Tip:
Highlight text to annotate it
X
CAREFUL WHERE WE'RE SPENDING OUR
MONEY SO THAT WE CREATE THE JOBS
FOR TOMORROW AND WE CREATE THE
OPPORTUNITY FOR AMERICA TO MAKE
ONCE AGAIN.
MR. TONKO, YOU CAN CONTINUE ON.
I WOULD MAKE THIS ONE
POINT.
OBVIOUSLY IT'S ABOUT
NOT SPENDING.
INVESTMENTS.
EXPECTING LUCRATIVE DIVIDENDS,
LUCRATIVE RETURNS AND WHO IS
THIS CUTTING GRENS AN ATTACK ON?
IT'S AN ATTACK ON MIDDLE CLASS
AMERICA, AN ATTRACT ON CHILDREN,
IT'S AN ATTACK ON WORKING
FAMILY, IT'S AN ATTACK ON OUR
SENIORS AND WE ONLY GET HERE
WHAT WE'RE WANTING TO INVEST
HERE.
AND I THINK THAT WE CAN GO
FORWARD WITH A SOUNDNESS OF
POLICY AND A RESOURCEFULNESS OF
INVESTMENTS MADE THAT ALLOWS LOW
US TO CARRY US, TRANSITION US
INTO A NEW ECONOMY, DESIGNED
INTENTIONALLY TO GROW THE
POTENTIAL OF THIS NATION.
THAT'S WHAT AMERICA WANTS FROM
US AND I THINK THIS ATTACK IS A
TREMENDOUSLY COLD-HEARTED ATTACK
ON AMERICA'S WORKING FAMILIES.
IT'S GOING TO DESTROY OUR MIDDLE
CLASS WITHOUT A STRONG MIDDLE
CLASS THERE IS NOT A STRONG
AMERICA.
SOMEONE NEEDS TO CREATE THE
PRODUCT, BUILD THE PRODUCT,
SOMEONE NEEDS TO PURCHASE THE
AND WITHOUT A STRONG MIDDLE
CLASS, WITHOUT STRONG PURCHASING
STORY'S OVER.
SO LET'S MOVE ON, LET'S MARCH
FORWARD WITH MAKE IT IN AMERICA,
IT IS GREAT TO JOIN YOU,
REPRESENTATIVE GARAMENDI, FOR
THIS SPECIAL ORDER.
MR. TONKO, IF I
COULD JUST PICK UP ON ONE OF THE
ISSUES YOU RAISED WHICH WERE THE
WAYS IN WHICH WE SPEND OUR
MONEY.
NOW, WE ALL PAY GASOLINE TAX.
RIGHT NOW IT SEEMS AS THOUGH IT
WOULD BE TAXED BY THE OIL
COMPANIES AN EXTRA 50 CENTS OR
$1 BECAUSE THE PRICE OF GASOLINE
IS WAY UP THERE.
BUT ACTUALLY THE FEDERAL TAX ON
GASOLINE IS ABOUT 18 1/2 CENTS
AND ON DIESEL SOME 25 CENTS.
THAT MONEY IS USED TO BUILD OUR
INFRASTRUCTURE, OUR STREETS, OUR
ROADS, THE INTERSTATE HIGHWAY
SYSTEM, AS WELL AS TRAINS, BUSES
AND THE LIKE.
THE QUESTION IS, WHERE DO WE
SPEND THAT MONEY?
NOW, PREVIOUSLY WE WOULD SPEND
THAT MONEY ON BUSES THAT WERE
MADE OVERSEAS, WE WOULD SPEND
THAT MONEY ON TRAINS AND LIGHT
RAIL CARS THAT WERE MADE
OVERSEAS.
BUT OUR AGENDA HERE IS TO BRING
IT HOME TO AMERICA.
IF IT'S OUR TAX MONEY WE WANT
THAT MONEY TO BE SPENT ON THINGS
THAT ARE MADE IN AMERICA.
LET ME GIVE YOU A COUPLE OF
EXAMPLES ON TRANSPORTATION.
BUSES, ARE THEY MADE IN AMERICA?
OUR TAX MONEY, IS IT BEING USED
TO PURCHASE BUSES THAT ARE MADE
IT CAN BE.
I HAVE A BILL THAT I'VE
INTRODUCED THAT SAYS, IF IT'S
OUR TAX MONEY IT'S GOING TO BE
SPENT ON AMERICAN-MADE
EQUIPMENT.
HAPPENS TO BE THE EXACT SAME
POLICY THAT CHINA'S FOLLOWING
AND IT'S A GOOD POLICY.
YOU'VE TALKED ABOUT SOLAR AND
YOU'VE TALKED ABOUT WIND.
THE ENERGY FUTURE OF TOMORROW.
PEOPLE AND ECONOMISTS THAT LOOK
AT THE ENERGY ISSUE SAY THAT AT
THAT IF WE GO TO -- SAY THAT IF
WE GO TO RENEWABLE ENERGY, CLEAN
ENERGY SOURCES, WE CAN HAVE AN
ENORMOUS NEW ECONOMY IN AMERICA.
BUT IF WE FAIL TO TAKE UP THE
CHALLENGE, THAT ECONOMY WILL BE
OVERSEAS.
HOW CAN WE JUMP START THE
AMERICAN ECONOMY IN THE NEW
ENERGY SECTOR?
WE CAN DO IT BY USING OUR TAX
MONEY TO SUPPORT AMERICAN-MADE
SOLAR SYSTEMS, WHETHER THEY ARE
PANELS LIKE THIS OR THE NEW
SOLAR THERMAL PROGRAMS, THE WIND
SYSTEMS, IT'S OUR TAX MONEY THAT
ARE ALLOWING THESE SYSTEMS TO BE
BUILT, BUT ARE THEY
AMERICAN-MADE?
MY LEGISLATION WOULD SAY, YES,
THEY MUST BE AMERICAN-MADE.
AND I'LL GIVE YOU ONE EXAMPLE OF
WHERE THIS HAS WORKED.
