[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 162 (2016), Part 11]
[House]
[Pages 15602-15612]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




 PROVIDING AMOUNTS FOR FURTHER EXPENSES OF THE COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND 
            COMMERCE IN THE ONE HUNDRED FOURTEENTH CONGRESS

  Mr. HARPER. Madam Speaker, by direction of the Committee on House 
Administration, I call up the resolution (H. Res. 933) providing 
amounts for further expenses of the Committee on Energy and Commerce in 
the One Hundred Fourteenth Congress, and ask for its immediate 
consideration.
  The Clerk read the title of the resolution.
  The text of the resolution is as follows:

                              H. Res. 933

       Resolved,

     SECTION 1. AMOUNTS FOR COMMITTEE EXPENSES.

       For further expenses of the Committee on Energy and 
     Commerce (hereafter in this resolution referred to as the 
     ``Committee'') for the One Hundred Fourteenth Congress, there 
     shall be paid out of the applicable accounts of the House of 
     Representatives not more than $800,000.

     SEC. 2. VOUCHERS.

       Payments under this resolution shall be made on vouchers 
     authorized by the Committee, signed by the Chairman of the 
     Committee, and approved in the manner directed by the 
     Committee on House Administration.

     SEC. 3. REGULATIONS.

       Amounts made available under this resolution shall be 
     expended in accordance with regulations prescribed by the 
     Committee on House Administration.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Mississippi (Mr. Harper) 
is recognized for 1 hour.
  Mr. HARPER. Madam Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield 
the customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. 
Brady), pending which I yield myself such time as I may consume. During 
consideration of this resolution, all time yielded is for the purpose 
of debate only.


                             General Leave

  Mr. HARPER. Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members 
have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and to 
include extraneous matter in the Record on the consideration of H. Res. 
933, currently under consideration.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Mississippi?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. HARPER. Madam Speaker, I rise in support of H. Res. 933, a 
resolution that authorizes additional funds for the Committee on Energy 
and Commerce's budget for the remainder of the 114th Congress.
  Last year, on October 7, the House passed, by a majority vote, a 
measure creating a Select Investigative Panel on Infant Lives within 
the Committee on Energy and Commerce. Our committee has the 
responsibility to ensure that each committee of the House has 
sufficient resources to fulfill their assigned oversight duties.
  Last year, our committee transferred funds from the committee reserve 
account to the Energy and Commerce Committee so that the panel could 
begin its work. An additional transfer was made earlier this year. 
These funds were allocated based on the full committee's need to 
fulfill its mission. These initial transfers were insufficient to cover 
the costs associated with the select panel.
  The measure before us on the House floor today will rectify this 
situation and allow the Committee on Energy and Commerce and the Select 
Investigative Panel on Infant Lives to continue to operate until the 
end of this Congress.

                              {time}  1445

  Passing this measure to provide additional funds is an institutional 
responsibility. If we do not allocate these additional funds, the work 
of the entire Committee on Energy and Commerce, both for the majority 
and minority, would grind to a halt. The committee would be unable to 
complete its vital work. This work covers important areas, such as 
electronic communications, environmental protection, and health care. 
We saw this week the important work of the committee in the 21st 
Century Cures Act.
  There are differences of opinion on the creation of the select 
investigative panel. However, we are not here to relitigate a decision 
that the House made more than a year ago but to fulfill our 
institutional responsibilities. It is my hope that we will swiftly pass 
this measure today.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. BRADY of Pennsylvania. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as 
I may consume.
  I rise in opposition to this resolution and in opposition to the 
existence of the panel generally. It has been nothing more than a 
partisan witch hunt that will ultimately cost taxpayers over a million 
dollars and has found no wrongdoing by the people it was created to 
investigate. Three House committees and 13 States have launched their 
own similar investigations and came to the same conclusion.
  The panel has been a one-sided operation from the start, with the 
majority failing to consult and inform the minority on official actions 
and withholding panel records and documents.
  The dangers of this panel go far beyond simply wasting taxpayer 
money. It is a direct assault on women's health care and the right to 
choose. The panel's actions also put at risk the lives of researchers 
working to find cures to our most debilitating and deadly diseases. It 
is my hope that this is the last we hear of it.
  Madam Speaker, I yield 26 minutes to the gentlewoman from Illinois 
(Ms. Schakowsky), and ask unanimous consent that she be permitted to 
control that time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Pennsylvania?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. HARPER. Madam Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from 
Tennessee (Mrs. Blackburn), the chairman of the select investigative 
panel.
  Mrs. BLACKBURN. Madam Speaker, the select investigative panel was 
formed to investigate areas that, prior to the revelations of 
undercover journalists, received too little attention. For most of us, 
it is nothing short of an outrage that Planned Parenthood and other 
abortion clinics supplement their budgets by selling the leftover parts 
of babies they have aborted.
  This Chamber charged the panel with investigating fetal tissue 
trafficking, second and third trimester abortion practices, the 
standard of care for infants who survive abortions, and the role our 
taxpayer dollars play in this sector of society. Over the last year, we 
have held hearings that explored the bioethics surrounding fetal tissue 
use, and that revealed the sobering reality of how fetal tissue is 
priced.
  Our investigation revealed four models by which the subjects of our 
investigation implicate serious public policy concerns. The first, the 
middleman model, comprises a middleman and tissue procurer that obtains 
tissue directly from a source such as an abortion clinic or hospital 
and then transfers the tissue to a customer, usually a university 
researcher.
  As the example of StemExpress illustrates, the procurement company 
would embed a lab technician inside an abortion clinic, where the 
technician would receive the day's orders for body

[[Page 15603]]

