[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 157 (2011), Part 3]
[House]
[Pages 3979-3983]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                      CELEBRATING WOMEN'S HISTORY

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under the Speaker's announced policy of 
January 5, 2011, the gentlewoman from Ohio (Mrs. Schmidt) is recognized 
for 60 minutes as the designee of the majority leader.
  Mrs. SCHMIDT. Mr. Speaker, thank you for giving me this opportunity 
to talk about a subject I really love, and that is history, especially 
women's history.
  I think all too often as we grew up as children, our history books 
failed to mention the courageous activities of women throughout the 
Nation and throughout the world. Somehow we learned about men, but all 
too often not about women. But when we did learn about women, we didn't 
learn what they really were all about.
  Growing up as a little girl, I grew up in an era where women were not 
really allowed to do all the things we could do today. We weren't 
allowed to run marathons or drive race cars or be in the pits at the 
Indianapolis 500 as a press person. We weren't allowed in Rotaries. It 
was just not something women were allowed to do. Why, shoot, women 
weren't even allowed to vote until 1920. In fact, the first woman that 
served in this House served there 2 full years before women had the 
right to vote.
  And when you think about all the things that happened in this last 
century, we have to look to a century before to see, wow, who were the 
folks that really made this happen, because it just didn't happen 
overnight.
  In the hallway out in the Rotunda there is what I think is the best 
statue, and it is the statue of the pioneers for women's suffrage. It 
is an extraordinary piece of artwork, one that depicts the likenesses 
of Elizabeth Cady Stanton, Lucretia Mott, and Susan B. Anthony, 
arguably the women who pushed the button for women today to have true 
equal rights with men.

                              {time}  1640

  These were the most pro-women feminists in the history of America. 
And as you will see in a few moments, the rest of the story, as Paul 
Harvey would say, for Elizabeth Cady Stanton and Susan B. Anthony was 
just not written when I was a little girl.
  I would like to begin this hour by referring to a few quotes from a 
couple of these four mothers that truly show where they stood in 
history with what I believe is the most pro-feminine issue, and that's 
the issue of abortion. You see, Mr. Speaker, every one of us has the 
right to life, born and unborn. And it is the women who have the 
responsibility to make sure that that baby is born. Unfortunately, our 
courts over 38 years ago decided to change that and said that women had 
the right to end that life. But, Mr. Speaker, we don't have that right. 
It is our responsibility to bear those children. And these four mothers 
knew that.
  In a letter to Julia Ward Howe in 1873, Elizabeth Cady Stanton, the 
woman who shocked society, Mr. Speaker, by daring to leave her house 
proudly showing her pregnancy--because that was just not done--wrote: 
``When we consider that women are treated as property, it is degrading 
to women to treat our children as property to be disposed of as we see 
fit.''
  When I was a child in school learning about the issues of women's 
suffrage and women's rights, I knew Elizabeth Cady Stanton was pro-
woman, pro-freedom pioneer, but I didn't know she was pro-life. I 
didn't know she was pro-life until a few years ago. She was hardly 
alone in her pro-life views. As you can see, Susan B. Anthony also 
expressed her thoughts about pro-life in the publication ``The 
Revolution":
  ``Guilty? Yes. No matter what the motive, love of ease, or a desire 
to save from suffering the unborn innocent, the woman is awfully guilty 
who commits the deed. It will burden her conscience in life; it will 
burden her soul in death.''
  Mr. Speaker, those words were written over 150 years ago, and yet 
they could easily be written today. Because today, Mr. Speaker, we hear 
from women who have had the painful tragedy of abortion on their soul, 
and they talk about how their heart weeps because of the life that they 
gave up and how they want not just to forgive themselves but to protect 
women from that awful decision that they made to protect other women 
from the suffering that they have. And yet Susan B. Anthony knew that 
years ago. So, you see, in history, pro-life was an issue.
  You have to think about it, Mr. Speaker, and you have to think it 
makes sense because the whole issue of abortion, it just didn't come 
about in the 21st century. It came about centuries ago. Unfortunately, 
indiscretions have happened throughout history. And when indiscretions 
happen, babies are created, and then the issue becomes what do you do 
to hide the dirty little secret. Are you like Hester Prynne in 
Nathaniel Hawthorne's, ``The Scarlet Letter,'' where you put her in 
prison and then put her out into the wilderness, trying to hide Pearl, 
her beautiful daughter; in the end, only knowing that Pearl became the 
most beautiful little girl?

