[Congressional Record Volume 170, Number 144 (Tuesday, September 17, 2024)]
[Senate]
[Pages S6075-S6084]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                          LEGISLATIVE SESSION

                                 ______
                                 

                  RIGHT TO IVF ACT--MOTION TO PROCEED

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the Senate will 
resume legislative session and resume consideration of the motion to 
proceed to S. 4445, which the clerk will report.
  The senior assistant legislative clerk read as follows:

       Motion to proceed to Calendar No. 413, S. 4445, a bill to 
     protect and expand nationwide access to fertility treatment, 
     including in vitro fertilization.

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Alabama.


                       Unanimous Consent--S. 4368

  Mrs. BRITT. Mr. President, I am proud today to be joining my 
colleague from Texas in support of the IVF Protection Act. I am 
grateful to Senator Cruz for his leadership on this important topic.
  Both Senator Cruz and I are parents. We can both attest to the fact 
that there is no greater blessing in life than our children. For many 
Americans, building a family, becoming a mom or a dad--that is their 
American dream.
  IVF makes the difference in achieving that dream for millions of 
Americans who are facing infertility. IVF helps aspiring parents to 
start families, to grow their family. In the United States, nearly 200 
babies are born a day, so nearly 2 percent of all babies born are 
because of IVF.
  This treatment is really a game changer for so many families; that is 
why I strongly support continued nationwide access to IVF. IVF is legal 
and available from coast to coast, in every single corner of America, 
and in all 50 States.
  That includes my home State of Alabama, where Governor Ivey and the 
Alabama legislature acted quickly to protect IVF access.
  Today, we have an opportunity to act quickly and overwhelmingly to 
protect continued nationwide IVF access for loving American families.
  Our IVF Protection Act would do just that: It would give aspiring 
parents nationwide the certainty and peace of mind that IVF will remain 
legal and available in every State. Our bill is the only bill that 
protects IVF access while safeguarding religious liberty.
  It also could get 60 votes in the U.S. Senate, and isn't that the 
point? Yet we are going to have a show vote when we have been talking 
and saying that we want to protect access to IVF, but yet no one is 
working to actually get to the 60-vote threshold, which makes me wonder 
how serious my colleagues on the other side of the aisle are about 
this.
  In an era of hyperpartisanship, this bill, the IVF Protection Act, 
should be the one that is on the floor today. This is the bill that 
will give aspiring parents confidence and continued hope that their 
dreams of bringing life into this world can come true.
  Look, as I talk to families across Alabama and parents who are 
hopeful they can bring a child into this world, making sure that this 
process is protected and available is critically important.
  However, this bill is not the one the Democrats are putting on the 
floor. This is not drafted in that way. It is drafted to be a partisan 
scare tactic in what we are going to see today. For example, it is not 
written in a way to narrowly cover IVF; it includes completely separate 
treatments and technology, even including human cloning.
  Democrats are choosing to spread misinformation rather than fostering 
hope. The American people deserve better. The path forward is Senator 
Cruz and my IVF Protection Act. Again, I want to applaud my colleague 
from Texas for his unwavering and continued support for nationwide IVF 
access.
  While Democrats prioritize scaring families, Republicans will 
continue to fight for them. I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Texas.
  Mr. CRUZ. Mr. President, I want to thank my friend Senator Britt for 
her powerful and passionate defense of in vitro fertilization. Senator 
Britt has been an incredible partner as she and I have worked to pass 
landmark Federal legislation protecting IVF for every American.
  I am proud to rise once again to speak on an issue that is personal 
and vital to millions of American families: the protection of in vitro 
fertilization. IVF is a medical miracle that has brought the joy of 
parenthood to millions of families who otherwise might never have 
experienced it.
  I am an unequivocal supporter of protecting IVF, and I am grateful 
that IVF has given so many parents struggling with infertility the gift 
of finally holding a child, a baby, in their arms, finally having the 
opportunity to be a mother or a father and to raise a son or daughter 
and to give all of the love in a family that they so desperately want 
to give.
  Today, unfortunately, my colleagues on the other side of the aisle 
are staging an empty show vote on what they call an IVF bill in order 
to stoke baseless fears about IVF and push their broader political 
agenda.
  Let's be clear, there is not a single Senator in this Chamber, on 
either side of the aisle, who wants to ban IVF. All 100 Senators, to 
the best of my knowledge, support IVF. Not a single one has called for 
banning it.
  And yet I previously voted against the Democrats' partisan 
legislation because it is not an IVF bill. It is designed to backdoor 
and federalize broad abortion legislation, which I understand is the 
Democrats' partisan position, but it is contrary to the views of a 
great many Americans.
  And the partisan Democrat bill also deliberately overturns the 
conscious protections of the Religious Freedom Restoration Act. You 
know, it is unfortunate that Democrats have abandoned what used to be a 
bipartisan commitment to religious liberty and they are now more than 
willing to overturn religious liberty protections.

  Instead of pushing a partisan and, frankly, cynical agenda, I invite 
my Democratic colleagues to actually do what they claim they want to 
do, which is work with me today and stand together to pass clear 
Federal legislation protecting IVF.
  IVF is profoundly pro-family. Over 8 million babies have been born 
through IVF, providing millions of American families the chance to 
embrace the joy of raising a child. It is an avenue of hope for those 
struggling with infertility.
  Misconceptions and deliberate scare tactics from the Democrats about 
the legal standing of IVF will only serve to hurt families who are 
desperately trying to welcome a child into their lives.
  What the American people deserve is straightforward, pro-IVF 
legislation. That is why my colleague Senator Britt and I have 
introduced the IVF Protection Act, legislation that offers ironclad, 
Federal statutory protection for IVF.
  Our bill does not engage in backdoor politics. It does not infringe 
on the deeply held beliefs of individuals or organizations. It simply 
does what needs to be done: safeguarding the right of couples to grow 
their family if they choose to use IVF. Because this should not be a 
political issue; instead, it is a deeply human issue.
  Our bill unequivocally prohibits any State or local government from 
banning IVF, ensuring that no family will be caught in the crossfire of 
State-level judicial interpretations. It provides peace of mind to 
parents and to aspiring parents, while still allowing States to 
implement reasonable health and safety standards.
  It ensures that access to IVF is fully protected by Federal law so 
that every family praying to have a child will be fully protected in 
their right to pursue parenthood.
  This isn't just policy. It is a promise to honor and support your 
desire to welcome a new baby into your family.
  I urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to support this bill. 
This is a

[[Page S6076]]

