
California, in my opinion, is abusing the power of the State to force
people to post messages they do not believe in and which violate their
conscience.
Government coercion of speech or conduct that violates the religious
conscience of an individual is in direct violation of the First
Amendment. The Founders intentionally listed the right to freely
express our religious beliefs first because they recognized the vital
role faith in God plays in cultivating a moral foundation necessary for
this democratic society.
While this inherent right to religious expression is being
undermined, the Constitution could not be clearer on this question. I
am confident the Supreme Court will uphold this sacred right against
the heavy hand of government coercion.
Mr. HARRIS. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Texas for those
comments. He is absolutely right. No matter where you stand on the
issue of abortion, you should stand with the First Amendment on the
right of an individual not to have their speech compelled by the
government; and that is what at stake in this court case.
I want to just thank God that we have a President who understands the
importance of these constitutional bases, and one who, I believe, will
nominate Justices to the Supreme Court who will continue to uphold the
First Amendment and the other amendments to the Constitution.
Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentlewoman from Missouri (Mrs.
Hartzler), a pro-life leader in the House of Representatives.
Mrs. HARTZLER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman and Representative
LaMalfa for hosting tonight's Special Order to draw attention to the
wonderful benefits of crisis pregnancy centers.
I would like to share the story of two women. Summer is a smart 17-
year-old who is in love with her first love, John. Although their
parents are concerned about how serious they have gotten, they spend as
much time together as possible. They soon find out that their college
plans are in jeopardy when they discover that they are pregnant.
Tanya is a 40-year-old single mom with three kids. She works at a
local restaurant as a server, and she gets by with the help of Federal
welfare programs. She has been seeing Sam off and on for the past
several months, but they recently broke up. Now she finds out that she
is pregnant. She can't handle one more mouth to feed. Abortion seems to
be the only option.
Summer's and Tanya's situations are different, yet they both can find
help and hope through their local crisis pregnancy centers. Like over
2.3 million women and men across America, they can receive pregnancy
tests; ultrasounds; parenting classes; and other basic necessities,
such as maternity and baby clothing, through these centers. These vital
centers are making a huge difference for so many.
Pregnancy care centers provide a safe haven for women in crisis. In
other words, they provide a safe haven for pregnant moms who need love
and support as they welcome their babies into the world. There are more
than 2,300 pregnancy care centers throughout America. Some of these
clinics provide medical care, housing for expectant moms and their
children, and adoption referrals.
I am thankful for the Shiloh Center in Harrisonville, Missouri, my
hometown. The Shiloh Center welcomes moms in difficult circumstances,
offering hope and help, enabling each mother to choose life for her
baby. Like many other centers, the Shiloh Center provides free
pregnancy testing, ultrasound services, counseling, and educational
resources.
The Shiloh Center also provides prenatal care for pregnant moms, and
ensures that new moms are equipped with baby clothes, diapers, and
formula for their little ones.
There are thousands of these centers across America. I would like to
highlight the wonderful pregnancy care centers in my district:
Crossroads Pregnancy Resource Center in Warsaw, Missouri; My Life
Clinic in Columbia, Missouri; Pregnancy Health Center Lake of the
Ozarks in Camdenton, Missouri; Door of Hope Pregnancy Center in
Clinton, Missouri; New Beginnings Women's Center in Warrensburg,
Missouri; Pregnancy Support Center in Lebanon, Missouri; Birthright of
Sedalia in Sedalia, Missouri; Free Women's Center of Pulaski County in
Waynesville, Missouri; Birthright of Moberly in Moberly, Missouri;
Birthright of Nevada in Nevada, Missouri; and Choices Pregnancy Center
in Marshfield, Missouri.
I am grateful to each of these centers for the countless hours of
community service and client care lovingly offered to women like Summer
and Tanya and thousands in similar circumstances experiencing
challenging life circumstances. They are bringing practical help and
hope, and that is the best story of all.
Mr. HARRIS. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman from Missouri (Mrs.
Hartzler) for her comments.