parts at specified gestation periods, access patient files in violation 
of women's HIPAA privacy rights, and collect the tissue. Then the 
technician would receive pay and even bonuses based on the tissue she 
secured.
  A second model, the university clinic model, reveals the cozy 
relationship between abortion clinics and research institutions, most 
of them State universities funded by the taxpayers. The clinic provides 
the university the tissue used for research. The university adopts the 
clinic doctors as faculty members, giving them benefits regardless of 
whether they actually teach. And, in many cases, thanks to programs 
like the Ryan Fellowship, medical students are deployed to abortion 
clinics to be trained as the next generation of abortion providers.
  The panel's investigation into a third model, the late-term abortion 
clinic, revealed the appalling absence of mechanisms or procedures to 
safeguard those infants who survive the abortion procedure. Put 
bluntly, even though we have the Born-Alive Infants Protection Act and 
the prohibition of partial birth abortion on the books, they are not 
enforced.
  Fourth, the panel investigated the model by which Federal tax dollars 
make their way to abortion clinics, typically by Medicaid payments 
under title XIX, and fetal tissue researchers.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentlewoman has expired.
  Mr. HARPER. Madam Speaker, I yield an additional 1 minute to the 
gentlewoman from Tennessee.
  Mrs. BLACKBURN. Madam Speaker, to provide just a snapshot of the 51 
known external audits of Planned Parenthood clinics, nearly all found 
title XIX overpayments for family planning and reproductive health 
service claims. The overbilling totalled more than $8.5 million, and 
that is without counting several False Claims Act lawsuits that allege 
millions more in overbilling.
  Consider all that our panel has identified, despite having just 
barely a year--even less by the time we were fully staffed--to conduct 
the investigation. It is now up to us to build on the work, to hold the 
government accountable, and to stop these affronts to human dignity.
  Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. I thank the gentleman from Pennsylvania for yielding 
the time to me, and I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Madam Speaker, I rise in opposition to this legislation to fund the 
select investigative panel, the panel that we call the select panel to 
attack women's health.
  It really shouldn't come as any surprise that one of the very first 
things that the Republicans have done coming back now to Washington is 
to approve additional funding for this select so-called investigative 
panel, doubling its budget and putting it on track to spend nearly 
$1.6-million taxpayer funds by the end of this year.
  This investigation is essentially built on a pack of lies that are 
perpetrated by anti-abortion extremists and has never been and has no 
chance of becoming a fact-based investigation. The panel Republicans 
have continually relied on, even today, doctored videotapes, so-called 
evidence, even though that evidence and those videotapes have been 
discredited already by three House committees, 13 States, and a Texas 
grand jury.
  Throughout this investigation, Republicans have abused congressional 
authority, issuing 42 unilateral subpoenas in violation of House rules, 
demanding that clinics and universities name names of their doctors, 
students, and staff, and releasing some of these names knowing that 
doing so puts lives in danger, a truly McCarthyesque attack on 
individuals. They have compared researchers to Nazi war criminals and 
echoed the words of anti-abortion activists that were also used by a 
gunman who shot 12 people, killing 3 at a Planned Parenthood clinic in 
Colorado Springs.
  Despite Republicans' failure to find any evidence of wrongdoing, they 
continue to make inflammatory, grotesque allegations to justify the 
panel's existence, and, by their words and actions, have put lifesaving 
research and women's health care at risk.
  The panel has already had a chilling effect on research, drying up 
the supply of needed tissue for research on multiple sclerosis and 
threatening research on other diseases from A to Z, Alzheimer's to 
Zika.
  Fetal tissue research has historically had broad, bipartisan support. 
It is the basis for key vaccines that have saved, literally, millions 
and millions of lives, including the polio vaccine. That is why over 60 
of our Nation's leading medical institutions released an open letter in 
support of scientific research using fetal tissue.
  We cannot afford to let a set of reckless and irresponsible claims 
stop this vital medical research. This panel and its investigation are 
a disgrace to this House of Representatives. We need to end this 
dangerous and unjustified witch hunt, and, instead of providing more 
funding for this divisive and dangerous inquisition, Congress should 
shut down this panel and put an end to its shameful proceedings.
  Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. HARPER. Madam Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from 
Pennsylvania (Mr. Pitts).
  Mr. PITTS. I thank the gentleman. As a member of the select 
investigative panel, I rise in support of H. Res. 933.
  Madam Speaker, after the release of the undercover videos of Planned 
Parenthood, one little known tissue procurement company became a 
household name: StemExpress. They are one of the biggest players in the 
sale of aborted-baby body parts in the United States. In clear 
violation of the intent of Federal law, they promise profits to 
abortion clinics in return for otherwise discarded--and I will use 
their quote--products of conception.
  The select panel learned that in order to make as much tissue 
available for sale as possible, and thus rake in huge profits, 
StemExpress sought to contract with the National Abortion Federation. 
Contracting with this network of abortion clinics would mean access to 
thousands of baby body parts, which StemExpress could procure, then 
turn around and sell at huge markups.
  Our investigation found that they had created a drop-down menu--here 
is a copy of part of it--on their Web site, such as one might find on 
Amazon.com, to facilitate their sales. Their buyers could select the 
gestational age, the type of tissue, and the number of specimens. For 
example, you could select three 12-week-old baby scalps, twelve 14-
week-old baby brains, one 15-week pair of baby eyes, or seven 16-week 
baby livers, to name just a few of the combinations. For crying out 
loud, this is the Amazon.com of baby body parts. It is outrageous. It 
is disgusting. It is a very disturbing practice that has been tucked 
away and out of sight for too long.
  The CEO of StemExpress told one undercover journalist over lunch and 
a glass of wine that some of the buyers' lab techs ``freak out and have 
meltdowns'' when they see little baby hands and little baby feet 
attached to an order of limbs. So she makes sure her techs cut off the 
hands and the feet before shipping off boxes of these body parts. It is 
this callous, dark talk that has so many Americans concerned with the 
state of research in our country.
  The select panel is proud to support lifesaving ethical research, 
but, like the rest of America, my colleagues and I know that ethical 
boundaries do exist, and I hope StemExpress' research will cease to 
come at the expense of unborn children who have had no say in the so-
called donation of their body parts. Many years from now, we will look 
back on this practice as a dark and horrible time where humanity and 
human dignity lost to financial profits. We must end this horrific 
practice. I urge support for this resolution.
  Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman 
from New York (Mr. Nadler), the distinguished member on our team of the 
select panel.
  Mr. NADLER. I thank the gentlewoman for yielding.
  Madam Speaker, from start to finish, this select panel has abused 
congressional power in order to intimidate and threaten private people 
and entities engaged in legal businesses in constitutionally protected 
health care.

[[Page 15604]]

  Republicans on the select panel have now spent $1.5 million on this 
so-called investigation. What do they have to show the American people 
for spending their hard-earned tax dollars? They have not presented any 
evidence that any entity broke the law surrounding fetal tissue 
donation or research. They have not presented any evidence that any 
entity or physician engaged in the horrifying behavior of which 
Republicans accuse them. We have heard today on this floor, as we have 
repeatedly from the select panel, the oft-proven lies that Planned 
Parenthood sold fetal tissue for profit. We have heard the lie that the 
clearly doctored and disproven videotapes bore some relationship to 
reality.

                              {time}  1500

  We have heard today on this floor, as we have repeatedly from the 
select panel, the oft disproved lies that Planned Parenthood sold fetal 
tissue for profit. We have heard the lie that the clearly doctored and 
disproved videotapes bore some relationship to reality. We have heard 
the disproved lie that StemExpress procured fetal tissue not for 
lifesaving medical research, but for profit.
  The Republicans have wasted countless hours and millions of dollars 
running in circles after evidence that doesn't exist. They have 
insisted over and over again that entities name names, with no promise 
or plan to protect those individuals; and when asked to explain why 
they needed names, they simply refused to answer. When Republicans on 
the panel did get names, they released some of them publicly, even 
though they knew that doing so would expose the doctors, researchers, 
and other private individuals to harassment, threats, and even murder.
  The Republicans on the panel have repeatedly made baseless 
accusations of wrongdoing, with no concern for the consequences. They 
have had a chilling effect on lifesaving medical research through their 
intimidation tactics. They have flown in the face of congressional 
rules and abused congressional power to meet their own blatantly 
partisan ends. And now the Republicans on the select panel have the 
audacity to ask for more taxpayer money to fund this witch hunt.
  In words once addressed to the last Member of Congress to so clearly 
violate congressional authority, Senator Joseph McCarthy, I ask my 
Republican colleagues: ``At long last, have you no sense of decency?''
  I call on all of my colleagues today to remember their decency. This 
grotesque and murderous panel should have been shut down long ago. Vote 
against the previous question, vote against this absurd funding bill, 
and stand up for the American taxpayer and for the dignity of this 
institution.
  Mr. HARPER. Madam Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from 
Tennessee (Mrs. Black).
  Mrs. BLACK. Madam Speaker, one of the striking discoveries we have 
made in this investigation has been the sheer number of laws implicated 
by the troubling actions of abortion providers, tissue procurement 
businesses, and researchers. One such law is the HIPAA privacy rule.
  The panel's investigation uncovered a series of business contracts 
between StemExpress, which is a tissue procurement business that is not 
covered by HIPAA, and several abortion clinics that are. StemExpress 
paid fees to the abortion clinics for fetal tissue and maternal blood 
and then resold the fetal tissue and the blood to researchers.
  Here is a quick HIPAA privacy tutorial:
  The HIPAA privacy rule protects all individually identifiable health 
information, known as protected health information, or PHI, that is 
held or transmitted by a covered entity. This information identifies an 
individual or can reasonably be believed to be useful in identifying an 
individual, such as a name or an address, and includes demographic data 
related to her physical or mental health, condition, treatment, and 
payments.
  The panel's investigation indicates that StemExpress and four 
abortion clinics, including three Planned Parenthood locations, 
committed systemic violations of a HIPAA privacy rule over a course of 
about 5 years. The abortion clinics provided patients' private, 
protected health information to StemExpress to help them obtain human 
fetal tissue for resale.
  How did they do this? Well, the abortion clinics permitted the 
employees of StemExpress to enter their clinics to obtain human fetal 
tissue from the aborted infants, obtain protected health information 
about their patients, interact with the patients, and, yes, even seek 
and obtain patient consent for the tissue donation.
  StemExpress did not have a medically valid reason to see, and the 
abortion clinics did not have a reason to disclose, the patients' 
private information. Instead, the abortion clinics intentionally shared 
patients' most intimate private information with StemExpress to 
financially benefit StemExpress and the clinics.
  The panel has made a referral of each of these entities to the 
Department of Health and Human Services and has requested a swift and 
full investigation by the HHS Office for Civil Rights. But more 
importantly, we have discovered a deeply concerning violation of a law 
that protects the most cherished privacy rights.
  Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. Madam Speaker, I just find it so hypocritical that 
the majority is talking about putting peoples' private names out into 
the public when we have had people who have been attacked and lives 
threatened as a result of them putting names out there.
  Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Washington 
(Ms. DelBene), another distinguished member of our select panel.
  Ms. DelBENE. Madam Speaker, I rise in strong opposition.
  This resolution provides an additional $800,000 of taxpayer money to 
a select investigative panel that should never have been created in the 
first place. As a member of that panel, I can tell you it has been 
nothing more than a bully pulpit for the majority to spread extreme 
anti-choice falsehoods and fabrications, with no basis in reality. This 
so-called investigation has repeatedly shown contempt for the facts and 
disdain for the truth.
  Instead of carrying out a fair and evidence-based process, the panel 
has spent the last year publicly targeting women's healthcare 
providers, bullying scientists and medical students, delaying medical 
research, and trying to cut off lines of scientific inquiry, all 
because the majority opposes a woman's constitutional right to choose.
  Now we are voting to double the panel's budget. It is ridiculous. No 
one in this Chamber should be condoning this kind of harassment and 
intimidation, let alone approving hundreds of thousands of additional 
taxpayer dollar to do so. This has been a brazenly partisan and 
ideological witch hunt, and it should have been shut down months ago.
  Rather than wasting another $800,000 on this dangerous panel, 
Congress could use that money to provide more than 270,000 school 
lunches to low-income students, purchase nearly 12,000 textbooks to 
make higher education more affordable for college students, or purchase 
more than 3 million diapers to help new mothers care for their babies. 
But instead, that money will go toward intimidating doctors, harassing 
researchers, and delaying the progress of science. It is shameful.
  We shouldn't throw good many after bad by passing this legislation. I 
urge my colleagues to vote ``no.''
  Mr. HARPER. Madam Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from 
Indiana (Mr. Bucshon), who is a medical doctor.
  Mr. BUCSHON. Madam Speaker, this is about infant lives, but I would 
like address what else it is about. It is about science and research. 
The other side seems to only want to focus on politics and scare 
tactics.
  From the beginning, we recognized the other side would try to avert 
attention from our investigation by falsely claiming we are opposed to 
science. As a doctor, I find that offensive, and I think it is a 
dangerous practice to introduce fear into important scientific debates.

