[Congressional Record Volume 169, Number 152 (Wednesday, September 20, 2023)]
[House]
[Pages H4419-H4425]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




      MOTION TO INSTRUCT CONFEREES ON H.R. 2670, NATIONAL DEFENSE 
                 AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2024

  Ms. HOULAHAN. Mr. Speaker, I offer a motion to instruct.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Clerk will report the motion.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Ms. Houlahan of Pennsylvania moves that the managers on the 
     part of the House at the conference on the disagreeing votes 
     of the two Houses on the Senate amendment to the bill H.R. 
     2670 be instructed to disagree to section 716 of the House 
     bill.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 7 of rule XXII, the 
gentlewoman from Pennsylvania (Ms. Houlahan) and the gentleman from 
Alabama (Mr. Rogers) each will control 30 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Pennsylvania.


                             General Leave

  Ms. HOULAHAN. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members 
have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks on this 
motion to instruct.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentlewoman from Pennsylvania?
  There was no objection.
  Ms. HOULAHAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise today because this House has a choice. We can 
either stand up for the rights of servicemembers and military families 
or we can allow the Republican-led House, and specifically the extreme 
faction of the Republican Conference, to continue their assault on 
reproductive freedoms.
  For my Democratic colleagues and I, this choice is clear. We will 
fight. We will fight for the freedom of servicewomen and for their 
families, and I urge my colleagues on the other side of the aisle to 
please do the same.
  Many of our servicemembers joined the Armed Forces prior to the 
overturning of Roe v. Wade last June, and they did so with the 
understanding that they and their families would be treated with 
dignity and would receive comprehensive and high-quality healthcare 
services, regardless of where they were stationed--and, yes, that also 
includes access to abortion care.
  Since Roe was overturned, servicemembers and their families have had 
access to travel and to leave if they need to seek reproductive 
healthcare, but unfortunately, that freedom is now being threatened 
today.
  Mr. Speaker, today, for the very first time since 1973, 14 States 
have passed outright abortion bans. Seven more have passed partial 
bans, and six more have tried but have been stopped by the courts.
  Nearly 120,000 servicemembers are currently stationed in Texas. This 
is a State that has implemented a draconian anti-choice law and now has 
among the worst maternal health outcomes for women in the entire 
Nation. Our servicewomen deserve better.
  This issue has been politicized, and it has been distorted. Outright 
lies have been spread by elected officials and by anti-abortion 
activists alike.
  I will set the record straight. Here are the facts: Women in States 
with abortion bans are nearly three times more likely to die during 
pregnancy, during childbirth, or soon after giving birth. Let that sink 
in. We are stationing our women in uniform and their families in States 
where they are three times more likely to die during pregnancy.
  No servicemember should have to accept a reality where they could 
literally die as a result of the anti-choice State law where they are 
stationed.
  These are the conditions that our servicewomen and their military 
families have to consider when they decide to serve. Nearly half of 
servicemembers no longer have access to abortion care, and that is not 
counting even the members of their families, as well.
  Our servicemembers signed up to serve our country with the 
understanding that one day they may have to make the ultimate 
sacrifice, the sacrifice of their life.
  Let me remind the Chamber and those who are watching that we have an 
all-volunteer force. Again, I will repeat: We have an all-volunteer 
force.
  As we look to recruit and retain the best fighters and the greatest 
minds that this Nation has to offer, we really cannot restrict the very 
freedoms that we ask women and men in uniform to potentially die for.
  It is also important, as we talk, to go beyond the facts and figures 
and to share the personal and human impact of these anti-abortion laws 
and the choices we are facing here this week in this body.
  In Texas, the second-largest State for Active-Duty servicemembers in 
our country, Amanda Zurawski was 18 weeks pregnant when her water 
broke, putting her at a high risk for developing a life-threatening 
infection. Doctors told Amanda that her life was in danger and that the 
fetus was going to die, but doctors could not provide the medical care 
that she needed because their hands were tied by Texas law.
  Amanda eventually did develop sepsis and did eventually nearly die. 
Heartbreakingly, her ability to be and get pregnant in the future might 
be damaged, as well.
  Amanda survived, and she survived to share this story about her 
harrowing experience to hopefully prevent others from having this 
experience, as well.
  This story and the data that we have talked about today is why I am 
working with my colleagues, led by my dear

[[Page H4420]]

friend and fellow veteran, Congresswoman Mikie Sherrill, to try to 
codify this basic travel policy.
  This body decided that women cannot be trusted to make their own 
reproductive healthcare choices, and instead, the majority in this 
House has decided to make it harder for servicewomen and their families 
to access care; to make it harder for them to make their own healthcare 
choices; to make it harder for servicewomen and military families to 
decide on their own if, when, and how to start their own families.
  Also, a single United States Senator is holding up more than 300 
military promotions and counting, hollowing out the military leadership 
and hurting our military readiness in the process. He is doing this all 
because he is that adamant that women in uniform cannot be trusted.
  As a veteran myself, let me say out loud and clear that his actions 
are a disgrace, and Americans agree.
  Again, more data: 70 percent of our constituents believe that women 
should have access to abortion care.
  Mr. Speaker, the grave concerns I have outlined don't even begin to 
scratch the surface of all the harmful amendments that are also tacked 
on to this bill. Quite frankly, it is an embarrassment to this 
institution that our governance is just so fractured, so unable 
to agree on something so simple as letting a woman in uniform make the 
best care decisions for her family, her career, and herself.

