Reproductive Choice Act

Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the Reproductive Choice Act with my colleague and friend Senator Lisa Murkowski, which would codify the protections for reproductive rights established by the Supreme Court's decisions in Roe v. Wade in 1973 and affirmed by Planned Parenthood v. Casey in 1992. We are introducing the Reproductive Choice Act as a substitute amendment to the Women's Health Protection Act before us today and as a standalone bill for future consideration.

Unfortunately, the Women's Health Protection Act goes far beyond codifying Roe and Casey. Among other issues, this legislation would severely weaken protections afforded to healthcare providers who refuse to perform abortions on religious grounds. Rather than just codifying Roe's protections, the bill would undercut Federal and State laws that have been in place for decades and call into question basic conscience protections.

The Reproductive Choice Act that Senator Murkowski and I are introducing today would simply codify the essential holdings of the U.S. Supreme Court's 1973 decision in Roe v. Wade and 1992 decision in Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey. Our bill carefully tracks the Supreme Court's language and would provide reassurance to women that the reproductive rights they have relied on for nearly 50 years will continue to be the law of the land.

Specifically, the Reproductive Choice Act would make clear in Federal law that States may not impose an ``undue burden'' on the ability of a woman to choose whether or not to terminate a pregnancy prior to viability. It would still allow States to enact regulations to further the health or safety of a woman seeking to terminate a pregnancy, while stating that regulations that have the purpose or effect of presenting a ``substantial obstacle'' to a woman seeking to terminate a pregnancy would be considered an ``undue burden.''

As is currently permitted under Roe and Casey, our legislation would allow individual States to impose restrictions on terminating a pregnancy after fetal viability, except when necessary to preserve the life or health of the woman. Notably, unlike the Women's Health Protection Act, our bill would not restrict laws regarding conscience protections, including laws that protect healthcare providers who refuse to provide pregnancy termination services for moral or religious reasons.

Women should be assured privacy in making their reproductive choices, and I oppose efforts to overturn the U.S. Supreme Court's decision in Roe v. Wade. It is my hope that the Reproductive Choice Act will be enacted to ensure that women in this country are able to make their own reproductive choices as established in the landmark Roe decision.

Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the Reproductive Choice Act with my colleague and friend Senator Lisa Murkowski, which would codify the protections for reproductive rights established by the Supreme Court's decisions in Roe v. Wade in 1973 and affirmed by Planned Parenthood v. Casey in 1992. We are introducing the Reproductive Choice Act as a substitute amendment to the Women's Health Protection Act before us today and as a standalone bill for future consideration.

Unfortunately, the Women's Health Protection Act goes far beyond codifying Roe and Casey. Among other issues, this legislation would severely weaken protections afforded to healthcare providers who refuse to perform abortions on religious grounds. Rather than just codifying Roe's protections, the bill would undercut Federal and State laws that have been in place for decades and call into question basic conscience protections.

The Reproductive Choice Act that Senator Murkowski and I are introducing today would simply codify the essential holdings of the U.S. Supreme Court's 1973 decision in Roe v. Wade and 1992 decision in Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey. Our bill carefully tracks the Supreme Court's language and would provide reassurance to women that the reproductive rights they have relied on for nearly 50 years will continue to be the law of the land.

Specifically, the Reproductive Choice Act would make clear in Federal law that States may not impose an ``undue burden'' on the ability of a woman to choose whether or not to terminate a pregnancy prior to viability. It would still allow States to enact regulations to further the health or safety of a woman seeking to terminate a pregnancy, while stating that regulations that have the purpose or effect of presenting a ``substantial obstacle'' to a woman seeking to terminate a pregnancy would be considered an ``undue burden.''

As is currently permitted under Roe and Casey, our legislation would allow individual States to impose restrictions on terminating a pregnancy after fetal viability, except when necessary to preserve the life or health of the woman. Notably, unlike the Women's Health Protection Act, our bill would not restrict laws regarding conscience protections, including laws that protect healthcare providers who refuse to provide pregnancy termination services for moral or religious reasons.

Women should be assured privacy in making their reproductive choices, and I oppose efforts to overturn the U.S. Supreme Court's decision in Roe v. Wade. It is my hope that the Reproductive Choice Act will be enacted to ensure that women in this country are able to make their own reproductive choices as established in the landmark Roe decision.

Mr. President, today I am introducing the Auto Reenroll Act of 2022, alongside Representative Kathy Manning, who has introduced companion legislation in the House of Representatives. Enacting this bill would improve financial security for Americans by strengthening their private retirement savings.

Nearly 7 in 10 Americans working in the private sector have access to employer-sponsored retirement plans, but a quarter of those with access do not participate in those plans. This means less money saved for retirement. Often, it means leaving money on the table, in the form of employer-matching contributions. Encouraging more employees to participate in their workplace plans would increase their overall compensation and improve their financial security and retirement outlook.

The Auto Reenroll Act of 2022 would boost participation through a simple change to the automatic enrollment safe harbor. Automatic enrollment plans have been tremendously successful at encouraging workers to participate in employer-sponsored plans, but employees who opt out of participating at the beginning of their tenure will likely never reconsider that decision. This bill would build on the success of auto enrollment by having employers reenroll nonparticipants once every 3 years, providing them another opportunity to consider participation. This would encourage those employees to reassess their nonparticipation as their financial situation evolves.

I encourage my colleagues to support this commonsense legislation to bolster private retirement savings.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.