moment for us to unite political divides and affirm our shared belief 
in the sanctity of family and the promise of life.
  In just a moment, I will propound a unanimous consent request to take 
up and pass the Cruz-Britt bill. Because if we truly stand with 
families, we must act now to ensure that IVF remains protected today 
and for generations to come.
  Now, for those of you in the gallery, those of you at home, there are 
times when Senate procedure can sound confusing. I want to explain what 
you are about to see. I am going to ask this body for unanimous consent 
to pass Senator Britt's and my legislation protecting IVF, putting it 
into Federal law, a clear Federal statutory protection for IVF.
  After I ask for consent, we are going to see a Democrat Senator stand 
up and begin speaking. When she begins speaking, you should listen to 
two magic words: ``I object.''
  If the Democrats say those words, ``I object,'' it will defeat this 
bill. And I want you to understand all that is necessary is for the 
Democrats not to say those words, ``I object.'' We could have Democrat 
Senators stand up and give speeches about all of their policy 
priorities, but understand, the show vote this afternoon is not about 
IVF, because if the Democrats wanted to protect IVF, this bill would 
pass 100 to nothing right now.
  What the show vote this afternoon is about is Democrats want to spend 
hundreds of millions of dollars running TV ads in an election season 
falsely claiming that Republicans oppose IVF.
  So listen carefully, if you hear the words ``I object'' from Senate 
Democrats, then you will understand the only reason that IVF is not 
protected with strong, ironclad protection in Federal statute is 
because Senate Democrats cynically object to protecting IVF.
  And I would note to the members of the media who are writing on this, 
the Democrats are staging the show vote to get the headlines. They want 
you to write headlines: Every Republican opposes IVF.
  Well, if you are going to write those false headlines, at least 
include the facts that today the Senate would have passed 100 to 
nothing strong, clear Federal protection of IVF for every mom and dad, 
every parent in America but for the fact that Senate Democrats 
cynically object while they claim to support IVF.
  Well, let's listen and see what happens. Let's hear if we hear the 
words ``I object.''
  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Finance Committee be 
discharged from further consideration of S. 4368 and the Senate proceed 
to its immediate consideration. I further ask that the bill be 
considered read a third time and passed and that the motion to 
reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
  The Senator from Washington.
  Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, reserving the right to object. I have 
been perfectly clear about the glaring issue with this Republican bill. 
The cold, hard reality is this Republican bill does nothing to 
meaningfully protect IVF from the biggest threats from lawmakers and 
anti-abortion extremists all over this country.
  It would still allow States to regulate IVF out of existence. And 
this bill is silent on fetal personhood, which is the biggest threat to 
IVF. It is silent on whether States can demand that an embryo be 
treated the same as a living, breathing person or whether parents 
should be allowed to have clinics dispose of unused embryos, something 
that is a common, necessary part of the IVF process.
  Talk to the experts who provide this care. Talk to the families who 
are seeking it. And that question looms large in their mind.
  What are we supposed to do if our State says these embryos are 
living, breathing people? Do we have to do this process in another 
State? What is our legal risk here?
  That uncertainty is at the core of the chaos Republican bans have 
caused. The last time Republicans offered this hollow gesture of a 
bill, I asked the junior Senator from Texas point-blank: Do you support 
letting parents have unused embryos disposed of? And a funny thing 
actually happened: He said on the floor ``I will answer that 
question,'' but he never did. He spoke about what the laws in some of 
our States are, but he never actually said what he supported; he never 
said what he believes should be Federal law; he never mentioned that he 
once pledged to support a constitutional amendment to establish fetal 
personhood as the law of the land.
  So I ask all of my Republican colleagues once again: As a matter of 
national policy, should parents be allowed to dispose of unused 
embryos? If so, why is that key provision missing from your bill? Well, 
we all know why. If not, how can you look the American people in the 
eye and say you support IVF? It doesn't compute.
  Mr. President, I object.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Objection is heard.
  The Senator from Texas.
  Mr. CRUZ. Mr. President, I would note there is one reason and one 
reason only that the Senate has not passed 100 to nothing a clear, 
unequivocal Federal protection of IVF: because Senate Democrats 
cynically chose to object.
  The Senator from Washington raised all sorts of issues that are, 
frankly, red herrings. The issues she raised are current State law in 
multiple States, including Louisiana, including Missouri, including 
Georgia. Yet, IVF is fully protected and available in those States.
  Senator Britt and I very consciously focused this bill on issues that 
could command bipartisan agreement. There is not a word in this bill 
that any Senator, Democrat or Republican, disagrees with.
  Understand why the Democrats are objecting. The Democrats are 
objecting because they do not want to protect IVF in Federal statute. 
It is cynical because we are 49 days away from Election Day, and they 
intend to try to scare voters in elections across the country by 
misleading the voters--I will point out, at the same time that we have 
a Presidential election.
  Many of us served with the Vice President, Kamala Harris. I remember 
Vice President Harris voting again and again and again against border 
security, against a border wall. Yet, right now, Vice President Harris 
is spending millions of dollars running ads with pictures of Donald 
Trump's border wall. It is deeply cynical, and it is because she is 
running away from her open borders record.
  The same is true here. The Democrats are going to spend millions of 
dollars arguing that Republicans are opposed to IVF and ignoring the 
fact that it is Democrats standing up and objecting that prevent it 
from being protected in Federal law.
  The Democrats don't want to protect IVF because if we pass this law, 
do you know what? They couldn't run their misleading campaign 
commercials. So from a partisan perspective on the Democrat side, it is 
far better to block strong Federal legislation protecting IVF than to 
actually come together in a bipartisan way and pass this. I wish we had 
done that, but this is an election season, and perhaps that is asking 
too much from my colleagues.
  Mr. CORNYN. Will the Senator yield for a question?
  Mr. CRUZ. I would happily yield to Senator Cornyn for a question.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Texas.
  Mr. CORNYN. I am a little confused. If the Democrats sincerely want 
to pass a law relative to IVF, wouldn't they ordinarily work to have an 
amendment process where we can actually have debate and maybe achieve 
some consensus?
  It seems to me that by introducing a bill that they know is bound to 
fail and blocking the bill that you and the Senator from Alabama have 
offered, they are guaranteeing there will be no Federal protection for 
IVF. Am I missing something?
  Mr. CRUZ. As usual, my friend, the fellow Senator from Texas, you are 
not missing something. That is precisely what is going on. This is not 
lawmaking. This is politics. This is partisan politics. This is an 
election campaign commercial that the Democrats are engaging in.
  To make clear, Leader Schumer knows the result of the vote this 
afternoon. Why? Because we had the same vote just a couple of months 
ago. He knows exactly the result. Why are we voting on it again? 
Because they want

[[Page S6077]]

reporters to write the same headlines again to deceive the voters.
  Again, I invite my Democrat colleagues, this should be an easy bill 
to support if--and this is a big ``if''--in good faith you actually 
want to protect IVF legislation.
  If you want a campaign issue, the worst thing for Democrats is 
actually to pass the Cruz-Britt bill because then it takes the issue 
off the table because every mom and dad and every woman or man who 
wants to be a mother or father knows IVF is protected. The Democrats 
don't want that.
  Mr. CORNYN. Would the Senator yield for one more question?
  Mr. CRUZ. I am happy to yield to Senator Cornyn.
  Mr. CORNYN. So if Senator Schumer and Senator Murray--the Senate 
Democrats who offered this bill--were actually serious about passing a 
bill to protect IVF, wouldn't the logical approach be to make sure 
there was an opportunity to offer and vote on an amendment? If they 
were to prevail in their version of the bill, well, 60 Senators could 
determine that and make that happen.

