Supporting Pregnant and Parenting Women and Families Act

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Georgia for yielding me the customary 30 minutes, and I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, we had plenty of time last night in the Rules Committee to debate these awful, lousy bills: H.R. 6945, H.R. 6359, and H.J. Res. 140. I encourage everyone to look them up. Don't take my word for it.

Two of these bills are about misleading pregnant women to stop them from making decisions about their own

bodies. This is all part of the Republicans' war on women. These bills are aimed to please anti-choice protesters who are flying into Washington this week. The third is about making it easier for a foreign mining company to dump pollution into a pristine wilderness recreation area in Minnesota.

All of these bills are being brought to the floor under completely closed rules--no amendments, limited debate, no nothing. I won't waste more time on these terrible bills. They are just more of the same stupid garbage that this majority has brought to the floor time and time again.

What I do want to highlight, Mr. Speaker, is that this week marks 1 year since Donald Trump was sworn in as President of the United States. Republicans have had total control of the entire Federal Government-- the House, the Senate, and the White House--for over a year.

Yet still, after an entire year in charge, Republicans continue to point the finger at Democrats rather than take responsibility for their own embarrassing failures and broken promises. Republicans and Trump ran on fighting for working people, but every single day, they have governed on behalf of billionaires and corporate donors.

Let's take a look at some of these broken promises. Donald Trump said he would put America first. He has not. What he has done is given a $40 billion loan to Argentina. He stabbed American ranchers in the back, proposing that we import beef from South America. He threw a fancy party at the White House for a Saudi Prince who murdered an American journalist. He has not put America first.

He also promised no more endless wars. Give me a break. He renamed the Pentagon the Department of War. Last year, he bombed Iran, Iraq, Nigeria, Somalia, Syria, and Yemen. He bombed Venezuela and now says that we are running the country, whatever the hell that means. He is also threatening to take an autonomous territory from Denmark, a NATO ally.

Let's go over another failure. Donald Trump promised ICE would only deport the worst of the worst. Guess what. That is not true. ICE agents are terrorizing not just immigrants, but U.S. citizens, sowing chaos, murdering an unarmed American mom in broad daylight, and deporting veterans and asylum seekers who are here legally.

Another campaign promise: Donald Trump said he would lower prices on day one. Oh, my God, Mr. Speaker, has anyone in this administration gone shopping? Let me say this as someone who buys his own groceries in Worcester, Massachusetts. Prices are not only high, but they are going up even more because of Trump's reckless tariffs. Remember when Trump bragged about how he would get gas down to $2 a gallon? It is $3 a gallon down the street from my house.

Let's keep going down the list. Trump said he would get drugs off our streets and put criminals in jail. Give me a break. He pardoned the guy who created the dark web market that smuggled in tons of fentanyl. Then he pardoned the Honduran ex-President convicted of trafficking tons and tons of cocaine into the United States.

Let's not forget, he pardoned all the January 6 rioters, many of whom have since gone on to reoffend with illegal gun possession and committing child sex crimes after Donald Trump let them out of jail.

Then, of course, we have the promise that Trump would replace ObamaCare with something better. Instead of something better, Republicans let the enhanced ACA tax credits expire at the end of 2025, which means that now people are paying more. Tens of thousands of people in Massachusetts alone have now dropped coverage, meaning they have no insurance at all.

Republicans don't have a plan to replace ObamaCare. They never have. Fifteen years later, I am starting to think that they never will.

Now, another thing that Donald Trump promised: no corruption and full transparency. Remember that promise? Seriously, how much money does one family need to make off the Presidency before Republicans admit it is corruption? The Trump family has gotten nearly $4 billion richer since he took office last year. How much can one family treat the Presidency like a piggy bank before Republicans finally step up and do something about it?

Why is his ballroom being funded by billionaire donors? What are they looking for?

What about the Epstein files? There has been no transparency there. We had to force a vote in Congress. He reluctantly signed the bill, and he still hasn't released all the files. Less than 1 percent of the files have been released. What the hell is taking so long? What is he so afraid of? What is he hiding?

It has been clear to me since day one of Donald Trump's disgraceful Presidency what it has been all about. Look at who was in the front row of his inauguration, all billionaires: his Treasury secretary, a billionaire; his education secretary, a billionaire; his entire Cabinet, Health and Human Services, Energy, Interior, all led by billionaires.