[[Page 3980]]

  What was Nathaniel Hawthorne saying about the pregnancy? What was he 
saying about the birth of that child? Was he saying that child had the 
right to life or was Nathaniel Hawthorne thinking other things? We 
don't know. We can only wonder why he put her in prison and why he 
chastised her to the wilderness, but the point was they wanted to hide 
the secret. And because she chose to have the child, that secret was 
going to be born.
  So for people like Susan B. Anthony and Elizabeth Cady Stanton in the 
1860s to say, wait a minute; women should have the right to get 
married, to get divorced, to raise their children, and, oh, by the way, 
have their children, own property, be able to vote; we shouldn't be 
surprised that protecting the child and the birth of that child was 
part of their platform.
  Today, in 2011, I am very proud to stand here and carry on with their 
message, because today, ever more so, the assault of life is all around 
us. And I believe that assault to life is there because we don't 
recognize the meaning of life at its conception. And when you 
compromise it at its conception, I think you question the validity of 
life all the way through to its end.
  Each year--and I'm so proud to represent the Second Congressional 
District of Ohio--I am really proud of the hundreds of thousands of 
people that come out to the lawn on the Capitol on probably the coldest 
day in January to petition Congress to end abortion. It's called the 
Right to Life March. In the 5 years that I have been in Congress, 
standing with them, we've yet to have a decent day. Sometimes it's just 
cold. Sometimes it's cold and snowy. Sometimes it's cold and rainy. But 
it's always cold.
  And I stand out on a platform, and I'm there for maybe an hour, but 
they're standing there for hours. Kids from schools are coming up in 
buses, traveling all night, getting off the bus, only to stand on cold 
ground, only to get back on that bus and go right back home and go 
right back to school. Parents are coming with small kids, buses, cars, 
airplanes, caravans asking Congress to end something that is so wrong.
  And as I look out on the lawn and I see these brave people, I say to 
myself, Wow, that's what America is all about. And among the crowd I 
see so many women. I believe more women than men, because women, we 
have the privilege to experience childbirth, and we understand 
firsthand what that life is like inside a womb. And I think when we do 
have that experience and we understand the meaning of life, it makes us 
want to get out and protect it so that it can have its natural right to 
come into the world and be the person God wants it to be. And I do this 
because I'm so proud of the folks that are out there, but I also do it 
for some folks back home.
  Back when I was in high school, the whole issue of abortion began to 
emerge before Roe v. Wade because States were considering whether they 
should legalize abortion or not. There was a couple in Cincinnati by 
the name of Dr. Jack and Barbara Wilke--he a physician, she a nurse--
who were at the forefront of this movement. They gathered people like 
my parents and other people around their coffee table to discuss how we 
could protect Ohio from legalizing abortion. Of course, Roe v. Wade hit 
in 1973, and the campaign escalated to a national debate.
  But along the way--and they weren't the only ones, Mr. Speaker. There 
were people all across coffee tables all across America debating how 
we're going to protect life. But it was Barbara among the group. And 
they were talking on the telephone. It was before email and BlackBerrys 
and even fax machines, talking on the phone long distance with one 
another.
  But it was Barbara at her kitchen table that said one day, Jack, I 
just don't understand this whole debate. My gosh, we're protected. Our 
Nation protects us. It's as if everybody has the right to life. And he 
says, Barbara, that's the name of the movement. And the name of the 
movement was branded: the National Right to Life movement.
  Now, Barbara and Jack Wilke have served for many years in many 
capacities in this movement. Jack served as president of the National 
Right to Life Committee for well over a decade. They founded the 
International Right to Life Federation and wrote the ``Handbook on 
Abortion,'' a book often described as the unofficial bible of the pro-
life movement during the seventies and eighties.