  If, in fact, 60 Senators agreed with the bill that you and the 
Senator from Alabama have offered, then that bill would prevail and go 
to the House and then presumably to the President for his signature. 
But apparently they are afraid to allow the Cruz-Britt bill to even get 
a vote. They have so little confidence in the likely electoral outcome 
of their proposal that they don't even want a vote on the Cruz-Britt 
bill.
  So, again, I just wanted to ask the Senator a couple of questions 
because I was wondering whether I was missing something. This seems 
like, as you said, a cynical show vote and certainly not one to 
accomplish a result. I appreciate your answering the question.
  Mr. CRUZ. The Senator from Texas is exactly correct. As Senator 
Cornyn knows well, there are multiple ways to draft a bill. What the 
Democrats have drafted is a bill that is intended to force Republicans 
to vote no because that is the objective. They want the ``no'' vote. 
They deliberately have put poison pills in this bill. They call it an 
IVF bill, but it is a radical pro-abortion bill, and it is a radical 
anti-religious liberty bill. Their objective is they want their bill to 
fail because this is all about misleading campaign commercials.
  The bill that Senator Britt and I drafted--we worked very carefully 
to draft a bill that every Senator could agree with. There is not a 
word in our bill that the Democrats disagree with.
  Look, abortion is an issue that divides this Chamber. There are some 
of us who are pro-life; there are others who are pro-choice. Senator 
Britt and I recognized we were not going to resolve the disagreements 
on abortion on the floor today, so we deliberately drafted a bill that 
is focused on IVF specifically.
  There are no poison pills in our bill. There is nothing designed to 
force the Democrats to vote no.
  Senator Cornyn is exactly right that if our bill were on the floor, I 
believe it would pass. I believe any Democrat voting honestly would 
vote for it, but I think, at a minimum, we would get 60 votes and 
enough to pass it, which is why the Democrats object to taking it up--
because they want their bill to fail in order to be misleading.
  Mrs. BRITT. Would the Senator yield for a question?
  Mr. CRUZ. I am happy to yield to the Senator from Alabama.
  Mrs. BRITT. So it is my understanding, as the 2 of us came together, 
49 Republicans-strong, sent a letter--a statement saying we strongly 
support IVF. Now, if the Democrats were serious about needing to 
protect IVF--which, by the way, is legal and accessible in every 
State--then wouldn't they have come to us to figure out a pathway 
forward? Yet, today, instead of taking our bill and, if they feel like 
it needs to be improved, working to do that, they are choosing to do a 
show vote just to give themselves something to campaign on.
  Has anyone approached you about working together to find a pathway 
forward for IVF? Because I am a strong supporter of IVF. I am proudly 
here pro-family and believe that we need to find ways to make sure that 
people do have access and that it continues that way, and I think we 
have been very clear. But no one has approached me. And you have to get 
to 60.
  So if you really believe that IVF is in trouble and in jeopardy, then 
wouldn't we be the first two people you would come talk to? And no one 
has talked to me. Yet this bill is going on the floor, which means they 
know they can't get to 60. There are only 51 of them. Maybe they have a 
few more.
  My question is, has anyone approached you? Because if they 
authentically wanted to protect IVF, if they really cared about women 
and parents who are wanting to bring a child into the world and they 
want to give them certainty, they don't just want something to campaign 
on, I think we would be the first two people you would come talk to to 
figure out how to have a path forward. No one has spoken to me. It is 
so ingenuous. This body is supposed to be more than that. Has anyone 
spoken to you?
  Mr. CRUZ. I thank Senator Britt for that question. No, no Democrat 
has spoken to me.
  I am, like you, unequivocally in support of IVF, but, understand, the 
Democrats do not want to pass legislation protecting IVF. If you are 
trying to pass legislation, you don't put poison pills in it. That is 
what the Democrats have done. Their objective, their goal, is to have 
their partisan bill fail so that they can use it for political 
campaigns across this country. It is designed to fail, and it is 
cynical. It is also predicated on, sadly, the failure of the media--I 
would note there are no reporters that I see sitting in the Gallery. It 
is predicated on what they know the media will refuse to cover--that 
they are the ones blocking IVF. They are counting on the media to be 
partisan and to push their deceptive messaging.
  We should be protecting IVF. We should be standing unequivocally. As 
Senator Britt noted, all 49 Republicans stood and signed a joint letter 
saying we support IVF, we support protecting IVF.
  I would note, the last time Senator Britt and I came to this floor, 
we were joined by Senator Roger Marshall from Kansas. Senator Roger 
Marshall is a physician--he is an OB/GYN--who has performed IVF for 
years. He has helped hopeful parents become parents through IVF. And it 
is literally the cynical position of Democrats that an IVF doctor is 
opposed to IVF.
  I want to repeat that for you because it is such an absurd statement. 
It is the partisan political position of Senate Democrats that an IVF 
doctor--Roger Marshall has helped hundreds of parents conceive through 
IVF, and yet Senate Democrats claim he somehow opposes IVF. That is not 
true. Use your common sense.
  This is cynical, and it is wrong. But for those of you at home about 
to be subjected to millions of dollars of false campaign ads from the 
Democrats, just understand that if they are telling you that there are 
Senators who are trying to ban IVF, they are deliberately misleading 
you, and they are doing it because they don't want to defend their 
actual position on the issues.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The majority leader.
  Mr. SCHUMER. Mr. President, by all accounts, a vote to protect 
something as basic and as popular as IVF shouldn't be necessary, but 
sadly it is very necessary thanks to attacks against reproductive care 
by Donald Trump and his Project 2025.
  From the moment Donald Trump's MAGA Supreme Court reversed Roe, the 
hard right made clear that they would keep going. As we saw earlier 
this year in Alabama, IVF has become one of the hard right's next 
targets.
  Today, Senate Republicans must answer a simple question: Do they 
support American families' access to IVF or not?
  If they support it, the only option is to vote yes on the Right to 
IVF Act, but if Senate Republicans vote no today and block IVF 
protections yet again, it will be further proof they stand against the 
well-being of families. If Senate Republicans vote no today, it will be 
further proof that Project 2025 is alive and well when it comes to 
women's rights and reproductive rights as well.
  Republicans cannot claim to care about supporting families while 
voting against IVF protections, but that is

[[Page S6078]]

precisely what they did 3 months ago. Today, Republicans get a second 
chance: Either stand with families struggling with infertility or stand 
against families and with Project 2025.
  Kudos and great thanks to Senators Duckworth and Murray and Booker 
and to everyone who has championed this bill. Thank you to all of my 
colleagues who have raised their voices on this most personal of 
issues. I urge everyone to vote yes.


             Motion to Proceed to the Motion to Reconsider

  Mr. SCHUMER. Mr. President, I move to proceed to the motion to 
reconsider the vote by which cloture failed on the motion to invoke 
cloture on the motion to proceed to Calendar No. 413, S. 4445.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the motion.
  The motion was agreed to.


                   Motion to Reconsider Cloture Vote

  Mr. SCHUMER. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote by which 
cloture was not invoked on the motion to invoke cloture on the motion 
to proceed to Calendar No. 413, S. 4445.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the motion to 
reconsider.
  The motion was agreed to.


                             Cloture Motion

  Pursuant to rule XXII, the Chair lays before the Senate the pending 
cloture motion, which the clerk will state.
  The senior assistant legislative clerk read as follows:

                             Cloture Motion

       We, the undersigned Senators, in accordance with the 
     provisions of rule XXII of the Standing Rules of the Senate, 
     do hereby move to bring to a close debate on the motion to 
     proceed to Calendar No. 413, S. 4445, a bill to protect and 
     expand nationwide access to fertility treatment, including in 
     vitro fertilization.
         Charles E. Schumer, Tammy Duckworth, Richard Blumenthal, 
           Alex Padilla, Tammy Baldwin, Tim Kaine, Richard J. 
           Durbin, Jeanne Shaheen, Benjamin L. Cardin, Debbie 
           Stabenow, Patty Murray, Catherine Cortez Masto, Tina 
           Smith, Elizabeth Warren, Sheldon Whitehouse, Kirsten E. 
           Gillibrand, Christopher Murphy.

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. By unanimous consent, the mandatory quorum 
call has been waived.
  The question is, Is it the sense of the Senate that debate on the 
motion to proceed to Calendar No. 413, S. 4445, a bill to protect and 
expand nationwide access to fertility treatment, including in vitro 
fertilization, shall be brought to a close?
  The yeas and nays are mandatory under the rule.
  The clerk will call the roll.
  The senior assistant legislative clerk called the roll.
  Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from New Jersey (Mr. Booker) 
and the Senator from West Virginia (Mr. Manchin) are necessarily 
absent.
  Mr. THUNE. The following Senators are neccessarily absent: the 
Senator from South Dakota (Mr. Rounds), the Senator from North Carolina 
(Mr. Tillis), and the Senator from Ohio (Mr. Vance).
  Further, if present and voting: the Senator from North Carolina (Mr. 
Tillis) would have voted ``nay.''
  The yeas and nays resulted--yeas 51, nays 44, as follows:

                      [Rollcall Vote No. 242 Leg.]

                                YEAS--51

     Baldwin
     Bennet
     Blumenthal
     Brown
     Butler
     Cantwell
     Cardin
     Carper
     Casey
     Collins
     Coons
     Cortez Masto
     Duckworth
     Durbin
     Fetterman
     Gillibrand
     Hassan
     Heinrich
     Helmy
     Hickenlooper
     Hirono
     Kaine
     Kelly
     King
     Klobuchar
     Lujan
     Markey
     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

                                NAYS--44

     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
     Marshall
     McConnell
     Moran
     Mullin
     Paul
     Ricketts
     Risch
     Romney
     Rubio
     Schmitt
     Scott (FL)
     Scott (SC)
     Sullivan
     Thune
     Tuberville
     Wicker
     Young

                             NOT VOTING--5

     Booker
     Manchin
     Rounds
     Tillis
     Vance
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Welch). On this vote, the yeas are 51, the 
nays are 44. Three-fifths of the Senators duly chosen and sworn not 
having voted in the affirmative, the motion on reconsideration is not 
agreed to.
  The motion was rejected.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Illinois.