[[Page 15605]]

  Every member of the panel is committed to medical research that finds 
cures. The rhetoric that we are opposed to cures for Zika, HIV, 
Alzheimer's, or Parkinson's is just ridiculous and wrong.
  The United States of America is a global leader in scientific 
research. We should all be proud of the research enterprise in our 
country and support it with tax dollars. The House Select Panel on 
Infant Lives shares this support. We are strongly committed to 
promoting both basic and clinical research.
  The goal of the House select panel is not to oppose science but, 
rather, to determine how best to support science so that this important 
work can advance as rapidly as possible without ethical compromise. As 
the history of biomedical research in the 20th century clearly 
demonstrates, when scientific research is separated from ethics or the 
law, grave injustice can occur.
  We here in Congress, like the rest of Americans, care deeply about 
protecting the rights of patients and ensuring ethical oversight of 
research procedures. These are not meant to ``hinder'' advances in 
science but, rather, to ensure that the scientific enterprise more 
perfectly fulfills its promise to society by advancing in a manner that 
is both just and ethical.
  Through the panel's investigation, we have discovered inaccuracies 
about the role of human fetal tissue and have sought to correct them to 
realistically address the obstacles facing research.
  Any argument from the 1950s--or even the 1990s, for that matter--
about biomedical research is outdated, and the actual record is clear: 
human fetal tissue did not directly result in a vaccine for diseases 
like measles. Similarly, the Nobel Prize was not awarded for curing 
polio using human fetal tissue. In fact, of the 75 vaccines in use 
today, not one was produced using fetal tissue.
  Furthermore, the NIH has not funded fetal tissue transplant grants 
for nearly 10 years. That should tell us something. We examined 30 
major grants that were funded by the NIH over the last 5 years and 
found that human fetal tissue research represents only a tiny fraction 
of the overall scientific enterprise. In fact, only 0.2 percent used 
human fetal tissue.
  Hysterical calls for enhanced fetal tissue research through expanded 
abortion licenses are a matter of politics, not medicine or science. A 
small subset of NIH-funded grants use fetal tissue to study things like 
birth defects. These types of grants represent only 1 in 100,000.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has expired.
  Mr. HARPER. Madam Speaker, I yield the gentleman an additional 1 
minute.
  Mr. BUCSHON. Tissue or cells for these studies could be derived from 
another source than aborted babies, like premature natural demise 
infants whose parents are willing to donate. The other grants use fetal 
tissue when alternatives are easily available, like placenta, cord 
blood, or modified adult stem cells.
  Some grants even study adult macular degeneration. Research on adult 
macular degeneration should be conducted on adult donor eyes, but these 
grants are instead using fetal eyes from aborted infants--not because 
of science, but because of convenience.
  Madam Speaker, I know these things can be uncomfortable to discuss, 
but that is why the other side wants to avoid the facts and that is why 
this debate is so important. It is about conducting medical research in 
an ethical and just manner. So let's sit down and talk science with the 
NIH and others so that research works for everyone in an ethical and 
moral way.
  Mr. HARPER. Madam Speaker, may I inquire as to how much time is 
remaining?
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Mississippi has 14 
minutes remaining, and the gentlewoman from Illinois has 21\1/2\ 
minutes remaining.
  Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman 
from New Jersey (Mrs. Watson Coleman).
  Mrs. WATSON COLEMAN. Madam Speaker, I am disappointed that we are 
here today asking the American taxpayers to waste another $800,000 on 
an unnecessary, dangerous investigation.
  This select panel was formed based on fraudulent videos created by 
anti-abortion extremists to attack Planned Parenthood, an organization 
that has always fought for women's rights and provides healthcare 
services to 3 million women and men each year.
  I was proud to be the first Member of Congress to speak out against 
these videos immediately after their release. And here we are, a year 
and a half later, with no evidence of wrongdoing after 17 separate 
investigations in three House committees, 13 States, and one grand 
jury. Yet Republicans continue to chase false, inflammatory 
allegations, at a severe cost to advances in medicine and to the safety 
of those involved in this lifesaving research.
  Panel Republicans have conducted themselves in ways reminiscent of 
Joe McCarthy's abusive tactics: witnesses have been harassed and 
intimated during testimony; names of researchers, students, clinical 
personnel, and doctors have been released publicly, placing their lives 
in great danger; misleading ``exhibits'' have been manufactured; 
critical documents have been withheld from Democrats; and Republicans 
have continued to fan the flames of anti-abortion extremism with their 
inflammatory rhetoric.
  Let us not forget the horrible tragedy that occurred in a Colorado 
Planned Parenthood clinic where a gunman shot 12 people and killed 3, 
echoing the same anti-abortion rhetoric used by Republicans to this 
day.
  What this investigation truly is is an attack on women's rights and 
women's access to legal health services. The select panel comes at a 
time when Republicans have repeatedly voted to defund Planned 
Parenthood, eliminate family planning services, and restrict access to 
abortions.
  This investigation dishonors this institution and hurts the American 
people that Congress is elected to serve. Let's put an end to the witch 
hunt, stop wasting taxpayer dollars, and reject this resolution.

                              {time}  1515

  Mr. HARPER. Madam Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from 
Missouri (Mrs. Hartzler).
  Mrs. HARTZLER. Madam Speaker, the Select Investigative Panel on 
Infant Lives investigation has uncovered many valid concerns and 
potential law violations that are disturbing, horrific, and 
unacceptable.
  In the course of our investigation, we discovered a hardness, a 
callousness, and a track record of deceptive tactics that some abortion 
clinics and fetal tissue procurers exercised toward vulnerable women. 
It is difficult to imagine a more vulnerable time in a woman's life 
than when she is considering an abortion.
  What if, during that time, the woman is lied to and told that, by 
having an abortion, she will facilitate research that will cure tragic 
diseases?
  This is exactly the type of concern that our panel addressed during 
our hearing on bioethics and fetal tissue. During that hearing, I 
shared a consent form widely used by abortion clinics to obtain a 
mother's consent to donate fetal tissue. And the form stated that 
research using the blood from pregnant women and tissue that has been 
aborted has been used to treat and find a cure for such diseases as 
diabetes, Parkinson's Disease, Alzheimer's disease, cancer, and AIDS. 
This is clearly false.
  The witness, who is an ethics expert, agreed and he said that the 
idea of promise of cures found in the form was a ``very powerful 
motivator.'' He also expressed concern that the scientific community's 
standards for fetal tissue donation are absent in that consent form, 
saying, ``the thoroughness of the consent seems to be missing in this 
form.''
  A researcher for the minority testified during the hearing. He also 
agreed, stating the form would not have made it past his institutional 
review board. Yet, this is what is being used in abortion clinics with 
vulnerable women.
  In other words, the testimony provided by both of the witnesses from 
the majority and the minority raised concerns that the principles 
embodied in