These people don't shop for themselves or they don't worry about paying rent. They don't care about us. Trump said he would drain the swamp. What a bunch of BS. He moved the swamp into the Lincoln bedroom for God's sake.

The bottom line is simple: He has not done a single damn thing that he promised to do. Not only have they failed, they have failed catastrophically, and look no further than the bills on the floor today.

There is nothing for workers, nothing to lower grocery prices, nothing to take on price gouging, nothing to bring down rent, nothing to help people buy a home, nothing to lower prescription drug costs, nothing to raise wages, nothing to strengthen workplace protections, and nothing to create jobs. Just culture war garbage and corporate giveaways is all the GOP knows how to do.

After 1 year of total power, there is nobody else to blame. This is the Republican record, and it is awful. This is Donald Trump's economy, and it sucks. The people back home see it. They feel it. They are living it. They see who keeps getting help and who keeps getting hurt. They see the billionaires cashing out while working families get squeezed. The Republican Party has had a year, and the American people have had enough.

Mr. Speaker, I urge a ``no'' vote on the rule, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consumer.

I will correct the Record on something. Donald Trump promised he would lower gas prices to $2 a gallon. I just did Google maps and looked at the price of gas in the gentleman's district. It is like $2.80. That is a far cry from $2.

Mr. Speaker, if we defeat the previous question, I will offer an amendment to the rule to bring up H.R. 12, the Women's Health Protection Act, to restore the rights of women to an abortion nationwide and undo extremist abortion bans in States across the country.

Mr. Speaker, since the Supreme Court's Dobbs decision, 13 States have imposed complete abortion bans and many more have imposed extremely short timeframes to get an abortion, endangering women, threatening doctors with criminal prosecution, giving politicians in State capitol buildings extreme power over personal medical decisions and fundamental freedoms.

The bills in this rule are part of that dangerous trend. One bill actually diverts Federal TANF funds meant for low-income families to fund so-called crisis pregnancy centers, which provide pregnant women oftentimes with fake medical advice with the goal of dissuading them from accessing contraception or abortion care.

Republicans aren't providing more funding for TANF. God forbid they do that. Giving this money away to these fake medical clinics is stealing money from low-income families who need real help. The damage these fake pregnancy centers do isn't theoretical.

In my district, a woman was told by one of these centers that she had a viable pregnancy, but as time went on and she continued to feel sharp pains, she went to a real doctor and was diagnosed with an ectopic pregnancy that threatened her life and resulted in an emergency surgery. She will have lifelong complications. If she had received actual medical care earlier, she could have received the treatment she needed before it was too late.

Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to defeat the previous question so we can bring up a bill that will actually protect women and allow them to access the full suite of reproductive care options.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to insert the text of my amendment into the Record, along with any extraneous material, immediately prior to the vote on the previous question.

Mr. Speaker, to discuss our proposal, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Chu).

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

Mr. Speaker, I would say to the gentleman who just spoke that some of us had different experiences. In my district, a woman almost died from one of

these crisis pregnancy centers because she got bad advice from a quack. Don't lecture us about our dedication to making sure that women are not only presented all options but treated by people who are actually qualified.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from New Mexico (Ms. Leger Fernandez), a distinguished member of the Rules Committee.

Mr. Speaker, I yield an additional 1 minute to the gentlewoman from New Mexico.

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

Mr. Speaker, it is interesting. Now the gentleman is blaming the Governors and not Biden. I don't even know where the hell Worcester is. I never heard of that place the way he is saying it. It is certainly not in Massachusetts.

Mr. Speaker, in any event, while this Chamber is wasting more time on yet more messaging bills, a real crisis is unfolding in plain sight. Our allies are preparing for a possible military conflict with the United States. Let me repeat that again.

Our closest allies, our partners in freedom and peace for decades, are reinforcing their territory because the President of the United States has plunged us into the greatest transatlantic crisis in a generation.

Are we supposed to be relieved by the fact that finally, after a week of chaos, he said he won't use force? Is that supposed to somehow comfort us? I don't really feel very comforted because these are the same people who told us they wouldn't invade Venezuela the week before they invaded Venezuela. Let me remind everyone how this started.