WE ARE NOW, AND THIS IS THE
PRESIDENT'S AGENDA ON HIGH SPEED
RAIL, HAPPENS TO BE MINE, I
INTRODUCED A PIECE OF
LEGISLATION IN CALIFORNIA IN
1989 THAT ESTABLISHED THE HIGH
SPEED RAIL COMMISSION.
WE NEED TO DO THAT.
AND IN THE LEGISLATION, THIS WAS
THE RECOVERY ACT, THE STIMULUS,
IT SAID, MONEY FOR HIGH SPEED
RAIL MUST BE SPENT ON
AMERICAN-MADE EQUIPMENT.
SO COMPANIES ARE ESTABLISHING
MANUFACTURING FACILITIES IN
AMERICA.
WE CAN DO IT WITH WISE PUBLIC
POLICY AND I KNOW THAT YOU'VE
TALKED ABOUT THIS AND YOU'VE
INTRODUCED SOME LEGISLATION OF
YOUR OWN SO IF YOU WOULD SHARE
WITH US YOUR VIEWS ON HOW THIS
WELL, I THINK THAT
IT'S IMPORTANT FOR US TO MAKE
CERTAIN THAT WE CREATE THE
RENEWABLE INDUSTRY HERE IN THIS
COUNTRY.
AND YOU KNOW YOU TALKED ABOUT
THE CHALLENGES OF COMPETING WITH
CHINA.
LET'S LOOK AT THE PROOF IN THE
PUDDING.
LET'S TAKE A LOOK AT WHAT IT
LOOKED LIKE IN 2008.
PRIVATE SECTOR INVESTMENT IN THE
UNITED STATES WAS AT SOME $32
BILLION.
AND CHINA WAS AT ABOUT $23
BILLION.
IN TERMS OF PRIVATE SECTOR
INVESTMENT AND RENEWABLES.
THEN FAST FORWARD TO THE NEXT
YEAR IN 2009.
IT FLIPPED.
CHINA WAS AT $35 BILLION, WE
WERE DOWN TO $19 BILLION.
WE NEED TO MEET SO WE CAN
COMPETE AND WE COMPETE
EFFECTIVELY BY INVESTING.
IT'S THERE, THE CLAIRIAN WAKEUP
CALLS ARE SOUNDING AND WE NEED
TO HEED THEM, WE NEED TO LISTEN
TO THOSE ALARMS THAT ARE GOING
OFF, TELLING US THAT WITHOUT
INVESTING INTO THE FUTURE WE ARE
GOING TO LOSE IN THE RACE.
SO, I WANT TO PUT A HOPEFUL SPIN
ON THIS, I THINK THAT OUR
EFFORTS AS DEMOCRATS OF THIS
HOUSE TO MAKE IT IN AMERICA ARE
RIGHT ON.
IT'S WHAT THE DOCTOR ORDERED,
WE'RE TALKING ABOUT INVESTING IN
A CLEAN ENERGY INNOVATION
ECONOMY, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT
INVESTING IN HIGHER ED, IN R&D.
THAT'S HOW WE WIN IT, WE WIN IT
BY A COMPLETE COMMITMENT TO AN
AGENDA THAT IS WELL DOCUMENTED
THROUGH THE YEARS, IT'S NO
DIFFERENT NOW IF WE WANT TO WIN
THIS GLOBAL RACE ON INNOVATION
WE NEED TO MARCH FORWARD
AGGRESSIVELY WITH THE RESOURCES
AND WITH PASSIONATE RESOLVE AND
WE CAN WIN IT, I BELIEVE IN MY
HEART WE CAN WIN IT, WE JUST
NEED TO COMMIT TO THE AMERICAN
PUBLIC THAT ARE COUNTING ON US
TO PROVIDE THE HOPE AT THEIR
DOORSTEP.
THANK YOU VERY
YOU ARE A TREMENDOUS
REPRESENTATIVE OF NEW YORK STATE
AND AMERICA.
YOUR PASSION FOR THE BUILD IT IN
AMERICA, MAKE IT IN AMERICA
AGENDA IS SO VERY OBVIOUS.
WE THANK YOU FOR THAT.
I WANT TO WRAP THIS SESSION UP
WITH GOING BACK TO WHAT WE DEALT
WITH ON THE FLOOR EARLIER TODAY.
EARLIER TODAY WE DEALT WITH A
CONTINUING RESOLUTION THAT WOULD
GO FOR THREE WEEKS AND IT HAS A
SERIES OF CUTS IN IT.
SOME OF THOSE CUTS ARE
APPROPRIATE.
SOME OF THEM ARE VERY, VERY
DETRIMENTAL.
FOR EXAMPLE, $120 BILLION
REDUCTION IN THE NATIONAL
OCEANIC AND ATMOSPHERIC
ADMINISTRATION.
THAT'S WHY WE GET INFORMATION --
$120 MILLION IN THE NATIONAL
OCEANIC AND ATMOSPHERIC
WHY WOULD WE CUT THAT?
IT WILL BE DETRIMENTAL.
RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT.
WE ALREADY TALKED ABOUT IT.
WE NEED TO MOVE FORWARD WITH A
NEW GREEN REVOLUTION SO THERE
WILL BE PEOPLE OF THIS WORLD AND
FOR OURSELVES.
THAT WAS CUT OUT OF THIS BUDGET.
AND IF YOU'D LOVE TO HAVE GERMS
AND OTHER PROBLEMS WITH YOUR
FOOD, WELL, YOU'LL LOVE WHAT THE
REPUBLICANS DID EARLIER THIS
MORNING OR THIS AFTERNOON WHEN
THEY CUT SOME $24 MILLION OUT OF
THE ANIMAL PLANT INSPECTION
SERVICES.
WHY DO WE WANT TO HAVE
I DON'T KNOW.
BUT APPARENTLY OUR REPUBLICAN
COLLEAGUES DO KNOW.
SO, ANYWAY, THAT'S BEEN DONE.
BUT IF YOU TAKE THE WHOLE THING
IN CONTEXT, I WANT TO POINT OUT
HERE THAT IN DECEMBER WITH THE
CONTINUING RESOLUTION IN
DECEMBER THAT WAS A DEMOCRATIC
SPONSORED RESOLUTION TO CONTINUE
FUNDING THE GOVERNMENT FOR ABOUT
THREE MONTHS WE CUT $41 BILLION
OUT OF THE BUDGET.
