[Congressional Record Volume 172, Number 14 (Wednesday, January 21, 2026)]
[House]
[Pages H1139-H1147]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
SUPPORTING PREGNANT AND PARENTING WOMEN AND FAMILIES ACT
Mr. SMITH of Missouri. Mr. Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution
1009, I call up the bill (H.R. 6945) to amend part A of title IV of the
Social Security Act to clarify the authority of States to use funds for
pregnancy centers, and for other purposes, and ask for its immediate
consideration in the House.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. LaLota). Pursuant to House Resolution
1009, the amendment in the nature of a substitute consisting of the
text of Rules Committee Print 119-17 is adopted and the bill, as
amended, is considered read.
The text of the bill, as amended, is as follows:
H.R. 6945
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled.
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ``Supporting Pregnant and
Parenting Women and Families Act''.
SEC. 2. PROHIBITION ON DISCRIMINATION AGAINST PREGNANCY
CENTERS.
Section 404 of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 604) is
amended by adding at the end the following:
``(l) Use of Funds for Pregnancy Centers.--
``(1) In general.--Nothing in this part shall be construed
to prohibit a State from using a grant made under section 403
to support pregnancy centers.
``(2) Definition of pregnancy center.--In paragraph (1),
the term `pregnancy center' means any organization, such as a
pregnancy resource center, pregnancy help center or
organization, or pregnancy medical center, that--
``(A) supports protecting the life of the mother and the
unborn child; and
``(B) offers resources and services to mothers, fathers,
and families, including but not limited to relationship
counseling, prenatal and pregnancy education, pregnancy
testing, diapers, baby clothes, or other material
supports.''.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The bill, as amended, shall be debatable for
1 hour equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority
member of the Committee on Ways and Means or their respective
designees.
The gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Smith) and the gentlewoman from
California (Ms. Chu) each will control 30 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Missouri.
{time} 1410
General Leave
Mr. SMITH of Missouri. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all
Members may have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks
and submit extraneous material on the bill under consideration.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from Missouri?
There was no objection.
Mr. SMITH of Missouri. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
Mr. Speaker, I rise in favor of the Supporting Pregnant and Parenting
Women and Families Act led by Representative Fischbach.
What this bill does is really pretty simple. It ensures States will
be able to continue to use TANF funds for pregnancy resource centers
and the maternal care they provide to pregnant women and moms. That is
it, Mr. Speaker.
Pregnancy resource centers offered material support and care to over
2 million women at more than 2,700 locations in 2024 alone, including
diapers, prenatal vitamins, parenting classes, and transportation, just
to name a few of the many services provided to these mothers.
[[Page H1140]]
These services meet the core purposes of TANF. Yet, the Biden
administration proposed a regulation to discriminate against the pro-
life mission of pregnancy resource centers by forbidding States from
using TANF funds for these centers. It was a deliberate attempt to
sidestep the law to achieve a partisan political agenda. Nothing, Mr.
Speaker, in the TANF statute gave the Biden administration or any other
future administration the ability to target pregnancy resource centers.
Following pressure from the Committee on Ways and Means and this
Chamber, the Biden administration withdrew the rule in its final days.
Think of what would have happened to maternal care in this country. One
of the few places women can get care and support would have been
closed.
In my home State of Missouri, $3 out of every $4 the State gives to
pregnancy resource centers comes from TANF, and it is not just
Missouri. Women in other States would have had fewer choices for their
own care.
That is why we are passing this bill, to give pregnant women and moms
a choice about where they receive maternal care and to stop any future
administration from taking the same action as the Biden White House.
Democrats will talk until they are blue in the face, Mr. Speaker,
about a woman's right to choose, but they oppose this bill, which is
all about empowering women to make their own choices.
Why is that, Mr. Speaker? Simply because it doesn't align with their
political agenda. The hypocrisy is absolutely stunning, Mr. Speaker.
Democrats only believe in choice when it is the choice that their party
would make.
Republicans are on the side of pregnant women, moms, and children who
choose to get the help they need at one of these centers.
Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this bill, and I reserve
the balance of my time.
Ms. CHU. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, as families across the country are being crushed by
rising costs and stripped of their healthcare, it is shameful that
Republicans have chosen to bring a bill to the floor that does nothing
to address these crises for pregnant women and families.
Instead, the bill before us today would allow Temporary Assistance
for Needy Families, or TANF, dollars to be used to fund so-called
crisis pregnancy centers that have a proven track record of
intentionally lying to, misleading, and endangering women.
It is no coincidence that this bill is being rushed to the floor this
week as Republicans once again prioritize appeasing a national anti-
abortion group in town for its annual rally instead of addressing the
real crises facing American families.
I want to paint a picture as to what happens to a young woman who
suspects that she may be pregnant. She has a mix of emotions. She may
have overwhelming fear and anxiety, especially if she has few
resources. She goes to what she thinks is a medical center or clinic,
and it is called a pregnancy center of some sort.
When she gets there, she is greeted so warmly with open arms. There
are people in white coats, who she assumes are medical professionals.
They tell her she can get so many things for free: pregnancy tests,
ultrasounds, pregnancy counseling, and, after the birth, even free
diapers and formula. It all sounds so wonderful to this woman that she
says sign me up.
They don't tell this woman that, in order to get these free services,
she has to first sit through an ideological or religious indoctrination
session in which all the reasons not to have an abortion are given.
They don't tell her that the person administering the ultrasound has
no medical credentials, that, in fact, this is not an official
ultrasound, and that she could be misdiagnosed.
They don't tell her that half of the personnel in the so-called
clinic have no medical credentials at all and, therefore, are not
equipped to advise on any medical complications, such as an ectopic
pregnancy.
They don't tell her that this is not a medical clinic at all. In
fact, because it is not, this woman's privacy is not protected, and her
information could be shared with the public.
The real world of the crisis pregnancy centers is exemplified by an
OB/GYN in Iowa, who has seen patients who visited these centers and
were told that using contraceptives was the same as having an abortion.
She has seen patients who suffered miscarriages and ectopic pregnancies
because they were misdiagnosed by these anti-abortion centers.
These women were told that their pregnancies were in the early stages
or that they were experiencing normal amounts of pain because the staff
members they saw were not actual, qualified medical professionals.
As a result, these women ended up in the hospital, needing emergency
care and surgery to save their lives.
In Illinois, a woman seeking an abortion was deliberately misled by a
fake clinic. She was subjected to graphic videos and told that having
an abortion would make her infertile and, ultimately, mentally ill.