                              {time}  1650

  They also have other groups that they work with around the world, 
fighting all kinds of life issues, not just for the unborn but for 
human trafficking and women's rights. I mention this because this 
couple, this simple couple from College Hill, Ohio, is just one of many 
across our Nation who recognizes the importance of this issue and is 
dedicating their lives to eradicating abortion.
  So, when I stand out on that lawn on those cold January days each and 
every year, I look at people, and I think there are other Jack and 
Barbara Willkes--maybe not as famous--who are doing the same thing, 
hundreds and hundreds and thousands.
  Then I think of Susan B. Anthony and Elizabeth Cady Stanton and of 
the contemporary bearers of that message like that of the Willkes, and 
I say, wow, there is a plan out there, and the last note on abortion 
hasn't been written. Alice Paul is another pretty important feminist in 
history. She was actually the original author of the Equal Rights 
Amendment.
  Mr. Speaker, if you think that abortion is a hot issue, I can 
remember back in the 1970s when the Equal Rights Amendment was being 
debated across this land and the hot issue that that was. Oh, my gosh.
  Should we give women the same rights as men?
  There were women who said, No, no, no. They need to be back in the 
home.
  Then there were folks who said, No, no, no. Women need to have equal 
pay as men.
  What are we going to do about private facilities?
  Ah, it was just an awful debate because it really deflected from the 
real issue that all of us are God's creatures and that all of us are 
created equal.
  So I remember Alice Paul as being at the forefront of this, and I 
remember the debate both in high school and college--but, man, I didn't 
know until a few years ago that Alice Paul was pro-life. Now, here is a 
woman who was painted as this equal rights, left-wing feminist. When we 
look at pro-life issues, we think they're conservative, right-wing 
issues. Yet it was Alice Paul, the original author of the Equal Rights 
Amendment, who stated: ``Abortion is the ultimate exploitation of 
women.'' Let me repeat that. ``Abortion is the ultimate exploitation of 
women.'' This is from this far-left, hard-nosed person. Add to her 
views the ones previously referenced, and it is difficult to see any 
ambiguity or confusion about where these feminists and advocates of the 
women's rights movement stood on the issue of abortion. Simply put, 
they detested abortion and went as far publicly and privately as they 
could in condemning it.
  Unfortunately, Mr. Speaker, it seems as though their rhetoric has 
been largely lost over the years, hidden in the annals of history, and 
I just don't know why, because, if we don't understand the full depth 
of history, we'll never understand March 15, 2011, and the views that 
we debate in this very Chamber today.
  It's sad because, as a little girl, I didn't know about these 
pioneers. I didn't know about their pro-life positions. I didn't know 
that they were sisters with me. I thought they were different. I 
thought that the folks who stood before me to give us equal rights were 
pro-choice. That couldn't be farther from the truth.
  I think many people wrongly believe that feminism and pro-life 
principles are mutually exclusive and cannot be reconciled with each 
other; but when you look at history, you can see that they're not 
exclusive but inclusive because it is we, as I said earlier, who have 
the responsibility to have the children, to continue to procreate for 
the future. That is why we were put here on Earth--to have children. It 
is our responsibility to make sure that these children are cared for 
both inside

[[Page 3981]]

the womb and out; and for a court to say it is our right to end it I 
think is exclusive of what we are made of. It is against what we are 
made of.
  Now, Mr. Speaker, I'll speak more, but I've had the privilege of 
being joined by my good friend, the Congresswoman from North Carolina. 
I would like to yield as much time to the good Congresswoman as she 
would like.
  Mrs. ELLMERS. Thank you so much, my esteemed colleague from Ohio. 
Your comments are so pertinent to today's fight.
  We are women. We are conservative women. As for those who have come 
before us, as you pointed out so eloquently, we don't know what they 
believed, but we are starting to unveil all of that.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of women, to honor the rich 
contributions women have made in the history of this world. I want to 
take a moment to discuss the strong pro-life movement that my 
colleagues and I are continuing to fight today. I rise in support of 
and fight on behalf of women. In this month dedicated to women, I ask 
them to choose life for themselves and for their children.
  The original feminists were, indeed, against abortion. These women 
believed that there was power in motherhood and in choosing life. Alice 
Paul, the author of the original Equal Rights Amendment, said it best: 
Abortion is the exploitation of women.
  It is this exploitation by groups like Planned Parenthood that 
frighten me for the women of our country. It has been proven that a 
woman who has had an abortion is six to seven times more likely to 
commit suicide in the following year than a woman who chooses to 
deliver her child. We all know of the syndrome postpartum depression. 
Women who abort are 65 percent more likely than women who deliver to be 
at risk for long-term clinical depression. Sixty-five percent of U.S. 
women who had abortions experienced multiple symptoms of posttraumatic 
stress disorder, which they attributed to their abortions. In another 
study, 60 percent said they felt ``part of me died.'' Compared to women 
who deliver, women who abort are more than twice as likely to be 
subsequently hospitalized for psychiatric illnesses within 6 months and 
to subsequently require significantly more treatments for the 
psychiatric illnesses through outpatient care.
  There are also numerous health risks that can occur after an abortion 
is performed. Reproductive complications and problems with subsequent 
deliveries can occur, one of these being pelvic inflammatory disease, 
which is a major direct cause of infertility. After an abortion, there 
is a 7- to 15-fold increase in placenta previa in subsequent 
pregnancies, which is a life-threatening condition for the mother and 
baby that increases the risk of birth defects, a still birth and 
excessive bleeding, leading to the possible loss of life of the woman.
  Honestly, I could go on and on about the aftereffects of an abortion, 
but I think that the picture has been made quite clear.

