Right to Contraception Act

Madam Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 1232 and ask for its immediate consideration.

Madam Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Reschenthaler), 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

Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members be given 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks.

Madam Speaker, on Monday the Committee on Rules met and reported a rule, House Resolution 1232, for three measures.

First, it provides for consideration of H.R. 8294 under a structured rule. The rule provides 1 hour of general debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on Appropriations, makes in order 190 amendments, provides en bloc authority, allows the chair the ability to offer up to five pro

forma amendments, and provides one motion to recommit.

Second, the rule provides for consideration of H.R. 8373 under a closed rule. The rule provides 1 hour of general debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on Energy and Commerce, self-executes a manager's amendment, and provides one motion to recommit.

Third, the rule provides for consideration of H.R. 8404 under a closed rule. The rule provides 1 hour of general debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on the Judiciary and provides for one motion to recommit.

Finally, the rule provides the majority leader or his designee the ability to en bloc requested votes on suspension bills this week and deems passage of House Resolution 1230.

Madam Speaker, today's rule provides for consideration of three important bills--one that is part of the regular process of funding the government for the next year, and two that are emergency measures to respond to the ongoing assault by an extremist rightwing minority against Americans' individual rights and liberties.

The first bill is a package of bills called the minibus. This package of six annual appropriations bills provides funding for the Federal Government for the next fiscal year for a wide array of important government programs: Food and farming, transportation, housing, conservation and environmental protection, veterans programs, community development, and general operations of the Federal Government.

Thanks to the strong leadership of House Democrats on the Committee on Appropriations, today's bill makes major investments to meet the needs of Americans at this difficult point in time. When we talk about these huge budget bills each year, it can be overwhelming, so let's look at some concrete examples of how these bills are going to benefit our country.

This budget bill will increase funding for veterans' healthcare by $20 billion, helping the VA to meet the health needs of our Nation's veterans. In addition to funding traditional health services for veterans, this bill will expand mental healthcare, including suicide prevention, improve women's healthcare, homeless assistance programs, substance use disorder programs, and invest in medical research to address veterans' unique health needs.

With the lack of affordable housing being one of the major issues impacting our communities across this country, this bill will increase funding for housing by $9 billion and provide 140,000 more families and seniors with stable, affordable housing. It will get lead and radon out of public housing units and incentivize the construction of thousands of new units of affordable housing.

This bill will provide a $7 billion boost for the Department of the Interior and the Environmental Protection Agency, which is funding for our national parks, our land and water conservation programs, and for enhanced enforcement of our environmental protection laws so that Americans of all ages and backgrounds--and our children--can have clean air to breathe and water to drink, and enjoy the natural wonders that our amazing country has to offer.

This bill provides a $2 billion increase for programs that support public health, rural development, and fight hunger. Vital funding for SNAP and WIC will increase access to healthy foods for the 40 million Americans who rely upon our Nation's antihunger programs, improving their health and lowering the cost of living for those in need.

Funding for the FDA under this title will improve the safety and availability of baby formula. It will strengthen oversight of our food and drug safety laws and support supply chains for critical drugs and medical devices.

Funding for rural development will provide grants and low-cost financing to expand broadband and fix water infrastructure in rural communities, promoting community and economic development.

The bill also provides an additional $4 billion in funding for government operations so that our Federal agencies can do the work that we all rely upon. Among other things, this boost will help the IRS improve its processing times and provide more taxpayers with help when filing. A stronger IRS will also be able to better enforce our tax laws to make sure that billionaires and large corporations pay their fair share.

This funding will more than triple the Election Security Grants program which provides funding to the States to secure our Federal elections by purchasing new technology and keeping ahead of bad actors who try to attack our elections. This funding has helped to make the U.S. elections so secure that anyone who says the 2020 election was stolen is either a liar or a fool.

This funding will encourage economic development by funding the Small Business Administration's lending programs and the Treasury Department's Community Development Financial Institutions. Combined, these programs are often the main source of financing for minority and women-owned small businesses, many of which are increasingly leading the way in creating jobs and economic opportunities.

The minibus also makes major investments in our servicemembers by increasing funding for housing and childcare on military installations.

This funding will provide more childcare services for the 1.2 million children of Active-Duty servicemembers, as well as the ability to construct and remediate thousands of substandard units of military family housing.

Finally, this year's appropriations bills build on last year's successes with community project funding, which allows Members of Congress to better represent their districts and exercise Congress' responsibility to direct Federal spending, rather than delegating it.

Community project funding allows Members to support smart, high- impact investments in their districts in a way that is transparent and ethically sound. I thank the Appropriations Committee for their work to responsibly reinstate this opportunity.

Because of these rule changes, I have been able to bring millions of dollars back to my district for a variety of locally backed efforts ranging from mental health programs to community centers to workforce development. This year, I am proud to have secured funding for 15 projects totaling $20 million for Pennsylvania's Fifth Congressional District.

Madam Speaker, obviously, I could keep going on about the amazing things that this bill will do, but all together the minibus is a strong investment in our country that will help working families, small businesses, and local communities, as well as helping to fight inflation, create jobs, and support economic development.

Funding the government is Congress' primary responsibility. It is right there in the beginning lines of Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution, that Congress has the power to provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States.

With the consideration of these six appropriations bills this week, and the other six later this month, House Democrats are meeting their responsibility to the American people by passing a budget on time.

I say House Democrats because I am concerned that my Republican colleagues may follow their recent practice of refusing to work in a bipartisan manner to fund the government or to solve problems for the American people, and then voting against this bill when it comes to the floor.