  Sadly, this is indicative of where we are today. I grew up in a 
military family, and I myself served. My parents didn't always agree on 
politics, but they shared a common love for the promises that this 
Nation offered my father, a refugee and Holocaust survivor who became a 
Navy aviator.
  I have colleagues on the other side of this aisle with whom I work 
and respect, which is why I am deeply saddened to see a bipartisan bill 
that has endured for 60 years fall victim to this kind of partisan 
politics because the bipartisan bill that we passed originally out of 
committee by 58-1 is literally no longer recognizable.
  Today, Mr. Speaker, is about choice, choice in more ways than one. We 
can either let this far-right minority continue to hold our national 
security hostage to their radical agenda, or we can refuse to allow 
them to play politics with our national security and with the health 
and well-being of our servicemembers.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. ROGERS of Alabama. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong opposition to this motion to instruct. 
This motion seeks to strip language in the House bill that prohibits 
the Department of Defense from spending taxpayer money to facilitate 
abortion procedures.
  DOD's abortion travel policy is a flagrant violation of Congress' 
intent and our Nation's moral principles.
  This is all part of the Biden administration's politicization of the 
military.
  For years, Biden's political appointees have been pushing 
questionable policies on our troops just to satisfy their ideological 
agenda. They understand that using military orders is the most 
efficient way to usher in the rapid social change that they seek.
  The military should not be used as a petri dish for social 
experimentation. This is not the right thing to do. Our troops should 
not be used as the vanguard for the left's social agenda.
  The civilian leadership at DOD should be focused on building the 
world's most lethal fighting force. Instead, they are doing somersaults 
to try to satisfy the far-left's political agenda.
  This misguided abortion travel policy is just another example. It is 
a radical overreaction to a problem that doesn't exist.
  Secretary Austin said that the policy was necessary to avoid 
significant implications for the readiness of the force, but in the 6 
months since this began, there have been less than a handful of people 
who have exercised this policy.
  Rather than helping readiness, radical policies like this one are 
undermining readiness. They are driving away potential recruits, and 
they are undermining morale and retention. It needs to end.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge all Members to oppose this motion, and I reserve 
the balance of my time.

                              {time}  1230

  Ms. HOULAHAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Just before I introduce our next person, I want to emphasize that 
this is not a new policy. The DOD is not simply creating a new policy 
out of thin air. The DOD is, in fact, using precedent from the 
nonavailability of care and simply allowing women with reproductive 
health service needs to be able to have effective travel and 
reimbursement for said travel. Again, this is not a new policy, and it 
simply updates a policy that allows for travel reimbursement to ensure 
that we have equal access to healthcare.
  Thankfully, we have a President in Joe Biden who is responsive to the 
needs of our military servicemembers and who supports this effort.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Minnesota (Ms. 
McCollum).
  Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman from Pennsylvania 
for the time.
  Hopefully, at some point on this floor, we will be able to debate the 
Defense appropriations bill. That bill and this bill that we have the 
motion on, the NDAA, have extreme social policy riders that make 
bipartisan cooperation just impossible.
  The restricting rider that we are focusing on today is in both bills, 
and it stops servicemembers, civilians, and dependents from seeking 
basic reproductive healthcare. As the gentlewoman from Pennsylvania 
pointed out, when certain care is not available where a person is 
stationed, they have the flexibility of going to seek out that 
healthcare. The DOD's current policy is totally under Federal law and 
is totally legal.
  Another misnomer that I hear quite often sometimes is it is 
undermining the Hyde amendment. Well, it doesn't do that either. The 
Hyde amendment allows for abortion services in certain circumstances. 
This would be a ban if a woman was stationed at a military post where 
we don't even offer obstetrics and gynecology, where she would have to 
seek care in another State, and many of these States have limited and 
put so many restrictions in place that the doctors are fearful of 
performing even procedures after miscarriage or the procedures that 
were pointed out with the woman in Texas. They have to go someplace 
else to receive the service, even services that are provided under the 
Hyde amendment.
  Make no mistake, I don't support the Hyde amendment, but that is the 
least we should be able to do.
  As has been pointed out, nearly 20 percent of the people who serve in 
our military are women, 80,000 of them are in States that restrict 
abortions, and our troops don't get to choose where they are stationed.
  We need to make sure that our servicewomen are not treated as second-
class citizens and that they have full access to their reproductive 
rights. In the past and in the future, women have faced barriers to 
reach their full potential. Let's not put up another barrier.
  Mr. ROGERS of Alabama. Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the 
gentleman from Texas (Mr. Jackson), an outstanding member of the Armed 
Services Committee.
  Mr. JACKSON of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I thank Chairman Rogers for his 
outstanding leadership in crafting the strongest defense bill I have 
seen during my time in Congress.
  Year after year, the chairman assures us that we are going to have a 
strong NDAA that we can be proud of back home, and this year is no 
different.
  In July, this body passed the NDAA on a bipartisan basis to provide 
our warfighters with the resources and the authorities they need to 
provide for the defense of our Nation.
  As a former Navy rear admiral, I know the vital role this legislation 
plays in our national security. Not only does this NDAA ensure that we 
have the weapons systems and equipment that our servicemembers need, it 
makes needed course corrections to restore the military's focus on 
fighting and winning wars.
  This bill ensures that our military is laser focused on confronting 
the most