                            Right to IVF Act

  Ms. DUCKWORTH. Mr. President, I come to the floor today to speak on 
the bill that recently failed, despite my colleagues' assertion that 
they support access to in vitro fertilization for all Americans.
  You know, this morning I was able to pack my daughters' lunchboxes. 
It sounds mundane, I know, but when I spend just a second thinking 
about it, even that kind of everyday moment with my girls isn't mundane 
at all--it is a miracle.
  Because after 10 years of struggling with infertility, after being 
wounded in combat, I was only able to have my two darling girls through 
the medical marvel that is in vitro fertilization.
  The only reason there are PB&Js for me to make for their lunch, the 
only reason there are teeny sneakers for me to Velcro closed is because 
after I came home from war, I had the freedom to seek the healthcare I 
needed to make my dream of going from ``Tammy'' to ``mommy'' a reality.
  I was one of the lucky ones, because now, that freedom to get 
reproductive care is at risk for millions of other women whose most 
desperate hope in the world is to have a little one of their own. Make 
no mistake, that isn't some future nightmare; this is our present 
reality.
  Countless women already had their IVF treatments interrupted this 
year after an Alabama Supreme Court ruling painted women seeking 
fertility treatment as criminals.
  And in this perilous moment for our country, as we stare down 
November and all the uncertainties that come with it, there is no 
telling how many more will follow.
  Look, I doubt that Donald Trump even knows what the acronym IVF 
stands for, and half the time I wonder if he can even spell IVF. But 
despite the incoherent, delusional, and, frankly, embarrassing rambling 
that came out of his mouth last week, the reality is that he is the 
reason that IVF is at risk in the first place.
  The Dobbs decision is what led us to today's nightmare, taking the 
power to decide how and when to start families from us women and 
handing it to politicians in statehouses across the country.
  Donald Trump is the one who brags about taking down Roe. Donald Trump 
is the one who acts like that is something to be proud of. He is like a 
bank robber who steals cash out of the till and flees the scene and 
then still expects a reward for calling the police to report a crime.
  So while it may now be convenient for him to claim that his support 
of IVF is as huge as the made-up crowd sizes at his rallies, we know 
the truth. He is the reason that IVF is in danger. He is to blame. He 
and every other Republican who cares more about staying good with Trump 
than about doing good for the Americans they are supposed to be 
serving.
  Many--too many--of those Republicans are in this very Chamber. I know 
that because today marked the third time in the past 7 months that I 
have come to the floor begging my Republican colleagues to help me pass 
legislation I wrote that would protect every American's right to IVF, 
regardless of what State they live in--a bill that would ensure no 
doctor or hopeful mom could be criminalized for trying to start a 
family; one that would permit all health insurers to cover the 
treatments; and one that would require the Federal health insurance 
plan to cover reproductive technologies, allowing our troops to 
preserve their sperm or eggs before deploying to a combat zone.
  When I tried to pass it in February, it took the junior Republican 
Senator from Mississippi what seemed like not even one full Mississippi 
second to block its passage. Then when I tried to pass it again in 
June, nearly every GOP Member voted it down.
  Today it was the same old cynical story, as Republican after 
Republican voted no, no, no. And at this point, it is obvious, despite 
whatever talking

[[Page S6079]]

points they force through gritted teeth on cable news, when the rubber 
hits the road and the vote is called, Republicans will do anything to 
get out of actually passing legislation that would protect women's 
right to access reproductive healthcare.
  Women in this country have been through enough. What women don't need 
is a man who was found liable for sexual abuse controlling what we can 
or cannot do with our bodies. What we don't need are politicians who 
have sworn fealty to a convicted felon treating us like we are the ones 
who are criminals.
  It is tragic. Republicans only seem to care about protecting life 
when it supposedly consists of some cells in a medical lab freezer. But 
what about when that life is a fifth grader whose school day gets 
shattered by a man with an AR-15 who wants to turn their math class 
into a massacre?
  What about when that life is their neighbor's, who is yet one more 
woman to bleed out on the delivery table, as the maternal mortality 
crisis among women of color rages on? Well, then those same Republicans 
couldn't seem to care less about defending the sanctity of life.
  Listen, I am sure that some of my colleagues will try to slink away 
from taking any accountability here. Per usual, they will shout some 
ridiculous excuse, like this bill would allow for human-animal hybrids, 
as if anyone would ever believe that. And, for the record, it would 
not.
  Well, to those folks I say that this afternoon's vote was your chance 
to put your vote where your mouth is. It was your chance to prove that 
you believe that every woman in this country deserves the chance to be 
called ``Mom'' without also being called a criminal. Instead, your true 
policy beliefs, your hypocrisy, your misogyny showed through.
  Look, I went to war to defend this Nation's rights and freedoms. I 
did it because I believed so deeply in the importance of that mission. 
I wasn't asking my GOP colleagues to head into combat to show that they 
cared deeply too. I wasn't asking them to do anything hard at all, 
actually. All I was asking them to do was to simply support a bill that 
could have represented millions of women's only chance of starting 
families.
  All I was asking of them was to vote in a way that reflected the 
position they claim to have when they were spouting talking points on 
FOX News. They couldn't even do that. So on behalf of every woman who 
has faced a heart-shattering struggle of infertility, all I can say to 
my Republican colleagues this afternoon is: Shame on you.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Minnesota.
  Ms. KLOBUCHAR. Mr. President, I first want to thank our colleague 
Senator Duckworth from Illinois for her leadership. Anyone that sees 
the beautiful pictures of her two girls with their different 
personalities, both of whom would not be here without these procedures, 
would understand once you see those kids. As we all know people in our 
families, our friends, our neighbors who, literally, their families are 
there because of this procedure, we understand how disappointing this 
vote was. That is a Minnesota euphemism for what happened in just the 
last hour, where we only had two of our Republican colleagues--the same 
two who voted with us last time--who were willing to stand up for IVF.
  IVF is a miracle medical treatment for families who couldn't 
otherwise have children. Over the last four decades, 8 million babies--
8 million babies--have been born around the world thanks to IVF. Yet 
today we are moving backwards.
  The right to IVF is under attack because 2 years ago, the Supreme 
Court decided to shred half a century of legal precedent and strip away 
women's right to make their own healthcare decisions.
  Now American women are at the mercy of a patchwork of State laws, as 
my colleague from Illinois just described, which governs their access 
to reproductive care, including fertility treatment. What has happened 
in Minnesota now is way different than what happened in our neighboring 
States of South Dakota and North Dakota where, in fact, women have 
crossed the border to get the kind of healthcare they need instead of, 
as my colleague noted, what has happened in Oklahoma and other States--
bleeding out in parking lots because they have no choice.
  We saw it happen, of course, when it comes to IVF in Alabama. Their 
February Supreme Court decision brought IVF procedures in the State to 
a halt, leaving more than 2 million women in that State without access 
to this treatment.
  Whatever happens legally, court cases and the like that change 
things, that go back and forth, it really is the same thing, all of 
this. All of this angst, all of this actual disastrous effect on 
women's rights could have been prevented. But instead, we have a group 
of people--which does not reflect where 70 to 80 percent of the 
American people are--who have decided that politicians should make 
these decisions about women's health; that politicians should be the 
ones who are going to decide about IVF or are going to decide about 
whether or not people can get abortions or the kind of birth control 
that they want or even have access to mifepristone.
  I used to think that the people who were opposing us on this wanted 
to bring us back to the 1950s, but now it looks like it is the 1850s. 
The people of this country deserve better.
  I am thinking of Meta, a woman from Minnesota, who became a mom 
thanks to IVF. In her own words:

       I am the proud mother of twin girls, but without IVF and my 
     ability to access treatment, they would not be here today.
       Our twins are . . . almost 8 years old and I cannot imagine 
     my life without them. They are incredible humans who are 
     already bringing so much love, joy, and hope into this world.

  Every parent deserves that hope. No court, no politician should 
interfere with that hope. But right now that hope is under attack, and 
today many of my colleagues chose to deny that hope to women across the 
country. In doing so, they are working against the will of 86 percent 
of Americans who believe IVF should be protected and legal.
  Attacks on reproductive freedom and freedom in general is not what 
today should be about. I refuse to settle for a reality in which my 
daughter has fewer rights than I did or her grandmother did. And I will 
never stop fighting for a future where women--and not politicians--are 
in charge of their own healthcare decisions.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from North Carolina.
  Mr. BUDD. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to use a prop during 
my speech.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.