[[Page 15606]]

ethics reports, and later incorporating the Federal regulations, are 
not being followed by abortion providers seeking consent for the 
donation of human fetal tissue.
  We must raise this awareness, make sure people know, and make sure 
that women are protected.
  Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman 
from Colorado (Ms. DeGette), not only someone who has been such a 
stalwart for women's rights and reproductive rights, but the co-chair 
of the Pro-Choice Caucus in the House of Representatives.
  Ms. DeGETTE. Madam Speaker, so this panel was supposed to be set up 
to investigate the alleged sale of fetal tissue, which is illegal under 
current law. That didn't turn out so well.
  So now, as you can hear from the other side of the aisle, they are 
going after fetal tissue research itself, something that has been legal 
and used in an ethical way since the 1930s, something which has been 
used to find most vaccines and other cures for diseases in this 
country, something which a panel appointed by President Ronald Reagan, 
found unanimously in 1980 to be ethical.
  So I want to ask, Madam Speaker, what the heck are we being asked to 
spend another $800,000 on?
  The total funding for this witch hunt and this reckless endeavor is 
now more than $1.5 million. We have gone after women and punished them. 
We have gone after medical professionals and put their lives at risk, 
like what happened in my neighborhood of Colorado Springs, Colorado. We 
have put doctors and researchers on the line, and we have had a 
chilling effect on important biomedical research.
  I say enough is enough. We need to disband this select committee. We 
need to continue to make sure that we have ethical medical research in 
this country because, frankly, that will lead to the cures that affect 
diseases that affect millions of Americans.
  Mr. Speaker, from its start, the Select Panel has been nothing but a 
partisan witch hunt. The apparent goal of the Select Panel is to punish 
and intimidate women medical professionals and researchers who are 
following the law. Through wanton use of subpoenas, inflammatory 
language and release of private information--including addresses and 
phone numbers where those wishing to harass health care providers can 
find them--the Select Panel as put many, many people at risk. It has 
also threatened life-saving research and health care that these people 
provide.
  Make no mistake: this threat is very real. Clinics are picketed and 
fire-bombed, doctors and their families are targeted at their homes, 
and some have even been murdered.
  Furthermore, the Select Panel is trying to force universities and 
clinics to turn over the names of their researchers, graduate students, 
lab and clinic staff and doctors--for no legitimate congressional 
reason. Not since Joe McCarthy have we seen such abusive pressure 
tactics to ``name names.''
  The Select Panel is acting as judge, jury, and executioner and 
endangering lives. It is time for Speaker Ryan to disband this panel--
rather than let it gorge even more on taxpayer funds.
  Like the seventeen investigations that preceded it, the Select Panel 
has found no evidence of wrongdoing by Planned Parenthood, other 
providers, researchers or the companies that facilitate life-saving 
research and health care for women.
  The Washington Post editorial board called on Speaker Ryan to disband 
the Select Committee months ago, noting that it ``has issued 
indiscriminate subpoenas, intimidated witnesses and relied on 
misleading information. It is abusing power at taxpayer expense, and 
Democrats are right to demand its shutdown.'' The paper added, ``There 
is no legitimate reason for this inquiry.''
  The Select Panel is a waste of funds, an attack on women's rights, a 
danger to life-saving medical research and an abusive use of 
Congressional power for mere partisan gain.
  So Mr. Speaker, I say enough with the smear campaigns, fishing 
expeditions and endless stream of subpoenas. Congressional bullying to 
frighten women out of exercising their rights, and to drive researchers 
and healthcare providers out of business, has to stop.
  We in the minority have long called for the Select Committee to be 
disbanded before it does any more damage. I look forward to closing 
this shameful chapter in Congressional history at the end of this year.
  Mr. HARPER. Madam Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from 
Maryland (Mr. Harris), who is also a medical doctor.
  Mr. HARRIS. Madam Speaker, I am glad the gentlewoman talked about the 
need for ethical medical research because one of our panel's 
accomplishments is to show how StemExpress undermined the very 
foundations of ethical American scientific research.
  First, Federal regulations require researchers to obtain informed 
consent from each person used as a subject. The basic element of 
informed consent includes a detailed explanation of the purposes of the 
research for which tissue is being obtained. StemExpress, as we found, 
simply did not follow that requirement.
  HHS regulations also require that in obtaining consent, researchers 
``minimize the possibility of coercion or undue influence.'' Well, 
StemExpress documents that we uncovered shows that its employees were 
already promising to deliver baby body parts even before the abortions 
were performed. That raises serious concerns that there may have been 
coercion or undue influence on women to donate parts of their aborted 
babies.
  Now, second, Federal regulations require that all research that 
involves human subjects needs approval from an institutional review 
board, or IRB. As a medical researcher, I had to file IRB applications 
and receive IRB approval from my university's IRB.
  Now, it turns out that StemExpress received their IRB approval from a 
company called BioMed IRB, a California firm that is basically an 
online, mail order IRB that the Federal Government actually barred for 
2 years because they violated FDA rules in granting their IRB approval.
  The FDA gave the panel its file on BioMed IRB. Madam Speaker, that 
file literally was more than a foot high.
  HHS regulations require IRBs to ``prepare and maintain adequate 
documentation'' of their activities, including: copies of all research 
proposals reviewed, records of continuing review activities, and copies 
of all correspondence between the IRB and the investigators, in this 
case, StemExpress' founder and CEO, Cate Dyer.
  Now, the panel subpoenaed BioMed IRB for all documents related to its 
approval of StemExpress' research protocol. BioMed IRB's executive 
director informed the panel that, in regards to those records, ``there 
are none.'' In other words, BioMed clearly violated Federal regulations 
on IRBs.
  The head of BioMed went further. He told the panel to just bring on a 
contempt proceeding. That is the IRB StemExpress used. That says a lot 
about StemExpress' motives and it says a lot about the accomplishments 
of the select panel. None of these shameful practices would have been 
discovered if not for the panel's investigative work this year.
  As a physician and researcher, I know that if I had used the same 
shady tactics as StemExpress and BioMed IRB, at best, my research 
reputation would be at risk and, at worst, I would be facing prison.
  Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman 
from Connecticut (Ms. Esty).
  Ms. ESTY. Madam Speaker, I rise today in opposition to H. Res. 933, 
legislation that would waste an additional 800,000 taxpayer dollars on 
the partisan witch hunt against Planned Parenthood.
  I learned from a young age the value of making quality reproductive 
health care available to everyone. In the rural town I grew up in, too 
many young women didn't have access to family planning services. Too 
many got pregnant, dropped out of school, and never pursued their 
dreams. That is why, in college, I volunteered with Planned Parenthood 
to ensure legal access to the full range of safe family planning 
services for all women.
  So instead of funding a sham investigation, $800,000 could fund 
lifesaving breast exams, pregnancy tests, Pap smears, and ovarian 
cancer screenings.
  Today I stand with women and men across this country to speak out 
against a baseless investigation, which has shamefully wasted tax 
dollars to

[[Page 15607]]