$41 BILLION OUT OF THE BUDGET.
NOW, WHEN THE REPUBLICANS CAME
IN THEY DECIDED TO DO A NEW
RESOLUTION A COUPLE OF WEEKS AGO
AND THAT RESOLUTION WOULD
ACTUALLY ELIMINATE SOME 700,000
JOBS IN AMERICA.
IS IT GOING TO LEAD TO A
SOLUTION TO THE DEFICIT?
WE ARE TALKING ABOUT THE
DISCRETIONARY SPENDING WHICH IS
A VERY, VERY SMALL PART OF THE
AMERICAN BUDGET.
AS SUCH, THERE'S NO WAY YOU CAN
REALLY SOLVE THE DEFICIT PROBLEM
IN THAT WAY.
YES, WE NEED TO MAKE REDUCTIONS.
THAT'S WHY WE DID $41 BILLION
BACK IN KEYS.
BUT THOSE ARE VERY TARGETED CUTS
THAT CONTINUED TO ALLOW AMERICA
INVEST IN THOSE THINGS THAT
CREATE JOBS.
WE'RE NOW INTO A NEW SET OF
CONTINUING RESOLUTIONS.
TWO WEEKS LAST WEEK -- OR TWO
WEEKS AGO.
THAT'S NO WAY TO RUN A
GOVERNMENT BUT THAT'S APPARENTLY
WHAT WE HAVE BEEN REDUCED TO.
NOW, I UNDERSTAND THE ARGUMENT
THAT WE DIDN'T GET AN
APPROPRIATION BILL LAST FALL.
WHY WASN'T THERE AN
APPROPRIATION BILL LAST FALL?
THE REASON IS THAT IT WAS
BLOCKED IN THE SENATE BY A
HANDFUL OF FOLKS THAT THREATENED
THAT'S WHY WE DON'T HAVE A
THAT'S WHY WE'VE BEEN THROWN
INTO THIS CONTINUING RESOLUTION
PROBLEM.
WHAT WE NEED TO DO IS TAKE THE
LONG TERM.
IN PRESIDENT OBAMA'S BUDGET, THE
LONG-TERM DEFICIT IS DEALT WITH
OVER A PERIOD OF FIVE YEARS
BRINGING DOWN THE DEFICIT TO A
POINT WHERE IT IS AN ACCEPTABLE
PART OF THE AMERICAN ECONOMY.
IT ALLOWS THE ECONOMY TO GROW
WITH INVESTMENTS THAT ARE MADE
NOW IN INFRASTRUCTURE,
EDUCATION, INVESTMENTS MADE IN
RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT SO THAT
WE CAN GROW THE ECONOMY FOR
TOMORROW.
THAT'S A WISE WAY TO DO IT, BUT
A FEEDING FRENZY OF CUTS THAT
ACTUALLY WOULD ELIMINATE 700,000
JOBS IS NOT THE WAY YOU GROW THE
AMERICAN ECONOMY.
WE HAVE TO BE WISE.
WE HAVE TO HAVE THE LONG TERM,
AND WE HAVE HAD THE LONG TERM
BEFORE.
DURING THE CLINTON
ADMINISTRATION WE ACTUALLY
BALANCED THE BUDGET FOR THE LAST
2 1/2 YEARS IN THAT
ADMINISTRATION AND WE WERE ABLE
TO CREATE -- HAD THOSE POLICIES
GONE FORWARD DURING THE BUSH
ADMINISTRATION, HAD THOSE
POLICIES BEEN KEPT IN PLACE WE
WOULD HAVE ELIMINATED THE
AMERICAN DEBT.
WOULD HAVE BEEN GONE.
BUT THOSE POLICIES WERE
RADICALLY CHANGED BY THE GEORGE
BUSH ADMINISTRATION.
MOST OF THOSE BENEFITS GOING TO
THE HIGH END OF THE ECONOMY, TO
THE VERY, VERY WEALTHY RESULTING
IN A SIGNIFICANT INCREASE IN THE
DEFICIT AND THEN AN INCREASE IN
THE MEDICAID -- MEDICARE PROGRAM
FOR DRUG BENEFITS.
AGAIN, NOT PAID FOR.
INCREASING THE DEFICIT AND TWO
WARS.
NEITHER OF WHICH WERE PAID FOR.
THE AFGHANISTAN WAR AND THE IRAQ
WAR.
NOT PAID FOR BUT RATHER BORROWED
MONEY FROM CHINA AND OTHER
PLACES.
THE RESULT OF THAT, AN ENORMOUS
INCREASE IN THE DEFICIT FOLLOWED
BY THE GREAT RECESSION WHICH WAS
BASICALLY CAUSED BY GREED, WALL
STREET GREED AND THE ELIMINATION
OF REGULATION.
IT WAS AS THOUGH YOU HAD AN NFL
FOOTBALL GAME AND YOU WOULD HAVE
WIPED OUT THE SIDELINES, YOU
TOOK THE REFEREES OFF THE FIELD,
YOU KNOW WHAT WOULD HAPPEN?
CHAOS.
AND THAT'S WHAT WE GOT IN THE
FINANCIAL SECTOR WHEN REGULATION
WAS REMOVED AND WE WOUND UP WITH
THE GREAT RECESSION.
WE NEED TO PUT IN PLACE SOUND
REGULATION, GOOD REGULATION AND
WE NEED TO HAVE THE REFEREES ON
THE FIELD.
WE ALSO NEED TO HAVE A LONG-TERM
VISION ON HOW TO DEAL WITH THE
DEFICIT, AND YOU CANNOT DO IT BY
JUST IN A FEEDING FRENZY WIPING
OUT CRITICAL PROGRAMS THAT
CREATE FUTURE ECONOMIC GROWTH.
UNFORTUNATELY THAT'S WHAT OUR
REPUBLICAN COLLEAGUES HAVE
SUGGESTED WE DO.
WE'RE NOT THERE YET.
THE H.R. 1, THE RESOLUTION THAT
WOULD HAVE LOST 700,000 JOBS WAS
STOPPED IN THE SENATE.