[[Page H4421]]

pressing national security threats that our Nation faces.
  However, now, my colleagues on the other side of the aisle have 
chosen to come to the floor and are seeking to inject politics back 
into our military by overturning the Jackson-Roy amendment that was 
adopted on a bipartisan basis to end the Department of Defense's 
illegal and immoral abortion policy.
  After the Supreme Court's historic decision to overturn Roe v. Wade, 
the Biden administration made their intention clear that they would 
work to sidestep the law however possible.
  The Biden administration has pulled every lever within the Federal 
Government and encouraged Federal agencies to create rules and adopt 
policies that not only expand abortion access but also leave American 
taxpayers on the hook to subsidize abortion services.
  Not even the Department of Defense was spared from the Biden 
administration's efforts. In October of last year, the Secretary of 
Defense released a memo titled: ``Ensuring Access to Reproductive 
Health Care.''
  This memo outlined the steps to be taken by the Department to use 
taxpayer dollars to provide servicemembers and their dependents access 
to abortions and for providers to travel to different States to obtain 
the licensing required to perform such procedures.
  In February of this year, the DOD enacted the policies outlined in 
the memo and became a completely unjustified and inappropriate 
participant in the war on life.
  According to its illegal policy, the DOD can now reimburse travel 
expenses for servicemembers and their dependents who travel to obtain 
an abortion in another State and can also reimburse any associated fees 
for healthcare professionals seeking to be licensed in other States for 
the purpose of performing abortions, all, once again, on the taxpayers' 
dime.
  Last year, immediately after the DOD started this unconstitutional 
process, Congressman Roy and I got to work to address this issue and 
ensure that we developed a bill to right this wrong.
  I am so proud to stand on the House floor today and say that our 
provision mandating the DOD cease this insanity was successfully 
included in the House-passed version of the bill.

  At the same time, Senator Tuberville has bravely and steadfastly held 
the line in the Senate by placing a hold on all DOD senior leader 
nominations until the DOD complies with Federal law and ceases its 
abortion policies.
  The DOD has complained that these holds harm national security, but 
the DOD has the ability to stop this immediately. All they have to do 
is rescind this illegal policy.
  It has become clear to me that the Biden administration has purposely 
prioritized an illegal and highly political abortion policy over 
confirming general and flag officers in our military.
  This Biden-endorsed policy has nothing to do with strengthening our 
national security. Instead, this is just the latest example of the 
Biden administration pushing its radical and extreme pro-abortion 
agenda, ironically in the very agency responsible for defending 
American lives.
  Regardless of your political or moral stance on abortion, this policy 
is in direct violation of Federal law, specifically section 1093 of 
title 10, U.S. Code, which restricts funds made available to the DOD 
from being used to perform abortions or for DOD facilities to be used 
for abortions.
  No doubt my colleagues on the other side of the aisle will insist 
that taxpayer dollars are not directly funding these abortions, thereby 
rendering their policy legally sound. This is absolutely misleading, 
and they are lying to the American people.
  While funds may not be going directly to the performance of the 
procedure, it has always been true that a restriction on funding for 
abortion is a restriction on funding for any cost used to promote or 
facilitate the abortion.
  Funding travel and/or other costs for an abortion is, in fact, 
funding the abortion. There is no other reason for these travel 
expenses except to get an abortion. Therefore, providing financial 
support for the travel expenses relating to an abortion is a clear 
violation of laws that are already on the books.
  The NDAA is meant to provide aid, support, and direction to the men 
and women charged with defending the security of this Nation. When 
necessary, it is also a mechanism through which we can bring the 
Department into compliance as needed.
  Inclusion of the House's prohibition on the DOD's abortion policy in 
this year's NDAA is vital to bringing the Department into statutory 
compliance in accordance with our oversight function and refocusing the 
Department on its core mission of fighting and winning wars.
  It stops here and it stops now. On this issue, I will never relent.
  The days of the radical left ignoring the law and driving their 
social agenda in the military are done. I will absolutely not waver in 
my defense of the unborn or in my support of the rule of law.
  I will do everything I can to ensure our military servicemembers can 
focus on their jobs and their families instead of being used to score 
political points for the Biden administration.
  I appreciate the chairman's strong leadership in crafting this year's 
bill, and I look forward to the conference process where we will do 
everything in our power to maintain this vital provision.
  Ms. HOULAHAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Here are the facts: Not a single dollar is going toward paying for an 
abortion under the current DOD travel policy, which only provides for 
leave and travel reimbursements for servicewomen who are forced to 
travel for their healthcare due to restrictive laws of the State that 
they are stationed in, in line with a very longstanding DOD policy that 
has always provided for travel and leave where specialized healthcare 
is not provided or allowed for.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Michigan (Ms. 
Slotkin).
  Ms. SLOTKIN. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to call out the amendments 
that have been forced into the Pentagon budget over the past month-and-
a-half.
  When this Pentagon budget was voted on in our committee, it passed 
58-1. I voted for it, as did many of my peers on this side of the aisle 
and the other side of the aisle.
  When it left our committee, it became a wish list of the rightwing 
culture war agenda. If you take a 40,000-foot view of what is going on 
here, it becomes very clear. The other side of the aisle is not going 
to stop until there is a Federal ban on all abortions, in every State, 
in every circumstance. Our last speaker made it clear.
  A bill that is typically bipartisan has now become a prisoner of this 
debate. Let's review the bidding.
  We have seen the other side of the aisle put in unnecessary abortion 
restrictions in minor appropriations, in veterans' bills targeting 
female veterans. A single Senator is holding up 300 critical military 
nominations because servicemembers want to get leave to get the care 
that they need, and the NDAA in its current form is targeting 
servicewomen specifically.
  Make no mistake, the United States should hear that in every place, 
in every possible window. The people on the other side of the aisle are 
going to continue their 50-year pledge to get rid of all abortions 
everywhere. They are open about that. While those of them who are in 
competitive elections may try to mealymouth what they have done for the 
past 20 years, we need to hear what they are telling us.
  The other side of the aisle is taking national security issues 
hostage for their unrelenting fight on this issue so that no woman can 
have a right to an abortion if she has been raped, if she is the victim 
of incest, or for a simple miscarriage, which one out of three women in 
America have had.
  I know the other side of the aisle is not listening on this issue. 
The American people need to hear it loud and clear. They want a Federal 
ban on abortion.