attack the very people who most need our help.
  Mr. HARPER. Madam Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from 
Utah (Mrs. Love).
  Mrs. LOVE. Madam Speaker, my colleagues on the other side have said 
that the three House Committee investigations related to the sale of 
fetal tissue have produced nothing. Others have said that the State 
Attorney General investigations have also looked into the matter and 
have found nothing. They complain that this is a waste of time and they 
complain that it is a waste of money.
  First of all, there is so much that we don't know and the American 
people don't know and still don't understand about this industry. 
However, since the panel's investigation, we have uncovered alarming 
revelations about the fetal tissue industry and, because of this, there 
have been criminal and regulatory referrals. They have resulted in 
numerous investigations around the Nation, and I will highlight eight 
of these.
  First, the panel discovered that the University of New Mexico was 
violating their State's Anatomical Gift Act by receiving tissue from 
late-term abortion clinics. This is currently being investigated.
  Second, the panel made a forensic accounting analysis of StemExpress' 
limited production and determined that they were profiting from the 
sale of baby body parts. Now the El Dorado District Attorney and the 
United States Department of Justice are investigating this.
  Third, the panel learned that StemExpress and certain abortion 
clinics were violating HIPAA privacy rights of vulnerable women for the 
sole purpose of increasing and harvesting fetal tissue to make money.
  Fourth, the panel discovered that an abortion clinic in Arkansas 
violated State law when it sent tissue to StemExpress. This, too, is 
under investigation.
  Fifth, the panel discovered that a university in Ohio was trafficking 
in baby body parts, an illegal act under Ohio State law.
  Sixth, it was discovered that DV Biologics, another tissue 
procurement company, was profiting from the sale of fetal tissue and 
violated California State law. This case has been filed.
  Seventh, recently the panel learned that Planned Parenthood of Gulf 
Coast violated both Texas and U.S. law when it sold baby body parts to 
the University of Texas.
  Eighth, the panel also learned that Advanced Bioscience Resources 
made a profit when it sold tissue to various universities.
  As elected Representatives, we are tasked with oversight of our 
government that enforces our laws. These eight referrals are proof of 
potential criminal activity in the fetal tissue industry. They justify 
the existence of the panel and their investigations.
  The work of the select panel is not over. More referrals will come, 
and we need to complete this process. Continued funding for the panel's 
unfinished work is needed.
  I urge my colleagues to support this resolution to fund the 
investigative work and fulfill the obligations that we have to the 
American people and the rule of law.
  Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. Madam Speaker, let me just say that bogus referrals 
do not a conviction make, and that StemExpress had offered many times 
to come in with its procurement officers and answer all the questions. 
They were denied that.
  Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from Massachusetts 
(Ms. Clark).
  Ms. CLARK of Massachusetts. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman 
for yielding.
  Republicans today are asking us to spend more than $1.5 million to 
conduct a radical, dangerous inquisition that targets and intimidates 
private citizens.
  To satisfy their seemingly unquenchable obsession with rolling back 
women's reproductive rights and access to basic health care, this 
overreaching panel recklessly has demanded names, and interferes in the 
lives of law-abiding students, scientists, and researchers whose 
private lives and jobs have been turned upside down by their own 
government.
  What do we have to show for this display of government abuse?
  Absolutely nothing. In fact, it is worse than nothing.
  Today, they are invoking institutional responsibility to ask the 
taxpayers to foot a bill for $800,000 of their own cost overruns. This 
is money that could have been used to help families, feed the hungry, 
help our veterans and military families, and go toward education.
  I urge my colleagues to reject this dangerous abuse of power and 
taxpayer funding.
  Mr. HARPER. Madam Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from 
Wisconsin (Mr. Duffy).
  Mr. DUFFY. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Mississippi for 
yielding.
  Let's be really clear about what this is about. This is about 
following the law. We negotiate, we vote, we pass laws, the President 
signs them, and they should be enforced. That is what this conversation 
is about, Madam Speaker.
  StemExpress has thumbed its nose against the select investigative 
panel and obstructed our efforts to bring light to the fetal tissue 
procurement industry.

                              {time}  1530

  Nearly a year ago, the panel requested information from StemExpress 
regarding where they procured their fetal tissue, whom they distributed 
the fetal tissue to, any communications instructing the company's 
employees to procure fetal tissue, and all accounting records and 
banking records related to fetal tissue.
  StemExpress, in response to that request, has given us none--zero--no 
document. So to compel StemExpress to provide the panel with this 
information, the panel issued the company a subpoena. Instead of 
complying with the subpoena, StemExpress only turned over limited 
information to the panel, and the information that they turned over to 
us was so heavily redacted that it was completely useless for 
investigative purposes.
  To date, the select panel has not received a single accounting or 
bank record from StemExpress. So they have failed to comply with our 
requests and our subpoenas in violation of the law.
  If StemExpress is within the limits of the law, if nothing is illegal 
or immoral, then why does StemExpress refuse to turn over all the 
documents that our panel has requested? Opening your accounting records 
to a congressional panel shouldn't be that difficult.
  StemExpress has had plenty of time to get their act together and 
provide us with the requested documents that we have asked for. Other 
organizations that we have reached out to and made the same requests to 
have turned over the documents in a pretty timely fashion.
  For failure to comply with our subpoenas, this panel has recommended 
the House hold Cate Dyer, the CEO of StemExpress, in contempt of 
Congress.
  Despite StemExpress' best efforts to stonewall this investigation, 
the panel did find out the name of StemExpress' bank which we 
subpoenaed. The bank provided us with StemExpress' banking records. So, 
again, StemExpress won't give us the records, but we got them from the 
bank.
  We now know why StemExpress was hiding these documents. The banking 
records reveal that StemExpress may have been shredding documents that 
were directly related to this panel's investigation. The bank records 
show that payments were made to a shredding company--a shredding 
company. We looked back at all the records we sought from StemExpress 
back to 2012, and there is no payments to a shredding company. But when 
this panel started its investigation and when we started asking for 
documentation, guess what? You have bank records that show they hired a 
shredding company. Why hire a shredding company when we were starting 
our investigation?
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has expired.

[[Page 15608]]


  Mr. HARPER. Madam Speaker, may I inquire as to how much time is 
remaining.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Mississippi has 3 minutes 
remaining. The gentlewoman from Illinois has 16 minutes remaining.
  Mr. HARPER. Madam Speaker, I yield the gentleman an additional 1 
minute.
  Mr. DUFFY. Madam Speaker, there is no cause and no reason why 
StemExpress would allegedly shred these documents. We both know on both 
sides of the aisle--though we may have a disagreement on this issue--
that when this Congress sends a lawful request to an institution, they 
are required to provide the documents that are requested. Both sides of 
the aisle know that when we send a subpoena, those who are subpoenaed 
are required to provide those documents to us.
  So if StemExpress has failed to comply with these requests and these 
subpoenas, and if they are willing to violate the law in regard to 
subpoenas to hide information, the question becomes: What laws are they 
willing to violate in regard to the sale of baby body parts? I think 
that question deserves to be answered by StemExpress, by this 
institution, and for the American people.
  So I would ask support for this additional funding to complete this 
investigation and provide documentation to this country and to this 
House about what has been taking place in regard to the procurement and 
sale of fetal tissue.

       1. Date of Congressional Action: August 7, 2015.
       a. Event: Energy & Commerce Committee letter to StemExpress 
     requesting a briefing.
       b. Date of StemExpress Payment to Shred-It Us: August 13, 
     2015.
       2. Date of Congressional Action: August 21, 2015.
       a. Event: StemExpress briefing to Energy & Commerce 
     Committee.
       b. Date of StemExpress Payment to Shred-It Us: August 13, 
     2015.
       3. Date of Congressional Action: September 17, 2015.
       a. Event: Senate Judiciary Committee document request 
     letter to StemExpress.
       b. Date of StemExpress Payment to Shred-It Us: September 
     29, 2015; November 10, 2015; December 10, 2015.
       4. Date of Congressional Action: December 17, 2015.
       a. Event: Select Investigative Panel document request 
     letter to StemExpress.
       b. Date of StemExpress Payment to Shred-It Us: January 12, 
     2016.
       5. Date of Congressional Action: January 15, 2016.
       a. Event: StemExpress first production in response to 
     Select Panel document request letter.
       b. Date of StemExpress Payment to Shred-It Us: January 12, 
     2016.
       6. Date of Congressional Action: February 9, 2016.
       a. Event: StemExpress production in response to Select 
     Panel document request letter.
       b. Date of StemExpress Payment to Shred-It Us: January 27, 
     2016.
       7. Date of Congressional Action: February 12, 2016.
       a. Event: Select Panel Subpoena to StemExpres.
       b. Date of StemExpress Payment to Shred-It Us.
       8. Date of Congressional Action: March 28, 2016.
       a. Event: StemExpress production in response to Panel 
     subpoena.
       b. Date of StemExpress Payment to Shred-It Us: March 21, 
     2016.
       9. Date of Congressional Action: May 10, 2016.
       a. Event: StemExpress production in response to Panel 
     subpoena.
       b. Date of StemExpress Payment to Shred-It Us: April 26, 
     2016.

  Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from 
Pennsylvania (Mr. Evans) who is a new Member. He has served over three 
decades in the Pennsylvania legislature and now has joined us.
  Mr. EVANS. Madam Speaker, I would like to thank the gentlewoman from 
Illinois.
  In the short 2 weeks that I have been here, Madam Speaker, I have 
observed a lot of interesting things take place. But what I especially 
have observed at this particular point, Madam Speaker, is that the 
American taxpayers shouldn't be asked to spend another $800,000 on an 
unnecessary and dangerous selective investigation.
  Don't take my word, Madam Speaker, look at the aspect of quotes from 
around the United States.
  The Tennessean: ``Right now, the panel is creating the perception 
that it is embroiled in a wild goose chase.''
  The New York Times: ``Neither the videos nor the many investigations 
that followed have found any evidence that Planned Parenthood offered 
to sell fetal tissue for a profit.''
  ``Elected officials should not use the power of the office to 
intimidate citizens who hold different points of view.''
  The New York Times: ``Nor is there any reason to conduct this 
investigation . . . Republicans are pointlessly attacking a practice 
that could save lives and, in the process, potentially putting 
researchers' lives at risk.''
  The Hill: ``The committee is abusing its power and the effect is very 
troubling for researchers and patients alike.''
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has expired.
  Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. Madam Speaker, I yield the gentleman an additional 1 
minute.
  Mr. EVANS. The fact is Planned Parenthood does not sell fetal tissue 
for profit and never has. A Republican-led House panel is undeterred 
and conducting its own investigation and, more accurately, witch hunt. 
Even more troubling is the considerable time and money that will be 
wasted on this political damage to health care and medical research.
  Madam Speaker, this is not needed. We should be against it.
  Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman 
from California (Ms. Judy Chu).
  Ms. JUDY CHU of California. Today, Republicans are asking taxpayers 
to spend $800,000 to cover for their mistakes. The select panel to 
investigate Planned Parenthood, which was created based on lies spread 
by anti-abortion extremists, has already overspent the $1 million this 
Republican Congress has allocated them with no real findings. Now they 
want to continue their attack on women and Planned Parenthood. This is 
outrageous.
  This select panel--along with 13 States, three House committees, and 
a Texas grand jury investigation--has found no wrongdoing on the part 
of Planned Parenthood. It is clear that, after over a year of 
investigations, Republicans are not seeking truth or better policy.
  Instead, this panel has released confidential documents to the 
public, compared researchers to Nazi war criminals, and exposed doctors 
and researchers to harassment and violence. We cannot continue to fund 
this fruitless witch hunt that endangers our researchers and slows 
important medical discoveries.
  I strongly oppose this committee and urge my colleagues to vote 
``no.''
  Mr. HARPER. Madam Speaker, may I inquire as to how many additional 
speakers the minority may have?
  Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. Madam Speaker, I have six additional speakers and 
still, I think, some additional time beyond that.
  Mr. HARPER. Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from 
Pennsylvania (Mr. Rothfus).
  Mr. ROTHFUS. Madam Speaker, I rise today in support of this 
resolution. The Select Investigative Panel on Infant Lives has been 
investigating potential violations of the Federal law that makes it 
illegal to sell fetal tissue--that is body parts--for profit. The 
evidence reveals appalling practices. For example, on video, we saw a 
Planned Parenthood doctor talking about doing ``less crunchy'' types of 
abortion. That was to make sure they had intact body parts to sell.
  The gruesome practices the panel discovered shocked the conscience. 
Where does this end?
  Consider this: It was startling to learn that the University of New 
Mexico had a summer camp program in which students dissected the brains 
of unborn children. According to documents obtained by the panel, the 
university ordered from a late-term abortion doctor ``whole, fixed 
brains to dissect with summer camp students.''
  Think about that. We are talking about students--teenagers--
dissecting the brains of someone within the age group of their own 
siblings. What barbarity are we teaching our children? How seared have 
our consciences become?

[[Page 15609]]

  The select panel must move forward with its investigation into these 
alarming violations of law and assaults on human dignity and 
conscience.
  Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from 
California (Mr. Ruiz) who is a doctor.
  Mr. RUIZ. Madam Speaker, I rise in strong opposition to H. Res. 933. 
I oppose funding for the select panel to attack and intimidate women's 
health care.
  The select panel is a baseless committee formed with no regard to the 
facts or evidence of this case. In fact, the creators of the 
purposefully doctored and highly manipulated videos that they 
consistently bring up that this investigation is based on have been 
indicted on criminal felony charges, and we should be investigating 
their legal practices instead. Continuing to fund this panel is a 
disgrace, and this investigation must cease immediately.
  Instead of taking action that would improve the lives of women and 
families across the country, this panel continues to chase baseless 
allegations.
  As an emergency physician, I am exceptionally disappointed. The 
reckless work of the panel puts women's reproductive rights in jeopardy 
and threatens to undo the progress we have made over the last 40 years. 
It is also a complete waste of taxpayer money.
  I stand in strong opposition to this resolution and call on this 
panel to be disbanded. Let's take real action to improve the health and 
well-being of this country.
  Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman 
from Wisconsin (Ms. Moore) who is my friend.
  Ms. MOORE. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman from Illinois.
  Madam Speaker, I rise today in strident opposition to H. Res. 933.
  Madam Speaker, we have heard so much about fake news lately, and now 
we are being asked for taxpayer funding for fake congressional 
committees. This resolution provides another 800,000 taxpayer dollars 
to the Republicans' ongoing hatchet job against Planned Parenthood. We 
already know the facts on the faked Planned Parenthood videos and the 
unethical videographer. The fake committee's only goal is to create 
Orwellian unfacts.
  So far, this fake committee has found no wrongdoing by Planned 
Parenthood or their doctors. Of course, this panel knows that they 
wouldn't find anything because Planned Parenthood has been cleared of 
wrongdoing 17 times by three different House committees, 17 State 
investigations, and a grand jury.
  Now, despite all this, Republicans want to waste more taxpayer 
dollars.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentlewoman has expired.
  Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. Madam Speaker, I yield the gentlewoman an additional 
30 seconds.
  Ms. MOORE. Madam Speaker, despite all this, Republicans want to waste 
more taxpayer dollars for their smear campaign, money that could be 
used on meaningful measures to reduce infant mortality, feed hungry 
children, or improve early childhood education. What we really need to 
get to the bottom of is: What will it take to get Republicans to get 
the target off women's backs?
  Do that, and we might actually make some progress.
  Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from 
Michigan (Mr. Kildee).
  Mr. KILDEE. Madam Speaker, I thank my friend and colleague for her 
leadership and for yielding.
  Let's just be clear. We know what this is. This is yet another 
attempt to fund with Federal taxpayer dollars a Republican messaging 
effort to attack Planned Parenthood.
  More than 2.5 million people--2.5 million women--every year rely on 
Planned Parenthood for lifesaving cancer screenings and for other 
health services. We have important legislative work to do, and we ought 
not be using taxpayer dollars to fund this effort which has clearly 
been described in all sorts of lofty tones but is essentially a 
political witch hunt after an organization that provides essential 
services to women.
  The majority cannot deny the chilling effect that this effort has had 
on medical research. It has already been revealed that this is also an 
attack on stem cell research. You just have to listen to the debate.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has expired.
  Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. Madam Speaker, I yield the gentleman an additional 30 
seconds.
  Mr. KILDEE. We need to make sure that we are pursuing scientific 
research to fight diseases like diabetes, like Alzheimer's, and like 
multiple sclerosis, a disease my wife, Jennifer, has been fighting for 
18 years.

                              {time}  1545

  We are one of those families that, when we hear about medical 
research and we hear about stem cell research, in particular, our ears 
perk up because we know there is hope in that research.
  This effort--no matter what anybody wants to say, it is well 
documented--has had a chilling effect on that medical research, and we 
ought to shut this down.
  Mr. HARPER. Madam Speaker, I continue to reserve the balance of my 
time.
  Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from 
Florida (Mr. Deutch).
  Mr. DEUTCH. Madam Speaker, I thank my friend, the gentlewoman from 
Illinois (Ms. Schakowsky) for yielding.
  Madam Speaker, it is time to move on from this dangerous, partisan, 
and wasteful investigation into Planned Parenthood. This case is 
closed--after investigations with 13 States, three House committees, 
and a Texas Grand Jury that found no wrongdoing by Planned Parenthood.
  The majority wants $1.5 million from the American taxpayers to fund 
this dangerous sham when they know that they will never find evidence 
of wrongdoing by Planned Parenthood.
  But the evidence doesn't matter, Madam Speaker. The majority knows 
that, if they keep this farce in the headlines, it will do real damage 
to women seeking health care. They know that it will feed fake news 
sites on the Internet. They know that it will block women from 
exercising their constitutional rights. And they know that it will 
unfairly harass women's health clinics. Madam Speaker, they know that 
this will put abortion providers and their staff in danger.
  This panel serves no true investigatory purpose. It is a political 
tool. It is a disgrace.
  I urge my colleagues to vote ``no.''
  Mr. HARPER. Madam Speaker, I continue to reserve the balance of my 
time.
  Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. Madam Speaker, if I could inquire how much time I 
have left.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentlewoman from Illinois has 8\1/2\ 
minutes remaining.
  Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman 
from California (Ms. Lee).
  Ms. LEE. Madam Speaker, I thank Congresswoman Schakowsky for yielding 
and for her tremendous leadership on this issue and so many issues that 
affect women.
  I rise in strong opposition to H. Res. 933, which is nothing more 
than a politically motivated resolution. It would shamefully--
shamefully--provide an additional $800,000 to the select investigative 
panel to so-called investigate Planned Parenthood and attack women's 
health.
  Republicans are asking for more money to continue their baseless 
attacks to undermine medical and scientific research and intimidate and 
harass providers. How outrageous. Let's be clear. This is yet another 
attempt to deny women, especially low-income women, access to health 
care.
  There have been multiple hearings and there have been committee 
investigations, none of which have resulted in any evidence of 
wrongdoing by Planned Parenthood, doctors, or researchers.
  Madam Speaker, this resolution and the absurd select panel 
investigation amounts to nothing more than a witch hunt. Instead of 
wasting millions of taxpayer dollars on this smear campaign, we should 
be fully investing in women's health and childcare.
  I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on this dangerous resolution and, 
instead,