Of course, over in the 50-50 Senate, where 10 Republican votes are needed to pass a budget bill, the Senators have not even begun consideration of any appropriations packages. Just like last year, House Democrats are passing funding bills on time while Republicans in the Senate are holding up the process for months by slow-walking negotiations and refusing to compromise.

Last year, this obstructive behavior by Senate Republicans meant that Congress didn't pass its 2022 budget until we were halfway through that year. That meant by the time the Federal Government received its 2022 funding, it only had 6 months left to use it. That is irresponsible. That is not good business, and it is not sound government.

At every turn, the filibuster and stonewalling by Republican Senators squash every single legislative initiative that comes their way.

Madam Speaker, this rule also brings two other critically important bills to the floor. Today's rule also provides for consideration of the Right to Contraception Act, a bill that would codify fundamental privacy rights relating to purchasing, using, and providing contraception; and the Respect for Marriage Act, which would codify the right to same-sex marriage in Federal law.

These are two basic freedoms that the overwhelming majority of Americans support, and that most Americans are surprised to learn are now under threat from an extremist rightwing minority in our Supreme Court and many Republican State legislatures across the country.

In the wake of the Dobbs decision, we immediately saw a number of States implement or try to pass abortion bans. The practical and tragic consequences of those decisions are growing every day with women and girls unable to get the healthcare they need, whether it is a 10-year- old rape victim in Ohio being denied medical care in her home State or a women with an ectopic pregnancy in Missouri whose healthcare providers are withholding what is standard medical care because they fear prosecution under these laws.

These tragic stories will continue, and they will get worse. This is the world we live in in the aftermath of the extremist Dobbs decision. But the impact of the Dobbs decision does not end with abortion care. The extremist rightwing majority on the Supreme Court has put our country down a perilous path. They have shown us the harsh reality of judicial review--no objectivity, no textualism or originalism, this is just politics by other means.

The majority in Dobbs and others who hold this minority view are pushing a rightwing agenda that can be summed up as this: for all their talk about States' rights and individual freedoms, the rightwing majority is going to uphold the rights they support and take away the rights they oppose.

The two bills we consider today respond to the immediate threat articulated by Justice Thomas in his concurrence in the Dobbs decision--that he wants to overturn decisions that protect rights to contraception, same-sex marriage, et cetera. It is not just Justice Thomas, Justice Alito has joined him in similar concurrences; and, of course, he wrote the majority decision in Dobbs.

Rightwing legislators and Members of Congress are saying exactly what they want to do and introducing bills to do exactly this--to undermine the right to contraception and to undermine the right to same-sex marriage. These are not hypotheticals but very real threats.

In response to this insanity, the House must vote this week on the Right to Contraception Act and the Respect for Marriage Act. The Right to Contraception Act would prohibit States from banning or restricting possession, sale, purchase, transportation, use, prescription of contraception, including birth control, IUDs, condoms, and other products that aid in family planning.

The Respect for Marriage Act will codify the current law of the land and protect the thousands of same-sex marriages and families across this country, who are now justifiably afraid that their families are under attack. I can't tell you how many constituents, colleagues, friends, and their children that I am hearing from in the wake of this decision and in the wake of Justice Thomas' explicit threat.

Both of these bills will protect rights enjoyed by Americans that are now being threatened by the Supreme Court minority view and their co- conspirators in the Republican Party. I am glad we are bringing these bills up for a vote so we can see who is going to vote for them and who is going to vote against them.

I am confident that House Democrats will provide the votes necessary to pass the bills. It is time for our colleagues across the aisle to stand up and be counted. Will they vote to protect these fundamental freedoms, or will they vote to let States take those freedoms away?

Today we will find out. Then we will see what our colleagues in the Senate will do. We are going to put these bills up for a vote, and the public can see, on the record, how their Representatives and Senators respond. At least everyone will know where their elected officials stand.

Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, these appropriations bills are not going to make inflation worse. It is a bad-faith argument. Inflation is bad. It is

eating away at family paychecks not just here in America but all across the globe.

My colleague cited the recent inflation figures here in the U.S.-- they are worse overseas. The economic shocks in supply chain disruptions caused by the pandemic and then exacerbated by Russia's invasion of Ukraine are hitting hard--yes, here at home and all across the world. There are things that we are doing to bring those prices down, and economic indicators show that prices are starting to come down. It doesn't deny the real pain that we are all feeling right now.

Second, which spending would he have eliminated? Would it have been the funding to develop vaccines and therapeutics? Maybe the funding to keep people in their homes during the pandemic? Would it be the funding that supported small businesses over the last several years, or maybe it is just the paycheck protection funding?

I think it is a hollow argument, and I think it is also worth noting that we are not seeing any alternative solutions.

Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from North Carolina (Ms. Ross), a distinguished member of the Rules Committee.

Madam Speaker, I yield an additional 1 minute to the gentlewoman from North Carolina.

Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Madam Speaker, I am so happy that my colleagues are rising to condemn political violence, but I find it disingenuous and maybe even a little one-sided when they only condemn political violence that they disagree with.

This previous question condemns violence, as my colleague just said, by the radical left but not the radical right. They are conveniently ignoring decades of violence, harassment, and even murder of abortion care providers and harassment of those seeking such care on a daily and weekly basis.

Why are they surprised by this political violence on this topic when this is a model that the anti-abortion forces have utilized for decades?