Ultimately, she was coerced into carrying a pregnancy to term. After
giving birth, she lost her job and health coverage, and the so-called
clinic never offered real medical care or follow-up support.
This is why the American Medical Association and the American College
of Obstetricians and Gynecologists have raised serious ethical and
medical concerns about these clinics.
Now, Republicans want to guarantee that taxpayer dollars through
these TANF funds will fund these centers and that there will be no
accountability for these dollars.
Let's first be clear about what TANF is actually supposed to be for.
TANF exists to help families experiencing poverty meet their most basic
needs and stabilize their lives so parents can work and children can
thrive. TANF was never intended to subsidize anti-abortion propaganda
or unregulated sham clinics that endanger women's health. Yet, that is
exactly what this bill does.
Not only that, it goes beyond the regular TANF program, which
requires reporting and accountability. Actually, this bill says that
nothing shall be construed to restrict TANF funding for these centers,
meaning that funding could not be taken away from them even if the
center engages in deceptive practices or even causes a woman's death.
{time} 1420
When the Ways and Means Committee marked up this bill last week,
Democrats offered commonsense amendments that should have been
uncontroversial to anyone who cares about women and families. We simply
proposed that TANF funds not go to pregnancy centers that have engaged
in deceptive or misleading practices that provide medically inaccurate
information or that have endangered the health of a woman seeking care.
We also offered amendments to address the real crisis affecting the
TANF program, which is the Trump administration's decision to seek
revenge against five Democratic Governors by preventing them from
accessing $10 billion in already appropriated funds for TANF and
childcare.
Republicans rejected every one of these amendments.
Clearly, this bill is not about supporting pregnant women and
families. It is about shielding deceptive actors, supporting Trump's
revenge tactics, and using public funds to advance an extreme anti-
abortion agenda.
If Republicans truly cared about pregnant women and families, we
would be debating how to undo their $1 trillion cut to Medicaid, which
rips healthcare away from millions of pregnant women, new mothers, and
children, and how to help the millions of women seeing their health
insurance premiums skyrocket due to months of Republican inaction.
Instead, this bill is merely an attempt to distract from these
devastating realities with the ultimate goal of appeasing the anti-
abortion advocates parading around Washington this week as countless
women suffer and die under extreme Republican abortion bans. Their
priorities are clear and profoundly misguided.
I urge my colleagues to vote ``no.'' Mr. Speaker, I reserve the
balance of my time.
Mr. SMITH of Missouri. Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the
gentlewoman from Minnesota (Mrs. Fischbach), the sponsor of this bill.
[[Page H1141]]
Mrs. FISCHBACH. Mr. Speaker, I thank the chairman for the opportunity
to speak. I am so proud to rise today in support of my legislation,
H.R. 6945, the Supporting Pregnant and Parenting Women and Families
Act.
For too long, previous Democrat administrations have weaponized the
Department of Health and Human Services against pregnancy resource
centers by attempting to cut off their Temporary Assistance for Needy
Families, or TANF, funding. This bill puts a definitive stop to that
harassment. It clarifies that these centers fundamentally meet the
statutory purposes of TANF by providing essential assistance to
children and expectant mothers.
The TANF block grant is built on four specific statutory goals, and
States have broad authority to pursue them all.
Let's look at the second goal: to ``end the dependence of needy
parents on government benefits through work, job preparation, and
marriage.'' Cash assistance alone does not end dependence. It often
merely just manages it. Pregnancy resource centers offer the best hope
of achieving this goal by providing parenting classes and life skills
training to help that mother move from a crisis to self-sufficiency.
Pregnancy centers are the backbone of community-based support. The
impact of their work is undeniable.
In 2024 alone, over 2,700 centers aided nearly 3.8 million women,
children, and families. These centers provided over $452 million in
total medical care, education, and material goods.
As Democrats continue to attack pregnancy care centers, I have asked
them repeatedly if they have ever visited a center, ever bothered to go
and see what they are talking about because if they had, they would see
the compassion, the support, and love that are present in these
facilities. These centers are staffed by trained men and women who
guide and support mothers, fathers, children, and families. They are
for the families from pregnancy through childbirth and beyond with
parenting classes and assistance such as formula, diapers, and whatever
else that family may need.
The attempt to strip TANF funding from these centers was never about
fiscal responsibility. It was a targeted, ideological attack on
organizations that provide a real alternative to abortion.
Democrats say choice, choice, choice over and over, but they try to
deny women the choice to choose life.
H.R. 6945 codifies the operations of TANF to ensure this funding
stream remains focused on its mission, helping needy families and
children, rather than serving as a tool for ideological gatekeeping.
I am incredibly proud of this bill, which protects the most
vulnerable among us and ensures that every woman facing adversity has
the options, resources, and support she deserves.
Ms. CHU. Mr. Speaker, I would like to point out that the previous
speaker said that these clinics have trained staff, but many of these
centers pose as clinics, offer incorrect medical advice, and even go so
far as to wear scrubs and white coats to appear as though they are
trained. Actually, fewer than half of crisis pregnancy centers have a
licensed medical professional on staff. Mr. Speaker, 95 percent do not
provide prenatal care, and only 1 out of 607 provides contraception,
and the facilities are unregulated.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Illinois (Mr.
Davis).
Mr. DAVIS of Illinois. Mr. Speaker, as we begin 2026 with Trump and
Republican policies squeezing workers, spiking costs, tanking job
security, the Republican leadership advances this bill to divert money
intended for poor children to dangerous anti-abortion centers.
When my home State of Illinois and four other States are facing an
illegal reduction of about $8.9 billion in TANF and SSBG funds due to
political retaliation, the Republican leadership chooses to move a bill
restricting women's reproductive choices.
If Republicans really wanted to help parents care for their children,
they would work with Democrats to ensure that HHS follows the law and
immediately releases the childcare funds that HHS is illegally delaying
from States across the country.
Illinois receives about $400 million from the Child Care and
Development Fund and another $500 million from TANF that help low-
income working families afford quality childcare.
Disruption to this funding will have substantial, immediate, and
destructive consequences to children, families, businesses, and
communities.
I am upset but not shocked that the Republican leadership rejected my
amendment to this bill that would penalize HHS for illegally
withholding payments of TANF, Child Care Entitlement to States, or SSBG
funding if the agency fails to pay an amount due to a State within 5
days by requiring the agency to make a monthly payment of the amount
due plus interest.