WE'RE NOW INTO A PROCESS OF
SHORT-TERM CONTINUING
RESOLUTIONS TO KEEP THE
GOVERNMENT GOING.
BE WISE AS YOU PUT FORWARD THOSE
RESOLUTIONS, I WOULD ASK MY
COLLEAGUES ON THE REPUBLICAN
SIDE.
IT'S A GREAT CHALLENGE.
IT'S A CHALLENGE THAT WE MUST
AND WE WILL MEET.
WE NEED A BALANCED, LONG-TERM
VISION, BRINGING THE ECONOMY
ALONG, ALLOWING IT TO GROW AND
TO BUILD IN THE FUTURE, WHETHER
THAT BE THE GREEN TECH ECONOMY
OF THE FUTURE, THE MEDICAL
SYSTEMS, THE HEALTH CARE
SYSTEMS.
WE HAVE GREAT OPPORTUNITY BUT
THOSE OPPORTUNITIES WILL NOT BE
MET IF WE ARE NOT WISE AND IF WE
HAVE THE WRONG KIND OF DEFICIT
REDUCTION PLANS WHICH, AGAIN, WE
SAW TODAY ON THIS FLOOR NOT MORE
THAN AN HOUR AGO.
MR. SPEAKER, I YIELD BACK THE
BALANCE OF MY TIME AND I THANK
MY COLLEAGUES.
UNDER
THE SPEAKER'S ANNOUNCED POLICY
OF JANUARY 5, 2011, THE
GENTLELADY FROM OHIO, MRS.
SCHMIDT, IS RECOGNIZED FOR 60
MINUTES AS THE DESIGNEE OF THE
MAJORITY LOWERED.
THANK YOU, MR.
SPEAKER, AND THANK YOU FOR
GIVING ME THIS OPPORTUNITY TO
TALK ABOUT A SUBJECT I REALLY
LOVE AND THAT'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.
YOU KNOW, GROWING UP AS A LITTLE
GIRL, I GREW UP IN AN ERA THAT
WE COULDN'T DO WHAT IS ALLOWED
TODAY.
WE COULDN'T RUN MARATHONS, BEING
AT THE PITS AT THE INDIANAPOLIS
500 AS A PRESS PERSON, WE
WEREN'T ALLOWED TO BE IN
ROTARIES.
WHY, SHOOT, WOMEN WEREN'T
ALLOWED TO VOTE UNTIL 1920.
IN FACT, THE FIRST WOMAN THAT
SERVED IN THIS HOUSE SERVED
THERE TWO FULL YEARS BEFORE
WOMEN HAD A RIGHT TO VOTE.
AND WHEN YOU THINK ABOUT ALL THE
THINGS THAT HAVE 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 A WHAT I THINK
IS THE BEST STATUE, AND IT'S THE
STATUE OF THE PIONEERS OF WOMEN
SUFFRAGE.
IT'S AN EXTRAORDINARY PIECE OF
ARTWORK, ONE THAT DEPICTS THE
LIKELINESSES OF ELIZABETH KATIE
STANTON, LACREESHA MOTT AND
SUSAN B. ANTHONY, ARGUABLY THE
WOMEN WHO PUSHED THE BUTTON FOR
WOMEN TODAY TO HAVE TRUE EQUAL
RIGHTS WITH MEN.
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 KATIE STANTON AND
SUSAN B. ANTHONY, WERE JUST NOT
WRIT WHEN I WAS A LITTLE GIRL.
I'D LIKE TO BEGIN THIS HOUR BY
REFERRING TO A FEW QUOTES FROM A
COUPLE OF THESE FOREMOTHERS 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 33
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.
THOSE CHILDREN.
AND THESE FOREMOTHERS KNEW THAT.
IN A LETTER TO JULIA WARD HOWARD
IN 1873, ELIZABETH KATIE
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,
AND I QUOTE, 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.
SCHOOL LEARNING ABOUT THE ISSUES
OF WOMEN SUFFRAGE AND WOMEN
RIGHTS, I KNEW ELIZABETH KATIE
STANTON WAS PRO-WOMAN,
PRO-FREEDOM PIONEER BUT I DIDN'T
KNOW SHE WAS PRO-LIFE.
SHOOT, 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
ABOUT PRO-LIFE IN THE
PUBLICATION "THE REVOLUTION."
GUILTY?
YES.
NO MATTER WHAT THE MOTIVE, LOVE
OF EASE OR DESIRE TO SAVE FROM
THE UNBORN INNOCENT, THE WOMAN
IS AWFULLY GUILTY WHO COMMITS
THE DEED.
LIFE.
IT WILL BURDEN HER SOUL IN
DEATH.
MR. SPEAKER, THOSE WORDS WERE
WRITTEN OVER 100 YEARS AGO, OVER
150 YEARS AGO, AND YET THEY
COULD EASILY BE WRITTEN TODAY
BECAUSE TODAY, MR. SPEAKER, WE
HEAR FROM WOMEN WHO'VE HAD THE
PAINFUL TRAGEDY OF ABORTION ON
THEIR SOUL AND THEY TALK ABOUT
HOW THEIR HEART REAPS 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.
AND YOU KNOW, 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 20TH CENTURY OR THE
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 PRIMM IN
NATHANIEL HAWTHORNE'S "THE
SCARLETT LETTER" WHERE YOU PUT
HER IN PRISON AND IN THE
WILDERNESS TRYING TO HIDE PEARL,
HER BEAUTIFUL DAUGHTER?
IN THE END ONLY KNOWING THAT
PEARL BECAME THE MOST BEAUTIFUL
LITTLE GIRL?
NOW, WHAT WAS NATHANIEL
HAWTHORNE SAYING ABOUT THE
PREGNANCY?
WHAT WAS HE SAYING ABOUT THE
WAS HE SAYING THAT CHILD HAD THE
RIGHT TO LIFE?
OR WAS NATHANIEL HAWTHORNE
THINKING OTHER THINGS?
WE DON'T KNOW BUT 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 THIS SECRET, AND BECAUSE
SHE CHOSE TO HAVE THE CHILD THAT
SECRET WAS GOING TO BE BORN.