[[Page H1592]]

Just to remind people, you know, there are things you find in a
crisis pregnancy center you just don't find in your local Planned
Parenthood. Almost all of them will have a room where donated
clothing--clothing that, you know, most of it used. Yeah, that is the
way it is. People who have had children, their children are grown. They
will donate their clothing to a pregnancy center to help those mothers
who need help, mothers who perhaps feel they can't financially afford
to have a child because they have to buy clothing for a child, they
have to buy diapers. These pregnancy centers give them a real choice.
Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentlewoman from North Carolina (Ms.
Foxx), another pro-life leader in the House of Representatives.
Ms. FOXX. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Maryland (Mr.
Harris) for leading this Special Order tonight and for yielding to me.
Mr. Speaker, today I rise to recognize the life-affirming and
lifesaving work done across the country by pro-life pregnancy centers.
I have the privilege of representing the New Hope Pregnancy
Compassion Care Center in Yadkinville, North Carolina; and I am proud
to share the testimony of a young woman who perfectly encapsulates what
these care centers do.
She writes: ``The day I found out I was pregnant, I was very upset
and didn't know what to do. I had so many different emotions and knew
that it was going to be very hard, especially with me still being in
college. I didn't know how I was going to tell my parents, my family,
or my church. After having two positive pregnancy tests, I decided to
go to Compassion Care Center. This was one of the best decisions I
could have ever made.
``When I got there, I took another pregnancy test and it was
positive. After that, I ended up having an ultrasound. After I seen my
little baby on the ultrasound, I was lost for words. I had so many
emotions and felt like I had no one. After my ultrasound, I ended up
talking to a staff person about life and about this new baby. I told
her how scared I was to tell my parents and how bad of a person I felt
because of this. Even though this baby was not planned by me, God had
planned it for me. She explained to me that even though I was still in
college and still living at home, that she knew that I could do this
and get through this. After we talked for a while about my life, the
new baby, and religion, we prayed together.

``I ended up going home after that and telling my parents. It was
very hard for them to cope with at first, but eventually they accepted
it. I started going back to Compassion Care every week after that to
take classes that offered videos about pregnancy and babies. Watching
those videos helped me so much because it was a lot of new information
that I did not know.
``I earned points every time that I came to watch these videos by
watching them and doing homework sheets. The points I earned I could
use to buy stuff in the store. The store had many different items that
I could get. I got maternity clothes, baby clothes, diapers, wipes, and
toys. These items helped me tremendously.
``Without Compassion Care offering these classes and items, I
wouldn't have known what to do. I have learned so much stuff that I
didn't know before and they have given me the best support. I
absolutely love everyone there and appreciate everything that they have
done for me. I just recently had my daughter, and she has become my
entire life.
``I know one thing, though, if I would have not been involved with
Compassion Care Center, I would not have been able to do this. They
were a lifesaver and I cannot express enough how thankful I am that
they were there for me every step of the way.''
Mr. HARRIS. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman from North Carolina
for comments.
Again, just reminding, as the gentlewoman said, these are centers
that provide true resources to women at a time when they are very, very
vulnerable. I can't imagine why a city council or a State legislature,
or any jurisdiction, or any legislature would want to--what amounts
to--close these centers down, because these are people who believe
abortion is wrong.