Also, on a more practical note, I am stunned that my colleague is seeking to reduce funding for the IRS. Any responsible Member of Congress who prioritizes constituent services knows that we receive hundreds and hundreds of calls every year, particularly in recent years, from people who are struggling to get a response from the IRS, who are struggling to get their much-needed tax refund, and who are struggling to get payments or straighten out difficulties. Why is that? It is because the IRS has been underfunded for decades.

The IRS is facing a crisis with retirements and with the inability to attract talent given the tight labor market. We need to fund the IRS again so that billionaires and large corporations pay their fair share.

Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Garcia).

Madam Speaker, I yield the gentlewoman an additional 30 seconds.

Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson Lee).

Madam Speaker, I know we are running short on time, but I yield an additional 30 seconds to the gentlewoman.

Madam Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.

Today's rule is a testament to the hard work and leadership of the Appropriations Committee led by Chairwoman DeLauro. I applaud the efforts of my colleagues on the Appropriations Committee and their staff to prepare legislation that meets the needs of everyday Americans; to grow our economy from the bottom up and the middle out, rather than relying, once again, on the failed trickle-down economics of the last 50 years.

Given the draconian consequences of failing to pass a budget, I encourage my colleagues in the House and Senate to move quickly in negotiating a final budget bill so we can fund the government on time. It is the responsible thing to do.

We cannot afford to govern from CR to CR, or to pass a budget bill halfway through the fiscal year.

And I am also incredibly grateful to my colleagues on the Energy and Commerce Committee and the Judiciary Committee for stepping up to present legislation to protect fundamental American freedoms that have been placed at risk by the rightwing majority of the Supreme Court in overturning Roe v. Wade.

I urge all of my colleagues to protect the right to contraception with the act of that name, and to repeal the statutory ban on same-sex marriage by approving the Respect for Marriage Act in its floor consideration.

At a time when Americans' rights are under attack by a well-funded, extremist minority which has seized control of the Supreme Court and some State legislatures, it is more important than ever for elected Members of Congress to use their legislative powers to protect and expand Americans' personal and fundamental freedoms.

So, Madam Speaker, I urge all of my colleagues to vote for the rule and the underlying legislation.

The material previously referred to by Mr. Reschenthaler is as follows:

Amendment to House Resolution 1232

At the end of the resolution, add the following:

Sec. 12. Immediately upon adoption of this resolution, the

House shall proceed to the consideration in the House of the

resolution (H. Res. 1233) expressing the sense of the House

of Representatives condemning the recent attacks on prolife

facilities, groups, and churches. The resolution shall be

considered as read. The previous question shall be considered

as ordered on the resolution and preamble to adoption without

intervening motion or demand for division of the question

except one hour of debate equally divided and controlled by

the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on the

Judiciary. Clause 1(c) of rule XIX shall not apply to the

consideration of House Resolution 1233.

Madam Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time, and I move the previous question on the resolution.

Madam Speaker, I thank the distinguished gentlewoman from my home State of Pennsylvania for yielding me the customary 30 minutes, and I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Madam Speaker, the rule before us today makes in order three pieces of legislation, including H.R. 8294, a bill to fund 6 of the 12 appropriations bills.

As a member of the Appropriations Committee, I want to just say I am extremely grateful to Ranking Member Granger and Chairwoman DeLauro for all the hard work that they put in, and also the committee staff. I know a lot of effort went into this legislation.

Unfortunately, the product before us was flawed from the very start. House Democrats drastically underfunded our national defense while providing major increases to the same social programs that have already received trillions of dollars in funding under the Biden administration.

It is clear that the Democrats' out-of-control spending has been the key driver to inflation. Don't take my word for it. Larry Summers, former economic adviser to President Biden, went so far as to call the American Rescue Plan ``the least responsible macroeconomic policy we've had in the last 40 years.'' Again, that was Larry Summers, Democrat adviser to the President.

You know what? He was right. Last month, inflation hit 9.1 percent. That is the highest inflation rate in my lifetime. It is the highest inflation rate since 1981.

President Biden's inflation crisis has cost the American worker over $3,000 in annual income, and the skyrocketing cost of goods and services will cost the average American family over $6,000. That is what is so nefarious about inflation, it hits the working class and those on a fixed income the hardest.

Yet, the Big Government Democrats with their reckless spending policies have these six bills before us today included in the package. The six bills included in today's package received a total increase of 11 percent over the previous fiscal year with some accounts, like the Federal Trade Commission and the Office of Personnel Management, receiving double-digit and triple-digit percentage increases, which will, of course, fuel additional inflation.

Keep in mind, the Defense appropriations bill approved by the Appropriations Committee had just a 4.4 percent increase. Additionally, instead of addressing record-high gas prices, Democrats are pushing this partisan Green New Deal initiative that will only worsen Biden's energy crisis.

Under this measure, offshore oil and gas activities are restricted and oil and gas inspection fees are increased. This is just going to drive up the cost of energy for working families.

H.R. 8294 also includes numerous far-left, radical, liberal policies like allowing taxpayer dollars to fund abortions, and keeping our critical and strategic minerals in the ground. Alarmingly, it includes provisions that threaten our national security, including allowing for the closure of Guantanamo Bay, which houses some of the world's most dangerous terrorists. It also fails to modernize the nuclear weapons stockpile and complex, and provides incentives for illegal immigration.

Further, the rule before us today provides for consideration of H.R. 8373, which goes far beyond supporting access to contraception. Let me just be clear about this point. Not a single State in the Union, not a single general assembly in any State is debating considering making contraception illegal.

This poorly drafted bill has extreme provisions that could harm the health of women, send taxpayer dollars to Planned Parenthood and other abortion providers, and force people to violate their religious and sincerely held beliefs.