AND SO FORTH, PEOPLE LIKE SUSAN
B. ANTHONY AND ELIZABETH KATIE
STANTON IN THE 1860'S TO SAY,
WAIT A MINUTE, WOMEN SHOULD HAVE
THE RIGHT TO GET MARRIED, TO GET
DIVORCED, TO RAISE CHILDREN AND
OH, BY THE WAY HAVE THEIR OWN
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.
AND 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 ON 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.
YOU KNOW, EACH YEAR, AND I'M SO
PROUD TO REPRESENT THE SECOND
CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT OF OHIO,
EACH YEAR I AM REALLY PROUD OF
THE HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF
PEOPLE THAT COME OUT TO THE LAWN
ON THE CAPITOL IN PROBABLY THE
COLDEST DAY IN JANUARY TO
PETITION CONGRESS TO END
ABORTION.
IT'S CALLED THE RIGHT TO LIFE
MARCH AND IN THE FIVE YEARS THAT
I'VE BEEN IN CONGRESS, STANDING
WITH THEM, WE'VE YET TO HAVE A
DECENT DAY.
I MEAN, 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,
CAR VANS ASKING CONGRESS --
KARAADVANCE, ASKING CONGRESS TO
END SOMETHING -- KA -- CARVANS,
THAT IS SO WRONG.
AND I LOOK OUT ON THE LAWN AND I
SEE THESE BRAVE PEOPLE, SAY TO
MYSELF, WOW, THAT'S WHAT
AMERICA'S 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 CHILD
BIRTH 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.
AND THERE WAS A COUPLE IN
CINCINNATI BY THE NAME OF DR.
JACK AND BARBARA WILKY, HE A
PHYSICIAN, SHE A NURSE, WHO WERE
AT FOREFRONT OF THIS MOVEMENT.
AND THEY GATHERED PEOPLE LIKE MY
PARENTS AND OTHER PEOPLE AROUND
THEIR COFFEE TABLE TO DISCUSS
HOW WE COULD PROTECT OHIO FROM
LEGALIZING ABORTION.
AND THEN 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 ONCE, BY THE
WAY, 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 BLACKBERRIES AND EVEN
FAX MACHINES, WERE TALKING ON
THE PHONE LONG DISTANCE WITH ONE
ANOTHER, BUT IT WAS BARBARA AT
HER KITCHEN TABLE TO JACK THAT
SAID ONE DAY, YOU KNOW, JACK, I
JUST DON'T UNDERSTAND THIS WHOLE
MY GOSH, WE'RE PROTECTED, OUR
NATION PROTECTS US 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 HAVE
SERVED MANY YEARS AND 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 HAND BOOK ON ABORTION,
A BOOK OFTEN DESCRIBED AS THE
UNOFFICIAL BIBLE OF THE PRO-LIFE
MOVEMENT DURING THE 1970'S AND
1980'S.
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 THAT
RECOGNIZES THE IMPORTANCE OF
THIS ISSUE AND IS DEDICATING
THEIR LIFE TO ERADICATING
ABORTION.
AND 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 WILKYS,
MAYBES NO AS FAMOUS, THAT ARE
DOING THE SAME THING, HUNDREDS
AND HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS.
AND THEN I THINK OF SUSAN B.
ANTHONY AND ELIZABETH CADEY
STANTEN AND THE CONTEMPORARY
BARRIERS OF THAT MESSAGE LIKE
THE WILKYS AND I SAY, WOW, THERE
IS A PLAN OUT THERE.
AND THE LAST NOTE ON ABORTION
HASN'T BEEN WRITTEN.
YOU KNOW, ALICE PAUL IS ANOTHER
PRETTY IMPORTANT FEMINIST IN
HISTORY.
SHE WAS ACTUALLY THE ORIGINAL
AUTHOR OF THE EQUAL RIGHTS
AMENDMENT AND, MR. SPEAKER, IF
YOU THINK THAT ABORTION IS A HOT
ISSUE, I CAN REMEMBER BACK IN
THE 1970'S WHEN THE EQUAL RIGHTS
AMENDMENT WAS BEING DEBATED
ACROSS THIS LAND AND THATA HOT
ISSUE THAT WAS.
OH, MY GOSH, SHOULD WE GIVE
WOMEN THE SAME RIGHTS AS MEN
ARNED AND THERE WERE WOMEN THAT
SAID, NO, NO, THEY NEED TO BE
BACK IN THE HOME AND OTHER FOLKS
THAT SAID, NO, WOMEN NEED TO
HAVE EQUAL PAY AS MEN AND ARE WE
GOING TO HAVE -- WHAT ARE WE
GOING TO DO ABOUT PRIVATE
FACILITIES AND -- IT WAS JUST,
YOU KNOW, AN AWFUL DEBATE
BECAUSE IT REALLY DEFLECTED FROM
THE REAL ISSUE THAT ALL OF US
ARE GOD'S CREATURES AND ALL OF
US ARE CREATED EQUAL.
AND SO I REMEMBER ALS I PAUL AS
BEING AT THE FOREFRONT OF THIS
AND REMEMBERING 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.
HERE'S A WOMAN THAT WAS PAINTED
AS THIS EQUAL RIGHTS LEFT WING
FEMINIST AND YET WHEN WE LOOK AT
PRO-LIFE ISSUES WE THINK THEY'RE
A CONSERVATIVE RIGHT WING ISSUE.
BUT IT WAS ALICE PAUL, THE
ORIGINAL AUTHOR OF THE EQUAL
RIGHTS AMENDMENT, WHO STATED,
ABORTION IS THE ULTIMATE
EXPLOITATION OF WOMEN.
ABORTION IS THE ULTIMATE
EXPLOITATION OF WOMEN 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 RIGHT MOVEMENT STOOD ON
THE ISSUE OF ABORTION.
SIMPLY PUT, THEY DETESTED
ABORTION AND WENT AS FAR AS
PUBLICLY AND PRIVATELY AS THEY
COULD IN CONDEMNING IT.