{time} 1845

They are not going to refer people for abortions. That is the bottom
line. They will close their doors before they will send someone to
something that they think is morally reprehensible, and the last thing
the State should do is compel them to ever do that. Why we would want
to close these centers down that are so vital to our communities is a
puzzle to me.
Mr. Speaker, I yield as much time as he may consume to the gentleman
from Washington (Mr. Newhouse) for his comments.
Mr. NEWHOUSE. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Maryland for
yielding.
Mr. Speaker, I rise to speak in support of the First Amendment free
speech rights of pro-life pregnancy centers across the Nation. I want
to thank my colleagues, Congressman Andy Harris as well as Congressman
Doug LaMalfa, for leading this Special Order this evening.
Mr. Speaker, our Declaration of Independence proclaims that life,
liberty, and the pursuit of happiness are God-given rights of all
people. If we truly believe that, then we must be consistent that the
right to life is inherent for every person, born or unborn.
National Institute of Family and Life Advocates v. Becerra is a case
before the Supreme Court that centers on the right of free speech of
pro-life licensed medical centers. Under California's State law, these
centers are forced to violate their conscientious objections and post
written advertisements for free or low-cost abortions subsidized by the
State.
I would ask: What could be more deeply offensive to any person who
shares the strongly held belief that abortion takes innocent lives?
I believe that this unjust law violates First Amendment protections
under our Constitution, and the ramifications of this Court decision
will be felt across the Nation.
There are nearly a dozen crisis pregnancy centers in central
Washington State, and most are in the Fourth Congressional District,
which I represent. Life Choices Pregnancy Medical Center in Yakima,
which I recently visited, is a pregnancy medical center that provides
pregnancy testing, medical consultation, STD testing, and adoption
referrals for expectant mothers.
Crisis pregnancy centers exist to support mothers, fathers, and their
children. Many provide free material resources for young families and
ongoing parental support. These centers exist to further the progress
and protection of innocent life.
I signed onto the amicus brief supporting NIFLA with more than 140
colleagues because States do not have the right to force private
individuals or entities to compel speech that violates their
conscience.
I am proud of the House of Representatives' work to protect the
sanctity of life, such as the Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection
Act, which I supported, to ensure that children who survive an abortion
or an attempted abortion are given proper medical treatment. Today I
stand with my colleagues to be a voice for the voiceless and to stand
for the right of free speech of all who believe in the sanctity of
life.
Mr. HARRIS. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the gentleman from
Washington for those comments. He points out that each of our districts
have numerous pregnancy centers, usually. In fact, crisis pregnancy
centers outnumber abortion clinics three to one. These are valuable
resources in anyone's district, in any town, any county.
What is at issue here is, if you had a nonprofit running a recreation
center in your neighborhood and it provided resources to troubled
teenagers after school, this would be like the State telling that
recreation center, ``Do you know what? You have got to promote a
certain religion in your recreation center,'' or, ``Do you know what?
You have got to put out certain political pamphlets of one political
party on your desk when people come in the door.'' We would be incensed
with that. This is exactly what California is attempting to do with
this law to these pro-life crisis pregnancy centers.
With that, I yield as much time as he may consume to the gentleman
from Texas (Mr. Williams) for his comments.

[[Page H1593]]

Mr. WILLIAMS. Mr. Speaker, I thank Dr. Harris for yielding me this
time.
Mr. Speaker, I would like to take this time to recognize pro-life
pregnancy centers and all the good they do for mothers and their unborn
children.
As a God-fearing father and grandfather, I have always believed that
life begins at the moment of conception. No one should ever be forced
to promote the abortion of an unborn baby against their will.
Rather than protecting free speech, a constitutional right, the
Federal Government is extorting speech by forcing these pregnancy
centers to contradict their pro-life message.
During my time in Congress, I have visited multiple pro-life
pregnancy centers around the 25th District of Texas. In particular, I
would like to highlight the Austin Pregnancy Resource Center and the
Cleburne Pregnancy Center, both of which I have been to.
These outstanding centers provide resources, information, and
emotional support for those soon-to-be moms. They also provide after-
care for moms and their baby, such as supplies, clothing, and
education, as we previously heard. Women deserve to know there are
better options than abortion and that there are facilities out there to
help them.
The bottom line, Americans and organizations should not be forced by
the government to promote ideas that conflict with their beliefs. As a
steadfast pro-life supporter, I will continue advocating for the rights
of the unborn and the centers that fight for them.
In God we trust.
Mr. HARRIS. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Texas and, again,
remind everyone that these are such valuable resources in their towns
and their neighborhoods.
I yield as much time as he may consume to the gentleman from
Louisiana (Mr. Johnson).
One thing about Congress is we have people with all different areas
of expertise, but on this particular issue, the gentleman from
Louisiana brings particular expertise because of his background as a
lawyer and one who has defended religious liberty in courtrooms here in
the United States, protecting that very important right given to us in
the First Amendment that is at issue, at issue in this California case.
Mr. JOHNSON of Louisiana. Mr. Speaker, I thank Dr. Harris for this
time this evening and all of our strong colleagues who are standing
with us today for the Constitution and for the sanctity of human life.
You know, Psalm 127 says:

Children are a heritage from the Lord, a reward from him.