                              {time}  1700

  The picture has been made, as Susan B. Anthony said, who believed it 
was not sufficient merely to denounce abortion. Anthony considered it 
the work of women to prevent this violation. This is the task that 
Susan B. Anthony gives us to continue today. Like Anthony, we, too, 
must challenge the status quo for the sake of women and their children. 
Women deserve better than abortion.
  Mrs. SCHMIDT. Thank you to the gentlelady from North Carolina for so 
eloquently pointing out some of the dangers of abortion, both physical 
and emotional, and I don't think the chapter, Mr. Speaker, has been 
written on the dangers of abortion, but I do wonder about the lives 
that we've missed and the fabric, and how it has been compromised, the 
fabric of America, the fabric of the world, because an innocent life 
didn't get to be woven into it.
  You know, when we're born, our parents don't know what we're going to 
become. They just hope that we're happy. They hope that we're healthy. 
I mean, if you look at our President, do you think when he was born his 
mom thought he was going to be the President of the United States? I 
seriously doubt it. He didn't come from a dynasty of Presidents. He was 
just an ordinary person born from an ordinary mom, but he, you know, 
had the opportunity and the privilege to live in America and become the 
President.
  Our very own Speaker from Cincinnati, Ohio, I dare say, his parents 
never thought he would be Speaker of the House. They were ordinary 
people. They owned a bar. They had 12 kids. Chances are 12 kids will do 
12 different things, but I don't think any of them thought they were 
going to be Speaker of the House. But that mother gave all those kids 
love, and because they lived in America, the piece of fabric that he 
has become resides over this wonderful body.
  And I point that out because none of us knows what our children or 
grandchildren will become, but it's incumbent upon us to give them that 
chance to be the best person they can be, the best version of 
themselves, and that starts at conception. It doesn't start when we 
choose for it to start. It starts when God chooses for it to start, or 
if you don't want to use the term ``God,'' nature chooses for it to 
start, and when you compromise that, you compromise life all the way 
through.
  You know, as I said before, many people see feminism and pro-life 
issues as exclusive. Well, they're inclusive, and I would like to offer 
evidence of the pro-life feminists in the past, the ones that we owe so 
much to, because they are in large part responsible for women being 
able to go to college, to serve in the military, to vote, and may I 
dare say, stand on the floor this very evening. It is because of them 
that we are here today arguing for this precious position.
  In a few minutes, I am going to be joined by another good lady from 
North Carolina, and I believe that this young lady is going to 
eloquently talk about her views on women in history and the pro-life 
movement, and I now yield to the gentlelady from North Carolina.
  Ms. FOXX. Well, I thank the gentlewoman from Ohio, my colleague, for 
organizing this time to speak about the importance of protecting unborn 
children in this country.
  March is national Women's History Month, and each year other Members 
and I of the Pro-Life Women's Caucus make a point of coming to the 
House floor to celebrate the achievements of women and talk about the 
detrimental impact of abortions on women.
  Last year, it was brought to my attention that the University of 
North Carolina's system, which I attended, three of the universities in 
the system required its students to purchase health care through the 
university if they did not have acceptable coverage through their 
parents or on their own. These plans automatically enrolled students in 
abortion coverage, regardless of gender or their feelings regarding 
abortion.
  Pro-life groups in North Carolina, as well as the Students for Life 
of America, wrote to the UNC system, as well as North Carolina Governor 
Bev Purdue, requesting that they not force students to purchase 
abortion coverage as part of their student health plan. The UNC system 
responded by allowing students to opt-out of abortion coverage. 
However, a student still pays the same amount for health care coverage 
regardless of whether or not abortions are included on his or her plan.
  This situation was brought to my attention because the UNC system, 
along with at least 37 other university systems across the country, 
requires their students to purchase health care coverage that includes 
abortion. These universities are including the cost of this health care 
plan in the total cost of attendance, which means there may be Federal 
money covering these health insurance plans and thereby covering 
abortion.
  My concerns about unborn children not only in North Carolina but 
across the United States prompted me to send a letter to the Secretary 
of Education, Arne Duncan, requesting that he look into the UNC 
situation and determine if, in fact, taxpayer money was being