HHS should be held accountable for harming individuals, families, and
businesses.
I strongly oppose this bill that tramples on women's rights to choose
their own best health interests.
Mr. SMITH of Missouri. Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the
gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Smith), an incredible advocate for the
unborn.
Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, I thank the distinguished
chairman for yielding and for his leadership. I especially want to
thank Michelle Fischbach for her leadership and compassion by offering
and authoring this legislation to protect pregnancy care centers from
discrimination and to ensure that they can continue their important
work of assisting families in need.
Mr. Speaker, I was at a New Jersey pregnancy center dinner a few
years ago when two women through tears of joy expressed their deep and
abiding gratitude for the incredible love, respect, and care that
persuaded them to reverse their decision to abort their babies.
They spoke of how desperate, even hopeless, they were. They spoke
about the pressure that they were under to abort until they met the
director of the pregnancy resource center who reached out to both of
them at different times but within about a month in a gentle and
nonjudgmental way.
{time} 1430
They chose life and thanked God, the director, and the pregnancy
resource center for helping them avert the loss of their precious
babies' lives.
Then, Mr. Speaker, two teenaged girls took to the podium and spoke
about their lives: schools, sports, friends, and their reverence for
the sanctity of human life.
Near the end of their remarks, they turned toward the director of the
center and thanked her for being there for their moms through those
very difficult times and said: If you weren't there for them, we would
be dead.
This is coming from two girls standing at the podium, and that has
been replicated many, many times throughout the country. There are more
than 55 pregnancy care centers in my district. I have been to many of
them. They are filled with the most loving, compassionate, and honest
people I have ever met.
So I find all the smear that we always hear so objectionable. They
are an amazing group of women. They are almost all women, who run these
pregnancy care centers.
Consider the story of Jean Marie Davis, a mother and a survivor of
human trafficking.
I know a little about human trafficking. I have written five laws on
trafficking, including the landmark Trafficking Victims Protection Act
of 2000. There is a big, heavy, trauma-informed emphasis on victims,
and we have one now pending to further that effort.
This woman, Jean Marie Davis, is a survivor of trafficking who says
that her life was saved by a pregnancy care center.
She said: ``I was trafficked in 33 States.''
She went on: ``Even though I was losing weight from the drugs, my
belly kept growing, and I soon discovered the pregnancy that would
ultimately save my life.''
Fighting despair and with only $1.38 to her name, she had almost no
place to turn. She was connected with a woman named Phyllis at a local
pregnancy care center.
She says:
The pregnancy center provided me with free resources and support, and
then when the child was born to take
[[Page H1142]]
care of my son. I was able to realize and pursue dreams I had never
imagined.
That is because these people have such compassion, not the smear we
hear from the other side. They have compassion, and I am just amazed at
that, that the other side says these things about these wonderful
people.
Years later she applied, and now she is the executive director of the
Branches Pregnancy Resource Center in Vermont. She is giving back. She
was given so much by these individuals, and now she is giving back.
Across the U.S., there are more than 2,700 pregnancy centers offering
mothers and their precious children an oasis of love, compassion, and
care.
One report found that in 2024, $452 million in free medical care was
provided. I have been to these. There are so many nurses at these
pregnancy care centers. They do ultrasounds.
Frankly, when the woman does see the baby, it is transformational.
Mr. Speaker, you don't get that in a Planned Parenthood clinic at all.
They talk about the child being a nonentity and not a human being.
Recognizing the extraordinary care provided at these centers, some
States--there are at least six of them, including the distinguished
chairman's from Missouri--do provide TANF funding. Biden was in the
process of promulgating a rule that would have precluded that.
We can't allow that to happen now or ever. This important
legislation--again, I can't thank Michelle enough for it--would ensure
that pregnancy centers cannot be excluded or restricted from receiving
TANF funding as a result of discrimination and the smear campaign that
they suffer.
Hopefully, the Supreme Court will soon render its decision on a very
important case coming out of my State, and I do think it will be
favorable. These are amazing centers, and we ought to be supporting
them, not smearing them.
Ms. CHU. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, I wish the previous speaker could have met this
Massachusetts woman who sought care at a crisis pregnancy center after
a Google advertisement led her to believe it was a legitimate medical
facility where she could confirm her pregnancy. At Clear Way, a nurse
administered an ultrasound and told the plaintiff that she had a viable
intrauterine pregnancy. The nurse was not licensed to diagnose viable
pregnancies and did not undertake appropriate medical measures to rule
out an ectopic pregnancy.
Rather than referring the patient for immediate medical evaluation,
Clear Way staff focused on encouraging her to continue the pregnancy.
As a result of the misdiagnosis, this woman's ectopic pregnancy
ruptured, causing massive internal bleeding and requiring emergency
surgery. She lost a fallopian tube and narrowly avoided death.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Illinois (Mr.
Schneider).
Mr. SCHNEIDER. Mr. Speaker, I include in the Record links to three
articles. The first is: The American College of Obstetricians and
Gynecologists. ``Issue Brief: Crisis Pregnancy Centers.'' https://
schneider.house.gov/sites/evo-subsites/schneider.house.gov/files/evo-
media-document/crisis-pregnancy-centers-rep-schneider.pdf.
The second is from the AMA Journal of Ethics: ``Why Crisis Pregnancy
Centers Are Legal but Unethical.'' https://schneider.house.gov/sites/
evo-subsites/schneider.house.gov/files/evo-media-document/why-crisis-
pregnancy-cen ters-are-legal-but-unethical-rep-schnei der_0.pdf.
The third is an article by a number of doctors from Women's Health
Reports: ``Truth and Transparency in Crisis Pregnancy Centers.''
https://schneider.house.gov/sites/evo-subsites/schneider.house.gov/
files/evo-media-document/truth-and-transparency-in-crisis-preg nancy-
centers-rep-schneider.pdf.
Mr. SCHNEIDER. Mr. Speaker, I think it is shameful that my Republican
colleagues have brought this bill to the floor to funnel money to so-
called crisis pregnancy centers and away from programs that truly help
families in need.
My Republican colleagues are saying that these centers help women. In
reality, too many of these centers trick women before they even walk in
the door.
They advertise themselves as real medical clinics. They are not. They
might look like a normal doctor's office with ultrasound machines and
employees wearing lab coats, but the coats are for show, and the
employees are not medical professionals.
Mr. Speaker, don't be fooled. The primary purpose of these centers is
to deceive women, and the organizations promoting these centers are the
same organizations advocating for a national abortion ban.