  Mr. ROGERS of Alabama. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman 
from Louisiana (Mr. Johnson), a great new member of the Armed Services 
Committee and a longtime champion of the unborn in America.
  Mr. JOHNSON of Louisiana. Mr. Speaker, I thank Chairman Rogers and 
Representative Jackson for their important work on this really critical 
issue.

[[Page H4422]]

  Mr. Speaker, historically, Americans have transitionally held the 
most positive view of the U.S. military among all of our institutions, 
but something changed last year. Right now, less than half of Americans 
now have a great deal of confidence and trust in the military.
  You want to know why? The reason stated is because the military 
leadership has become overly politicized. They are addressing issues 
that don't have anything to do with our national defense.
  The best example of that probably is Secretary Austin's policy of 
reimbursing travel expenses for servicemembers seeking an abortion.
  The law is clear, as the chairman has stated. Title 10, section 1093, 
explicitly prohibits funds available to the DOD from being used to 
perform abortions.
  The statute was drafted, passed, and signed into law by the people's 
duly elected representatives. This politicized Department of Defense 
has decided to create a workaround.
  Thankfully, the House-passed NDAA will end this lawlessness. We have 
to stand for that. The House has spoken on the issue, and the House's 
position is very clear.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to defeat this motion to instruct.
  Ms. HOULAHAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  We don't get to choose what our facts are. The chilling effect that 
is happening right now on recruiting is caused by a variety of things, 
but the number one reason, the number one contributing factor to a 
servicemember's decision to enlist or reenlist, is the support of their 
spouse.
  If we are showing the entire country that we don't trust women and 
families to be in control of their own healthcare decisions, why would 
they encourage anyone in their family to reenlist or to enlist in the 
service at all.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. 
Crow).
  Mr. CROW. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to urge the conferees to strike 
this truly abhorrent provision from the National Defense Authorization 
Act.
  As several of my colleagues have pointed out, when this bill went out 
of committee, out of the Armed Services Committee, it passed with a 
very strong bipartisan 58-1 vote. Then extremists within the Republican 
Party got ahold of it and made floor amendments and put in poison 
pills, including this one, in the bill.
  A couple of facts: Number one, no taxpayer money is going to provide 
abortions for servicemembers. The longstanding policy of the Department 
of Defense is we allow servicemembers to travel for necessary medical 
procedures and care when they can't get that care on a base or locally. 
That is longstanding policy. That is what we are talking about here 
today.
  You have also heard a bunch of my colleagues get up today and say 
this has nothing to do with national defense, that this is superfluous; 
nothing to do with the national defense of our country. Really?
  We can spend money and buy all the best tanks and aircraft carriers 
and missiles that money can buy, but what actually makes us strong? It 
is our people. Our people are behind all of that. What undergirds 
people is the trust within a unit.
  I served three combat tours in Iraq and Afghanistan. I can tell you, 
if you don't trust the person you are going to war with, it is all 
meaningless.
  Are we really going to set up a system where our women servicemembers 
are second-class citizens within our units and undermine the very trust 
and integrity of those units? No, we should not and will not. I will 
stand against that.
  Number two, we are suffering historic recruiting shortages in our 
military. Are we really going to send a message to our young women who 
want to stand up and serve our country and maybe give their lives, that 
they can't access the same care as their male counterparts?