[[Page 3982]]

used to purchase these health insurance plans. Secretary Duncan 
responded last month and said the Department of Education was not able 
to determine if students were able to use Federal, also known as 
taxpayer, student aid money to purchase these health insurance plans, 
which can include abortion coverage.
  This is unacceptable. There should be no question whatsoever that 
taxpayer money should not be used to purchase abortion coverage, 
regardless of whether it is through a student health plan at a 
university or at an abortion clinic. I will continue to work with the 
Department and the UNC system to ensure that taxpayer money is not 
being used to pay for abortions.
  As a Christian, I am adamantly opposed to the practice of abortion, 
and I'm especially opposed to American taxpayers being forced to pay 
for it. This is why last month I voted with 239 of my colleagues to 
stop subsidizing Planned Parenthood's radical abortion agenda with 
taxpayer money. In 2009 alone, Planned Parenthood reported that the 
organization performed over 332,000 abortions nationwide, and in the 
next 2 years will require each and every one of its 87 affiliates to 
have at least one abortion clinic.
  The vast majority of my constituents do not want their hard-earned 
money paying for abortions, and as their elected Representative, I will 
continue fighting to protect unborn children and taxpayers from the 
scourge of abortion.
  Congresswoman Schmidt, I have here a chart that I'd like to make sure 
people watching can see. This is from a Quinnipiac poll in December 
2009. It is a little hard to read Quinnipiac down here, but it was a 
poll that asked women: Do you support or oppose allowing abortions to 
be paid for by public funds under a health care reform bill? Only 25 
percent of the women polled said they support it, 70 percent opposed, 
and 5 percent didn't know or didn't care. That is an astounding number 
to have.
  Mrs. SCHMIDT. Especially for women because we're always cast as the 
ones that really want abortion, and it's the men that don't want it, 
but you're telling me that 70 percent of the women in that December 
2009 study adamantly opposed Federal funding of abortion under the 
health care bill?