Here is what should concern us all: These centers routinely spread
medical misinformation and intentionally cause delays in accessing
legitimate healthcare. Their theory is delay long enough and women in
crisis are effectively forced to continue their pregnancies.
Now, Mr. Speaker, you will hear my Republican colleagues tout that
these centers offer maternal care. They don't. Real maternal care
requires real medical professionals who offer real, ethical, and
comprehensive health services, who are licensed and regulated, and who
don't have a personal bias counter to their patients' medical interest
or decisions.
Yet, my Republican colleagues want to divert Federal TANF funding
away from families in need and to these clinics instead. This is a
disgraceful diversion. If my Republican colleagues were serious about
helping children and families in need, let them speak out against this
administration's illegal payment freeze for childcare and child welfare
funding.
Right now, as we debate this bill on eligibility for TANF spending,
the Trump administration is illegally holding up more than $10 billion
in Federal funding for childcare and family assistance funding,
including TANF funds, to States, including my own of Illinois, as well
as California, New York, Colorado, and Minnesota.
The administration is illegally withholding payments to States for
childcare, foster care, child protective services, and cash assistance
to low-income families.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has expired.
Ms. CHU. Mr. Speaker, I yield an additional 30 seconds to the
gentleman from Illinois.
Mr. SCHNEIDER. They are hiding behind false claims and unauthorized
administrative barriers in order to inflict pain on States that the
President dislikes.
Let me be clear. These payments are legally required under the law,
and this freeze is unlawful.
The administration needs to pay the States what they are owed.
Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on the bill.
Mr. SMITH of Missouri. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman
from California (Mr. Fong).
Mr. FONG. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H.R. 6945,
the Supporting Pregnant and Parenting Women and Families Act.
Across our Nation, more than 2,700 pregnancy centers serve nearly 2
million women and families each year. I have seen firsthand my local
pregnancy centers in California and the services they provide offering
diapers, baby clothes, prenatal education, ultrasounds, housing
referrals, and additional real, compassionate support during life's
most vulnerable moments.
These services are valued at over $450 million annually and help
families choose stability, self-sufficiency, and hope.
The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families program was created to
strengthen families, reduce dependency, and ensure children can be
cared for in their own homes.
Pregnancy resource centers, especially in rural communities, clearly
advance those goals. However, under the Biden administration, a
proposed rule was issued that singled out pregnancy centers and
preemptively suggested State spending on these organizations would no
longer be allowable.
The Biden rule was never finalized, but there is a need to make sure
future administrations do not pursue similar actions. H.R. 6945 ensures
fairness. It clarifies that States may continue partnering with
pregnancy centers without political interference now and in the future.
Mr. Speaker, this bill stands for mothers, children, and families,
and I urge my colleagues to support it.
[[Page H1143]]
{time} 1440
Ms. CHU. Mr. Speaker, I wish we could think of the woman in
Pennsylvania who was pregnant who sought care at what she thought was a
medically certified clinic, but during her appointment, the staff told
her she had already miscarried and was sent home.
As time went on, though, she continued experiencing pregnancy
symptoms, so she later went to a licensed doctor who told her she was
still pregnant and that the crisis pregnancy center had given her the
wrong information. This misdiagnosis greatly increased her risk of
having pregnancy complications.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr.
Thompson).
Mr. THOMPSON of California. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman for
yielding.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today in opposition to this legislation that
prioritizes a partisan agenda over the health, privacy, and autonomy of
women.
Most of these so-called pregnancy centers are not licensed medical
clinics. What does that mean? It means they can and often do share
women's private medical information without their consent. It means
they can and often do provide false and misleading medical information
about abortion, contraception, and other reproductive health services
for women.
In California, my home State, our attorney general was compelled to
issue a consumer alert warning the public about deceptive practices
employed by these centers.
At a time when access to reproductive healthcare is under attack, our
Republican colleagues are advancing a bill that funnels resources to
organizations that mislead women rather than provide comprehensive
medical care.
Let me repeat: Most of these so-called pregnancy centers are not
licensed medical clinics. How can we, in good conscience, send our
constituents for healthcare to unlicensed facilities? I urge my
colleagues to vote ``no'' on this measure.
Mr. SMITH of Missouri. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the
gentlewoman from South Carolina (Mrs. Biggs).
Mrs. BIGGS of South Carolina. Mr. Speaker, the proudest title that I
carry is one that was given to me some 26 years ago from my son: Mama.
I have also been a nurse for more than 30 years. Not only do I have my
doctorate in family practice but also in psychiatric mental health.
I have spent my entire life caring for others, especially women and
families in crisis. I have listened to their fears, and I have worked
to make sure that they weren't facing those moments alone. That is why
I rise today in support of H.R. 6945, the Supporting Pregnant and
Parenting Women and Families Act.
As thousands gather in Washington for the March for Life, we are
reminded that the pro-life cause isn't just about protecting the
unborn, but it is about honoring life at every single stage. That means
showing up with real help, not just during the pregnancy, but as
families begin the journey of nurturing a child.
Under the Biden administration, there were efforts to block States
from partnering with pregnancy centers. This bill pushes back. It
protects a State's ability to work with trusted local organizations,
centers that offer prenatal care, parenting classes, counseling, and
everyday necessities like diapers, formula, and baby clothes.
I have visited centers like this in my own district and seen the
compassion that they offer firsthand. These are places where women are
met with dignity, not judgment, and where families are supported not
just through pregnancy, but long after.
This bill reflects what we believe: that every single life is a gift
from God, every mother deserves compassion, and every child deserves a
chance because, as Scripture reminds us: ``I will praise thee; for I am
fearfully and wonderfully made.''
Mr. Speaker, I am proud to support this important legislation, and I
urge my colleagues to do the same.
Ms. CHU. Mr. Speaker, may I inquire as to how much time is remaining.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentlewoman from California has 12\1/2\
minutes remaining.
Ms. CHU. Mr. Speaker, I would like to talk about Kentucky, where a
postpartum nurse with 20 years of experience was motivated to volunteer
at a crisis pregnancy center. During her training, she learned that the
clinic was using expired disinfectants to sanitize ultrasound
equipment. Not only that, the kind of disinfectant that the clinic was
using was ineffective in targeting human papillomavirus, which causes
90 percent of cervical cancer cases.
The volunteer nurse quit. She filed whistleblower complaints with the
State, but nothing was ever done, highlighting the lack of
accountability at the centers.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr.
Doggett).