UNFORTUNATELY, MADAM SPEAKER, IT
SEEMS AS THOUGH THEIR RHETORIC
HAS BEEN LARGELY LOST OVER THE
YEARS HID INNOCENT AN YOU WILLS
OF HISTORY -- IN THE ANNUALS OF
HISTORY AND I JUST -- ANNULS OF
HISTORY AND I JUST DON'T KNOW
WHY.
BECAUSE IF WE DON'T UNDERSTAND
THE FULT DEPTH OF HISTORY, WE'LL
NEVER UNDERSTAND MARCH 15, 2011,
AND THE VIEWS THAT WE DATE IN
THIS VERY CHAMBER TODAY.
-- WE DEBATE IN THIS VERY
CHAMBER TODAY.
AND 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 THAT
STOOD BEFORE ME TO GIVE US EQUAL
RIGHTS WERE PRO-CHOICE, BUT
COULD BE FARTHER FROM THE TRUTH.
I THINK MANY PEOPLE 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,
THAT HAVE THE RESPONSIBILITY TO
HAVE THE CHILDREN, TO CONTINUE
TO PROKEREAT FOR THE FUTURE.
THAT IS WHY WE WERE PUT HERE ON
EARTH, TO HAVE CHILDREN.
AND IT IS OUR RESPONSIBILITY TO
MAKE SURE THAT THESE CHILDREN
ARE CARED FOR BOTH INSIDE THE
WOMB AND OUT AND FOR A COURT TO
SAY IT IS OUR RIGHT TO END IT I
THINK IS EXCLUSIVE OF WHAT WE
WERE MADE OF.
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, AND I WOULD LIKE
TO YIELD AS MUCH TIME TO THE
GOOD CONGRESSWOMAN AS SHE WOULD
LIKE.
THANK YOU SO MUCH TO MY
ESTEEMED COLLEAGUE FROM OHIO AND
YOUR COMMENTS ARE SO PERTINENT
TO TODAY'S FIGHT.
AND YOU KNOW, WE WOMEN ARE
CONSERVATIVE WOMEN AND THOSE WHO
HAVE COME BEFORE US, AS YOU
POINTED OUT SO ELOQUENTLY, WE
DON'T KNOW WHAT THEY BELIEVE BUT
WE'RE STARTING TO UNVEIL ALL OF
THAT.
MR. SPEAKER, I RISE TODAY IN
SUPPORT OF WOMEN, TO HONOR THE
RICH CONTRIBUTIONS WOMEN HAVE
MADE IN HISTORY, IN THE HISTORY
OF THIS WORLD.
AND 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 AND FIGHT ON
BEHALF OF WOMEN AND IN THIS
MONTH DEDICATED TO WOMEN I ASK
THEM TO CHOOSE LIFE FOR
THEMSELVES AND FOR THEIR CHILD.
THE ORIGINAL FEMINISTS WERE
INDEED AGAINST ABORTION.
THESE WOMEN BELIEVED THAT THERE
WAS POWER IN MOTHERHOOD AND
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 WOMEN
WHO HAVE HAD AN ABORTION ARE 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 WERE 65% MORE
LIKELY THAN DELIVERING WOMEN TO
BE AT RISK FOR LONG-TERM
CLINICAL DEPRESSION.
65% OF U.S. WOMEN WHO HAD
ABORTIONS EXPERIENCED MULTIPLE
SYMPTOMS OF POST TRAUMATIC
STRESS DISORDER WHICH THEY
ATTRIBUTED TO THEIR ABORTION.
IN ANOTHER STUDY 60% SAID THEY
FELT THAT PART OF THEM DIED AND
I QUOTE, PART OF THEM DIED.
COMPARED TO WOMEN WHO DELIVER,
WOMEN WHO ABORT ARE MORE THAN
SUBSEQUENTLY HOSPITALIZED FOR
PSYCHIATRIC ILLNESS WITHIN SIX
MONTHS AND SUBSEQUENTLY REQUIRED
SIGNIFICANTLY MORE TREATMENTS
FOR THE PSYCH RATIC TREATMENT
THROUGHOUT PATIENT CARE.
THERE ARE ALSO NUMEROUS HEALTH
RISKS THAT 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
SEVEN TO 15 FOLD INCREASE IN
PLACENTA PREVIA IN SUBSEQUENT
PREGNANCIES, A LIFE-THREATENING
CONDITION FOR MOTHER AND BABY
THAT INCREASES THE RISK OF BIRTH
DEFECT, STILL BIRTH AND
EXCESSIVE BLEEDING LEADING TO
POSSIBLE LOSS OF LIFE OF THE
WOMAN.
HONESTLY, I COULD GO ON AND ON
ABOUT THE AFTER AFFECTS OF AN
ABORTION.
BUT I THINK THAT THE PICTURE HAS
BEEN MADE QUITE CLEAR.
THE PICTURE HAS BEEN MADE AS
SUSAN B. ANTHONY SAID, WHO
BELIEVED IT IS NOT SUFFICIENT
NEARLY 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.
CHALLENGE THE STATUS QUO FOR THE
SAKE OF WOMEN AND THEIR
CHILDREN.
WOMEN DESERVE BETTER THAN
ABORTION.
THANK YOU AND I WILL YIELD BACK
MY TIME.
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 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
YOU KNOW, WHEN WE'RE BORN OUR
PARENTS DON'T KNOW WHAT WE'RE
GOING TO BECOME.
THEY JUST HOPE THAT WE'RE HAPPY
AND THEY HOPE THAT WE'RE
HEALTHY.
I MEAN, YOU LOOK AT OUR
PRESIDENT.
YOU THINK WHEN HE WAS BORN HIS
MOM THOUGHT HE WAS GOING TO BE
THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED
STATES?
I SERIOUSLY DOUBT IT.
PRESIDENTS.
HE'S JUST AN ORDINARY PERSON
BORN FROM AN ORDINARY MOM, BUT
HE, YOU KNEE, 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'D BE
SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE.
THESE WERE ORDINARY PEOPLE.
THEY OWNED A BAR.
THEY HAD 12 KIDS.
CHANCES ARE 12 KIDS WOULD DO 12
DIFFERENT THINGS BUT I DIDN'T
THINK THEY WOULD 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'S BECOME RESIDES OVER THIS
WONDERFUL BODY.