Last weekend, Donald Trump sent a message to Norway's Prime Minister. I want the President's words in the Record because the American people deserve to hear them.

``Dear Jonas, considering your country decided not to give me the Nobel Peace Prize for having stopped eight wars plus, I no longer feel an obligation to think purely of peace.''

Now, let's listen to that again. Since he didn't get the prize, the President of the United States says he no longer feels obligated to think of peace.

Then he pivots from grievance to threats, saying that he wants ``complete and total control of Greenland.''

That is nuts. Again, this is truly crazy. This is the President of the United States talking about a NATO ally the way that Putin talked about Crimea before he invaded Ukraine.

`` . . . if we don't do it the easy way, we are going to do it the hard way.''

Again, that is not a Putin quote. It is a Trump quote. You can hardly tell the damned difference anymore. Wake up, America.

Are any of my friends on the other side of the aisle going to step up and put an end to this insanity, or are we all just going to shrug it off and move on? The President's own words show that he is living in a different reality. He told The New York Times that acquiring Greenland is psychologically important to him. Not to the United States, but to him personally.

Mr. Speaker, just so we are all on the same page, the U.S. does not need to invade Greenland to protect America. We already have a U.S. military presence there, and Denmark has basically said that they are happy to partner with us even further, because our militaries already work very closely, to make sure that Russia or China doesn't gain a foothold in the Arctic, so his own justification is total BS.

Threatening to annex Greenland actually makes us less safe. If we wanted to stand up to Russia, I can think of a really easy way to do that that doesn't involve invading a NATO ally. No, no, no. In no way is this about national security or defending the Arctic. It is a cover story.

This is about a thin-skinned, petty man throwing a global tantrum because he didn't get the prize that he thinks he deserves. Through all of this, barely a peep from most Republicans--not a whisper. Imagine if this were a Democratic President. They would be up in arms. We would be having investigations and subpoenas, and it would be a national scandal. Yet, we are hearing nothing from Republicans because they are in a cult.

I will say what they won't: None of this is normal. This is not a joke. This is not something Republicans can

shrug off or turn away from. This President is threatening a NATO ally in writing, and the world is responding.

European allies have begun sending troops to Greenland to protect it from an American invasion. Canada has signaled that such an invasion would activate Article 5, meaning our allies would be obligated to take military action against us. Record-setting protests are taking place in Greenland and in Denmark because they have no interest in being taken over by Trump.

Instead of deescalating, Trump is ramping up--tariffs, threats, blackmail, trying to bully our allies into letting him grab territory.

Do you know what the kicker is to all of this? Working people will pay the price for Trump's little temper tantrum. When you blow up alliances, you don't just blow up diplomacy. You blow up supply chains. You blow up markets. You blow up global stability, and it is never the billionaires who eat the cost. It is families. It is farmers. It is workers. It is regular people.

Maybe that is why 91 percent of Americans think that taking over Greenland is a stupid idea, but here is the bottom line: China benefits when America alienates Europe. Russia benefits when NATO is weakened and distracted. Every authoritarian on Earth benefits when the President of the United States starts acting like a two-bit tyrant.

I will just end on this: The world where America invades Greenland is a horrible, horrible world. It is a world with no moral compass. It is a world with no North Star towards liberty and justice. It is a world where China, Russia, and America conspire together to subvert freedom, democracy, and peace. It is a world I don't want to live in, but it is the world that will come to be if we allow this President to do what he says he wants to do.

My message to our allies is simple: Do not mistake this President for the American people. Stand up to him. Do not appease him, and know that there are Americans and there are Members of Congress who will stand with you in defense of democracy, alliances, and the rule of law.

My message to House Republicans is even more simple: It is time to take the car keys from grandpa. Stop worshipping this President. Stop acting like you are in a cult. Grow a spine, and for once in your lives, cut the BS and do something to stop him.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, it is incredible to be lectured by people who claim they are pro-life but who vote to take food away from hungry kids in this country, who vote to cut SNAP by $200 billion in the big, ugly bill, who vote to cut Medicaid by $1 trillion in the big, ugly bill. It really is incredible. It takes my breath away.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Oregon (Ms. Bonamici).

Mr. Speaker, I yield an additional 30 seconds to the gentlewoman from Oregon.

