[Congressional Record Volume 169, Number 65 (Wednesday, April 19, 2023)]
[Senate]
[Pages S1236-S1238]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




  PROVIDING FOR CONGRESSIONAL DISAPPROVAL UNDER CHAPTER 8 OF TITLE 5, 
UNITED STATES CODE, OF THE RULE SUBMITTED BY THE DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS 
    AFFAIRS RELATING TO ``REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH SERVICES''--MOTION TO 
                           PROCEED--Continued

  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Murphy). The Senator from Washington.


                              S.J. Res 10

  Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, ever since Republicans succeeded in 
overturning Roe v. Wade and ripping abortion rights away from millions 
of women, they have been trying to hide how extreme their positions on 
abortion are and how devastating the fallout has been for families.
  Even as each new day brings another horror driven by Republican 
extremists, like the dystopian bill put forward in South Carolina which 
proposed the death penalty for women who get an abortion, one of my 
colleagues even recently said that as President, he would ``literally 
sign the most conservative pro-life legislation.''
  Let's not forget the terrifying lawsuit in Texas that is hanging over 
the entire country, where Republican extremists want to overrule the 
FDA's experts, undermine its authority to review and approve all manner 
of drugs, from chemotherapy to insulin, and take the abortion pill 
mifepristone away from patients all across the country, even in States 
like mine where abortion is still legal and even though we have 20 
years of data showing this drug is safe and effective.
  Yet, when the district judge issued a dangerous ruling that would rip 
this drug off the shelf, 69 congressional Republicans filed a brief 
calling for that ruling to go into effect and deny women in every 
single State access to this FDA-approved medication. The Supreme Court 
has stayed the decision for the time being, but this threat to women's 
ability to get this drug is as real as ever, and now 147 congressional 
Republicans--many Republicans who are in leadership, Republicans with 
oversight authority over the FDA--have filed a brief opposing our 
efforts to protect access to mifepristone and protect the FDA's 
authority.
  And this extreme lawsuit is far from the only dangerous anti-abortion 
policy some congressional Republicans are pushing, as is the bill we 
are about to vote on today.
  It has been incredibly infuriating for women to be told by 
Republicans that we are overreacting, fearmongering, even as we are 
being told by patients and providers about the nightmares they are now 
living in, about the impossible decisions they have had to make, and 
about the decisions--the deeply personal decisions--they have not been 
allowed to make that Republican politicians are, instead, now making 
for them.
  It strains belief that Republicans actually think victims of rape or 
incest are not being affected by their policies and that women whose 
health--whose very lives--are in danger are not facing any barriers or 
are being denied the care they need, especially when we see news 
stories reported every day showing that that is not the case--stories 
that show women are being put in horrific, unthinkable situations, 
forced to travel absurd distances for care after they are raped, forced 
to wait and bleed and get sicker and sicker before they can get the 
care they desperately need.
  But even if Republicans are ignoring the devastation State abortion 
bans are causing and are ignoring women who are speaking out every 
single day, what we are talking about today in this Senate is a bill 
congressional Republicans wrote themselves. It really puts an end, once 
and for all, to some Republicans' empty claims that they are being 
moderate in any way here. Victims of rape or women with medical 
complications are not being heard, because this bill, which Republicans 
wrote, which Republicans are coming to the floor advocating for, would 
cut veterans and their families off from care when their lives are in 
danger and would cut them off from care after rape or incest.
  Make no mistake, that is what this debate is about today. That is 
what they are voting for. In arguing for this bill, they are also 
showing they know full well how extreme State bans actually are. After 
all, they cannot pretend that, on the one hand, State abortion bans 
have meaningful exemptions for women with life-threatening 
complications and for people who have been raped, including children, 
while also arguing, on the other hand, that this proposal defies State 
laws to allow the VA to provide care in those heartbreaking situations. 
Those arguments contradict each other. More importantly, those claims 
contradict the real, heartbreaking stories we are already hearing from 
women and doctors about how these bans are putting lives at risk.
  Extreme abortion bans are causing healthcare crises all across the 
country, along with so many personal crises for families in facing 
incredibly difficult situations, which is why the VA care rule that 
President Biden put forward is so important and why the Democrats are 
standing so firm to keep it intact. Despite the rhetoric from my 
Republican colleagues, this rule that they are trying to overturn is a 
meaningful, modest step to protect our veterans. It simply allows the 
VA to provide abortion care to make sure that none of our veterans or 
their eligible dependents go without medical treatment when their lives 
are in danger or are forced to stay pregnant after rape or incest.