                              {time}  1245

  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Miller of Ohio). The time of the 
gentleman has expired.
  Ms. HOULAHAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield an additional 30 seconds to the 
gentleman from Colorado.
  Mr. CROW. Is that the message we want to send? No. You can't say you 
are for our national security and also support this measure. More than 
anything else, this is a moral argument.
  I don't want to see yellow ribbons tied around trees, I don't want to 
see people thank people for their service, I don't want to see 10 
percent discounts on coffee or meals if they are willing to support a 
policy that undermines the morality of this country and the ability of 
our young men and women to get the care they need and for our young 
servicewomen, in particular, to be treated equally.
  Mr. ROGERS of Alabama. Mr. Speaker, I have one correction to make, 
that this is a new policy. This was not existing policy. It was 
announced on October 20 against the advice of the congressional 
leadership and finalized on February 16. They didn't just take existing 
policy and continue it.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Self), 
a great new freshman Member.
  Mr. SELF. Mr. Speaker, I rise today, and I agree with my colleagues 
across the aisle: You cannot choose your own facts, and this is a moral 
discussion.
  Abortion is not reproductive health. Abortion takes a life. There are 
two people involved in this issue, and one of them dies. This is not 
healthcare. This is not a political issue. It is a moral issue that our 
Nation needs to grapple with.
  This motion must not pass.
  Ms. HOULAHAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from 
California (Ms. Pelosi), former Speaker of the House.
  Ms. PELOSI. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman for yielding and for 
her leadership on this issue.
  I commend the chair and ranking member of the Armed Services 
Committee for the legislation that came out of their committee 58-1, 
the bipartisanship to protect and defend, which is the oath of office 
that all of us take to serve in government; and also, though, to 
acknowledge that, on the floor of the House, these poisonous 
resolutions came forward and were added to the bill. I rise to move to 
instruct House conferees to honor our men and women in uniform by 
protecting their fundamental health freedom.
  I was listening with interest and prayerfully, frankly, to the 
previous speaker, who just said that terminating a pregnancy is not a 
health issue. Well, for some people, it might be.
  Do you believe in the Hyde amendment? I am not a fan of the Hyde 
amendment, but that is the law of the land. Under the Hyde amendment, 
if there is rape, incest, or the life of the mother is at risk, then 
that changes the dynamic in terms of public policy.
  Now, suppose a family member has a situation where the life of the 
mother is at risk or a child of a servicemember is the victim of 
violence and rape in the community. Would you want that person to have 
their health needs met? If they are in a State that says absolutely 
not, then they would have to travel elsewhere to have their health 
needs met, in keeping with the Hyde amendment.
  If you believe in the Hyde amendment, which I don't subscribe to, but 
many of you do, how can you deprive the life of a mother--whether it is 
a servicewoman herself or the spouse of a serviceperson, or child of a 
servicemember--the ability to seek the healthcare that they need?
  The NDAA has long been bipartisan. This year, House Republicans are 
now engaging in a version that would restrict servicemembers from 
receiving full reproductive rights.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentlewoman has expired.
  Ms. HOULAHAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield an additional 30 seconds to the 
gentlewoman from California.
  Ms. PELOSI. This is disrespectful. Shame on those who play political 
games with the courageous people who would give their lives to save 
ours.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Members are reminded to direct their remarks 
to the Chair.
  Mr. ROGERS of Alabama. Mr. Speaker, I share the sentiment of the most 
recent speaker. I think it is shameful that the DOD has been playing 
games with the troops in this country.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from Illinois (Mrs. 
Miller).
  Mrs. MILLER of Illinois. Mr. Speaker, I thank Congressman Jackson for

[[Page H4423]]

working tirelessly to stop Joe Biden from using our military to fund 
abortions and his woke agenda. Throughout this year, we fought to 
incorporate an amendment into the Defense bill to protect the religious 
liberty of our servicemembers and prevent the Biden Pentagon from 
funding abortions.
  The American people do not want the military paying for abortions. 
Biden's radical leftwing transformation of our military has created a 
recruitment and retention crisis which puts our military readiness in 
crisis.
  I thank my colleagues in the House who have fought to keep our 
military from funding abortions. No taxpayer funds should ever be used 
to fund abortions, and I will continue to advocate for innocent life.
  As the saying goes: ``America is great because America is good.'' 
Abortion is evil, and we can never become advocates for killing 
innocent babies in the womb.
  Ms. HOULAHAN. Mr. Speaker, just a reminder that President Biden knows 
personally what it means to support those in uniform and to keep the 
administration's promise to make sure that our servicemen and -women 
are protected as they serve us all.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Washington (Mr. 
Smith), the ranking member of the Armed Services Committee.
  Mr. SMITH of Washington. Mr. Speaker, just a couple quick points.
  First of all, there is no legality issue here. This policy is clearly 
and unequivocally legal. As the quotes from the Hyde amendment said 
earlier, the Hyde amendment says that the government can't pay for an 
abortion or use their services for abortion.