Madam Speaker, I, therefore, urge my colleagues to oppose this rule, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Madam Speaker, my friend and colleague from Pennsylvania asked me which programs I would cut funding from as if this were some kind of checkmate in floor debate. It is not because the answer is very obvious. I have an extensive list of where I would cut.

Just for starters, let's look at some of the increases in the appropriations package and, of course, where I would cut.

We have a 20 percent increase for the Environmental Protection Agency. That could be cut.

We have a $1 billion increase for the Internal Revenue Service. That could be cut right there.

There is a 30 percent increase for the Federal Trade Commission. That could be cut. Don't take my word for it. Not one but two of the Commissioners of the FTC said that they don't even need this increase. There is money that you could cut right there, Madam Speaker.

There is a 12 percent increase to maintain and improve Federal buildings. I don't know if anybody across the aisle has been paying attention, but most of the people in these Federal buildings have been working remotely from home for the last 2 years. Yet, we need to increase funding to Federal buildings that are literally sitting empty as people work from home?

Then, we have a lot of bad ideas regarding climate. $100 million is provided for the President's proposal to use the Defense Production Act authorities to accelerate domestic manufacturing of select clean energy technologies. That can be cut.

While we are talking about the shift to clean energy technologies, let's just be honest about who benefits from this. It is China because they are the ones who are selling the rare earth elements that are going into things like solar panels. By the way, they are bringing more nuclear power plants online and more coal-fired plants online while we hamstring our economy and our energy sector with these absurd climate change proposals.

I have more, actually, but for the sake of time and brevity, I will save them for later if the issue comes up.

Additionally, this notion that inflation is a worldwide issue, I am not sure when they stopped teaching economics in school, but we are the world's largest GDP. If we have inflation, then the world has inflation because we literally export it. That is just how economics works.

To blame Ukraine, Ukraine might play a part in this, but who is to blame for Ukraine? It is President Biden. It was the weakness and vacillation--his surrender in Afghanistan--that emboldened Putin. It was the vacillation. It was the ``minor incursion'' comment that he had that gave Vladimir Putin the green light to invade. Had he just been more resolute in our national security, then we could have deterred this invasion. So, he owns Ukraine, as well.

The gentlewoman from North Carolina brought up Dobbs. I want to quote the actual decision because I think a lot of the points in Dobbs were taken out of context. The Court made it clear in that decision that the decision on abortion should ``not be misunderstood or mischaracterized . . . to cast doubt on precedents that do not concern abortion.''

The Court went out of its way to state that they are not concerned about contraception, despite the gentlewoman from North Carolina saying otherwise.

But let's go back to Dobbs. Since the point of the leak of the Dobbs draft Supreme Court decision, there have been 70 violent attacks and threats on churches, pregnancy centers, and pro-life organizations.

These attacks consist of vandalism. They consist of destruction of property, arson, and even included protesters breaching the Arizona State Capitol, forcing legislators to evacuate.

Radical pro-abortion groups have proudly declared ``open season'' on pro-life pregnancy centers while these organizations are providing critical resources to pregnant women, infants, and families.

Republicans want to protect public safety. We want to ensure pro-life organizations can continue helping women and babies in need. That is why if we defeat the previous question, I will personally offer an amendment to the rule to immediately consider H. Res. 1233, a resolution affirming the importance of pro-life crisis pregnancy centers, condemning the violent attacks by far-left extremist groups, and calling upon the Biden administration to use all law enforcement authorities to uphold public safety and protect the rights of pro-life facilities, groups, and churches.

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.

Madam Speaker, I yield 7 minutes to the gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Johnson). The vice chairman of the Republican Conference and sponsor of the resolution is here to explain the amendment.

Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

There was an--I don't know if you want to call it an allegation--an insinuation that the only time I speak to condemn violence is when it is violence that I don't agree with.

I want to be clear about something. I condemn all acts of political violence. I have been very consistent on that; so have my colleagues across the aisle.

Great example: The first time I ever spoke here on the House floor was in support of a resolution rejecting white supremacy, and I talked at length at that time of the Tree of Life synagogue shooting that occurred in Squirrel Hill, Pennsylvania.

As you know, I am from the South Hills of Pittsburgh. I have a lot of friends that actually attend that synagogue. And again, the first time I spoke on the House floor was to condemn violence.

So I just want the Record to reflect my consistency on this issue and the consistency of my colleagues.

I wish my friends on the left would condemn violence that the left has done. It seems that they cherry-pick their own outrage.

But let's just get back to economics. Again, there was this notion floated that inflation is not as bad here as it is internationally, and this is a global problem. Again, it is a global problem because we are the world's largest GDP. We are exporting inflation.

But even with that said, inflation is far worse here than it is in the developed world. Our inflation, by reference, is 9.1 percent. Japan is at 2.4 percent. The U.K. is at 9.1 percent; they are the same as we are. Italy is at 8 percent; Canada, 7.7 percent; France, 5.8 percent.

Again, all those countries I listed, those nations in the developed world have inflation that is lower than where we are, with the exception of the U.K., which is the same. In Brazil--I should say this about Brazil. It is at 11.9 percent in Brazil.

So this idea that everybody is experiencing inflation, and that we have it easier, is just not accurate when you look at the numbers.

Now, I gave a list of what I would cut from the budget. It wasn't an exhaustive list, and neither is this, but I just want to give a few more examples.

$75 million is allocated for public housing, energy efficiency and climate resilience upgrades. That could be cut. There is 75 million right there.