AND I POINT THAT OUT BECAUSE
NONE OF US KNOW 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
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
WE OWE SO MUCH, 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 GOD 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.
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 IN EACH YEAR
OTHER MEMBERS AND I OF THE
PRO-LIFE CAUCUS, PRO-LIFE
WOMEN'S CAUCUS MAKE A POINT OF
COMING TO THE HOUSE FLOOR TO
WOMEN AND TALK ABOUT THE DEBT
CRIMENTAL IMPACT OF ABORTION --
DETRIMENTAL IMPACT OF ABORTION
ON WOMEN.
LAST YEAR IT WAS BROUGHT TO MY
ATTENTION THAT THE UNIVERSITY OF
NORTH CAROLINA SYSTEM WHICH IS
-- I ATTENDED THREE OF THE
UNIVERSITIES IN THE SYSTEM --
REQUIRED A STUDENT TO --
STUDENTS TO PURCHASE HEALTH CARE
THROUGH THE UNIVERSITY IF THEY
DID NOT HAVE ACCEPTABLE COVERAGE
THROUGH THEIR PARENT OR ON THEIR
THESE PLANS AUTOMATICALLY
ENROLLS STUDENTS IN ABORTION
THEIR FEELINGS REGARDING
ABORTION.
PRO-LIFE GROUPS IN NORTH
CAROLINA AS WELL AS THE STUDENTS
FOR LIFE OF AMERICA WROTE TO THE
U.N.C. SYSTEM AS WELL AS NORTH
CAROLINA GOVERNOR BETH PURDUE
THAT THEY NOT FORCE STUDENTS TO
PURCHASE ABORTION COVERAGE.
THEY RESPONDED BY ALLOWING
STUDENTS TO OPT OUT OF ABORTION
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 U.N.C.
SYSTEM, ALONG WITH AT LEAST 37
OTHER UNIVERSITY SYSTEMS ACROSS
THE COUNTRY, REQUIRE THEIR
STUDENTS TO PURCHASE HEALTH CARE
COVERAGE THAT INCLUDES ABORTION.
THESE UNIVERSITIES ARE INCLUDING
THE COST OF THIS HEALTH CARE
PLAN AND 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 CHIRP
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 U.N.C. SITUATION AND
DETERMINE IF IN FACT TAXPAYER
MONEY WAS BEING 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 U.N.C. 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 AM ESPECIALLY
OPPOSED TO THE AMERICAN TAXPAYER
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 TWO YEARS WILL
REQUIRE EACH, 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.
AND CONGRESSWOMAN SCHMIDT, I
HAVE HERE A CHART THAT I'D LIKE
TO MAKE SURE PEOPLE WATCHING CAN
SEE.
THIS IS FROM A POLL IN DECEMBER,
IT'S A LITTLE HARD TO READ IT
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% OF THE WOMEN POLLED
SAID THEY SUPPORT IT.
70% OPPOSE AND 5% DIDN'T KNOW OR
DIDN'T CARE.
THAT IS AN ASTOUNDING NUMBER TO
HAVE.
BECAUSE WE ARE
ALWAYS CAST AS THE ONES THAT
REALLY WANT ABORTION.
IT.
YOU'RE TELLING ME THAT 70% OF
THE WOMEN IN THAT DECEMBER,
2009, STUDY ADAMANTLY OPPOSED
FEDERAL FUNDING OF ABORTION
UNDER THE HEALTH CARE BILL?
THAT IS CORRECT.
I'M SORRY I COULDN'T BE ON THE
FLOOR FOR YOUR PRESENTATION.
I WAS IN THE RULES COMMITTEE AND
COULD NOT LEAVE TO COME DOWN.
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, BUT I DO LIKE
TO 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 THEY ARE
NOT EXPLOITED BY ABORTION.
AND THERE'S ANOTHER QUOTE FROM
ELIZABETH CADY STANTON.
I DON'T KNOW IF YOU HAD USED IT.
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.
THOSE IN A LETTER TO JULIA WARD
HOWARD IN OCTOBER OF 1873 AND
RECORDED IN HER DIARY.
I THINK IT'S SO IMPORTANT THAT
WOMEN BE HERE DURING WOMEN'S
HISTORY MONTH TO SPEAK IN FAVOR
AGAIN OF RIGHTS FOR WOMEN BUT
THAT WE POINT OUT THAT WE ARE
OPPOSED TO ABORTION WHICH IS THE
ULTIMATE EXPLOITATION OF WOMEN.
AND I YIELD BACK.
MUCH.
I'M REGLAD YOU TOOK THE TIME TO
POINT OUT THAT SURVEY BECAUSE I
BELIEVE THAT THE NATION HAS
SINCE 1973.
AND MAYBE IT'S BECOMES WITH
TECHNOLOGY AND WITH THE FACT
THAT SONOGRAMS CAN NOW SHOW US
THE COLOR OF THE BABY'S EYES AND
WHAT IT'S BEING TO LOOK LIKE
INSIDE THE MOM'S WOMB AS EARLY
AS THREE 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 GOT TO SAY TO YOURSELF,
HOW -- 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.
YOU KNOW, A DECADE AGO BACK IN
2001 THERE WAS A POLL TAKEN
WHEREIN 40% OF THE RESPONDENTS
IDENTIFIED THEMSELVES AS BEING
PRO-LIFE WHILE 49% IDENTIFIED
THEM AS BEING PRO-CHOICE.
WELL, IN 2005 ANOTHER POLL WAS
TAKEN.
THERE WAS LITTLE MOVEMENT TOWARD
THE PRO-LIFE MOVEMENT.
42% SAID THEY WERE PRO-LIFE
WHILE 52% SAID THEY WERE
PRO-CHOICE.
BUT FOR SOME REASON IN 2006 THE
NUMBER GREW 45% TO 47%.
IN 2008 THE NUMBERS WERE 46% TO
48%.
MAYBE IT'S BECAUSE OF THE
PREVALENCE OF ALL THESE
SONOGRAMS.
AND TODAY WHEN YOUR DAUGHTER OR
YOUR SON GOES IN WITH HIS WIFE
OR -- THE SONOGRAM, THE
GRANDPARENTS AND GREAT
GRANDPARENTS GO TOO.