                              {time}  1710

  Ms. FOXX. That's correct. I'm sorry I couldn't be on the floor for 
your entire presentation. I was in the Rules Committee and could not 
leave to come down. But as I came in, I heard you talking about the 
fact that pro-life women can be feminists, and I think that's very 
important for us to point out. I do quote from Alice Paul, who worked 
very hard for equality for women, who said, ``Abortion is the ultimate 
exploitation of women.'' And I think that as we work hard to see that 
women are treated equally in our society under the law that we make 
sure that they are not exploited by abortion.
  And there is another quote from Elizabeth Cady Stanton. I don't know 
if you have used it. But she said, ``When we consider that women are 
treated as property, it is degrading to women that we should treat our 
children as property to be disposed of as we see fit.'' That was in a 
letter to Julia Ward Howe in October 1873 and was recorded in Howe's 
diary.
  I think, again, that it's so important that women be here during 
Women's History Month to speak in favor of rights for women and that we 
point out that we are opposed to abortion, which is the ultimate 
exploitation of women.
  Mrs. SCHMIDT. Thank you so much. I am really glad that you took the 
time to point out that survey, because I believe that the Nation has 
shifted its opinion on abortions since 1973. And maybe it's because 
with technology and the fact that sonograms can now show us the color 
of a baby's eyes and what it's going to look like inside the mom's womb 
as early as like 3 months, that we're really believing and knowing that 
it really is a baby. It's not this little fetus, this little mushy 
thing. It's really a baby. And when you see that sonogram and you see 
that baby inside the womb, you've got to say to yourself, How can I 
call this anything else but life? And I think that's probably one of 
the reasons why, throughout the years, public opinion has truly shifted 
on abortion.
  A decade ago, back in 2001, there was a poll taken wherein 40 percent 
of the respondents identified themselves as being pro-life while 49 
percent identified themselves as being pro-choice. Well, in 2005, 
another poll was taken. There was little movement toward the pro-life 
position: 42 percent said they're pro-life while 52 percent said 
they're pro-choice. But for some reason, in 2006, the number grew 45 to 
47; and in 2008, the numbers were 46 to 48. Now maybe that's because of 
the prevalence of all these sonograms. And today when your daughter or 
your son goes in with his wife for the sonogram, the grandparents and 
great grandparents go, too. It didn't happen a decade ago. But, oh, my 
gosh, it's a family thing because we can't wait to see what the baby 
is. And we are told to cover our eyes at that one moment if you don't 
want to know what the sex of the baby is. Believe me, I couldn't tell 
anyway. But I have gone twice and had to close my eyes twice. And I 
think because the family is involved in this whole sonogram with the 
birth of the baby, that all of our eyes are beginning to light up and 
say, Wow, that really is a life. In just 3 months' time, it's a real 
baby.
  In May 2009, 51 percent of those polled identified themselves as 
being pro-life where only 42 percent responded that they were pro-
choice. Now, the latest poll I could find on the subject was conducted 
in January of this year, just a couple of months ago; and it was 
consistent with the 2009 poll. Half the respondents said they were pro-
life. The numbers become even more definitive when it comes to public 
funding or taxpayer moneys going towards the funding of abortions, even 
indirectly.
  This is a very real and timely debate as we struggle today to tackle 
our enormous deficit and debt which, Mr. Speaker, if we don't get under 
control will reshape this country in a way that I don't believe will 
allow our children to have at least as equal an opportunity as us, if 
not to have a better opportunity than us. But that's a debate for 
another day on the debt and deficit.
  When I first got here in September of 2005, the very first person I 
wanted to meet was Henry Hyde of Illinois because he was my hero. You 
see, after Roe v. Wade, people at my kitchen table and in my family 
were talking about money, Federal money being used for abortion. My mom 
and dad were mad; and, shoot, even I was mad. And Henry Hyde was mad, 
too.
  In 1976, he offered the Hyde amendment, and it simply said that 
Federal taxpayer dollars were barred from funding abortion, period, 
case closed. And that amendment has been consistent with the policy of 
this House ever since. So I wanted to meet that hero, that gentle man. 
And when you walk into my office, you see a picture of him and me on 
the last day that he served in this House. Of all the people that I 
have ever met, he is truly my hero.
  Anyway, every year we debate this. Even in the health care bill, it 
was a hotly contested issue. And after the bill was voted on, the 
President had an executive order that at this point still stops the 
Federal funding of abortion in health care, we believe. But that's a 
very fragile piece of paper, and I really believe this body needs to 
recodify in the health care bill that no money will ever be spent for 
abortion and no insurance policies will have any Federal dollars 
attached to it that would allow for abortions to occur. But that's 
something I believe we have to work on this year, Mr. Speaker.
  And even today in this body as we voted on the CR, the issue of 
abortion was there. Do we put it in the CR and stop the Federal funding 
of abortion or not? You know, we have a lot of pro-life leaders in the 
House. They have looked at the budget very, very shrewdly; and they 
have determined that if we don't put these protections in place, 
Federal funding will slip into the budget in the future. And that's why 
they are so adamant about putting out bills and provisions in CRs that 
would stop the Federal funding of abortion.