Funding for the FDA--and let's not forget, the FDA was the agency that failed to prevent the infant formula crisis. The Democrats are rewarding the FDA with a 10 percent increase. That can be cut.

And what is so insulting about a 10 percent increase to the FDA is, at the same time Democrats want to increase the funding to the FDA-- again, the agency that led to the baby formula shortage--you have farmers and ranchers that are struggling to make ends meet and to actually harvest food because of the rising food costs and fertilizer costs, and there is no increase to them.

And I think one of the most outrageous items that can be cut is the $90 million that is going to The Presidio park, a park that is in an incredibly affluent area of San Francisco, arguably, one of the wealthiest areas in the entire United States. Yet, that park is getting $90 million, when those around that park can fund it.

And again, what is so insulting about this is we are not even giving allocations to places like Yellowstone and Yosemite that are actually national parks. So those are just some of the areas I would cut.

Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I have no further speakers at this time, and I yield myself the balance of my time.

Since Democrats jammed through their $1.9 trillion stimulus bill last year, inflation is at an over 40-year high; the value of American paychecks has also fallen; and families are paying more for just about everything.

Yet, the rule before us makes in order a funding package that provides double-digit and triple-digit increases for nondefense programs that will further fuel Biden's inflation crisis.

And by the way, while this bill is providing double-digit and triple- digit increases for nondefense programs, the defense budget has only increased 4.4 percent. That is appalling.

H.R. 8294 also is packed with far-left liberal wish list items like taxpayer-funded abortion, rather than policies that will address Biden's economic crisis and fix our supply chains, secure our border, and invest in national security, and bring down gas and electricity costs through domestic energy production.

Clearly, the Democrats' spending and policy priorities are out of touch with everyday Americans. And that is just not me saying that. According to a poll, a shocking 75 percent of Americans are experiencing hardship because of Joe Biden and House Democrats' inflation crisis. And the majority of Americans expect the economy to get worse this year.

This bill, like the Democratic Party, is tone-deaf and out of touch.

I, therefore, urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on the previous question and ``no'' on the rule, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Madam Speaker, I rise for the purpose of inquiring to the House majority whip the schedule for next week.

Madam Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Clyburn), the majority whip of the House.

Madam Speaker, I know this is a conversation I have had for months with the majority leader as we have talked about the concern over high gas prices, and I notice that, on the agenda that was listed, there are no bills that would deal with the high price of gasoline that families are struggling under due to President Biden's many different actions he has taken to shut down American energy.

Of course, as we know, the President today is in Saudi Arabia, begging the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia to produce more oil, when we have been asking the President to work with us to open up American energy, which is abundant, available, but, unfortunately, closed for business.

Of course, we know during the campaign, President Biden bragged that he was going to shut down drilling, that he was going to make it hard for the energy companies to produce in America, and he has done that. The problem is it has had devastating impacts on families.

So, we brought forward a number of bills, again, months ago. I have presented some of these to the majority leader. He said he would look at them and consider bringing some of them up. I want to present a few of these to the gentleman from South Carolina to see if we can get consideration of some of these bills next week at a time when we just saw a report with 9.1 percent inflation, the worst numbers in 40 years, in large part driven by the high price of gasoline.

We have bills to alleviate that problem that families are facing.

I will start with H.R. 7285, by Mr. Carl. This is the Unleashing American Energy Act that requires the Secretary of the Interior to conduct a minimum number of oil and gas lease sales so that we can get back to producing more energy here.

H.R. 7292, by Garret Graves, the Securing American Energy and Investing in Resiliency Act: This requires the Secretary of the Interior to conduct all oil and gas lease sales that, under current law, he is supposed to be doing. The President is not in compliance with existing law on that.

H.R. 7293, the Energy Permitting Certainty Act, by Ms. Herrell: This requires the Secretary of the Interior to process applications for a permit to drill. It doesn't tell the Secretary what determination they have to give, but it gives them a shot clock, just like they give to businesses. When they tell a business that they have to give an answer on something, it is by a certain date. Yet, when the applications are submitted, the agency just ignores it, just doesn't do their job. Let's get an

answer, yes or no. Let's get an answer and back it up with facts. That is what this bill requires.

H.R. 7298, the Promoting Energy Independence and Transparency Act, by Mr. Moore from Utah: This requires the Secretary of the Interior to submit a report on expressions of interest in applications of permits to drill and requires the publication of data on expressions of interest in applications of permits to drill.

H.R. 7304, the Restore Onshore Energy Production Act, by Mr. Rosendale: This requires the Secretary of the Interior to immediately resume onshore oil and gas lease sales. Let us have an opportunity to utilize our natural resources to lower the price of gas.

H.R. 751, the Protecting American Energy Production Act, by Mr. Duncan: This prohibits any declaration of a moratorium on the use of hydraulic fracturing, which, again, has been a threat by this administration on a very efficient, clean source of energy that America could produce but, right now, is being dramatically limited.

Finally, H.R. 1616, the Promoting Interagency Coordination for Review of Natural Gas Pipelines Act, by Mr. Burgess: This provides for Federal and State agency coordination in the approval of certain authorizations under the Natural Gas Act for the critical infrastructure of pipelines to move energy throughout America so we don't have to get it from tankers, from foreign countries, many of them hostile to America.

I would be happy to yield to see if we could get some consideration next week of some of those bills, if not all.

Madam Speaker, if the gentleman is interested in inflicting pain on Putin, then pass these bills. These bills will take away all of Putin's leverage. The only reason Vladimir Putin has any leverage over America and Europe is because President Biden shut down American energy.