  The travel policy does not do either one of those things, so there is 
nothing illegal and nothing unconstitutional. This is a policy choice, 
and we have heard some very passionate arguments on both sides about 
what that policy choice should be.
  Number one, let's put aside this ridiculous notion that this is 
illegal or unconstitutional. No. This is a perfectly legal policy that, 
on a policy ground, you disagree with.
  Number two, in response to Chairman Rogers' comment about this being 
a new policy, it is not really a new policy in the following sense: It 
has always been the policy of the Department of Defense that if you 
cannot get the healthcare that you need where you are at, they will pay 
to take you to where you can.
  Now, prior to the Dobbs decision, that was not an issue when it came 
to reproductive services. The Dobbs decision changed that. The Biden 
administration didn't support the Dobbs decision and didn't make that 
happen.
  Once that happened, servicemembers in many, many States were no 
longer able to get the reproductive healthcare that they needed or 
wanted where they were, so, therefore, the travel policy that has been 
a long-time existing policy then applied. It applied to servicemembers 
seeking reproductive healthcare that couldn't get it in the State where 
they were.
  This is not a change in policy, and it is not illegal. It is a policy 
choice. As a number of speakers have mentioned, it is an important 
policy choice on the very recruitment issue. It will be harder to 
recruit women if they are not protected.
  I think the former Speaker made an outstanding argument for why it is 
really important. Even if you don't believe in abortion, you have a 
miscarriage, you need these services that you cannot get, this is 
crucial to recruitment.
  The last point on this is we keep hearing the military is not popular 
anymore because of Biden's woke policies, which is ridiculous. To the 
extent that the military has gone down in credibility, it is because so 
many people are running around trashing our military saying they are 
excessively woke.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has expired.
  Ms. HOULAHAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield an additional 30 seconds to the 
gentleman from Washington.
  Mr. SMITH of Washington. Our military is the best in the world. It is 
the best in the world today with those policies. Continuously 
undercutting and trashing our military as being weak and woke is 
hurting recruitment. I will grant you that. It is completely wrong, as 
are Senator Tuberville's efforts to gut the military's ability to do 
its job because he disagrees with the policy.
  We had a vote on it. President Biden got elected. He made his 
decision. Change the policy. Don't trash the military.
  Mr. ROGERS of Alabama. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the 
gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Smith), a longtime champion of the 
unborn in America.
  Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to the 
motion to instruct.
  Let's be absolutely clear. Current Federal DOD law already permits 
taxpayer funding of abortion in cases of rape, incest, and to save the 
life of the mother, but the Biden DOD travel policy forces taxpayers to 
pay the transportation costs for military members and dependents to 
travel to procure an abortion for any reason whatsoever right up until 
the moment of birth.
  Some States, like my State of New Jersey--and there are many others 
like it, like New York and California--have enacted extremist laws that 
legally sanction the killing of a baby for any reason whatsoever right 
up until the moment of birth. The Biden policy has no limits on 
gestational age, so it facilitates aborting babies through all 9 
months.
  There is nothing humane, Mr. Speaker, or benign about abortion. 
Abortion is not healthcare unless one construes the precious life of an 
unborn child analogous to a tumor to be excised or a disease to be 
vanquished.
  Dr. Ronny Jackson's House-passed amendment to the NDAA overturns the 
DOD abortion travel policy.
  Regrettably, the pro-abortion culture is truly a culture of denial. 
It continues to deny, devalue, and disrespect unborn children, both 
boys and girls.
  We must recognize the breathtaking miracle of the newly created life 
of an unborn child and that women deserve better than abortion. We need 
to care for both. We need to love them both.
  I do believe, Mr. Speaker, that future generations will someday look 
back on us and wonder how and why a society that bragged about its 
commitment to human rights could have legally sanctioned and 
aggressively promoted child beheadings, because they do behead the 
child during the process of a dismemberment abortion, as well as other 
dismemberment.

  Abortion pills. How do they work? They literally starve the child to 
death. That is how they work. I work on global hunger and food 
insecurity issues in my district and throughout the country and world 
all the time. How does the abortion pill work? It starves the baby to 
death.
  Please, Mr. Speaker, I call on my colleagues to not force taxpayers 
to facilitate abortion on demand.
  Ms. HOULAHAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
California (Mr. Garamendi).
  Mr. GARAMENDI. Mr. Speaker, I am honored to stand here beside my 
women colleagues in support of this very important motion. As they have 
shared, we have an essential duty to protect the rights of our 
servicemembers, their reproductive rights. We protect the decisions 
that they must be able to make about their own body.
  When servicemembers volunteer, they know that they will be making 
sacrifices. They know that they will have to follow orders. They know 
that they will have to take on hard missions and do whatever is 
necessary to defend our country. One thing they did not sign up for is 
to sacrifice their fundamental medical care and their fundamental 
rights to their own body.
  Access to medical care has a direct impact on military readiness. I 
am very surprised to find that the very people that are claiming to 
care about our military's capability and readiness are pushing policies 
which will actively degrade our fighting forces.
  Denying access to medical care sends a loud and clear message to 
every woman in the military now and to every other woman that may want 
to join the military; that is, your reproductive rights will not be 
honored or will not even exist should you join the military.
  That is a message that will be sent to 18 percent of the women who 
make up our military today, and it will send the same message to every 
other woman who might want to join the military in the future.

[[Page H4424]]

  The policies that are in this bill will chase women away from what 
they want; that is, to patriotically serve our country in the military. 
It is the wrong message.
  This particular instruction should pass this House if we care about 
the readiness of our military.