Mr. Speaker, in closing, I yield myself the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, first of all, let's be clear, all of these crummy bills that are coming to the floor today are under completely closed rules.

The gentlewoman who just spoke, her amendment was blocked from being debated and voted on on the House floor by my Republican colleagues. Everything is just closed--their way or the highway. It is a terrible pattern that has developed here.

Mr. Speaker, after 1 year of total Republican control, there is nowhere left to hide. Republicans ran on helping working people. They ran on lowering costs. They ran on grocery prices and rent. What did they do? They delivered all right--for billionaires and big donors.

If Wall Street wanted a tax break, it would get done in a nanosecond. If Amazon wanted another loophole, it would materialize out of thin air. If Big Oil wanted another permit, they would roll out the red carpet. If Big Pharma wanted to rip off people, Republicans look the other way.

That is how things have worked around here for the last year. It is never a problem paying for tax breaks for billionaires, but somehow, when everyday people needed help, Republicans were nowhere to be found. They cut food assistance, cut Medicaid, and cut help for regular people. They stole from those with the least to give more to those with the most.

I am so sick of the excuses. For a year, we have heard Republicans blame everyone but themselves: blame Biden, blame Democrats, blame George Soros, blame the Clintons, blame Kamala Harris, blame the blue States, blame the media, blame fill-in-the-blank.

Here is a thought, Mr. Speaker: Why don't you guys blame yourselves? You control the House, the Senate, and the White House. You are in charge. You set the schedule. You control the government. You have been in power for an entire year. If you are still blaming someone else, that is really not a strategy. It is a confession.

As much as you guys might need a priest, I am not here to offer forgiveness or absolution. I am here to demand accountability.

Republicans need to take ownership of your pathetic, incompetent, disastrous inability to deliver on anything you said you would.

Mr. Speaker, I urge a ``no'' vote on this rule and a ``no'' vote on the underlying bill, and I yield back the balance of my time.

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

Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 1009 and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. McGovern), pending which I yield myself such time as I may consume. During consideration of this resolution, all time yielded is for the purpose of debate only.

General Leave

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks.

Mr. Speaker, last night the Rules Committee met and reported a rule, House Resolution 1009, providing for consideration of three measures. H.R. 6945, the Supporting Pregnant and Parenting Women and Families Act, is under a closed rule.

The rule provides 1 hour of debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking member of the Committee on Ways and Means or their respective designees, and provides one motion to recommit.

H.R. 6359, the Pregnant Students' Rights Act, is under a closed rule.

The rule provides 1 hour of debate, equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking member of the Committee on Education and Workforce or their respective designees, and provides one motion to recommit.

H.J. Res. 140, providing for congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of title 5, United States Code, of the rule submitted by the Bureau of Land Management relating to Public Land Order No. 7917 for Withdrawal of Federal lands; Cook, Lake, and Saint Louis Counties, MN, is under a closed rule.

The rule provides 1 hour of debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking member of the Committee on Natural Resources or their respective designees, and provides one motion to recommit.

Mr. Speaker, we are here today to debate a rule on three pieces of legislation. Beginning with H.R. 6945, the Supporting Pregnant and Parenting Women and Families Act.

Mr. Speaker, across the country, pregnancy centers serve as trusted, community-based nonprofits that offer a wide range of material assistance and support, including pregnancy testing, prenatal education, parenting classes, ultrasounds, diapers, baby clothing, adoption referrals, and connections to housing and other services.

In 2024 alone, these organizations assisted nearly 2 million individuals nationwide, Mr. Speaker.

Despite their longstanding role in supporting families and advancing the core purposes of Temporary Assistance to Needy Families, a proposed rule under the previous administration raised uncertainty about whether States could continue partnering with pregnancy centers even though these services clearly align with helping children remain in their homes and reducing dependence on government assistance.

H.R. 6945 addresses that uncertainty by making clear that States may not be restricted from choosing to work with pregnancy centers and that Temporary Assistance to Needy Families funds may be used for these services consistent with Federal law.

This bill does not mandate participation. Again, Mr. Speaker, this bill does not mandate participation, but instead preserves State flexibility and protects against future administrative overreach.

At a time when families are facing rising costs and difficult choices, ensuring access to proven community resources matters. This legislation reinforces support for pregnant and parenting women, respects State decisionmaking, and strengthens efforts to help families thrive.