Again, each of these bills addresses different components of President Biden's attack on American energy. It has been a very direct assault on American energy on many different fronts. These lay out all of those things.

You can have all the leases in the world, but if the administration won't give permits to actually execute the lease to do seismic, to build pipelines so you can actually move the resource, to drill in new areas while the resource is being depleted in other areas, then you don't have an ability to secure America's future. It results in the President going hat in hand to foreign countries like Saudi Arabia.

I would just point out that I know the President likes talking about carbon emissions a lot. It is a 5,700-mile trek to Saudi Arabia, and I would imagine he is going to come back home. That is more than 11,000 miles on Air Force One. If you notice the picture, there are no solar panels on the wings of Air Force One. It is jet fuel that actually gets it from here to there and back with the President and his staff. You could save all 11,000 miles and the entire carbon footprint of that trip by staying here in America. I recommend going to a place like Port Fourchon in south Louisiana where they produce energy cleaner, cheaper, and with American jobs.

By the way, as States drill, they get revenue sharing. They would actually be able to use that investment to lower prices at the pump and to help American families.

If you think about where the price is today, whether it is $5.20 or $4.80--of course, it continues to go back and forth in a very high range--it is all double, more than double, what it was 2 years ago.

What that means is that people who are filling up are looking at the bottom line. They are looking at the fact that it is costing them over $150 to fill their car today when it cost them maybe $70 2 years ago if they can afford to fill it up all the way.

We are seeing a trend right now where many families can't even get it to full. They might have to go only halfway because they can't afford the full price. Their credit cards get maxed out before then because if they are filling up to go to the grocery store, they are also paying double-digit increases for everything they are buying there because of the spending-induced inflation.

I suggest if we want to send a message to Putin, no better way to do it than to cut him off at the knees in his ability to hold leverage over America and Europe by producing more here in America.

If we produce it in America, cartels can't control the price. Putin can't control the price. We can meet all of our needs and help our allies around the world so that Putin has no leverage over anybody.

The only person giving Putin leverage today is President Biden by allowing all these limitations on American energy production that these bills will remove. These bills will help America get back to energy independence by unleashing all of those different leverages, those different inhibitions, the prohibitions that President Biden has put on our energy.

Again, if he was against all fossil fuels, maybe there would be a consistency in policy, but he is only against American fossil fuels. He will travel 5,700 miles to beg Saudi to produce oil that he won't allow our own producers here in America to produce. I think that is what has Americans irate the most.

I yield to the gentleman.

I appreciate that. Hopefully, as I continue to have these conversations with the leader, maybe you and I could be whipping these bills together. You would see an overwhelming result and a quick reduction

in the price at the pump that is hurting families.

One final question I want to raise to the gentleman, and this came up yesterday or 2 days ago as we were having a series of votes on the National Defense Authorization Act, as the gentleman pointed out. Next week, we will be bringing up some of the appropriations bills, with still more to come over the next few weeks. As we have large numbers of amendments on NDAA and appropriations, which is typical for the process, to be able to go back to 2-minute voting where we can do our business not in 4 hours until 11 at night, but where we can actually be more efficient at processing all the requests that Members have to get a vote on different issues.

We have continued to push to end proxy voting. Again, you have seen most of the country already get there. Most of the country is getting back to work.

Airplanes, finally, you don't have to wear masks anymore. People are traveling internationally again. People are opening up their offices again to get workers in the office.

Congress, frankly, should be leading, not lagging, on this. But if we got rid of proxy voting, we could get back next week to 2-minute votes and be much more effective and efficient in doing our jobs here in Congress.

Is that something that the majority would consider, especially looking at six different appropriations bills, which I am sure will yield hundreds of amendments that would be debated and voted on, on this floor?

I yield to the gentleman.

I appreciate that. I will share--and if the gentleman wanted to share as well with the majority leader--our side stands ready and strongly encourages the complete elimination of proxy voting. We could absolutely get back to 2-minute voting with that. It is not a partisan issue.

You can look across the Capitol, in the United States Senate they have never utilized proxy voting. They continue to do their work. It is, of course, controlled by Democrats over there. They represent the same States that we represent. They managed to do their business without proxy voting so that everybody has to show up to do their job.

This time is no different than any other time in our Nation's history. There are some people who get ill; there are some people who have surgeries; there are some people who just have other things maybe with their family that takes them away. That is something that we all accommodate, we all recognize as a condition of doing a job that actually requires interaction with other people. The Senate has managed to do it without proxy voting; we would just urge that the House embrace that same approach. We will continue to push for that, which would allow us to do things like 2-minute voting.

Unless the gentleman has anything else, I am prepared to yield back.

Madam Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, my friends on the other side of the aisle must have amnesia. You know why we are on this floor today? Because of the Dobbs case from a runaway Supreme Court, dominated by Members who answered that they understood precedent in Roe v. Wade and ignored it.

I thank Congresswoman Manning and all of the cosponsors who recognize that we have to methodically protect women. Do you know what is happening to doctors? Every news station will have doctors on, frightened about what they should do about women's healthcare.

This is important legislation, Right to Contraception, because it does deal with menstrual regulation, endometriosis, or hormonal imbalance.

Teenagers are given this because of menstrual problems, but those who don't understand this, they are standing on the floor talking about this is a runaway bill.

If it is coronavirus, the monkey pox, or any other health matter, it is Democrats who are saving America. This legislation is definitely needed because the Supreme Court has trampled on the Constitution, trampled on the Ninth Amendment, trampled on equal protection under the law.