           125th Anniversary of Appalachian State University

  Mr. BUDD. Mr. President, today, I have the distinct honor of 
recognizing my alma mater, Appalachian State University, on the 125th 
anniversary of its founding.
  Established in Boone, NC, as Watauga Academy in 1899, App State began 
as a teachers college with 53 students.
  Today, it enrolls over 21,000 students, employs more than 3,500 
employees, and boasts more than 150,000 living alumni who exemplify the 
Mountaineer spirit every day.
  This strong and steady growth has established App State as a premier 
public institution and one of the largest in the UNC System.
  Given its worldwide reputation, App State has remained true to its 
mission as a rural institution known for service to its local and 
regional communities. App State is committed to increasing enrollment 
of students from North Carolina's rural populations and ensuring timely 
graduation with as little debt as possible.
  The university's regional impact is undeniable, contributing nearly 
$2.2 billion to our State's economy. App State continues to maintain a 
low student-to-faculty ratio and offers more than 150 undergraduate and 
80 graduate majors at its campuses in Boone, Hickory, and online.
  The university is committed to supporting the workforce needs of 
North Carolina as one of our State's leading producers of graduates in 
business, education, and healthcare.
  Moreover, App State has stepped up to meet the growing needs in the 
areas

[[Page S6080]]

of veterinary technology, health sciences, and cyber security.
  App State's successes reach beyond the classroom to competitive 
sports, with more than 400 Mountaineer student athletes in 17 NCAA 
Division 1 varsity sports. These student athletes earned a cumulative 
GPA above 3.0 for the 12th consecutive year during the spring semester 
of 2024.
  Since joining the Sun Belt Conference in 2014, Mountaineer athletics 
programs have won 13 conference championships. Four of those titles 
belong to the nationally ranked football team--the legendary triumphs 
of which are known from Ann Arbor, MI, to College Station, TX.
  On behalf of the citizens of the State of North Carolina, I 
congratulate Appalachian State University on 125 years of service to 
our State and our region.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Arkansas.


                               Farm Bill

  Mr. BOOZMAN. Mr. President, last week, hundreds of farmers and 
ranchers, from all regions of our country, representing operations of 
all sizes and all the major crops, traveled to the Capitol to encourage 
us to pass a strong, farm-focused farm bill before the end of this 
year.
  I met with many of these individuals, and I am grateful they took the 
time away from their families and their farms and ranches to tell us 
what is at stake if Congress fails to pass a farm bill this year.
  For these farmers, this trip came with the additional stress of being 
away from the farm at the height of harvest season. Their visits 
clearly articulated the anxiety gripping farm country at this crucial 
moment.
  For the past few months, farmers, ranchers, the organizations that 
represent them, and the agricultural banking sector have all warned of 
an impending crisis in farm country.
  Producers are struggling to make ends meet in an environment where 
costs for farm inputs have ballooned from inflation; interest rates 
have doubled; and market prices are far below the cost production.
  Coupled with consecutive years of losses, the financial stress 
borne--particularly by our row crop farmers--is now being revealed. The 
reality is, there will be fewer farmers in 2025 if Congress does not 
respond.
  We have been warned that many farmers will struggle to secure 
operating loans for next year. This is a devastating realization. The 
outdated farm safety net they are operating under is doing nothing to 
address these realities. That is why the Senate needs to take two 
immediate actions.
  First, we need to provide emergency assistance to address the 
economic losses that farmers are facing associated with the 2024 crop. 
Even with record yields, farmers are still not breaking even. This is 
not a crisis that they can handle, in any way insure themselves, or 
conserve their way out of it. Farmers across the country need a bridge 
to help their family farmers survive in the next year.
  We have seen previous ad hoc assistance programs established in a 
period of weeks, as demonstrated by then-Secretary Perdue when the 
COVID-19 pandemic created disruptions for producers. That level of 
timely and urgent response by Congress and the administration is once 
again warranted.
  In Southern States like Arkansas, in Mississippi, and Texas, many 
producers have harvested their 2024 crop, and many are losing hundreds 
of dollars per acre of ground they farm. That same experience is 
beginning to creep into the Midwest and Northern States as harvest 
begins in these regions.
  What do losses of this magnitude actually translate to? Not only are 
producers not able to pay their bills, but they won't be able to secure 
an operating loan for next year's crop, let alone have any income at 
all to survive on. This has a devastating ripple effect on rural 
businesses and communities.
  Now, let me be clear, emergency assistance does not reduce the need 
to make meaningful investments to the commodity and crop insurance 
titles of the next farm bill. In fact, the clear necessity of providing 
ad hoc assistance for economic losses demonstrates how inadequate the 
2018 farm bill has become.
  The next farm bill is the appropriate place to make the necessary 
long-term corrections to our farm safety net, but farmers need timely 
support addressing the 2024 losses as they enter the winter months when 
they make planting decisions and secure financing for the upcoming crop 
year, which leads me to this second action Congress must take.
  We must redouble our efforts and pass a farm bill before the end of 
the calendar year--one that meets this moment, one that provides the 
support our farmers desperately need to stay in business.
  I am committed to sitting down with my counterparts for as long as it 
takes to hash out a deal that our Members can support. I was encouraged 
to see House Ag Committee Ranking Member David Scott make a similar 
appeal last week. I know our respective chairs are eager to pass a bill 
this session of Congress, but the window to make this happen is closing 
quickly. Our family farmers are staring down a crisis that is growing 
more dire by the day, and many fear that the Senate simply doesn't care 
about their plight.
  The Presiding Officer and I both know, as the Presiding Officer is 
one of our stellar members on the Ag Committee, that that is far from 
the truth. I know that our colleagues--all of our colleagues on both 
sides of the aisle--want to make sure our farmers can continue to 
produce the safest, most affordable, and most abundant supply of food, 
fuel, and fiber in the world, but without action, it is an 
understandable sentiment. We have been sounding the alarm on this 
brewing crisis for months. It is the very reason we have been adamant 
about the need for more farm in the farm bill.
  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.
  Mrs. BLACKBURN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order 
for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.


                 Unanimous Consent Request--S. Res. 669

  Mrs. BLACKBURN. Mr. President, across our country, more than 3 
million female high school and college athletes compete, practice, and 
train every day to achieve athletic success. For many of these young 
women and girls, their sports are more than just a game; they are a 
lifelong passion that improves their physical health, boosts self-
confidence, and teaches them the leadership skills to succeed on and 
off the field.
  In short, women's athletics have done incredible things for women, 
which is why it is so deeply disturbing to see the Biden-Harris 
administration wage a war on women's sports--in their crosshairs: title 
IX, the landmark civil rights law that codified protections on the 
basis of sex by requiring equal resources for training, recruitment, 
and scholarships for female athletic programs.
  Title IX led to an explosion of women's participation in sports. In 
fact, since 1972--the year title IX became law--the number of female 
college athletes has increased by a factor of seven while the number of 
female high school athletes has increased by more than tenfold. Yet, 
for years, we have seen this administration undermine the very title IX 
protections that have enabled greater women's participation in sports.
  In 2022, on the 50th anniversary of title IX, the Department of 
Education announced new rules that forced schools to allow biological 
males to play on female teams; and just in April, the administration 
redefined ``discrimination'' to allow biological men to use women-only 
locker rooms and bathrooms.
  Are Tennesseans and the American people really expected to believe 
this is OK? You do not need to be a biologist to understand that there 
are fundamental, biological differences between men and women, and when 
it comes to sports, these differences undermine fair play, erase 
women's hard-earned achievements, and put female athletes in danger.
  Thankfully, many young women are bravely speaking out against the 
Biden-Harris administration's radical agenda, including Tennessee's 
Riley Gaines. In 2021, Riley was forced to compete against and share a 
locker room with a biological male during the NCAA women's swimming and 
diving championships. During the 200-meter

[[Page S6081]]

competition, Riley tied for fifth with her male competitor, but when 
Riley went to the awards ceremony to pick up her trophy, officials told 
her that they were giving the fifth place trophy to the biological 
male. ``Yours will be coming in the mail,'' they told her.
  This should never happen in the United States. Now, more than ever, 
Congress should stand with the female athletes fighting for fair play 
and celebrate the incredible contributions women have made in the world 
of sports. That is why I am calling for unanimous consent for my 
resolution to establish October 10 as American Girls in Sports Day. Of 
course, we picked that date for a special reason. As the 10th day of 
the 10th month, October 10 is represented by the Roman numerals XX, the 
same numerals of the female sex chromosome.
  In the last 50 years, female athletes have gone from the sidelines to 
the center stage of competition. As we continue to fight for women's 
participation in sports, we must keep in mind what is at stake, and the 
American Girls in Sports Day resolution will help to ensure that we all 
join together and celebrate our female athletes.
  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on 
Commerce, Science, and Transportation be discharged from 
further consideration and that the Senate now proceed to S. Res. 669; 
further, that the resolution be agreed to, the preamble be agreed to; 
and that the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the 
table.