Additionally, the rule provides for consideration of H.R. 6359, the Pregnant Students' Rights Act. Mr. Speaker, today's student population looks very different than it did decades ago. Nearly one in five undergraduate students is raising children while enrolled, yet many pregnant students remain unaware of the rights and accommodations already available to them under Federal law.

While Title IX clearly prohibits discrimination based on pregnancy and requires reasonable accommodation, those protections are only meaningful if students know they exist and understand how to access them. Too often, that information is buried, inconsistently shared, or not communicated at all.

H.R. 6359 takes a straightforward approach by requiring colleges and universities that receive Federal student aid to clearly disseminate information regarding pregnant students' rights and available accommodations, as well as both on-campus and community resources. This bill also ensures students know how to file a Title IX complaint if those rights are violated.

This legislation does not expand Federal authority or create new rights. Instead, it promotes transparency, consistency, and accountability so that pregnant students can remain enrolled, complete their education, and plan for their futures. By reinforcing access to information respecting existing law, H.R. 6359 supports students, families, and institutions alike.

Finally, Mr. Speaker, the rule provides for the consideration of H.J. Res. 140, providing for congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of title 5, United States Code, of the rule submitted by the Bureau of Land Management relating to Public Land Order No. 7917 for Withdrawal of Federal Lands; Cook, Lake, and Saint Louis Counties, MN.

The Duluth Complex is home to one of the largest undeveloped mineral reserves in the world. It contains roughly 8 billion tons, Mr. Speaker, of copper and nickel, in addition to cobalt and platinum. It is the world's second largest copper deposit and the world's third largest nickel deposit.

Currently, China controls approximately 60 percent of global critical mineral production, and we have seen them use their control over the industry as a bargaining chip. It is clear, Mr. Speaker, that increasing domestic production of critical minerals is vital for America's economic and national security.

However, in 2023, the Biden administration issued PLO 7917, which withdrew 225,504 acres from mineral development in the Superior National Forest. This PLO locked these reserves for 20 years and prematurely ended the permitting process.

H.J. Res. 140 is simple. It permanently ends this irresponsible withdrawal and allows a transparent process to potentially develop the minerals in the Duluth Complex to move forward.

As the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Stauber), the sponsor of this bill, stated in the Rules Committee last night, this legislation doesn't green-light mining in the Duluth Complex. It reverses the Biden administration's mineral ban in the area and allows companies to continue to compete while following Federal permitting and environmental processes. Again, they will continue to follow Federal permitting and environmental processes.

Mr. Speaker, I look forward to consideration of these pieces of legislation. I urge passage of this rule, and I reserve the balance of my time.

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

Mr. Speaker, before I yield to Mr. Bost, I will say that by my count, I think my colleague blamed Donald Trump 14 times for the things the Democratic Party did before he got elected. Gas is very close to $2 a gallon in Tifton, Georgia, and I think it costs a lot less for gasoline in most Republican States than it does Democrat States right now because of the Democrats charging more and more taxes on their citizens.

As for the Affordable Care Act or ObamaCare that you all take so much credit for and are so proud of the way you wrote it, the benefactors of that legislation, the large insurance companies' CEOs are actually going to be on the Hill this week and will get to be questioned. I hope you will question them fairly hard, but I did bring one of my bills because I expected you to say that.

The charge is $546.53. The insurance carrier discount is $509.93. Insurance paid zero, nothing, not one dime. I paid $36.60.

Now, if you wanted to fix it for the American citizens, the question is: Why was it even a $500 charge if the fair value is $36? Republicans are trying to work to fix that. Unfortunately, we can't get a single Democratic vote for a piece of healthcare legislation that will actually work for all of the American citizens.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Bost), my friend and chair of the Veterans' Affairs Committee.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Crank).

Mr. Speaker, while the gentlewoman was speaking, I did take a second to pull up a couple of things on gas prices since they are blaming President Trump for it. They are correct.

In Worcester, the gas price is $2.91 a gallon on average. In Oklahoma, it is $2.21. In Wyoming, it is $2.22. In Texas, it is about $2.23. In Georgia, it is about the same thing.

Do my colleagues know what the difference is? We all have Republican Governors. Our Republican Governors are working to lower the cost of energy. The Democratic Governors are obviously keeping energy prices high and blaming the President for that. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, may I inquire as to how much time is remaining.