[[Page 15610]]

call for an end of the select panel to attack women's health.
  Mr. HARPER. Madam Speaker, I continue to reserve the balance of my 
time.
  Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman 
from Florida (Ms. Frankel).
  Ms. FRANKEL of Florida. Madam Speaker, I join my Democratic 
colleagues in opposing funding for a legislative panel that, instead of 
protecting, is jeopardizing life. Just ask the wife and 4 children and 
10 grandchildren of George Tiller, a good doctor, who, while attending 
church, was shot dead by an anti-abortion extremist. His loved ones 
know the tragic consequences of having a target on one's back. And what 
this panel is doing is funding and creating new targets.
  Reports naming names with bogus accusations; every day, clinics 
dealing with social media threats, bomb scares, harassment. We are 
playing deadly politics here, endangering lives and halting lifesaving 
medical breakthroughs. Enough is enough.
  I urge my colleagues to oppose this resolution.
  Mr. HARPER. Madam Speaker, I continue to reserve the balance of my 
time.
  Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  I just want to say a few things before yielding to the gentleman from 
Pennsylvania (Mr. Brady).
  We have heard a lot of accusations against certain businesses, et 
cetera, and institutions, and the Republicans have selectively and 
repeatedly released documents and letters, including a so-called 
criminal referral to the New Mexico attorney general, to the press 
before sending them or sharing them with Democrats. This is clearly a 
political move.
  They have also manufactured their own misleading so-called exhibits 
and withheld documents and information from Democrats in violation of 
the House rules. They have abused their power throughout the whole time 
and should now not be allowed to continue to get any more money for 
this panel.
  Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to defeat the previous question. 
If we defeat the previous question, I would offer an amendment to the 
resolution that would abolish the select panel instead of funding it. 
Let's be done with this once and for all.
  Madam Speaker, I yield the remainder of my time to the gentleman from 
Pennsylvania (Mr. Brady).
  Mr. BRADY of Pennsylvania. Madam Speaker, I also urge my colleagues 
to vote ``no'' on H. Res. 933.
  I reserved a little bit of my time because I thought that this would 
be the last time that our chairman, Candice Miller, would be here 
orchestrating the resolution. Instead we got my dear friend, Mr. 
Harper. That is okay. We will take the second.
  Candice Miller is going on to other things, and we wish her well. She 
is on other endeavors, and it is bittersweet. The sweetness is that she 
is leaving here and going home. The bitterness is that she is leaving 
here and going home. She has been a great chairman. We have had the 
pleasure of working together. We agreed 99.9 percent of the time. 
Without question, she was the classiest lady--without question, the 
classiest person, not only the classiest lady--in this institution.
  Again, I wish her well. And whatever I can do--if I am ever in 
Michigan, I am going to stop to see her; if she is ever in 
Philadelphia, she can come to see me; and if she comes back here, I 
would love to see her again.
  Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. HARPER. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  I share that admiration for Candice Miller, who will be leaving at 
the end of this term. It has been great to see the working relationship 
that Mr. Brady and Mrs. Miller have had together on the Committee on 
House Administration. It has been an excellent example of how this 
place can operate.
  Let us come together, though, here to fulfill our responsibility to 
one of the House's standing committees and provide the Committee on 
Energy and Commerce, both the majority and the minority, the funding 
that they need to finish their work this year.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to insert the 
text of the amendment in the Record along with extraneous material 
immediately prior to the vote on the previous question.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentlewoman from Illinois?
  There was no objection.
  Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. I yield back the balance of my time.
  Ms. SLAUGHTER. Madam Speaker, the Select Investigative Panel was 
created solely to attack Planned Parenthood and intimidate women, 
health care providers, and scientific researchers. Its investigation 
has never been fair or fact-based.
  It is shameful that the Majority is continuing to use the taxpayer's 
money to advance its own political purposes. This privileged resolution 
would waste another $800,000 of the American people's tax dollars on 
this partisan witch hunt. The Majority is now on track to spend more 
than $1.5 million on this dangerous smear campaign.
  Madam Speaker, I call on every Member of the House who does not want 
to fund witch hunts to support Ms. Schakowsky's amendment.
  Ms. JACKSON LEE. Madam Speaker, as a senior member of the Judiciary, 
and Ranking Member of the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, Homeland 
Security, and Investigations, I rise in strong opposition to H. Res. 
933, which would increase funding by $800,000 for the Select 
Investigative Panel of the Energy and Commerce Committee, which more 
accurately should be called the ``Planned Parenthood Witchunt.''
  The ostensible purpose of this Select Investigative Panel is to 
investigate and report on all issues related to medical procedures and 
practices involving fetal tissue donation and procurement; federal 
funding and support for abortion providers; and late-term abortions.
  But make no mistake, the Republican majority's real purpose in 
establishing this panel is (1) to open another front in their ongoing 
War Against Women, (2) impede women in the exercise of their right to 
make their own choices when it comes to their reproductive health, and 
(3) to persecute, smear, and demonize Planned Parenthood.
  We know this from our experience with the so-called ``Benghazi 
Committee,'' which the Republican leadership claimed was a nonpartisan 
inquiry into the facts and circumstances surrounding the 2012 tragedy 
in Libya which claimed the lives of four brave and heroic Americans.
  We know now, as confirmed by the Majority Leader and the Speaker-
apparent, that the Benghazi Committee was in reality part of 
politically-motivated strategy to disparage and damage the former 
Secretary of State and leading candidate for the Democratic 
presidential nomination that wasted $4.5 million of the taxpayers' 
money.
  Madam Speaker, with so many pressing challenges facing our nation, 
wasting time and taxpayer money on another partisan witch hunt is a 
luxury we simply cannot afford.
  The structure and powers to be given the Select Investigative Panel 
does not inspire any confidence that it will operate in a fair and 
impartial manner.
  For example, the composition of the committee is lopsided in favor of 
the majority (8 Republican; 5 Democrat), instead of more equally 
divided as select committees are comprised.
  Second, the chairman of the select panel is given subpoena power and 
deposition authority, including the authority to order the taking of 
depositions by a member of the select panel or the panel's counsel.
  Third, the the chairman of the select committee is authorized to 
recognize members to question witness for periods longer than the 
traditional five minutes and to recognize staff to question witnesses.
  Taken together, these unusual powers are susceptible to abuse and are 
valued tools to any party wishing to conduct a fishing expedition as 
opposed to a dispassionate search for facts.
  Madam Speaker, let me save our Republican colleagues some time by 
pointing out the facts that an objective, fair-minded inquiry would 
reveal.
  In 2011, approximately 1.06 million abortions took place in the U.S., 
down from an estimated 1.21 million abortions in 2008, 1.29 million in 
2002, 1.31 million in 2000 and 1.36 million in 1996.
  Based on available state-level data, an estimated 984,000 abortions 
took place in 2013--