[[Page 3983]]

  One of the latest initiatives to receive a full vote in the House was 
an amendment introduced by my good friend from Indiana (Mr. Pence) that 
would prohibit Federal funding for Planned Parenthood, which happens to 
be the largest abortion provider in the country. Now, I know what you 
are going to say, Well, they have a separate wall, and they're really 
only using the money for women's health issues. They're not using it 
for abortion. But we know money is fungible, and we know in a building, 
you can't really dissect how much energy costs are going to one side of 
the building and how much are going to the other. We know that while, 
yeah, the actual procedure isn't using Federal money, we know that the 
building is. So it's fungible, and it's slipping through.
  But a few weeks ago when we had the CR, his amendment received, I 
think, 239 votes out of this body that said, No, Planned Parenthood 
shouldn't receive the money. And you know, Mr. Speaker, maybe it's a 
bigger debate than just the abortion issue because what we saw last 
fall was a sting operation that showed where in some cases, abortion 
clinics, Planned Parenthood clinics across the country were actually 
talking about or ignoring the fact that people were coming in about 
human trafficking and saying there was a human trafficking issue, and 
if the underage girl got pregnant, how could they get an abortion. And 
the gal at the desk didn't think there seemed to be a problem with that 
conversation.

                              {time}  1720

  Now, I'm not saying that Planned Parenthood International condones 
it, and I'm sure that they don't, but I'm saying that there were 
clinics at which this conversation occurred. I know in my own hometown 
in Cincinnati, Ohio, where in 2 cases there were young girls that went 
to the Planned Parenthood clinic on Auburn Avenue, and both told the 
abortion provider they were underage and they were pregnant, one by her 
father, one by a coach. The father's now in jail. And the situation 
with the parents was, they didn't know the coach took her to the 
abortion clinic. He signed the document that said, oh, I'm the legal 
guardian, and it wasn't until later when she went to the doctor on 
another issue that the doctor said--When did your daughter have an 
abortion?--that this whole thing exploded. And right now it's in court. 
They're going after the coach, and they're trying to go after Planned 
Parenthood because the girl said, I'm 15.
  So maybe Planned Parenthood shouldn't have our money if they're not 
careful stewards about people that are coming through their doors, 
because a 15-year old that's pregnant, well, I think that's called 
statutory rape, no matter who the father was. And if a girl comes in at 
15 we should be asking questions--How did you get pregnant? Who was the 
father? What happened?--because that's breaking the law.
  So above the fact that we have a looming deficit and a looming debt, 
above the fact that I believe that money is fungible with Planned 
Parenthood, above the fact that in some cases they have people that go 
into clinics and they have a lady or a guy at the desk that doesn't 
understand what human trafficking is all about, maybe they shouldn't 
have the money, because when it's right in their eye, they simply 
choose to ignore the issue.
  Mr. Speaker, there are a lot of pro-life people in America, and there 
are a lot of pro-life people in this House. And I think it is time that 
we discussed this issue more openly, because people of this Nation 
understand that all life is precious, including the life of the unborn. 
They also understand that our money comes from taxpayers, and taxpayers 
expect us to do the right things with their money, and that means 
protecting life at all costs.
  One of the things that I want to say before I wrap up--and we talked 
about polling--is that there have been multiple polls conducted on the 
subject within the last year of Federal funds and abortion. Two that I 
want to highlight were conducted by CNN and Quinnipiac. Now, CNN is 
hardly a right-wing organization. But the CNN poll showed that 60 
percent of Americans oppose public moneys going to fund abortion. 
That's well over a majority. The Quinnipiac poll shows 72 percent 
oppose it. Wow, that's a lot of Americans.
  I believe that we need to do the right thing and end the public 
funding of abortion whether it's in the health care bill, any bill that 
comes here, or any moneys that go overseas.
  Like the feminists, the pro-life women of the past, pro-life women 
today simply believe that we are all afforded the right to life. It is 
not a gift from our government; it is a gift from our Lord. He is the 
one that has allowed us to stand here in America and across the world. 
He is the one that has said to us, He wants us to be in His image and 
His likeness. It is our Lord that wants us to be the best person we can 
be. And if we are to be the best person we can be, we have to ensure 
that each other has that same chance whether it's a little seed in a 
womb that is 20 minutes old or it's an elderly person in a nursing 
home. All of us are equal in the Lord's eyes. All of us have the right 
to life.
  So I am proud to stand here today, like my sisters before me--like 
Elizabeth Cady Stanton, like Susan B. Anthony and, yes, like Alice 
Paul--and say, enough's enough. Women's rights are women's rights, and 
if a woman has rights, those rights are the child's rights because 
everybody has the right to life.

                          ____________________