Mr. DOGGETT. Mr. Speaker, in their incessant drive to impose a
national ban on all forms of abortion, Republicans continue to block
relief for millions of Americans who are struggling with soaring
ObamaCare health insurance premiums. Now, today, they offer this bill
to funnel taxpayer dollars to fake health clinics.
To deceive women, these so-called pregnancy crisis centers use
medical jargon and dress up in scrubs, yet most of the 2,600 clinics do
not have a single licensed medical professional. Instead, they rely on
fear and misinformation to discourage vulnerable women as they are
trying to make one of the most important healthcare decisions about
what is best for them.
Much more shocking than the waste that is promoted through this bill
is the indifference with which so many extremist Republicans have shown
to the right to life, the right to life for the mother, the right to
life for American women.
I chaired an Austin field hearing last August, and I heard dozens of
tragic stories from Texas women like Kaitlyn Kash and Amanda Zurawski,
forced to the brink of death before they could receive care for a
miscarriage, hemorrhage, or sepsis.
An obstetrician, Dr. Donell Oliver, testified: ``Women are dying;
families are suffering; and medical professionals' hands are being
tied.'' That is the result of the kind of strict abortion ban
Republicans have imposed on Texas women that some here want to impose
on all 50 States and all women in our country.
I think the death certificates for so many other women who have been
denied treatment for pregnancy complications should really read the
truth, which is ``Cause of Death: Republican abortion ban.''
For every American whose life is threatened by Republican extremist
interference, I strongly oppose this bill and urge its rejection.
Mr. SMITH of Missouri. Mr. Speaker, Democrats are fear-mongering
today. The majority of pregnancy resource centers have voluntarily
signed on to industry standards, a call to commitment of care and
competence created by Heartbeat International. These standards set an
ethical code where they agree to adopt a transparent and honest service
model.
According to a recent report that surveyed 2,750 different pregnancy
centers in 2025, there were 4,779 licensed medical professionals on
staff, and 5,396 licensed medical professional volunteers.
I include in the Record a copy of Heartbeat International's ``Our
Commitment of Care and Competence.''
Our Commitment of Care & Competence
Clients are served without regard to age, race, income,
nationality, religious affiliation, disability or other
arbitrary circumstances.
Clients are treated with kindness and compassion, in a
caring manner.
Clients always receive honest and open answers.
Client information is kept securely and confidentially and
only released with the client's signed authorization or as
required by law.
Clients receive accurate information about pregnancy, fetal
development, lifestyle issues, and related concerns.
We do not offer, recommend, or refer for abortions or
abortifacients, or contraceptives. We are committed to
offering accurate information about related risks and
procedures.
All of our advertising and communications are truthful and
honest, and accurately describe the services we offer.
We provide a safe environment by screening and equipping
all staff and volunteers interacting with clients.
We are governed by a Board of Directors and operate in
accordance with our articles of incorporation, bylaws, and
stated purpose and mission.
[[Page H1144]]
We comply with applicable legal and regulatory requirements
regarding employment, fundraising, financial management,
taxation, and public disclosure including the filing of all
applicable government reports in a timely manner.
All services are provided in accordance with pertinent and
applicable laws. Medical services are provided in accordance
with medical standards, under the supervision and direction
of a licensed physician (or advanced clinical provider as
permitted by law).
All of our staff and volunteers receive appropriate
training to uphold these standards.
Mr. SMITH of Missouri. Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the
gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Yakym).
Mr. YAKYM. Mr. Speaker, from hearing my Democratic colleagues talk
today, it is clear that none of them has ever been to a pregnancy
resource center, and they certainly have never used their services.
Mr. Speaker, 17 years ago, my wife, Sallyann, and I found out we were
expecting our first child. Sallyann thought she was having some issues
with our pregnancy when she was only 7 weeks pregnant. We were young,
and we were scared. We didn't have a place to turn until one of her
friends suggested that we go to a pregnancy resource center.
We went down to the Women's Care Center in South Bend, where they
welcomed us with open and loving arms. They gave her an ultrasound, and
for the very first time, we saw our child, who, at that time, was about
the size of a peanut. Half of that peanut was a heartbeat. Most
importantly, they assured us that our child was okay and would be just
fine.
{time} 1450
When we went to leave, I had just one question for them: How much do
we owe you? They looked at us and they said: Guys, the services that we
provide here are free. You can go on your way. They assured us that our
baby was healthy, and they gave us such peace of mind.
Here we are, 17 years later, and our daughter Elle is smart. She is
beautiful. She is a junior in high school, and we are out looking for
colleges. The pregnancy resource center in my community was there for
us when we were young and scared, when we had very limited resources,
but, unfortunately, if my Democrat colleagues had their way, our
healthcare would have been denied.
Why deny the Sallyann Yakym's of the world access to the care that
they need? Why deny people like my daughter, Elle, the care to make
sure that they are okay?
I wish my friends from the other side of the aisle would simply join
me in voting ``yes'' today on this measure.
Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague, the gentlewoman from Minnesota
(Mrs. Fischbach), for the introduction of this bill, and I urge my
colleagues to vote ``yes.''
Ms. CHU. Mr. Speaker, let me say, there is a comprehensive study by
the Alliance for Women's Rights and Gender Equality that studied 607
crisis pregnancy centers across nine States, and they documented a
consistent pattern of deception, misinformation, and patient harm.
Nearly two-thirds of the centers promoted patently false or biased
medical claims about pregnancy, abortions, contraception, or
reproductive health providers, and fewer than half reported having a
licensed medical professional on staff.
These are not isolated incidents. These are standard practices for
these centers.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Minnesota (Ms.
Morrison).
Ms. MORRISON. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong opposition to H.R. 6945.
The Supporting Pregnant and Parenting Women and Families Act is yet
another Republican betrayal cruelly masked by a misleading title.
After spending the last few weeks threatening access to childcare
support and doing literally nothing to help millions of Americans
afford their healthcare, Republicans want to direct taxpayer dollars
away from helping families afford necessities like food, rent, and
childcare to crisis pregnancy centers that prey on vulnerable women
seeking legitimate reproductive healthcare.
We have heard today that wonderful, caring people staff these crisis
pregnancy centers, and I don't doubt that, but crisis pregnancy centers
do not provide medical care, though they imply that they do. Crisis
pregnancy centers are unregulated, deceptive, and dangerous.
As an OB/GYN myself for more than 20 years, I have seen far too many
patients who have had, at best, confusing and, at worst, life-
threatening experiences at crisis pregnancy centers. They don't serve
patients. They serve the anti-abortion agenda.