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

Mr. Speaker, I want everybody to take a deep breath, and I want you to know that Donald Trump, nor the United States is going to invade Greenland. It is not going to happen. It is just not.

Now, Russia might invade it, and China might invade it. As far as Canada and the NATO alliance goes, I just have to tell you that Canada committed to buying approximately 90 F-35s. Do you know how many they actually purchased? Less than 20.

Canada's national security strategy is to pick up the phone and call Donald Trump to protect us. Donald Trump has done the right thing by making NATO and our partners stand up and acknowledge that they don't have the defenses in place that they need.

While some people might not want to believe it, I will tell you one that does.

Mark Rutte, NATO chief, praises Trump at Davos by saying that he forced Europe to step up on defense. Now, this is the head of NATO. He is the head of NATO. A couple of comments about President Trump.

`` . . . I'm not popular with you now because I'm defending Donald Trump, but I really believe you can be happy that he is there because he has forced us in Europe to step up, to face the consequences that we have to take care more of our own defense,'' Rutte said.

Wednesday, in remarks at Davos, Switzerland: ``No way. Without Donald Trump, this would never have happened. They are all on 2 percent now.''

It went on during a panel at the World Economic Forum.

``I'm absolutely convinced, without Donald Trump we would not have taken those decisions. And they are crucial, particularly for the European and the Canadian side of NATO to really grow up''--``grow up,'' this is the head of NATO saying this about NATO--``in the post- Cold War world.''

``The Americans still have over 80,000 soldiers in Europe. . . . including in Poland, in Germany . . . they are still heavily invested in European defense. And yes, they have to pivot more towards Asia. So, it is only logical for them to expect us in Europe to step up, over time.''

I will tell you: Donald Trump doesn't have any plans to invade Greenland, but the Russians do. The Russians do. If NATO is not willing to do what it takes to defend Greenland, then the United States should.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to my friend from North Carolina (Mr. McDowell).

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

Mr. Speaker, I know a lot of people who work in these centers. They are honest, dedicated, hardworking people who care about the pregnant mothers and the unborn children. I think that the attacks on them are unfounded, unwarranted, and unprofessional.

Mr. Speaker, I have no further speakers on the rule, and I reserve the balance of my time.

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

Mr. Speaker, after listening to that, I can't help but go back to when 99 percent of Republicans voted to keep the government open just a couple of months ago, and 100 percent of Democrats voted to shut it down, how the Democrats were running around saying: See what the Republicans did. I mean, it is a totally false narrative.

Mr. Speaker, this week, the House can advance three simple pieces of legislation under this rule.

H.R. 6945, the Supporting Pregnant and Parenting Women and Families Act, addresses uncertainty and makes clear that States may not be restricted from choosing to work with pregnancy centers and that TANF funds may be used for these services consistent with Federal law. This is not a mandate, Mr. Speaker. We are not saying that the States have to do this.

H.R. 6359, the Pregnant Students' Rights Act, requires colleges and universities that receive Federal student aid to clearly disseminate information regarding pregnant students' rights, available accommodations, and both on-campus and community resources.

H.J. Res. 140 rescinds the Biden administration's mineral ban on almost a quarter of a million acres in the Superior National Forest and allows a transparent process to develop the minerals in the Duluth Complex to move forward.

Mr. Speaker, all three of these measures are worthy of support, and I urge my colleagues to join me in voting ``yes'' on the previous question and ``yes'' on the rule.

The text of the material previously referred to by Mr. McGovern is as follows:

An Amendment To H. Res. 1009 Offered By Mr. McGovern of Massachusetts

At the end of the resolution, add the following:

Sec. 4. Immediately upon adoption of this resolution, the

House shall proceed to the consideration in the House of the

bill (H.R. 12) to protect a person's ability to determine

whether to continue or end a pregnancy, and to protect a

health care provider's ability to provide abortion services.

All points of order against consideration of the bill are

waived. The bill shall be considered as read. All points of

order against provisions in the bill are waived. The previous

question shall be considered as ordered on the bill and on

any amendment thereto to final passage without intervening

motion except: (1) one hour of debate equally divided and

controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the

Committee on Energy and Commerce or their respective

designees; and (2) one motion to recommit.