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
  The Senator from Connecticut.
  Mr. MURPHY. Mr. President, in reserving the right to object, first of 
all, let me offer my thanks to the Senator from Tennessee for all the 
work that she has done with my colleague Senator Blumenthal to protect 
our kids online. I am truly grateful for what they have done together, 
and although she and I have not worked closely together on legislation, 
I hope that we will be able to find partnerships to work together to 
further protections for our kids. I mean that sincerely. She and I may 
not agree on a lot--as you will hear, we don't agree on this particular 
resolution--but I do hope that we get the chance to work together. I 
mean that.
  I also mean this with all due respect: Let's be clear about what this 
is. This isn't an effort to solve a problem. This whole obsession with 
transgender kids from the rightwing is just about picking on vulnerable 
kids so that adults can make themselves feel big--bullying and 
harassing kids because it makes adults feel powerful. As far as I am 
concerned, this whole effort is shameful.
  It is important to understand that resolutions like this do not stand 
in isolation. It is part of a massive campaign by the right to convince 
Americans that they should fear immigrants, that they should fear 
Muslims, that they should fear gay children, that they should fear 
transgender athletes.
  The world in which Republicans want us to live is a world where the 
biggest problems are not low wages or expensive healthcare or addiction 
or loneliness, but the threats posed to us by people who are of a 
different race or speak a different language or are of a different 
sexual orientation or gender identity. It is a massive, coordinated 
attempt to marginalize people who aren't White, straight, and 
Christian, and it exists for a reason: to distract you.
  I have a ton of close Republican friends in this Chamber whom I work 
with a lot, but let's be honest. The Republican Party's platform today 
is maybe the most unpopular agenda of any major political party in 
recent memory: ban abortion, cut taxes for corporations and 
millionaires, ban books, loosen gun laws. Nobody wants any of that.
  So what do you do if the things you actually want to do if you 
achieve power are super, super unpopular? You distract them with giant, 
gross lies, like immigrants are eating our pets, or greatly exaggerated 
untruths, like our high school sports are under assault from 
transgender kids.
  It is all an effort to hide the ball from the real agenda--abortion 
bans and millionaire tax cuts--by trying to make you believe that you 
should spend your entire day, that you should spend your entire life, 
just being afraid of people who are different from you.
  Let me give you the facts, not the fearmongering, about high school 
transgender athletes, and I will let you decide whether this situation 
is worthy of hundreds of bills having been introduced by Republicans 
all across the country and whether it is worthy of debate continuously, 
over and over again, on the Senate floor.
  There are over 6 million kids competing in high school sports today. 
For the problem of transgender girls competing in girls sports to be a 
national crisis, what percentage of that 6 million would be transgender 
girls? Ten percent? Is that a crisis? Five percent? One percent? It is 
none of those.
  Let's take Florida as an example. More than 800,000 students in 
Florida participate in high school athletics. Before they enacted their 
ban, how many transgender athletes were in Florida of those 800,000 
students? One hundred? Nope. Fifty? Nope. Over the course of 8 years in 
the entire State of Florida, before their ban, there were 13 
transgender high school athletes--13. Those 13 girls were apparently 
waging a war against girls sports. That is a pretty small army to be 
waging a war.
  You are more likely to be killed by a falling object in this country 
than to have your daughter compete against a transgender girl in high 
school sports, but what if she did? I think every State and every 
school district should decide these questions for themselves. I don't 
think the Federal Government should get involved. But as a parent, 
personally, I celebrate those few transgender kids, who often spend 
their entire adolescence being shamed or marginalized by the kind of 
small people who push resolutions like this--I celebrate the fact that 
they get the experience of the comradery and the happiness that come 
with being part of a sports team. I think that is great. I don't think 
that is a threat to my kids. I don't think that is a threat to my 
community or the Nation.
  I teach my kids to love everybody, to include everybody, to see 
people who are different from them--who are a different race, a 
different religion, even a different gender identity--as potential 
friends, not as enemies, waging war against them, to be shamed or 
bullied.
  This is an absurd resolution. It is designed to distract Americans 
from Republicans' real agenda. It is designed to build a culture of 
fear and mistrust, a culture that I and, I am going to tell you, most 
Americans reject.
  Therefore, I object.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The objection is heard.
  The Senator from Tennessee.
  Mrs. BLACKBURN. Mr. President, I would encourage my colleague to go 
read the Republican Party platform. It is very short, as a matter of 
fact. There is nothing in it about banning anything, believe you me. I 
know that. So I would encourage him to take the 15 or 20 minutes. It is 
not a long, lengthy document. It has 20 actions that we are going to 
take, and then it has some principles on which we stand and believe.
  I also find it very interesting that he looks at a resolution that 
would celebrate women as something that should be feared, because it is 
not about fear. It is not about division. It is not about distraction. 
This is something that says to our young girls and these young 
athletes: We are proud of you. Keep it up.
  I mean, here is some of the language from the resolution:

       Athletic participation has an important, positive impact on 
     young girls, improving their physical health, self-
     confidence, and discipline. . . . Women have been responsible 
     for some of the greatest athletic feats in the sports history 
     of the United States, from the Olympic games--

  And we all cheered our young women who excelled and won those medals 
and those who were in competition in the Olympics--

     [all the way] to professional competition. . . . [F]emale 
     athletes have served as inspirations for generations of women 
     and girls.

  In Tennessee, I will tell you, there are young girls probably out in 
the driveway bouncing a basketball right now. They want to be a Lady 
Vol. That is one of their goals in life.
  As for the number of titles and things that have been lost since 
2003, biological men have displaced women and girls from over 950 
championship titles, medals, scholarships, and

[[Page S6082]]

records that should have rightfully gone to these girls and at least 28 
women sports titles in volleyball, swimming, mountain biking, track and 
field, weightlifting, and cycling.
  This is a celebration of female accomplishments. This is a 
celebration of female accomplishments.
  So while I enjoy the opportunity to work with my colleague, I am 
disappointed to hear him feel and express his opinion that celebrating 
women and giving a day to celebrate our female athletes would be 
something that would strike fear and would cause division. We should 
all be united around celebrating our female athletes.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Washington.