DIDN'T HAPPEN A DECADE AGO.
OH, MY GOSH IT'S A FAMILY THING.
WE CAN'T WAIT.
WE'RE TOLD TO COVER YOUR EYES.
BELIEVE ME, I COULDN'T TELL
ANYWAY.
I HAD TO CLOSE MY EYES TWICE.
THE FAMILIES INVOLVED IN THIS
WHOLE SONOGRAM WITH THE BIRTH OF
THE BABY THAT ALL OF OUR EYES
LIGHT UP AND
SAY, WOW, THAT REALLY IS A LIFE
IN THREE MONTHS' TIME IT'S A
REAL BABY.
IN MAY, 2009, 51% OF THOSE
POLLED IDENTIFIED THEMSELVES AS
BEING PRO-LIFE WHERE ONLY 42%
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 MONTHS AGO,
AND IT WAS CONSISTENT WITH THE
2009 POLL.
HALF THE RESPONDENTS -- PARDON
ME -- 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 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 AN
EQUAL OPPORTUNITY IF NOT TO HAVE
A BETTER OPPORTUNITY AS US, BUT
THAT'S A DEBATE FOR ANOTHER DAY
ON THE DEBT AND DEFICIT.
YOU KNOW, 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.
SEE, AFTER ROE V. WADE PEOPLE AT
MY KITCHEN TABLE AND IN MY
FAMILY WERE TALKING ABOUT MONEY,
FEDERAL MONEY BEING USED FOR
ABORTION AND, I MEAN, MY MOM AND
DAD WERE MAD, SHOOT, EVEN I WAS
MAD.
AND HENRY HYDE WAS MAD TOO AND
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 HE AND I ON
THE LAST DAY THAT HE SERVED IN
THIS HOUSE.
OF ALL THE PEOPLE THAT I'VE EVER
MET HE'S TRULY MY HERO.
ANYWAY, EVERY YEAR WE DEBATE
THIS AND 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.
YOU KNOW, EVEN TODAY IN THIS
BODY, AS WE VOTED ON THE C.R.,
THE ISSUE OF ABORTION WAS THERE.
DO WE PUT IT IN THE C.R.?
AND STOP THE FEDERAL FUNDING OF
ABORTION OR NOT?
YOU KNOW, WE HAVE A LOT OF
PRO-LIFE LEADERS IN THE HOUSE.
AND THEY'VE LOOKED AT THE BUDGET
VERY, VERY SHREWDLY AND THEY'VE
TERMED 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 AND C.R.'S THAT
WOULD STOP FEDERAL FUNDING OF
ABORTION.
IN 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'RE 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.
SO WE KNOW THAT WHILE, YOU YEAH,
THE ACTUAL PROCEDURE -- WHILE,
YEAH, THE ACTUAL PROCEDURE ISN'T
USING FEDERAL MONEY, WE KNOW
THAT THE BUILDING IS AND SO IT'S
FUNGIBLE AND IT'S SLIPPING
THROUGH.
BUT A FEW WEEKS AGO WHEN WE HAD
THE C.R., HIS AMENDMENT RECEIVED
I THINK 239 VOTES OUT OF THIS
BODY THAT SAID NO, PLANNED
PARENT SHOOD SHOULDN'T RECEIVE
THE MONEY -- PARENTHOOD
SHOULDN'T RECEIVE THE MONEY.
AND, MR. SPEAKER, MAYBE IT'S A
BIGGER DEBATE THAN JUST THE
ABORTION ISSUE BECAUSE, YOU
KNOW, WE SAW LAST FALL WAS A
STING OPERATION THAT SHOWED 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 TRAFFICING --
TRAFFICKING AND SAYING THEY
WANTED 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 SEEM TO THINK THERE WAS A
PROBLEM WITH THAT CONVERSATION.
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 THAT THIS
CONVERSATION OCCURRED.
I KNOW IN MY OWN HOMETOWN IN
CINCINNATI, OHIO, WHERE IN TWO
CASES THERE WERE YOUNG GIRLS
THAT WENT TO THE PLANNED
PARENTHOOD CLINIC AND BOTH TOLD
THE ABORTION PROVIDER THEY WERE
UNDER AGE AND THEY WERE
PREGNANT.
ONE BY HER FATHER, ONE BY A
COACH.
THE FATHER'S NOW IN JAIL AND THE
SITUATION WITH THE PARENTS,
WELL, 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 LATE WHEN
ARE SHE WENT TO THE DOCTOR ON
ANOTHER ISSUE THAT THE DOCTOR
SAID, WHEN DID YOUR DAUGHTER
HAVE AN ABORTION THAT WHEN 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 WHO ARE COMING
THROUGH THEIR DOORS.
BECAUSE A 15-YEAR-OLD THAT'S
PREGNANT, WELL, I THINK THAT'S
CALLED STATUTORY *** 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 EYES 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 DISCUSS 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.
YOU KNOW, ONE OF THE THINGS THAT
I WANT TO SAY BEFORE I WRAP UP
AND WE TALK 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.
NOW, CNN IS HARDLY A RIGHT WING
ORGANIZATION.
BUT THE CNN POLL SHOWED THAT 60%
OF AMERICANS OPPOSE PUBLIC
MONEYS GOING TO FUND ABORTION.
THAT'S WELL OVER A MAJORITY.
THE OTHER POLL SHOWED 72% OPPOSE
IT.
WOW.
THAT'S A LOT OF AMERICANS.
AND I BELIEVE THAT WE NEED TO DO
THE RIGHT THING AND END THE
PUBLIC FUNDING OF ABORTION.
WHETHER NOTICE 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 AND SO I'M PROUD
TO STAND HERE TODAY LIKE MY
SISTERS BEFORE ME, LIKE
ELIZABETH CADY STANTON, LIKE
SUSAN B. ANTHONY, AND, YES,
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.
THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER, AND I
YIELD BACK.
UNDER
THE SPEAKER'S ANNOUNCED POLICY
OF JANUARY 5, 2011, THE CHAIR
RECOGNIZES THE GENTLEMAN FROM
IOWA, MR. KING, FOR 30 MINUTES.