  That is it. That is what Republicans are so upset about. They are 
upset that this administration has taken action to make sure women who 
have served our country in uniform can get the basic reproductive care 
they need when

[[Page S1237]]

their health is at risk or in cases of rape or incest. Those veterans 
fought to protect our rights, and now Republicans want to roll back 
theirs. These veterans put their lives on the line for us, and now 
Republicans who support this resolution want to tell them that when 
their lives are in danger, tough luck. Politics comes first. No one--no 
one--deserves that.
  So I urge all of my colleagues to stand with our veterans, to stand 
with their families, and vote against this unthinkably cruel bill that 
seeks to force women veterans to stay pregnant even when their lives 
are at risk, even after rape or incest.
  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that Senators Tuberville and 
Schumer be permitted to complete their remarks prior to the rollcall 
vote.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
  Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The Senator from Alabama.
  Mr. TUBERVILLE. Mr. President, I am proud to have come from a 
military family. Our veterans are some of the best people in this 
country. Because of that, I am grateful to serve on the Veterans' 
Affairs Committee. Giving back to our veterans has been a passion my 
whole life. Our men and women in uniform deserve the best medical care 
available. I am grateful for every healthcare provider that works for 
and with our veterans.
  The mission of the VA is taken from Abraham Lincoln's second 
inaugural address. Lincoln pledged our country to ``care for him who 
shall have borne the battle.'' That is what the VA is supposed to be 
about. But today, under the Biden administration, we see the VA 
increasingly--increasingly--getting distracted from that very important 
mission. The Biden administration increasingly has the VA involved in 
politics.
  Last year, the VA announced they would begin providing taxpayer-
funded abortions--last year. This is something the VA has never, ever 
done. Let me repeat that. The VA has never done abortions. In fact, the 
VA has been prohibited by this body from performing abortions at its 
facilities for more than 30 years.
  The 102nd Congress--1991 to 1992--made taxpayer-funded abortions at 
VA facilities illegal. Let me repeat that. Thirty years ago, this body 
made taxpayer-funded abortions illegal. It is a law. They did this with 
the bipartisan Veterans Healthcare Act of 1992. The last I heard, that 
is a Federal law, passed by this body, which, for some reason, we don't 
want to do anymore. We want the executive branch to be able to do it on 
their own, and that is wrong. We need to do our job.
  This, today, is not about abortions. It is about taxpayers paying for 
abortions that they don't have to pay for because of a law that was 
presented and passed in this Chamber in 1992. The bill was introduced 
in the House and the Senate by whom? None other than the Democrats. The 
Senate passed it unanimously. This includes a Senator by the name of 
Joe Biden.
  Now President Biden is breaking the law that he voted for. How do you 
do that? This is a direct violation of Federal law. The Biden 
administration even wants taxpayers on the hook for abortions for 
veterans' dependents. That has never happened. So we are changing the 
law at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue and not in here, where we are supposed 
to do our job. It has got nothing to do with the VA's mission.
  The VA won't even tell Congress if they are placing restrictions on 
abortions. When are they doing it--at 5 months? 3 months? 2 months? 
after the baby is born? We can't get any information out of them. They 
just write the laws themselves. The VA has refused to cooperate with 
Congress throughout this whole process. And that is what this is all 
about. For all we know, a taxpayer-funded abortion can be at any time, 
at their choosing.
  This new policy also includes very limited moral protections for VA 
medical staff. This, too, is unheard of in our laws and our traditions. 
We have had moral protections on the books for decades. It was James 
Madison who said that a man has a right to his property, and 
``Conscience is the most sacred property of all.'' This was the 