                            Right to IVF Act

  Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, today we once again attempted to move 
forward on the Right to IVF Act, and Republicans once again stopped us.
  Now, let's remember a few things about how we actually got here, 
because it is infuriating. Republicans have tried to claim the right to 
IVF is not under attack, but it was Republicans' own votes that killed 
this bill, and it was the Republicans' own efforts to overturn Roe v. 
Wade and champion fetal personhood--which treats an embryo like a 
living, breathing, person--that caused the chaos and uncertainty around 
IVF access. That caused women in Alabama to have IVF appointments 
canceled earlier this year, jeopardizing women's hopes of growing their 
families and lighting on fire the thousands of dollars some of these 
patients spent ahead of treatment.
  And despite that hard lesson, to this day, there is still widespread 
Republican support for fetal personhood bills. To this day, in 
Republicans' own bills to supposedly protect IVF, they say nothing 
about fetal personhood and do nothing to make sure parents can dispose 
of unused embryos.
  Now, Democrats came forward with a bill that would actually protect 
IVF. Our bill, the Right to IVF Act, protects the right to IVF 
nationally, and it lowers the cost of IVF for families with stronger 
insurance requirements. It also includes my bill to make sure more 
veterans and servicemembers can access IVF services.
  And many of the same Republicans who have supported fetal personhood 
laws--the single greatest threat to IVF--are pretending this bill is 
unnecessary. Many of the same Republicans who are desperate to posture 
as pro-family and who constantly say they stand by our troops are 
saying: We can't afford to help more military families get IVF.
  Funny how they are always game to shovel more money at tax breaks for 
billionaires, though. But I digress.
  Mr. President, Republicans voted this bill down--again. They voted 
down protecting IVF--again. They voted down making IVF more 
affordable--again. They voted down helping servicemembers and veterans 
grow their families--again. And they did it fresh off another round of 
pretending to support IVF. They did it just as Donald Trump, the man 
who kicked all of this off, the man who proudly boasted that he ended 
Roe, is trying to say he is the leader on IVF.
  When Donald Trump says he is the leader on IVF, hear me on two 
things: First, he almost certainly doesn't understand what IVF is. 
Secondly, he doesn't understand what leadership is. You do not get 
credit for opposing a problem that you caused in the first place, 
especially when your party--the party you lead--won't let us solve it.
  The entire country just saw, plain as day, that Donald Trump is lying 
again and that nothing has changed for Republicans since they 
overturned Roe v. Wade. Nothing has changed for Republicans since the 
absolute heartbreaking chaos their extremism caused in Alabama. Nothing 
has changed for Republicans despite Trump's imaginary leadership on IVF 
and despite all the families who are calling for action.
  But Democrats are not going to stop pushing. And I have a message for 
my Republican colleagues who think they can talk about this issue, make 
big promises to desperate families--like Trump's promise to cover IVF 
treatment--and then fail to follow through. I would urge them to think 
again and tread lightly, because that promise may just be an empty 
sound bite to Donald Trump, but it is so personal to these families. It 
is personal to women who have been trying for years to start a family 
with no luck, women who, month after month, get their hopes up and face 
another heartbreak.
  The last thing these families need is a broken promise. The last 
thing their heart can bear is false hope. So don't you dare breathe 
another word about helping them get IVF when you are not willing to put 
up the votes and make it happen. Don't you dare talk about protecting 
their chance to grow their family when you are not willing to stand 
clear and strong against fetal personhood laws.
  Don't you dare raise your voice in more fake support when you won't 
lift a finger to actually help, because these families have been 
listening to your words. They saw how you voted today. And, Mr. 
President, they will not forget.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Hawaii.
  Mr. SCHATZ. Mr. President, here in this Chamber, it is your vote that 
counts--not your tweets, not your public statements, not your TV 
interviews. Your votes. And today for the second time in 3 months, 
Republicans voted against protecting IVF. Some of them claim to support 
IVF. All of them profess to be pro-life. But given a chance to be both, 
they failed.
  Republicans are doing a lot of mental gymnastics to try to justify 
their cruel extremism on this issue. But let's be very clear about what 
the Right to IVF Act does. It protects every American's right to access 
IVF and lower the cost of treatments for families who need it. That 
means anyone struggling to start or to grow a family can undergo IVF 
without fear of interference or punishment by the government.
  And think about the fact that we have to make a law that says 
families should not be punished for trying to start a family. That is 
what this bill does. It says you should have access to this care and 
you cannot be punished for trying to start a family. It means providers 
can administer the treatment without worrying that they will be thrown 
in jail or have their license taken away just for doing their jobs. And 
it means insurers can cover IVF without implementing absurd 
restrictions and onerous requirements that would make it all but 
impossible to access this miraculous treatment.
  This bill is a commonsense measure that is necessary precisely 
because of the environment Republicans created with the fall of Roe, an 
environment where over half of women of reproductive age in America now 
live in States that are hostile to abortion rights. And let's be clear, 
Republicans did that through their vessel of the U.S. Supreme Court.
  And so they can pretend to be for IVF but vote against the bill that 
would actually protect it for good. They can pretend to be for life 
while also trying to restrict access to a miraculous treatment that 
creates life. They can pretend to have their own bill to support IVF 
when, in fact, that bill literally does the opposite. It literally does 
the opposite because here, it is your vote that counts. It is not your 
rhetoric. It is not your statement. It is not even your explanation. 
They voted no against IVF. And shame on them.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. HELMY). The Senator from Washington.
  Ms. CANTWELL. I rise to join my colleagues and want to thank my 
colleague, Senator Murray, for her leadership on this important issue 
over many, many years.
  I join my colleagues to say it is time to put partisan politics aside 
and stay out of family planning issues and leave that up to families in 
America.
  My colleagues on the other side of the aisle had an opportunity today 
to believe that women deserve the chance to start a family through IVF, 
the miracle for people who have been struggling with fertility 
challenges.
  In 2022, more than 2,000 new babies were born in the State of 
Washington thanks to IVF. This is something we would like to see every 
year. But as the Court has struck down important issues and States have 
gone on various efforts to try to restrict women's access to healthcare 
and full reproductive care, IVF has even been questioned.
  Practically everyone knows someone who overcame the challenge 
desperate to have a pregnancy and the sadness of

[[Page S6083]]

infertility. And that is probably why 86 percent of Americans say that 
IVF should be legal.
  This afternoon, we voted on that right, the Right to IVF Act. That is 
what we were voting on, a straightforward vote. One of those that would 
just show the American people, the mainstream of America, that we agree 
with them. That is all we were trying to do, as people have punted 
around this very important right that now, because of actions by 
individual States, no longer seems to be guaranteed.
  Yet we all here could have cast a vote saying we wanted to protect it 
in voting for this act. It was an opportunity for us to ask our 
colleagues who previously voted against this measure to say that they 
actually agreed this time on IVF; to show that they mean what they say, 
not some version of a bill that basically curtails and makes it 
impossible for somebody to run an IVF organization.
  We have no time for that--no time for that. My colleagues' voting 
history shows that if you didn't support IVF before and you didn't 
support it today, I am not sure what it is you think you support.
  Democrats are trying to guarantee the access, and Republicans are 
blocking us. Democrats tried to guarantee the right to contraception, 
which 81 percent of Americans say should be protected, and Republicans 
blocked us.
  We tried to pass a law saying you can't put a woman in jail for 
trying to leave her State just to get abortion care, and that was 
blocked. And we tried to pass a law saying that you can't put a 
healthcare worker in jail for performing abortions in their State where 
the procedure is legal. Republicans blocked that, too. And today 
another block of just something very basic--the Right to IVF Act.
  So reproductive freedoms of all sorts and family planning is under 
attack. We had a chance to speak as one voice and to talk about 
fertility treatments in the United States of America. Instead, families 
will continue to wonder whether IVF is going to be available in the 
United States of America. Americans should have the access to these 
reproductive rights. Americans should have the freedom to decide for 
themselves when and how to have children. And they should have the 
freedom to use IVF for their families and to plan to start a family.
  This summer, I released a healthcare report, along with my 
colleagues, that talked about people who lived in red States where they 
were forcing people to travel to other States just to get healthcare. 
It was so sad and scary to find out that, basically, almost weekly, 
someone from Idaho was walking into a facility with a pregnancy 
complexity, only to be told: I am not going to see you. And then have 
them flown to a facility in Seattle. What kind of hardship are you 
putting on people?
  Then, with great sadness, I read this article that came out late last 
night about the death of a young woman from Georgia ``who died after 
waiting 20 hours for a hospital to treat her complications from an 
abortion pill shows the consequences of [the actions that we passed] 
Donald Trump's actions.''
  This is what we are doing to America. We are leaving reproductive 
choice up in the air. We are making women travel all over just to get 
care. And now we are telling Americans we don't even know if we believe 
in IVF. This nonsense has to stop. This is about families planning. 
This is about families planning for their future. It is not about 
politicians putting hardships on patients seeking healthcare and then 
turning them away and affecting their lives. And in this case, the 
tragedy of this young woman.
  I thank my colleague, Senator Murray, for helping organize us. I ask 
our colleagues: We can do better than this. They need to do better than 
this for the American people.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Hawaii.
  Ms. HIRONO. Mr. President, I want to thank Senator Murray for her 
leadership on reproductive freedom issues and my colleagues talking 
today about the IVF bill we just voted on.
  Once again, today, our Republican colleagues have shown us where 
their priorities truly lie. Despite insisting time and again how much 
they support the right to in vitro fertilization, or IVF, they just 
voted again, nearly unanimously, to block a bill providing that very 
right.
  For decades, IVF and other assisted reproductive technologies, or 
ART, have helped people who otherwise couldn't start families of their 
own. While some on the right like to depict IVF as some sort of new or 
untested technology, that is not so. The first baby delivered via IVF 
was more than 45 years ago. And since then, IVF have helped bring more 
than 10 million babies into this world.
  In fact, as a State representative in Hawaii in the eighties, I led 
the passage of a bill making Hawaii one of the first States in the 
Nation to require health insurers to cover IVF treatment.
  Earlier this year, I met Dr. Lori Kamemoto, an OB-GYN in Hawaii who, 
decades ago, helped deliver the first baby born in Hawaii via IVF.
  But now, thanks to the chaos created by Dobbs, a whole range of 
reproductive rights, including the right to IVF, are on the chopping 
block. Look at Alabama where the State Supreme Court invoked a ``fetal 
personhood'' law to call into question the legality of IVF, effectively 
halting IVF treatment in that State.
  Despite the fact that more than 85 percent of Americans support IVF, 
Republicans here in the Senate have now, on several occasions, blocked 
our attempts to pass a bill to protect IVF treatments. Apparently, 
Republicans' obsessions with power and control over women's bodies and 
our lives knows no bounds.
  Republicans insist that they support IVF but refuse to protect access 
to IVF. They insist access to contraception is safe and they support 
it, but when given the chance, refuse to codify that support into law.
  Frankly, can anyone take Republicans at their word when they say they 
won't enact a nationwide abortion ban if given the opportunity? We 
can't. They have shown us who they are and just how wildly out of step 
they are with the American people.
  As Republicans continue on their anti-freedom, anti-women crusade, 
Democrats will continue fighting to protect the right to IVF as we work 
to ensure people can make decisions about their bodies, their lives, 
and their futures free from government intrusion.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Connecticut.
  Mr. BLUMENTHAL. Mr. President, actions speak louder than words. 
Actions always speak louder than words. For all their words, our 
Republican colleagues have acted today in a way that will speak for 
years and longer.
  It will speak to Lisa, a constituent of mine in Connecticut. I ask my 
Republican colleagues to listen to Lisa and what she shared with me 
after the Alabama Supreme Court ruling and before she and her husband 
became parents to a healthy, happy baby girl as a result of IVF. She 
said:

       If a woman is willing to go through the physical, 
     emotional, and financial toll of IVF treatment to bring a new 
     life into the world, you had better believe she is going to 
     love that baby more than anything one can imagine. And we 
     need more love like that in the world.
  For Lisa, that Alabama Supreme Court ruling banning IVF treatment was 
``heartbreaking and infuriating.'' Families like Lisa's wouldn't exist 
if it weren't for IVF.
  I ask my Republican colleagues to listen to Kim and Tina, who were 
married in 2013 and immediately knew they wanted to start a family in 
Connecticut. As a gay couple, they needed to rely on reproductive 
technology, and they were forced to meet standards that their straight 
friends never encountered. And IVF worked for them. They are now proud 
parents to twins whom they call ``the greatest gifts of our lives.'' 
Interested in politics and government, trumpets and sailing, they are 
gifts to their community, their friends, and their school.
  Listening to parents who have gone through the heartbreak and pain of 
infertility and who have found this miracle of IVF--it is not limited 
to Kim and Tina and Lisa; it is all of America who knows these stories 
in their own lives. Every American knows a couple that has tried year 
after year, and finally, if they are really lucky and can afford it, 
discovers the miracle of IVF.

[[Page S6084]]

  Very simply, every one of those families, every American ought to 
have access to that miracle of life. Yet our Republican colleagues, 
even though their own constituents would tell them, if they were 
listening, about the reasons why IVF should be protected, have acted 
today, despite their words and their rhetoric, to block IVF protection.
  This scientific miracle is so immensely important, it ought to be 
nonpolitical, nonpartisan, noncontroversial. There ought to be 
unanimity.
  And this vote is the second one. I believe in second chances. If we 
had wanted to be strictly political about this bill, we could have 
said: Well, no second chance here; we are going to take you on that 
first vote, because that would be the one politically advantageous. We 
gave them a second chance to get right on IVF, and they refused.
  I am angry. I am disgusted. Most important, I am sad because this 
vote was an opportunity to tell American families: We are with you. We 
stand with you. We know how physically painful IVF is. We know how 
emotionally painful infertility can be. We know how great families want 
to build greater families with children who will serve our country, 
make it greater.
  The callousness and cowardice of our Republican colleagues speak 
louder than words, and this vote will haunt them. It will haunt at the 
very least their consciences--or it should.
  We have the courage to stand with the American families who need and 
deserve IVF.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Michigan.
  Ms. STABENOW. Mr. President, first, I am so grateful to be here with 
colleagues who care deeply about protecting our reproductive freedoms 
and supporting families all across America. I want to thank Senator 
Patty Murray, who has been our leader on this for many years.
  It is just incredible to me that in 2024, we are standing here even 
having to talk about this. It is really incredible.
  I just want to take us back to it because this Congress, Republicans 
have had 16 chances to protect reproductive freedom--over 16 chances--
and every time, they have voted no. So today, once again, they block a 
bill to protect access to IVF for thousands of American families.
  Now, we had this vote before, and then the former President said he 
changed his mind and he wanted to make IVF free and he wanted to force 
insurance companies to cover IVF. I thought, well, that is great. Let's 
come together in a bipartisan way to be able to move forward and 
protect this really important part of reproductive freedom. So we bring 
the bill up again.
  Now, I assume that the former President was on the phone all last 
night calling our colleagues, calling all of our Republican 
colleagues--I mean, like he did for his effort to block and kill the 
bipartisan border security bill. When he wanted to make sure that 
didn't go forward and he had an issue to run on, he was burning up the 
phones.
  Well, given what he said to the American people about his now support 
for IVF, I assume he was burning up the phones last night. Well, if he 
was, it wasn't very effective. And, Mr. President, we know he wasn't. 
We know, when he really wants something, what he does. When he really 
wants something, he is calling the Speaker of the House to say: Don't 
support a bipartisan bill to continue the government; shut it down.
  But I bet there wasn't one phone call made last night to support this 
effort to protect a woman's reproductive freedom and the freedom of 
families to grow their families.
  Since the fall of Roe, Republicans have continued their assault on 
reproductive freedom: IVF; questions about birth control; of course, 
abortion access; and then a whole range of privacy questions for women 
in terms of what happens during their pregnancies.
  We know that IVF is about allowing the freedom to have children. If 
you struggle with infertility, it gives you a way, an effective way, to 
start or grow a family. It has helped thousands of Americans, thousands 
of American children, including my friend Ellen, who now has a 
beautiful little boy, Carter. He just had his first birthday party not 
long ago. I mean, how could you not love that face? Carter is 
incredible, and we are all so excited for Ellen and for Carter. That is 
the miracle of IVF.
  IVF has also helped Brittany from Holly, MI, start her family. After 
being diagnosed with PCOS at 16, she experienced fertility issues when 
she was ready to start a family. After 3 years, six rounds of fertility 
treatments, countless tests, and two rounds of IVF, she gave birth to 
her beautiful baby girl, Eloisa, who is now 11 months old. What a 
blessing.
  Despite the strain this journey put on her relationships, Brittany 
told me that every penny was worth it. ``Every penny was worth it for 
our daughter. IVF has made our family complete.''
  She is not the only Michigander who has been able to start a family 
because of IVF. When her husband was serving our country in the U.S. 
Navy, Sue from Brighton, MI, used IVF to bring her son into the world. 
At the time, she was an elementary school teacher, and her husband was 
deployed for months at a time. Her entire salary went towards the seven 
rounds of IVF that were needed to have a successful pregnancy. With 
insurance only paying for some of the medication, she spent over 
$100,000 out of pocket on treatment to be able to have that baby. This 
journey put an emotional and financial strain on Sue and her husband, 
and that is surely not surprising, and this situation is not unique.
  Our veterans and servicemembers sacrifice so much for our country. 
They shouldn't have to sacrifice their ability to start or grow a 
family because these treatments aren't covered and politicians tell 
them they don't have that choice.
  Families shouldn't have to choose between going into debt to cover 
the enormous cost of treatment and having a baby just because it is not 
covered by insurance.
  That is why voting for the Right to IVF Act was a no-brainer for me. 
We need to protect this freedom, access to this opportunity for 
families. We need to expand and protect fertility treatments for our 
servicemembers and our veterans and cover adoption assistance. We need 
to cover and lower the cost of IVF treatments for all. We need to make 
sure women have the freedom to make our own reproductive decisions, not 
rightwing politicians, not judges.
  When I hear the former President say that this was all about sending 
the decision back to the States rather than the Federal Government--no. 
This is about having individual women and their families make a 
decision. It doesn't matter if it is a Federal politician or a State 
politician; the point is, there should be no politician. It should be 
the woman and her family making those decisions, the woman herself 
making that decision about what will happen for her.
  So that is what we are fighting for, and we are not going to stop 
fighting for that. In America, we had that freedom for over 50 years, 
and it got ripped away by Donald Trump and the appointments he made to 
the U.S. Supreme Court. Now it has just unleashed all kinds of harm, 
all kinds of damage for women, and death, because of the fact that some 
folks think they can control women's lives.
  I am incredibly disappointed that our Republican colleagues did not 
join us today in protecting this important freedom.
  I yield the floor.
  I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The bill clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

                          ____________________