Let me be clear: Every person has the right and deserves the dignity
to make their own healthcare decisions, free from intimidation,
deception, and coercion. At a time when our country has a shameful
maternal and infant mortality crisis and is facing a worsening shortage
of obstetricians, the so-called pro-life movement is focused not on
helping women or supporting their families or delivering the IVF
coverage the President promised; they are focused on denying women
their reproductive rights and failing to deliver for American families.
Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to stand for women and families,
for dignity and for freedom, and vote ``no.''
Mr. SMITH of Missouri. Mr. Speaker, holy cow. The things that you
hear from the other side in this body could not be so--not truthful--
false.
They paint with a broad brush and say the most ridiculous items,
saying that pregnancy resource centers do not help anyone. Give me a
break. Where I come from, whenever someone says something useless, we
call it hogwash. They are swimming in hogwash on that side of the
aisle.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Ms. CHU. Mr. Speaker, well, it is not hogwash to this woman in
Georgia. She sought care from an unregulated clinic that offered free
ultrasounds and medical advice. She thought that was so great. The
ultrasound technician incorrectly informed her that her baby's kidneys
were filled with water and that she needed to see a primary care
doctor.
The diagnosis was incorrect, but the stress of that misdiagnosis
severely impacted the mother. She said: The irony in all this is that
they could have caused me to lose a perfectly healthy pregnancy.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from Wisconsin (Ms.
Moore).
Ms. MOORE of Wisconsin. Mr. Speaker, I include in the Record a news
article titled: ``Child care providers reporting unnerving stakeouts''
by Kristen Taketa.
[From the Union-Tribune, Jan. 21, 2026]
Child Care Providers Reporting Unnerving Stakeouts
(By Kristen Taketa)
Some San Diego child care providers say they are being
harassed and fear for their safety amid a campaign by
conservative activists and the Trump administration over
broad but unsubstantiated suggestions of fraud.
Meanwhile, billions of dollars in child care funding is up
in the air after the Trump administration last week moved to
freeze $10 billion in funding for social services, including
child care and cash assistance for low-income families, in
five Democratic-led states until it investigates.
A New York federal judge temporarily halted the freeze on
Friday, a day after the five states challenged the freeze in
court.
The states called it a politically motivated,
``extraordinary and cruel action'' and said the
administration has shown neither evidence of fraud nor the
legal authority to withhold mandated program funding.
The freeze could affect $5 billion in funding due to
California that helps pay for state child care subsidy
programs serving more than 300,000 children of low-income
families. The subsidies come in the form of vouchers that
families use to pay child care providers.
In the past week, conservative activists have been posting
on social media the names and phone numbers of child care
providers, including in San Diego County, suggesting without
evidence that they are benefiting from public funding but not
actually providing child care.
Several local providers say that since then, they have
begun seeing people loitering outside their homes or sitting
in parked cars with cameras, watching them.
One San Diego child care provider whose name and phone
number were posted online by a local activist said that ever
since then, her phone has been ``flooded'' with calls, and
she has seen people loitering around her home with recording
devices. The San Diego Union-Tribune is not identifying her
due to safety concerns.
``This has raised serious safety concerns for my family and
my business. It's not right!'' she wrote in a text message.
The harassment is also racist, providers say--those in San
Diego who have been targeted are overwhelmingly of African or
Middle Eastern descent.
[[Page H1145]]
Samsam Khalif, a Somali American who has been a family
child care provider in San Diego for 18 years, was frightened
last week when, as she was driving children to her home for a
day of child care, she saw two men with a camera sitting in a
car outside her home.
She circled the block a few times, but they didn't leave
until she got out of her car and walked the children to her
home. They drove away, she said, after they saw her with the
children.
Khalif said she is so scared that she avoids going out
unless she has to go shopping. She reactivated her home
security system last week.
The safety concerns are especially acute for family child
care providers, who run child care businesses out of their
own homes. Some providers have their own children or other
family members living at their place of business.
Yessika Magdaleno, a family child care provider of 25
years, said last week she hasn't faced harassment yet but
worries she will, considering she is an officer with a child
care providers union.
She counseled her young-adult children last week on safety,
telling them to look out for anybody who may be watching or
following them, and to be ready to call 911 if anyone
threatens them.
``You do your work with fear. You don't know who's going to
show up at your place, and you have all of these little
children in your care,'' said Magdaleno, who lives in Orange
County and is the United Domestic Workers union president for
the district that includes San Diego County.
``They're doing things that, as a child care provider, you
will never think will happen to you. Because all you're doing
is taking care of the children and educating them, right?''
The harassment has drawn attention from local Democratic
leaders.
``What the hell are we doing here where children, at day
care, might be subjected to extremists showing up at the door
of the home that they're receiving care, to investigate
whether or not there's actually child care happening?'' San
Diego City Councilmember Sean Elo-Rivera said at a UDW news
conference Thursday. ``Child care should be universal and
should be affordable for everyone, and it sure as hell should
be saved from extremists.''
The targeting--plus the potential loss of funding--has
shaken an industry in California that has been historically
underpaid, understaffed and run almost entirely by women,
most of them women of color and many immigrants.
Government subsidies for child care cover only some of the
cost of care, despite California's recent additional
increases in subsidy rates for providers and funded child
care slots.
Child care providers frequently make personal sacrifices to
run their businesses, often putting in long days, enlisting
family members to work unpaid or forgoing adequate pay and
benefits, such as time off for themselves.
In 2024, the median annual wage for a child care worker in
California was $38,220, according to the Bureau of Labor
Statistics.
``Child care providers are some of the most hardworking,
selfless, incredible humans that are raising our future
generation,'' said Kimberly McDougal, senior vice president
at YMCA Childcare Resource Service in San Diego County. ``The
fact that they're even having to go through this is sad.''
Child care leaders now worry that losing funding could
force some child care providers to close their doors, which
would exacerbate California's child care shortage.
``It's very fragile. Child care providers operate . . . on
a very, very razor-thin line, subsidies being so low,'' said
Max Arias, chair of Child Care Providers United, a union that
represents more than 40,000 family child care providers in
California.
The harassment comes as the White House targets child care
providers and Somali communities, part of a growing
conservative focus following years of state and federal
investigations into allegations of fraud in Minnesota's child
care system and social services, some involving Somali
American business owners.