For most women, of course, finding out they are pregnant is certainly
a beautiful moment in their life. Often, it is an answer to years of
prayer. However, of course, there are times when the heavy
responsibility of carrying a child can bring uncertainty. That is why
the work of thousands of pro-life pregnancy centers throughout our
Nation is so vital.
Hundreds of thousands of women have sought the guidance and the
services of these pregnancy centers nationwide, and they have been
embraced and supported with unconditional love and care throughout
their entire pregnancies. These centers serve the woman, the child, and
their whole family.
There are more than six pregnancy care centers in Louisiana's Fourth
Congressional District--that is my district--from the Community Care
Center, the Northwest Louisiana Crisis Pregnancy Center, and Mary's
House in the northern part of our district to the Community Pregnancy
Center, the New Life Crisis Pregnancy Center, and the Cenla Pregnancy
Center in the southern part of our district. These centers work day in
and day out to serve our communities. I know these folks well. They are
selfless servants down in the trenches.
Over the past two decades, I have provided pro bono legal services to
almost all of these centers and many more around the country, and I
have often defended their causes in court because I believe so very
strongly in what they do: they save lives and they provide critical
care, like performing ultrasounds and counseling services and parenting
classes and so much more, and they do this at zero cost to the persons
who are receiving these vital services.
They also do it with zero Federal funding, by the way, and they save
their clients and taxpayers hundreds of thousands of dollars every
year.
As fathers and mothers and sisters and brothers and friends, I think
Members of Congress have to stand with these pregnancy care centers
throughout our districts, and we ought to support these women and their
children and their families, especially in times as precious as
pregnancy when they need us most.
As Dr. Harris mentioned, on March 20, my former colleagues at the
Alliance Defending Freedom will stand before the U.S. Supreme Court,
and they will argue on behalf of National Institute of Family and Life
Advocates and its affiliated pregnancy centers in California.
All of us ask and expect the High Court to protect the freedom of
speech not just for pregnancy care centers, but for anyone who would be
forced by the government to speak a message that contradicts their
sincerely held beliefs. It is absolutely absurd for the State of
California to try to force pro-life centers to provide information on
abortion services.
The outcome of this case could not only affect the freedom of speech
for every American, it could save countless innocent lives. This is a
pivotal moment in our Nation's history, and we pray the Court will
uphold our fundamental liberty, the sanctity of every single human
life, and the best of our American traditions.
Mr. HARRIS. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Louisiana not
only for those excellent remarks, but for bringing this kind of
expertise to the House of Representatives.
Now I yield as much time as he may consume to the gentleman from New
Jersey (Mr. Smith).
Mr. Smith is a leader in protecting human rights around the world,
from the U.S. House of Representatives, a leader in protecting life
and, in this case, giving his remarks about how important pro-life
pregnancy centers are to our Nation and our communities and how
damaging this law would be.
Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, I thank Dr. Harris for his
leadership for many, many years. He is an extraordinary physician--
Johns Hopkins and so many other places where he has been an
anesthesiologist, and we are so grateful for the expertise and
precision that he brings. Doctors can focus in a way that makes it so
clear and so nonambiguous.
In defense of life, never has that message been more important than
now because there is so much fuzziness, so much distortion, and it is
about time clarity breaks out when it comes to the abortion issue. We
have never had that national debate.
In a way, we have had it in a minor way, in a micro way. Every time a
woman goes in and has an ultrasound, she walks away seeing her baby
still in utero. The first baby pictures today, as we all know, are not
newborns. On the refrigerators all across America, the first baby
pictures happen to be unborn babies, and we all are thrilled when we
see our children and grandchildren up on the refrigerator as an unborn
baby. That is the first thing they see as they begin to comprehend what
they are looking at: ``That is me while I was still in Mommy.''
As Dr. Harris pointed out in his opening, the Supreme Court does take
up this case next week, NIFLA v. Becerra, the California law that
requires medically licensed pregnancy centers to advertise for the
abortion industry by putting up notices. Telling clients where to get
free and low-cost abortions is an egregious--an egregious--violation of
the First Amendment Free Speech Clause.
The government should not compel, should not coerce an organization
or organizations and the people behind them to facilitate the
dismemberment and chemical poisoning of unborn children, which is
exactly what abortion is. The sophistry of choice cloaks the deed, and
the deed is all about taking that child apart through dismemberment or
through a chemical poison.