                              {time}  1300

  Mr. ROGERS of Alabama. Mr. Speaker, may I inquire as to how much time 
I have remaining.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Alabama has 18 minutes 
remaining.
  Mr. ROGERS of Alabama. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the 
gentleman from Texas (Mr. Fallon), an outstanding member of the Armed 
Services Committee.
  Mr. FALLON. Mr. Speaker, I have heard a lot of claims, some of them 
very hyperbolic and some of which I would classify as drivel from some 
of the prior speakers.
  It is one thing to disagree, but we should at least be truthful. 
Let's look at the amendment itself, section 716, lines 9 through 14: 
The Department of Defense may not use any funds for abortions except 
where the life of the mother would be endangered if the fetus were 
carried to term or in a case where the pregnancy is the result of rape 
or incest.
  Let's be truthful, Mr. Speaker. At least we are making some progress. 
Some of the Members, our friends across the aisle, have actually used 
the term ``woman'' instead of ``birthing person.'' That is something 
that has, I think at least for me, given me some hope.
  The question before us is a simple one: Are we a rule of law nation 
or not?
  Secretary Austin's decision to pay servicemembers to pursue abortions 
is a clear violation of current law, the Hyde amendment.
  We are hearing ``necessary healthcare.'' Is it necessary healthcare, 
or is it an elective abortion? Necessary healthcare in the case of, 
let's say, rape is already covered under the Hyde amendment.
  Don't paint us with some wide brush to say that we want to take that 
right away. I would submit that many Republicans want to protect women 
that have been impregnated because of rape.
  That is absurd, and it really is very unfair.
  Is the DOD complying with Federal law right now or not? This policy 
does it by prohibiting funding. The NDAA is simply ensuring we maintain 
the protections that are already enshrined in current law.
  Again, it is one thing to disagree, but to make these hyperbolic, 
untrue claims doesn't serve the purposes of a spirited exchange of 
ideas or an honest debate.
  Secretary Austin, if you want to be honest, is playing politics. If 
he would simply follow the law, 300 general and flag officers would get 
the promotions that they are due.
  The only people who are jeopardizing readiness right now are 
Secretary Austin and President Biden and his administration.
  Our bill puts an end to this nonsense once and for all. I support the 
amendment.
  Ms. HOULAHAN. Mr. Speaker, may I inquire as to how much time I have 
remaining.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentlewoman from Pennsylvania has 8 
minutes remaining.
  Ms. HOULAHAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from 
Massachusetts (Mr. Moulton).
  Mr. MOULTON. Mr. Speaker, my Republican colleagues often blame the 
military's current recruitment crisis on DEI initiatives. They say the 
military is becoming too woke and that it is driving away recruits.
  The only problem with that is that the survey data we have actually 
says the exact opposite. It says that what recruits are concerned about 
is being welcomed into an organization that will accept who they are.
  With this anti-abortion policy, Republicans are effectively telling 
50 percent of America and 20 percent of our current fighting force: You 
are not welcome here because of who you are.
  If you are a White guy, you are probably fine. If you are a woman, 
sorry, you are a second-class citizen. You don't have the healthcare 
options that the rest of us have.
  It is no wonder that every branch except the Marine Corps is 
struggling to meet recruitment goals.
  Instead of seriously focusing on how we deter a war with China, we 
are having politically motivated debates in this Chamber over a woman's 
private healthcare decisions.
  What my Republican colleagues won't say is that the DOD's abortion 
travel policy does not even pay for this medical care. It doesn't even 
pay for it. It simply allows a woman who has put her life on the line 
for our country the necessary leave if she is stationed in a State 
where abortions are not available.
  I voted against the NDAA because it doesn't support our 
servicemembers. It makes them political pawns. It is a slap in the face 
to every woman who serves or might consider it in the future. We need 
to treat women with the respect they deserve for serving our country.
  Mr. ROGERS of Alabama. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the 
gentlewoman from Indiana (Mrs. Houchin).
  Mrs. HOUCHIN. Mr. Speaker, let me start by saying killing a baby is 
not healthcare if it is done in an elective abortion. Clearly, the Hyde 
amendment gives exceptions for life of the mother, rape, and incest.
  Mr. Speaker, we shouldn't really have to be here talking about this 
issue today, but we are. The amendment we are speaking in support of 
today would repeal the Department of Defense's policy that facilitates 
elective abortion at taxpayers' expense. Whether those funds are for 
travel or any other purpose related to abortion, they are illegal.
  Mr. Speaker, it seems pretty cut and dry to me and many of my 
colleagues that what the Department of Defense is doing now is not in 
line with longstanding and current law, according to the Hyde 
amendment.
  While the administration might disagree with the Supreme Court's 
decision with respect to Dobbs, that does not give them the right to 
circumvent the law. Taxpayer funds should not be spent on elective 
abortion, period.
  Republicans are not the ones polarizing this country or injecting 
wokeness and politics into the institutions entrusted with our defense. 
It is quite the contrary.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentlewoman has expired.
  Mr. ROGERS of Alabama. Mr. Speaker, I yield an additional 30 seconds 
to the gentlewoman from Indiana.

  Mrs. HOUCHIN. Mr. Speaker, what we are trying to do is strip those 
things out of the Department of Defense and return them to their sacred 
duty of defending the country.
  I voted in support of this amendment during the House consideration 
of the NDAA because it was the right thing to do.
  As the House just agreed to proceed in conference, I strongly 
encourage House conferees to advocate for its inclusion in the final 
product in conference.
  This is an issue about the rule of law and pushing back on an 
administration that has demonstrated its appetite to ignore it.
  Mr. Speaker, I thank the chairman of the Armed Services Committee for 
his leadership as we head into conference.
  Ms. HOULAHAN. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. ROGERS of Alabama. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the 
gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Alford), a great member of the Armed 
Services Committee.
  Mr. ALFORD. Mr. Speaker, today, I stand with my colleagues to oppose 
the motion to obstruct and to repeal facilitating abortions funded by 
the Department of Defense and, in effect, taxpayers.
  Following the Supreme Court's landmark Dobbs decision, the Biden 
administration sought ways to bypass the ruling. They have encouraged 
Federal agencies to not only expand abortion access but also to burden 
American taxpayers with the cost.
  Last October, the Secretary of Defense released a memo titled: 
``Ensuring Access to Reproductive Health Care.'' Let's get something 
straight, Mr. Speaker. There is nothing reproductive about abortion. 
Abortion ends a life. It does not reproduce.
  This memo paves the way for taxpayer money to facilitate abortion for 
servicemembers and their dependents. It even allows for the 
reimbursement of