That has culminated in what the Trump administration has
called its largest immigration enforcement action, with
thousands of officers deployed last month to Minnesota in
part to investigate the child care fraud allegations.
That crackdown led to last week's killing of Renee Good by
an ICE officer Wednesday.
In early December, Trump shocked observers with his
comments during a Cabinet meeting in which he called Somali
people ``garbage'' and said, ``They contribute nothing. I
don't want them in our country.''
Weeks later, a conservative YouTuber named Nick Shirley
posted a video in which he recorded Minneapolis Somali-run
child care businesses and accused them of fraud, claiming
they got public funding but did not serve children.
Afterward, Minnesota investigators visited 10 businesses he
identified and found that nine were operating normally; the
10th had not yet opened for the day when officials arrived.
Shirley's video prompted other conservative activists
around the country, including in San Diego, to follow his
lead.
In San Diego, one proponent of unfounded fraud allegations
has been activist Amy Reichert, who founded Restore San Diego
in 2020, an organization whose stated goal is to ``get the
government out of our lives.''
In the past week, Reichert has promoted her claims on Fox
News and identified by name more than a dozen San Diego
County family child care providers on the social media
platform X, saying they do not actually serve children.
Her posts contained excerpts from publicly available state
reports, with providers' names and phone numbers listed, that
noted if there were no children present at the time of their
unannounced visits; some reports also noted violations of
state regulations, such as missing child or employee records.
Child care providers have called the claims reckless and
based on false assumptions. ``There are many reasons why
children may not be present when an inspector is on-site,''
said McDougal of YMCA's Childcare Resource Service.
Providers identified on social media said children weren't
there at the time of inspection because they serve children
after school or at night; others had kids absent due to
illness.
Not all children who are enrolled are present in child care
at the same time, depending on their families' schedules.
``They (are) just accusing us. And that's lying. And that's
wrong for you to put lie(s) out there,'' Khalif said.
Reichert told the Union-Tribune she had not contacted any
of the providers; she said she ``didn't want to give any
appearance of harassment.''
The child care subsidy system has several procedures in
place to protect against fraud, McDougal said. Her
organization and Child Development Associates are the two
nonprofits that administer subsidies to providers in San
Diego County.
The nonprofits check providers' enrollment with their
licensed capacity, review thousands of monthly attendance
sheets, validate signatures and verifications of employment
and eligibility and compare providers' rate sheets to
invoices, among other things, McDougal said.
Ms. MOORE of Wisconsin. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to H.R.
6945.
Despite the grandiose title, Supporting Pregnant and Parenting Women
and Families Act, this bill carves out--let's keep the main thing to
main thing. What it does, it carves out an earmark for an industry with
a narrow ideological mission to provide, I guess what I call anti-
abortion, but Mr. Chairman over there, he called it pro-life counseling
services.
Actually, this just does not fit within the four core purposes of the
TANF bill, which is why the Biden administration prohibited this. No
more that we provide moneys for abortion counseling, which if you stop
and think about it, it would fit more neatly into the core provisions
of the TANF bill, and that is to prevent unwanted pregnancies. We don't
provide abortion clinics with TANF moneys nor should we provide it to
these clinics.
Mr. Speaker, I hear the tortured explanation of how this fits into
the core duties of the TANF bill, and I hear them talking about the
diapers and the formula and all the wonderful things. The March of
Dimes provides all that stuff, too, but we don't provide them with TANF
funds.
No. This is a diversion from the already underfunded TANF program
which has been flat funded for 30 years at $16.5 billion and now we
have, according to the chairman, millions of women, 2 million, and
7,000 centers that are now going to be able to access TANF dollars.
These TANF dollars were meant not to provide baby wipes and diapers
for babies up to 6 months old, but to help a woman navigate her way
into the workforce to get job training, to have cash assistance until
she can get on her feet, not to provide moneys to stand up this
ideological and, quite frankly, religious organization.
That is why I oppose this bill. Mr. Speaker, I am going to later on
offer an amendment that would allow States to use TANF dollars, again,
not undermining this bill, but adding a section that would allow States
to use TANF dollars for security at childcare facilities and to be able
to gather evidence of harassment of childcare providers and to give
local law enforcement the ability to secure a place for children
because one of the core responsibilities of the TANF funding is to
provide childcare.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Simpson). The time of the gentlewoman
has expired.
Ms. CHU. Mr. Speaker, I yield an additional 30 seconds to the
gentlewoman from Wisconsin.
Ms. MOORE of Wisconsin. This all comes because there have been
vigilantes showing up at childcare centers.
These are people who are not Health Department officials, not
auditors showing up and harassing TANF recipients who need childcare as
we deny
[[Page H1146]]
States' moneys for childcare, but we have vigilantes, right-wingers
that are showing up and they are creating safety concerns in our
daycares.
Mr. Speaker, I include in the Record my amendment.
Ms. Moore of Wisconsin moves to recommit the bill H.R. 6945
to the Committee on Ways and Means with instructions to
report the same back to the House forthwith with the
following amendment:
Strike all after the enacting clause and insert the
following:
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ``Supporting Pregnant and
Parenting Women and Families Act''.
SEC. 2. PROHIBITION ON DISCRIMINATION AGAINST PREGNANCY
CENTERS.
Section 404 of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 604) is
amended by adding at the end the following:
``(l) Use of Funds for Pregnancy Centers.--
``(1) In general.--Nothing in this part shall be construed
to prohibit a State from using a grant made under section 403
to support pregnancy centers.
``(2) Safety.--Nothing in this part shall be construed to
prohibit a State from using funds from a grant made under
section 403 to provide security for child care facilities or
to obtain information about harassment of child care
facilities for law enforcement purposes.
``(3) Definition of pregnancy center.--In paragraph (1),
the term `pregnancy center' means any organization, such as a
pregnancy resource center, pregnancy help center or
organization, or pregnancy medical center, that--
``(A) supports protecting the life of the mother and the
unborn child; and
``(B) offers resources and services to mothers, fathers,
and families, including but not limited to relationship
counseling, prenatal and pregnancy education, pregnancy
testing, diapers, baby clothes, or other material
supports.''.
{time} 1500
Mr. Speaker, let the record reflect that this bill maintains the
status quo of funding. Right now, people can use TANF dollars for
funding. That is how it has always been. This is just protecting that
it continues to do so because the prior President, President Biden,
decided to try to eliminate it for the first time in history. We are
trying to prevent it so that no future administration can do that. Mr.
Speaker, I do want to talk about one individual. We hear all kinds of
examples over here.