I support H.R. 8373. The women who are in need, who are vulnerable, who are individuals, who are minority women need this legislation.

Madam Speaker, I am proud to rise in strong support of H.R. 8373, the ``Right to Contraception Act.''

H.R. 8373 would expressly assert the right of an individual to obtain and utilize contraception.

This would include any FDA approved device or medication used to prevent pregnancy, whether specifically used for that goal, or for other health needs like menstrual regulation, endometriosis, or hormonal imbalance.

Additionally, the ``Right to Contraception Act'' would outline the rights of healthcare providers to prescribe and dispense contraceptives and relevant information to patients.

This bill would require lawmakers who attempt to place additional requirements on providers or access to contraception to prove that the requirement significantly advances access to contraceptives and that access could not be better achieved by other methods.

Birth control pills, IUDs, and other forms of contraception are all forms of safe and essential healthcare.

They are central to women's ability to participate equally in the workplace, in academia, and in society.

The right to contraceptives has long been an expectation held by the American people.

In 1965, the United States Supreme Court's decision in Griswald v. Connecticut affirmed a married couple's right to birth control. In 1972, Eisenstadt v. Baird protected that right for single people. Then in 1977, the right to contraception for minors was secured in Carey v. Population Services International.

For more than 50 years, the right to contraception has been settled law.

That is, until the Supreme Court's recent ruling in Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization, when five conservative Justices chose to let their personal opinions and beliefs supersede decades of established precedent by overturning women's right to abortion.

Since then, the American people have witnessed the abhorrent consequences of Republicans' radical agenda to criminalize women's reproductive health decisions.

In his concurring opinion, Justice Clarence Thomas made it very clear that the extremist ruling that ended Roe v. Wade could be used to chop away at other rights--including the right to access contraception.

Reproductive rights opponents are now including emergency contraception, IUDs, and other forms of birth control in their anti- abortion legislation.

These anti-abortion laws shackle women to unwanted pregnancies.

Conservative lawmakers now seek to stop women from exerting agency over the prevention of pregnancy, as well.

If a woman is not permitted to end a pregnancy, and she is not permitted to prevent a pregnancy, I ask you, what rights to her body does she have left?

The ability to make personal choices about one's own body is the most basic of fundamental human rights.

That right is engraved into the very foundation of our Nation and inked into the hallowed lines of the U.S. Constitution.

Do we not uphold our Constitution for its promise of life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness?

How then, can we withhold those rights from half of our population by robbing women of agency over their bodies?

In 1965, the United States Supreme Court made the 7-2 Griswold v. Connecticut ruling that established the right for married couples to utilize contraception.

This decision was not determined by the personal belief systems of those Justices nor their approval or disapproval of contraception.

No, the right to access contraception was upheld by the promise of unenumerated rights and due process for all American people--as outlined in the United States Bill of Rights.

As my colleagues know, the 9th Amendment states that the federal government does not retain final authority over the rights that are not listed in the Constitution.

The Bill of Rights does not exhaust all the rights retained by the people.

Instead, those undocumented rights belong to the people, as does the right to contraception.

Also, as a hallmark of democracy, the 14th Amendment ensures that no right afforded to the American people can be taken away without due process of law, while also guaranteeing all Americans that they shall have equal protection under the law.

The assurances of the 14th Amendment became part of our national governing documents as a protection against those who would use their power to wipe away the freedoms of others without restraint or consent of the governed.

Unfortunately, it is just as necessary and relevant today as it was when it was ratified in 1868.

Even before the barbaric Dobbs ruling, conservative lawmakers across the country have been moving to limit women's ability to make decisions about their own healthcare and bodies.

In 2021 alone, at least 4 states attempted to ban access to some or all contraceptives by restricting public funding for these products and services.

Those laws work in conjunction with actions conservative legislators in red states have taken to curtail funding for family planning services at reproductive health centers like Planned Parenthood.

Such actions would limit access to birth control, particularly for Black and Brown low-income women.

A 2010 study found that access to contraceptive care resulted in approximately one million fewer unplanned conceptions per year.

That is one million fewer children born into families who are unprepared to support them.

When access to contraceptives is limited, more children are born into lives of difficulty and hardship.

After Texas Republicans excluded Planned Parenthood from its public family planning program for low-income women, there was a 35 percent drop in prescriptions for long-acting, reversible contraceptives and a 31 percent drop in the use of injectable contraceptives.

This caused a more than 25 percent increase in unintended births-- largely among Black and Brown low-income women.

H.R. 8373, the ``Right to Contraception Act,'' would help ensure that children are born into families who are eager, equipped, and prepared for their arrival.

We cannot allow human rights to be so callously stripped away from the American people.

We must fight back and codify these rights into law.

Contraception allows individuals, couples, and families to be in control of their own futures.

Contraception can allow a young woman to achieve her dreams of earning a college degree.

It can allow a young couple to prioritize their careers before raising a child.

It can allow parents to focus their financial and emotional resources on the care of a special needs son or daughter.

It is a tool that allows those who wish to become parents, and those who do not, the agency to make the decision that is best for them.

The Right to Contraception Act asserts that we will no longer allow the human rights of women to be infringed.

If conservative legislators and conservative Justices intend to continue to attempt to limit access to reproductive rights, we will fight back.

We will not allow women to be regulated like reproductive chattel.

American women deserve to have the final authority over their own bodies and their own lives, including whether or not to become pregnant and become a parent.

Contraception is on the front lines of this battle.