attitude of our Founders. Frankly, the Founders would be shocked by 
what is happening in this Chamber today.
  Frankly, the Biden administration is violating the consciences of the 
taxpayers as we speak by putting pressure on the taxpayers to have to 
defend and go after this. Taxpayers shouldn't be forced to pay for 
abortions, especially not when this was done without anybody's taking a 
vote in this building, especially when Congress voted to make it 
illegal 30 years ago. It is illegal and it is wrong.
  In just a few moments, the Senate has a chance to do something about 
it. We are going to vote on a bipartisan basis to overturn this rule. 
If Democrats want taxpayer-funded abortions within the VA healthcare 
system, let's vote on it. That is what we are elected to do, not lean 
on a President and the White House to say this is what we are going to 
do. That ain't the way we do it in this building. If we are going to do 
it that way, let's lock the door and go home and save the taxpayers a 
lot of money.
  Again, this is not about abortion; this is about doing it the wrong 
way. Let's pass the bill. Let's change the law. Let's don't break the 
law in here.
  I would like to thank the dozens of Senators supporting my 
resolution. I would also like to thank Senator Manchin and Senator 
Marshall for standing with me earlier today at a press conference to 
explain the facts to the taxpayers and the citizens of this country.
  It is very simple: Any Senator who votes against this resolution is 
voting for taxpayer-funded abortion with no guardrails or protection 
for any medical staff or nurses.
  Voting no on this resolution means voting to give away even more 
power from Congress to the executive branch, and that is really all we 
need around here.
  Right now, the VA is spending money we have never voted to spend. 
Anyone who believes in the appropriations process, let's oppose this 
rule and support this resolution.
  Voting no would mean letting the administration spend money without 
the consent of the people in this room, and that is what we are elected 
to do. Voting no means a big stamp of approval for a blatantly illegal 
regulation. Voting against the resolution also means turning the VA 
into a taxpayer-funded abortion clinic.
  The VA should be focused on their mission. Lord knows, we have got 20 
veterans a day dying of suicide. Why don't we focus on helping the 
veterans who have been fighting in wars, these last 20-year wars that 
we have been funding. Let's keep politics out of the VA. These people 
have had enough politics in their lives. Let's stay focused on their 
mission to ``care for him who shall have borne the battle,'' as spoken 
by President Abraham Lincoln.
  I yield the floor.
  Ms. KLOBUCHAR. Mr President, I rise in opposition to S.J. Res. 10 to 
roll back protections for veterans and their family members who are 
seeking to access basic reproductive healthcare. I would like to thank 
Senator Murray, Senator Baldwin, and Senator Duckworth for their 
leadership in standing against this resolution.
  Almost 10 months ago, the Supreme Court issued a ruling overruling 
nearly five decades of precedent protecting a woman's right to make her 
own healthcare decisions. Now, women are at the mercy of a patchwork of 
State laws governing their ability to access reproductive care, leaving 
them with fewer rights than their moms and grandmas.
  S.J. Res. 10 is yet another attempt to roll back women's access to 
care. It would overturn a decision by the Department of Veterans 
Affairs to allow veterans and their family members to access basic 
healthcare. Currently, the rule allows Veterans Affairs doctors to 
provide counseling and care to women veterans and beneficiaries covered 
by Veterans Affairs insurance, as well as abortion care in the case of 
rape, incest, or when the life or health of the women is at risk. The 
rule is limited, and the Department has said that Veterans Affairs 
doctors, nurses, or healthcare professionals can opt out of providing 
abortion care.
  Women across the country are already facing so much uncertainty 
because of the Supreme Court's decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women's 
Health Organization. This resolution threatens the lives and health of 
women veterans who risked their lives for our country. Today, we are 
standing up for