Let me talk about a 21-year-old named Faith who found out she was
pregnant. While driving down the highway, she saw a sign for a
pregnancy resource center in Rolla, Missouri, my congressional
district.
While sharing her initial visit, Faith said that the center
specifically told her: ``Anything you need, we will help you get it.''
She was shunned by her family and pressured by her fiance to abort
their unborn child.
After being shunned, Faith decided to return to the pregnancy
resource center in Rolla, Missouri. Through talking with those at the
center, Faith realized that she ultimately did want to have her child.
She gave birth to her son, Noah. Now, years later, Faith volunteers at
the very center that helped her life and protected her son, Noah.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Ms. CHU. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, I would like to clarify that this bill actually allows
these funds to be free of any accountability. It actually changes the
way in which these TANF funds are being used.
Right now, there has to be accountability if States use TANF funds
for the crisis pregnancy centers. What this bill does is, by amending
section 404 of the Social Security Act to state that nothing in this
part may be construed to restrict TANF funding for pregnancy centers,
this bill actually overrides TANF's statutory purposes, reporting
requirements, penalty authority, and HHS enforcement provisions.
As a result, any future Federal effort to limit condition or review
TANF funding for these crisis pregnancy centers could be challenged as
prohibited by this statute.
Even if that center engages in deceptive advertising and does actions
that even result in the death of a woman, there would be nothing that
could be done about that crisis pregnancy center.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from Wisconsin (Ms.
Moore).
Ms. MOORE of Wisconsin. Mr. Speaker, I have a motion at the desk. I
am closing. I have an amendment at the desk, Mr. Speaker.
As I indicated, my amendment, Mr. Speaker, would be added onto
section 2 of the bill and would just enable childcare centers--TANF to
fund childcare centers, which are now under siege and really
compromising the security of our children.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Simpson). Is the gentlewoman asking for
unanimous consent to insert the text of her amendment?
Ms. MOORE of Wisconsin. Yes, Mr. Speaker, I ask for unanimous
consent.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentlewoman from Wisconsin?
Mr. SMITH of Missouri. Mr. Speaker, I object.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Objection is heard.
Mr. SMITH of Missouri. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Ms. CHU. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.
Mr. Speaker, the truth is abundantly clear. Both the American Medical
Association and The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists
have raised serious ethical and medical concerns about so-called crisis
pregnancy centers.
These facilities are unregulated. They have no obligation to provide
accurate medical information. They are not subject to HIPAA. They are
not required to protect patient confidentiality. Yet, Republicans are
determined to send them Federal taxpayer dollars anyway.
I talked about this very comprehensive report by the Alliance for
Women's Rights and Gender Equality, which studied 607 crisis pregnancy
centers across 9 States. They documented patients' experiences at the
centers.
In one case, a patient seeking abortion care was misled into
believing she was too early in pregnancy to receive medical care and
was encouraged to delay seeing a licensed provider, despite
experiencing symptoms consistent with a pregnancy complication.
In another documented case, a patient was falsely told that abortion
would cause infertility and severe mental illness, information that
directly contradicted established medical evidence.
Several patients reported being reassured that severe pain or
bleeding was normal, only to later require emergency medical
intervention when complications were left untreated.
If Republicans truly cared about TANF oversight, they would have
spoken out when millions of TANF dollars were stolen from struggling
families in Mississippi to build a volleyball stadium and when the
Trump administration stepped in to shield the perpetrators from
accountability. Instead, they were silent.
The bottom line is simple. Anti-abortion centers that spread
misinformation and put women at risk should not receive taxpayer
dollars. Certainly, they should not receive taxpayer dollars that are
completely unregulated.
If we want to support parents and pregnant women, let's continue
helping them. That is why the House should reject this particular bill,
and I urge my colleagues to vote ``no.''
Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. SMITH of Missouri. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my
time.
Mr. Speaker, Democrats will make all kinds of wild and ridiculous
claims about pregnancy resource centers. They have tried to twist
giving diapers and ultrasounds to moms into some sort of nefarious
activity, giving diapers to moms.
The millions of women who have sought and received care at a
pregnancy resource center know the truth. I hope every American is
watching this debate today on this floor.
Democrats distract and fearmonger because they can't admit that
pregnancy resource centers fulfill the purposes of TANF. These centers
provide material support and assistance to women in need and reduce
dependence on government assistance. They are eligible for State TANF
funds, period.
I thank Representative Fischbach for her very hard work on this bill.
She has been a champion--a champion for women, mothers, and children
her entire career. I am glad she once again led the effort this
Congress to preserve funding for pregnancy resource centers.
Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
[[Page H1147]]
Ms. DelBENE. Mr. Speaker, I have heard story after story of people
seeking care from crisis pregnancy centers only to be provided with
misleading or deceptive medical information or services that endanger
their health.
That is why during last week's markup on this bill, I introduced a
responsible amendment that would have prohibited fraudulent centers
from receiving TANF funds funded by taxpayer dollars.
Republicans regularly talk about rooting out government waste, fraud,
and abuse, but not a single one supported my amendment.
It's clear that Republicans have no interest in addressing fraud if
it conflicts with their dogmatic ideology even at the cost of their
constituents' health.
Republicans are outraged at the idea of simply holding crisis
pregnancy centers to the same medical standards as licensed health
facilities.
Why are Republicans willing to categorically turn a blind eye to the
countless horror stories happening at these sham health clinics?
It is because for Republicans, when it comes to women's health,
accountability isn't required.
This bill defines pregnancy centers as organizations that support
``protecting the life of the mother and the unborn child,'' but
Republican's commitment to funneling taxpayer dollars to medical
grifters endangers both.
I urge my colleagues to vote No on this irresponsible bill.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. All time for debate has expired.
Pursuant to House Resolution 1009, the previous question is ordered
on the bill, as amended.
The question is on the engrossment and third reading of the bill.
The bill was ordered to be engrossed and read a third time, and was
read the third time.
Motion to Recommit
Ms. MOORE of Wisconsin. Mr. Speaker, I have a motion to recommit at
the desk.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Clerk will report the motion to
recommit.
The Clerk read as follows:
Ms. Moore of Wisconsin moves to recommit the bill H.R. 6945
to the Committee on Ways and Means.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 2(b) of rule XIX, the
previous question is ordered on the motion to recommit.
The question is on the motion to recommit.
The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that
the noes appeared to have it.
Ms. MOORE of Wisconsin. 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.
____________________