That is why I support H.R. 8373, the ``Right to Contraception Act'', and encourage my colleagues to do so as well.

Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Madam Speaker, I rise in opposition to H.R. 8373. Every woman's potential journey to motherhood is different, and I support their access to contraception.

However, this legislation has a lot of problems. Democrats just introduced it on Friday and debated it for the first time on Monday in the Committee on Rules. And since then, they have had to introduce multiple amendments to address their own failures to draft good policy.

This is not how we build trust in solutions to bring forward in the people's House. If Democrats came to me and asked to work together on a bill, I would have been happy to roll up my sleeves and work with them.

For years, Republicans on both sides of the Capitol have led on solutions to allow for great access to safe and effective contraception, including making it available over the counter. Right now, Congresswoman Ashley Hinson and Congresswoman Stephanie Bice are leading on these bills.

Unfortunately, today, rather than work with us, Democrats again, are spreading fear and misinformation to score political points. And they are doing it with a very poorly drafted bill that opens the door further to extreme abortion on demand and their agenda.

H.R. 8373 is a Trojan horse for more abortions. It should be called the payouts for Planned Parenthood act. It would send more taxpayer dollars to Planned Parenthood, freeing up more funds for them to provide abortions and end vulnerable lives.

This bill endangers the health and safety of women. It allows Planned Parenthood and abortion providers to prescribe both on- and off-label drugs to be used for abortions without any restrictions. Additionally-- and again, despite many drafts--Democrats included a definition of contraception that is not limited to FDA-approved products.

The term ``contraception'' is defined as an action taken to prevent pregnancy, including the use of contraceptives or fertility awareness- based methods and sterilization procedures.

This means that the bill creates an individual right to engage in contraception which can include the use of FDA-approved products, but also any other action taken to prevent pregnancy, including non- approved products.

H.R. 8373 will also continue President Biden's war on religious liberty and conscience protections. It would force health providers to violate their religion and sincerely held beliefs to provide contraception and perform sterilizations, including on minors.

It would also force organizations, like the Little Sisters of the Poor to violate their religion and provide contraception. For all the fearmongering Democrats are spreading about other Supreme Court precedents being threatened, where is the respect for the Little Sisters of the Poor and their victory for their constitutionally guaranteed religious freedom?

The unfortunate reality today is that this bill goes too far and defies the most basic safeguards meant to protect women and children. Women deserve the truth, not more fear and misinformation that forces an extreme agenda on the American people.

Again, Republicans have led to make birth control available over the counter. In 2019, the Federal Government, under a Republican President, spent $1.8 billion for family planning. We have solutions to build on this work to support women.

Unfortunately, Democrats are conflating the issues of abortion and contraception to promote unrestricted abortion for all 9 months of pregnancy.

Contraception is fundamentally different than abortion; a distinction recognized by the pro-life community, doctors, medical professionals, the science, and in Justice Alito's Dobbs opinion.

Abortion intentionally ends a human life. Contraception is to prevent conception.

There is a clear distinction, and to suggest otherwise is more fearmongering and scare tactics that are a disservice to women everywhere.

Madam Speaker, I urge opposition to H.R. 8373, and I urge my colleagues across the aisle to work with us. We welcome the opportunity. Rather than rushing another poorly drafted bill--an extreme bill--through the people's House, we can come together to support every woman's path to a better life and every woman's journey to motherhood.

Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Florida (Mrs. Cammack).

Madam Speaker, I yield the gentlewoman from Florida an additional 1 minute.

Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Arizona (Mrs. Lesko), a member of the Energy and Commerce Committee.

Madam Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Burgess), who is a leader on the Energy and Commerce Committee.

Madam Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentlewoman from Iowa (Mrs. Miller-Meeks).

Madam Speaker, to clarify, the bill defines both contraceptive and contraception. Contraceptive is FDA approved; contraception is not limited to FDA-approved licensed products.

Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Bucshon). Dr. Larry Bucshon is a leader on the Energy and Commerce Committee.

Madam Speaker, I would like to clarify, this legislation never went through the Energy and Commerce Committee. The only debate was in the Rules Committee.

And I also stand here proud that, in 2020, on the 100th anniversary of women gaining the right to vote, led by pro-life Republican women who fought for decades, we have a record number of women serving in the House of Representatives, a record number of Republican women.

Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Van Duyne), a Member from the class of 2020.

Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Joyce), a leader on the Energy and Commerce Committee.

Madam Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentlewoman from New York (Ms. Tenney).

Madam Speaker, I yield 1\1/4\ minutes to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Smith), a champion for life.

Madam Speaker, again, so proud that it was pro-life Republican women like Susan B. Anthony who led the right to vote over 100 years ago. Just to correct the record, both Speaker Pelosi and Majority Leader Hoyer suggested that there was a legislative hearing. I don't remember any legislative action. I would ask the chairman, was there any legislative action on this bill?

I yield to the gentleman from New Jersey.

Reclaiming my time, Congresswoman Diana DeGette, my colleague on the committee, said that we had a hearing. It was an Oversight and Reform Committee hearing on Dobbs. I want to quote because what the Democrat witness said confirms the Democrats' abortion on demand until birth act. The Democrat witness said: People find out they need abortions through their pregnancies, yes, at any time for any reason. The issue at hand is the Democrats' extreme agenda, abortion on demand up until birth.

Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Oklahoma (Mrs. Bice), a proud member of the class of 2020 with record Republican women.

Madam Speaker, I yield the balance of my time to the gentlewoman from Iowa (Mrs. Hinson), another dynamic leader from the freshman class of 2020.

Madam Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.