Sec. 5. Clause 1(c) of rule XIX and clause 8 of rule XX

shall not apply to the consideration of H.R. 12.

Sec. 6. The Clerk shall transmit to the Senate a message

that the House has passed H.R. 12 no later than three

calendar days after passage.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, as families across the country are being crushed by rising costs and stripped of their healthcare, it is shameful that Republicans have chosen to bring a bill to the floor that does nothing to address these crises for pregnant women and families.

Instead, the bill before us today would allow Temporary Assistance for Needy Families, or TANF, dollars to be used to fund so-called crisis pregnancy centers that have a proven track record of intentionally lying to, misleading, and endangering women.

It is no coincidence that this bill is being rushed to the floor this week as Republicans once again prioritize appeasing a national anti- abortion group in town for its annual rally instead of addressing the real crises facing American families.

I want to paint a picture as to what happens to a young woman who suspects that she may be pregnant. She has a mix of emotions. She may have overwhelming fear and anxiety, especially if she has few resources. She goes to what she thinks is a medical center or clinic, and it is called a pregnancy center of some sort.

When she gets there, she is greeted so warmly with open arms. There are people in white coats, who she assumes are medical professionals. They tell her she can get so many things for free: pregnancy tests, ultrasounds, pregnancy counseling, and, after the birth, even free diapers and formula. It all sounds so wonderful to this woman that she says sign me up.

They don't tell this woman that, in order to get these free services, she has to first sit through an ideological or religious indoctrination session in which all the reasons not to have an abortion are given.

They don't tell her that the person administering the ultrasound has no medical credentials, that, in fact, this is not an official ultrasound, and that she could be misdiagnosed.

They don't tell her that half of the personnel in the so-called clinic have no medical credentials at all and, therefore, are not equipped to advise on any medical complications, such as an ectopic pregnancy.

They don't tell her that this is not a medical clinic at all. In fact, because it is not, this woman's privacy is not protected, and her information could be shared with the public.

The real world of the crisis pregnancy centers is exemplified by an OB/GYN in Iowa, who has seen patients who visited these centers and were told that using contraceptives was the same as having an abortion. She has seen patients who suffered miscarriages and ectopic pregnancies because they were misdiagnosed by these anti-abortion centers.

These women were told that their pregnancies were in the early stages or that they were experiencing normal amounts of pain because the staff members they saw were not actual, qualified medical professionals.

As a result, these women ended up in the hospital, needing emergency care and surgery to save their lives.

In Illinois, a woman seeking an abortion was deliberately misled by a fake clinic. She was subjected to graphic videos and told that having an abortion would make her infertile and, ultimately, mentally ill.

Ultimately, she was coerced into carrying a pregnancy to term. After giving birth, she lost her job and health coverage, and the so-called clinic never offered real medical care or follow-up support.

This is why the American Medical Association and the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists have raised serious ethical and medical concerns about these clinics.

Now, Republicans want to guarantee that taxpayer dollars through these TANF funds will fund these centers and that there will be no accountability for these dollars.

Let's first be clear about what TANF is actually supposed to be for. TANF exists to help families experiencing poverty meet their most basic needs and stabilize their lives so parents can work and children can thrive. TANF was never intended to subsidize anti-abortion propaganda or unregulated sham clinics that endanger women's health. Yet, that is exactly what this bill does.

Not only that, it goes beyond the regular TANF program, which requires reporting and accountability. Actually, this bill says that nothing shall be construed to restrict TANF funding for these centers, meaning that funding could not be taken away from them even if the center engages in deceptive practices or even causes a woman's death.

When the Ways and Means Committee marked up this bill last week, Democrats offered commonsense amendments that should have been uncontroversial to anyone who cares about women and families. We simply proposed that TANF funds not go to pregnancy centers that have engaged in deceptive or misleading practices that provide medically inaccurate information or that have endangered the health of a woman seeking care.

We also offered amendments to address the real crisis affecting the TANF program, which is the Trump administration's decision to seek revenge against five Democratic Governors by preventing them from accessing $10 billion in already appropriated funds for TANF and childcare.

Republicans rejected every one of these amendments.

Clearly, this bill is not about supporting pregnant women and families. It is about shielding deceptive actors, supporting Trump's revenge tactics, and using public funds to advance an extreme anti- abortion agenda.