[[Page H4425]]

travel expenses for those seeking abortions in another State. Taxpayer 
funds for the DOD are meant for national defense, not to further a pro-
abortion agenda.
  Let me be clear, Mr. Speaker. We believe in life-affirming care for 
the mother and the baby that God is growing inside of her, but we also 
believe that the government in no way, no shape, and no form should be 
paying to facilitate ending that life.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to back this amendment and defeat 
the motion to obstruct. Let's save some lives.
  Ms. HOULAHAN. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. ROGERS of Alabama. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the 
gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Van Duyne).
  Ms. VAN DUYNE. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to this motion, 
although I will admit that it is very nice to hear my Democrat 
colleagues are finally concerned with military recruitment.
  I wish they were worried about military recruitment when they were 
voting to kick out of the military members who didn't want to get the 
jab or when they were voting to support the botched Afghanistan 
withdrawal that led to so many unnecessary deaths.
  They seem to have already changed the recruitment videos from ``Be 
All You Can Be'' to come and get an abortion. How proud they must be.
  This is no more than a Federal power grab usurping State laws that 
were legally and constitutionally created by State legislators elected 
by a majority of voters from each State.
  This is a Federal power grab by a party intent on forcing its radical 
political agenda down the throats of Americans, who overwhelmingly 
don't want it.
  As President Biden and my colleagues on the other side of the aisle 
know, the Hyde amendment, which President Biden supported for decades, 
explicitly prohibits Federal dollars from being used for taxpayer-
funded abortions. Nearly 60 percent of Americans agree that taxpayer 
dollars should not be used to fund abortions.
  Ms. HOULAHAN. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. ROGERS of Alabama. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the 
gentlewoman from Colorado (Mrs. Boebert).
  Mrs. BOEBERT. Mr. Speaker, I rise to oppose the motion to instruct 
conferees to not include Representative Ronny Jackson's amendment in 
the fiscal year 2024 NDAA.
  This policy is a gross misuse of taxpayer dollars to circumvent State 
laws and violates the decades-old, bipartisan Hyde amendment.
  It is clear that Joe Biden and Lloyd Austin's Department of Defense 
is more focused on appeasing the woke mob of pink-hat-wearing feminists 
than focusing on keeping our Nation safe.
  This is the same DOD that surrendered to the Taliban, costing the 
lives of 13 brave servicemembers. This is the same DOD treating our 
military like a woke social experiment. This is the same DOD the House 
will vote to fund later this week.
  The Department of Defense should be focused on readiness and 
lethality, not spending taxpayer dollars to kill the lives of innocent, 
unborn babies.
  We are not going to give up on this cause that is righteous, and we 
are not going to stop fighting to give voice to the voiceless.
  Since Roe v. Wade in 1973, over 63 million lives have been lost to 
abortion. I personally have held a newborn baby born at 23 weeks old, 1 
pound, 8 ounces. I know that her life has just the same worth and value 
as any one of us standing here today.
  Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend and colleague, Congressman Ronny 
Jackson, for his leadership in restoring our military focus and 
protecting these precious unborn lives.
  I am proud to stand with my colleagues in defense of these children, 
as well as with millions of Americans across our Nation.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to oppose this motion to instruct.

  Ms. HOULAHAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  I would like very much, Mr. Speaker, if I could ask you to ask my 
colleagues to not presume to judge who I am.
  I stand here as a woman who has worn the uniform, who has given birth 
while wearing the uniform. To have assumptions about who I am or what I 
am and to judge me or any of my other colleagues who have worn the 
uniform is an offense to me, and I would ask that you advise them not 
to presume anything about me.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. ROGERS of Alabama. Mr. Speaker, this provision protects life and 
restores sanity to the Department of Defense.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge all Members to oppose the motion, and I yield 
back the balance of my time.
  Ms. HOULAHAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.
  Mr. Speaker, a far-right minority in Congress has spent the last 9 
months holding this process, this NDAA, hostage--again, a reminder that 
this passed with overwhelming bipartisan support. They are currently 
struggling to even pass a rule for Defense appropriations, let alone to 
pass the budget itself.
  They have gone through attacks on servicewomen, on LGBTQ 
servicemembers, on immigrant servicemembers, and so much more. Their 
allies in the Senate are risking our military readiness with asinine 
confirmation holds and ignoring the repeated requests of our most 
senior military members to stop.
  Time and time again, they have used must-pass, historically 
bipartisan legislation such as the NDAA to force an extreme agenda on 
our servicemembers and many others in our country.
  As an Air Force veteran and as a proud military child who lived and 
served across this great country and in many other places outside of 
this country, I did so with the full protections of Roe v. Wade.
  It not only saddens me but also pains me to think that we would give 
servicewomen orders without the full reproductive freedoms and 
protections that I had when I was able to serve.

                              {time}  1315

  Today, Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to choose to be on the side 
of our servicemembers, military families, and all Americans who love 
and support them by supporting this motion to instruct.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Weber of Texas). All time for debate has 
expired.
  Without objection, the previous question is ordered on the motion to 
instruct.
  There was no objection.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion to instruct.
  The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that 
the noes appeared to have it.
  Ms. HOULAHAN. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
  The yeas and nays were ordered.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX, further 
proceedings on this question will be postponed.

                          ____________________