[[Page 15611]]

down from an estimated 1.02 million abortions in 2012.
  Fetal tissue research has been scientifically accepted since the 
Reagan Administration.
  In 1988 the Human Fetal Tissue Transplantation Research Panel (or the 
Blue Ribbon Commission) sought to separate the question of ethics of 
abortion from the question ethics of using fetal tissue from legal 
elective abortions for medical research.
  The report of this commission laid the foundation for the NIH Health 
Revitalization Act of 1993 (which passed overwhelmingly with bipartisan 
support), prohibits the payment or receipt of money or any other form 
of valuable consideration for fetal tissue, regardless of whether the 
program to which the tissue is being provided is funded or not.
  The law contains a limited exception that permits reimbursement for 
actual expenses (e.g. storage, processing, transportation, etc.) of the 
tissue.
  These fees generally amount to less than $100.
  Less than 1 percent of Planned Parenthood chapters participate in 
this area of research.
  Planned Parenthood reports revenue by source (either government or 
non-government) rather than the manner of disbursement (income versus 
grants and contracts).
  Payments from Medicaid managed care plans are listed as ``Government 
Health Services Grants and Reimbursements'' to reflect the ultimate 
source of the funds.
  Planned Parenthood spends about $1.1 billion annually on 11.4 million 
services, 83 percent of which is spent on research, client services and 
education.
  Client services are divided into six categories: Cancer Prevention 
and Screenings, STI Testing, Contraception, Abortion Services, Other 
Women's Health Services & Other Services.
  According to Planned Parenthood financial statements from 2009 
through 2014, 86 percent of Planned Parenthood's Services fall under 
the categories of Cancer Prevention and Screenings (12-16 percent), STI 
Testing for men and women (35-41 percent), and Contraception (32-35 
percent).
  Only about about 3 percent of its services fall under the Abortion 
category nationally.
  Additionally, Planned Parenthood is already prohibited from spending 
federal funds on abortion services anyway.
  Finally, Madam Speaker, H. Res. 933 is an irresponsible diversion 
from tackling and addressing the following critical challenges facing 
this Congress and the American people.
  Funding to keep the government open expires on December 9 and 
Congress must find a way to keep the government open in the face of 
irresponsible opposition from 151 Republicans who previously voted to 
shut down the government rather than allow women access to affordable 
family planning and life-saving preventive health care.
  Madam Speaker, we have far more important things to do than waste 
more time and taxpayer money on another partisan attempt to deprive 
women of their right to make their own decisions regarding their 
reproductive health that has been recognized as constitutionally 
guaranteed since 1973 by the Supreme Court decision in Roe v. Wade.
  I oppose H. Res. 933 and urge all Members to join me in voting 
against this wasteful and irresponsible measure.

             Health Impact of Planned Parenthood Affiliates


                             by the numbers

       378,692--Pap tests performed.
       487,029--breast exams performed.
       87,988--women whose cancer was detected early or whose 
     abnormalities were identified.
       865,721--Total Pap tests and breast exams performed.
       1,440,495--emergency contraception kits provided.
       516,000--unintended pregnancies averted by contraceptive 
     services.
       3,577,348--Birth control information and services provided.
       704,079--HIV tests conducted.
       169,008--STIs diagnosed, enabling people to get treatment 
     and to learn how to prevent the further spread of STIs.
       4,470,597--Tests and treatment for sexually transmitted 
     infections provided.
       Planned Parenthood health centers saw 2.7 million patients, 
     who collectively received 10.6 million services during 4.6 
     million clinical visits.


      Parenthood Clients Receiving Contraceptive Services in 2013

       42 percent--STI/STD Testing & Treatment.
       11 percent--Other Women's Health Services.
       3 percent--Abortion Services.
       1 percent--Other Services.
       9 percent--Cancer Screening and Prevention.
       34 percent--Contraception.


             medical services provided by affiliates (2013)

       STI/STD Testing & Treatment Total: 4,470,597.
       STI Tests, Women and Men: 3,727,359.
       Genital Warts (HPV) Treatments: 38,612.
       HIV Tests, Women and Men: 704,079.
       Other Treatments: 547.
       Contraception Total: 3,577,348.
       Reversible Contraception Clients, Women 2,131,865.
       Emergency Contraception Kits 1,440,495.
       Female Sterilization Procedures 822.
       Vasectomy Clients 4,166.
       Cancer Screening and Prevention Total: 935,573.
       Pap Tests 378,692.
       HPV Vaccinations 34,739.
       Breast Exams/Breast Care 487,029.
       Colposcopy Procedures 32,334.
       LEEP Procedures 2,095.
       Cryotherapy Procedures 684.
       Other Women's Health Services Total: 1,147,467.
       Pregnancy Tests 1,128,783.
       Prenatal Services 18,684.
       Abortion Services Total: Abortion Procedures 327,653.
       Other Services Total: 131,795.
       Family Practice Services, Women and Men 65,464.
       Adoption Referrals to Other Agencies 1,880.
       Urinary Tract Infections Treatments 47,264.
       Other Procedures, Women and Men 517,187.
       Total of All Services Provided: 10,590,433.


               government funding for planned parenthood

       National and Affiliate Chapters (FY2004-FY2014)
       $4,529,900,000: Amount that Planned Parenthood and its 
     affiliates have received in government funding over the last 
     ten years, according to the organization's annual reports.
       This represents less than half, approximately 45 percent, 
     of the organization total revenues.
       There are 38 Planned Parenthood locations in Texas.
       Planned Parenthood reports revenue by source (either 
     government or non-government) rather than the manner of 
     disbursement (income versus grants and contracts).
       Payments from Medicaid managed care plans are listed as 
     ``Government Health Services Grants and Reimbursements'' to 
     reflect the ultimate source of the funds.
       The government funding comes from both federal and state 
     governments.
       Government Health Service Grants and Reimbursements:
       FY 2014: $528.5 million.
       FY 2013: $540.6 million.
       FY 2012: $542.4 million.
       FY 2011: $538.5 million.
       FY 2010: $487.4 million.
       FY 2009: $363 million.
       FY 2008: $349.6 million.
       FY 2007: $336.7 million.
       FY 2006: $305.3 million.
       FY 2005: $272.7 million.
       FY 2004: $265.2 million.

  The material previously referred to by Ms. Schakowsky is as follows:

         An Amendment to H. Res. 933 Offered by Ms. Schakowsky

       Strike all after the resolved clause and insert:
       That the Select Investigative Panel of the Committee on 
     Energy and Commerce established pursuant to House Resolution 
     461, agreed to October 7, 2015, is hereby terminated.
                                  ____


        The Vote on the Previous Question: What It Really Means

       This vote, the vote on whether to order the previous 
     question on a special rule, is not merely a procedural vote. 
     A vote against ordering the previous question is a vote 
     against the Republican majority agenda and a vote to allow 
     the Democratic minority to offer an alternative plan. It is a 
     vote about what the House should be debating.
       Mr. Clarence Cannon's Precedents of the House of 
     Representatives (VI, 308-311), describes the vote on the 
     previous question on the rule as ``a motion to direct or 
     control the consideration of the subject before the House 
     being made by the Member in charge.'' To defeat the previous 
     question is to give the opposition a chance to decide the 
     subject before the House. Cannon cites the Speaker's ruling 
     of January 13, 1920, to the effect that ``the refusal of the 
     House to sustain the demand for the previous question passes 
     the control of the resolution to the opposition'' in order to 
     offer an amendment. On March 15, 1909, a member of the 
     majority party offered a rule resolution. The House defeated 
     the previous question and a member of the opposition rose to 
     a parliamentary inquiry, asking who was entitled to 
     recognition. Speaker Joseph G. Cannon (R-Illinois) said: 
     ``The previous question having been refused, the gentleman 
     from New York, Mr. Fitzgerald, who had asked the gentleman to 
     yield to him for an amendment, is entitled to the first 
     recognition.''
       The Republican majority may say ``the vote on the previous 
     question is simply a vote on whether to proceed to an 
     immediate vote on adopting the resolution . . . [and] has no 
     substantive legislative or policy implications whatsoever.'' 
     But that is not what they have always said. Listen to the 
     Republican Leadership Manual on the Legislative

[[Page 15612]]

     Process in the United States House of Representatives, (6th 
     edition, page 135). Here's how the Republicans describe the 
     previous question vote in their own manual: ``Although it is 
     generally not possible to amend the rule because the majority 
     Member controlling the time will not yield for the purpose of 
     offering an amendment, the same result may be achieved by 
     voting down the previous question on the rule. . . . When the 
     motion for the previous question is defeated, control of the 
     time passes to the Member who led the opposition to ordering 
     the previous question. That Member, because he then controls 
     the time, may offer an amendment to the rule, or yield for 
     the purpose of amendment.''
       In Deschler's Procedure in the U.S. House of 
     Representatives, the subchapter titled ``Amending Special 
     Rules'' states: ``a refusal to order the previous question on 
     such a rule [a special rule reported from the Committee on 
     Rules] opens the resolution to amendment and further 
     debate.'' (Chapter 21, section 21.2) Section 21.3 continues: 
     ``Upon rejection of the motion for the previous question on a 
     resolution reported from the Committee on Rules, control 
     shifts to the Member leading the opposition to the previous 
     question, who may offer a proper amendment or motion and who 
     controls the time for debate thereon.''
       Clearly, the vote on the previous question on a rule does 
     have substantive policy implications. It is one of the only 
     available tools for those who oppose the Republican 
     majority's agenda and allows those with alternative views the 
     opportunity to offer an alternative plan.

  Mr. HARPER. Madam Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time, and I 
move the previous question on the resolution.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on ordering the previous 
question.
  The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that 
the ayes appeared to have it.
  Mr. BRADY of Pennsylvania. Madam 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.

                          ____________________