[[Page S1238]]

them by making it clear that we will not settle for a reality where 
they cannot access basic care.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from California.
  Mr. PADILLA. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The senior assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. SCHUMER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order 
for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. SCHUMER. Mr. President, when the health and safety of our country 
is at risk, it is up to veterans to step up to protect us. They risk 
their lives for us. They are always there for us. But today Senator 
Tuberville from Alabama is pushing legislation that would take away 
reproductive care for hundreds of thousands of veterans and their 
families. That is right. The hard right is telling our veterans they 
should be treated as second-class citizens, our women veterans.
  It is the kind of extreme proposal millions of Americans strongly 
oppose and one which, if it is passed, would gravely harm women's 
health. There are over 150,000 women veterans. They risk their lives 
for us. Now we must protect them.
  The more Americans reject MAGA extremism, the more MAGA Republicans 
seem to double down, and this bill is a perfect example. That is the 
MAGA right in a nutshell: Eliminate women's choice at all costs, even 
at the cost of our national defense. Again, the MAGA right says: 
Eliminate women's choice at all costs, even at the cost of national 
defense.
  Here is the bottom line: Our veterans dedicated their lives to our 
freedom so we should protect their freedom of choice, plain and simple.


                           Order of Procedure

  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the vote in relation to 
the Scott of Florida amendment No. 81 occur following the vote on the 
motion to proceed to S.J. Res. 10; further, I ask that the Senate vote 
at 11:15 a.m. tomorrow in relation to amendment Nos. 85 and 83; and the 
Senate vote on passage of S. 870, as amended, if amended, at 1:45 p.m., 
with all provisions under the previous order remaining in effect.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
  Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. SCHUMER. I yield the floor, and I strongly urge a ``no'' vote on 
this CRA, this awful CRA.


                             Vote on Motion

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the motion to 
proceed to S.J. Res. 10.
  Mr. COTTON. I ask for the yeas and nays.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second?
  There appears to be a sufficient second.
  The clerk will call the roll.
  The senior assistant legislative clerk called the roll.
  Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from California (Mrs. 
Feinstein) is necessarily absent.
  The result was announced--yeas 48, nays 51, as follows:

                      [Rollcall Vote No. 90 Leg.]

                                YEAS--48

     Barrasso
     Blackburn
     Boozman
     Braun
     Britt
     Budd
     Capito
     Cassidy
     Cornyn
     Cotton
     Cramer
     Crapo
     Cruz
     Daines
     Ernst
     Fischer
     Graham
     Grassley
     Hagerty
     Hawley
     Hoeven
     Hyde-Smith
     Johnson
     Kennedy
     Lankford
     Lee
     Lummis
     Manchin
     Marshall
     McConnell
     Moran
     Mullin
     Paul
     Ricketts
     Risch
     Romney
     Rounds
     Rubio
     Schmitt
     Scott (FL)
     Scott (SC)
     Sullivan
     Thune
     Tillis
     Tuberville
     Vance
     Wicker
     Young

                                NAYS--51

     Baldwin
     Bennet
     Blumenthal
     Booker
     Brown
     Cantwell
     Cardin
     Carper
     Casey
     Collins
     Coons
     Cortez Masto
     Duckworth
     Durbin
     Fetterman
     Gillibrand
     Hassan
     Heinrich
     Hickenlooper
     Hirono
     Kaine
     Kelly
     King
     Klobuchar
     Lujan
     Markey
     Menendez
     Merkley
     Murkowski
     Murphy
     Murray
     Ossoff
     Padilla
     Peters
     Reed
     Rosen
     Sanders
     Schatz
     Schumer
     Shaheen
     Sinema
     Smith
     Stabenow
     Tester
     Van Hollen
     Warner
     Warnock
     Warren
     Welch
     Whitehouse
     Wyden

                             NOT VOTING--1

       
     Feinstein
       
  The motion was rejected.
  (Mr. SCHATZ assumed the Chair.)

                          ____________________