Dr. Harris spoke earlier about ultrasounds. We know that when
abortion is done, many types of abortions, they use an ultrasound.
Ultrasound-guided abortions make it easier for them to dismember the
child. And it was Abby Johnson who ran a clinic, was director of a
clinic in Texas for about 8 years, a Planned Parenthood

[[Page H1594]]

clinic, who quit when she finally saw on that screen an ultrasound-
guided abortion and was repelled and repulsed by how that child was
being killed by a so-called physician. She was repulsed. She became a
very strong pro-lifer since then.
Let me say one thing about pregnancy care centers. There are about
2,752 in the country, according to Heartbeat International, and the
numbers are growing. There are many in my district, like Dr. Harris
said are in his as well.
A few years ago, my wife and I went to a pregnancy care banquet in
Middlesex County, New Jersey. Two women got up and spoke so eloquently
and with tears in their eyes about how they were scheduled and actually
en route to the abortion at the clinic, and there were these
compassionate women, selfless women who said: Please reconsider. Please
take a look at the alternatives. We will help you.
Both of those women turned around, two different times, and went back
and had their babies.
With tears in their eyes, two young girls got up a little later, and
at first we thought they were just going to talk about how committed
they were to life. They talked about school and sports and boys, but at
the end of their talk, they looked at the director of the pregnancy
care center and her volunteers and thanked them for being there outside
that abortion clinic that day, the day that their moms were scheduled
to abort them.
Mr. Speaker, in an amicus brief submitted by a head of the NIFLA v.
Becerra oral arguments, 13 women told their stories of the care and the
hope that they received from pregnancy care centers, and here, briefly,
is Angela's story.
Angela grew up in a very difficult household and turned to drugs when
she was 14 years old. Angela continued to wrestle with addiction and,
at 31, discovered she was pregnant. Although she made an appointment
for an abortion, she decided to keep the baby.
Because of her addiction and the circumstance of her pregnancy, she
felt she could not turn to her family for support, so she found a
pregnancy care center. This one was in New York.
At her first appointment, staff showed Angela her baby through an
ultrasound.

{time} 1900

Mr. Speaker, let me remind you that Dr. Bernard Nathanson, the
cofounder of NARAL, who said, ``I have come to the agonizing conclusion
that I presided over 60,000 deaths,'' was one of leaders in the sixties
and seventies in promoting abortion throughout this country, and was
very effective at it. When he became pro-life, he said:

If wombs had windows, if every woman prior to an abortion
would see an ultrasound of her baby, she would run out of
that clinic.

Well, the pregnancy care center people in New York showed Angela the
ultrasound, and she was enamored, touched deeply by the baby--her
baby--that she saw on the screen.
They met with her weekly as the pregnancy progressed, always staying
by her side, and a staff member was with her in the hospital when she
delivered.
After Angela gave birth to her son, Cameryn, the staff helped her to
enroll in WIC and to reach out to New York's Department of Social
Services.
She continued to come to the pregnancy center--this is all in the
friend-of-the-court brief--for parenting courses and for support in
staying clean of those drugs that had so hurt her life.
She writes:

I always thought that people were fake, but they are
genuine, particularly at the center. This is who they really
are. They will help me. And they are helping to raise my son.

Looking forward to life now, she credits the center with giving her
support so that she doesn't turn back to drugs.
Women and children across our Nation share similar stories. I have
heard many, many of those stories over my time in the pro-life
movement. And every time you meet one of those women--because we argue,
Dr. Harris and I and all of those in the pro-life movement, that there
are two victims in every abortion. The obvious is the dead child, who
is dismembered or chemically poisoned; and the mother.
And pregnancy care centers are all about life affirmation, loving
them both. And to be told by California, ``You must advertise how to
kill that baby,'' when you are about loving them both, like I said at
the beginning, is an egregious violation of the First Amendment. And I
do believe, and I know Dr. Harris and others on our side of this issue
believe, that the Supreme Court will see that as such and render that
law moot.
Mr. HARRIS. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the gentleman from New
Jersey very much for his comments.
It is a shame that here in the United States, with the freedoms that
we have guaranteed in our Constitution, that this even has to come
before a court. It is so clear that it is unconstitutional to compel
speech against someone's beliefs--political, religious beliefs. These
are what our Nation is founded on, and to compel these clinics to do
this is something that shouldn't even enter the thoughts of anyone.
Again, we would never compel any other nonprofit existing on
donations and the neighborhood providing things to people in those
neighborhoods and communities. We wouldn't think of compelling, again,
political speech. We wouldn't think of compelling religious activity.
Yet, here, California attempts to compel these volunteers, these
clinics, who work on providing such a valuable choice to the women in
their community, to essentially refer for an abortion that is against
all the deeply held beliefs of these individuals.
Mr. Speaker, I want to read the stories of some of the women who go
to these clinics, because this really is about choice. This is about
institutions in a community that offer true choice. Now, these are
stories from the pregnancy centers in my community.
So let me first tell you about Miranda. Mr. Speaker, 19-year-old
Miranda came to this pregnancy center with her boyfriend and learned
she was 9 weeks pregnant. Miranda worked 9 hours a day as a cashier at
a Home Depot. She, honestly, was not happy with the positive results of
her test. She didn't think she could raise a baby, and nobody had any
faith in her.
You see, a year earlier, Miranda had had an abortion. She still cries
at the recollection and feels the pain of what she had done. She didn't
want to make that choice again, but her circumstances hadn't changed,
and she felt that that is what she had to do.
Now, the volunteer counselor praised Miranda for working full time
and getting her GED. The volunteer counselor explained how Miranda
could obtain healthcare, and how that clinic's Earn While You Learn
Program would educate her on prenatal care and parenting, as well as
provide her with much-needed baby supplies once the baby was born.
Then Miranda saw the fetal models depicting a 9-week-old fetus. She
couldn't believe what she was seeing. She asked so many questions,
like: When does the heart start beating? Would it be possible for her
to hear the beating heart? When does the baby start kicking?
You see, Miranda explained that the abortion clinic she had been to a
year before never told her about the development of the baby. She had
been 15 weeks pregnant at the time she aborted.
It was so surprising for her to see the truth in those baby models.
Nobody ever told her that her baby had been so fully developed. Miranda
said that the best part about coming to the pregnancy center was that
they ``told her she could do it.'' You see, she had never heard that
before. Nobody had ever told her that. She had a real choice now.
Here is a story about Laura. When Laura came to the center 2 years
ago, she was feeling nauseated and miserable. The timing of her
pregnancy couldn't be worse. She had recently discovered that her
mother had been diagnosed with late stage liver disease.
Laura, too, was post-abortive. Her previous abortion was a terrible
experience that left her emotionally scarred, of course, as it leaves
many women.
She didn't want to have another abortion, but felt she had no choice.
She wanted to be there for her mom during her mother's time of need.

Now, the volunteer advocate in the clinic spent lots of time just
listening to Laura. It became clear that Laura

[[Page H1595]]

really wanted to keep her baby but was lost in trying to figure out
how.
Mr. Speaker, this is a recurring story in these pregnancy centers.
There is a reason why they used to be called crisis pregnancy centers.
These are women frequently in crisis who want to have that choice but
don't see the way out of their circumstances.
Well, this counselor helped Laura navigate through the muddy waters
of her life and envision a future with her child.
Soon, Laura's fear began to subside. A sonogram revealed a 7-week-old
baby. In a tearful voice, Laura said: ``That is my baby.''
Since then, Laura has returned to the center weekly, participating in
their prenatal education classes. She actually moved in with her mother
so she could help her through her illness. Laura's hope is that her mom
will be strong enough to hold the baby and spend her last days on Earth
with her grandchild.
Mr. Speaker, that is the kind of hope that pregnancy centers give
women and their families. And, often, two lives are saved in these
pregnancy centers: the child's and the mother's.
An unplanned pregnancy can provide an opportunity and inspiration for
a woman to get her life back on track; in these two cases, to actually
start the family. A pregnancy can give a woman a reason to live, to
take care of that child; a reason to go back to school to finish her
education, as we heard about Miranda; a reason to reconcile with her
family.
As a father of five, and everyone who has been a parent knows this:
we know how parenthood truly fundamentally transforms a person well
before the child is born.
From the time you know that you are going to have a new baby in the
family, as well as every moment afterward, life is precious, life is
priceless. Pregnancy centers support women during every step of that
journey of providing a new life, a gift from God.
Mr. Speaker, next week, the Court will hear a case that perhaps
threatens the very existence of crisis pregnancy centers and pro-life
pregnancy centers in the United States. I hope that those nine Justices
have the wisdom to see that, in America, that a jurisdiction--whether
it is California or Baltimore, Montgomery County, or Austin, Texas, or
any jurisdiction--that has tried to compel speech in these pregnancy
centers is violating our constitutional rights and, worse than that, is
really affecting valuable resources in our community, the most valuable
resource a woman with a crisis pregnancy can have.
Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

____________________