If Republicans truly cared about pregnant women and families, we would be debating how to undo their $1 trillion cut to Medicaid, which rips healthcare away from millions of pregnant women, new mothers, and children, and how to help the millions of women seeing their health insurance premiums skyrocket due to months of Republican inaction.

Instead, this bill is merely an attempt to distract from these devastating realities with the ultimate goal of appeasing the anti- abortion advocates parading around Washington this week as countless women suffer and die under extreme Republican abortion bans. Their priorities are clear and profoundly misguided.

I urge my colleagues to vote ``no.'' Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to point out that the previous speaker said that these clinics have trained staff, but many of these centers pose as clinics, offer incorrect medical advice, and even go so far as to wear scrubs and white coats to appear as though they are trained. Actually, fewer than half of crisis pregnancy centers have a licensed medical professional on staff. Mr. Speaker, 95 percent do not provide prenatal care, and only 1 out of 607 provides contraception, and the facilities are unregulated.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Davis).

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

Mr. Speaker, I wish the previous speaker could have met this Massachusetts woman who sought care at a crisis pregnancy center after a Google advertisement led her to believe it was a legitimate medical facility where she could confirm her pregnancy. At Clear Way, a nurse administered an ultrasound and told the plaintiff that she had a viable intrauterine pregnancy. The nurse was not licensed to diagnose viable pregnancies and did not undertake appropriate medical measures to rule out an ectopic pregnancy.

Rather than referring the patient for immediate medical evaluation, Clear Way staff focused on encouraging her to continue the pregnancy. As a result of the misdiagnosis, this woman's ectopic pregnancy ruptured, causing massive internal bleeding and requiring emergency surgery. She lost a fallopian tube and narrowly avoided death.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Schneider).

Mr. Speaker, I yield an additional 30 seconds to the gentleman from Illinois.

Mr. Speaker, I wish we could think of the woman in Pennsylvania who was pregnant who sought care at what she thought was a medically certified clinic, but during her appointment, the staff told her she had already miscarried and was sent home.

As time went on, though, she continued experiencing pregnancy symptoms, so she later went to a licensed doctor who told her she was still pregnant and that the crisis pregnancy center had given her the wrong information. This misdiagnosis greatly increased her risk of having pregnancy complications.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Thompson).

Mr. Speaker, may I inquire as to how much time is remaining.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to talk about Kentucky, where a postpartum nurse with 20 years of experience was motivated to volunteer at a crisis pregnancy center. During her training, she learned that the clinic was using expired disinfectants to sanitize ultrasound equipment. Not only that, the kind of disinfectant that the clinic was using was ineffective in targeting human papillomavirus, which causes 90 percent of cervical cancer cases.

The volunteer nurse quit. She filed whistleblower complaints with the State, but nothing was ever done, highlighting the lack of accountability at the centers.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Doggett).

Mr. Speaker, let me say, there is a comprehensive study by the Alliance for Women's Rights and Gender Equality that studied 607 crisis pregnancy centers across nine States, and they documented a consistent pattern of deception, misinformation, and patient harm.

Nearly two-thirds of the centers promoted patently false or biased medical claims about pregnancy, abortions, contraception, or reproductive health providers, and fewer than half reported having a licensed medical professional on staff.

These are not isolated incidents. These are standard practices for these centers.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Minnesota (Ms. Morrison).

Mr. Speaker, well, it is not hogwash to this woman in Georgia. She sought care from an unregulated clinic that offered free ultrasounds and medical advice. She thought that was so great. The ultrasound technician incorrectly informed her that her baby's kidneys were filled with water and that she needed to see a primary care doctor.

The diagnosis was incorrect, but the stress of that misdiagnosis severely impacted the mother. She said: The irony in all this is that they could have caused me to lose a perfectly healthy pregnancy.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from Wisconsin (Ms. Moore).

Mr. Speaker, I yield an additional 30 seconds to the gentlewoman from Wisconsin.

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

Mr. Speaker, I would like to clarify that this bill actually allows these funds to be free of any accountability. It actually changes the way in which these TANF funds are being used.

Right now, there has to be accountability if States use TANF funds for the crisis pregnancy centers. What this bill does is, by amending section 404 of the Social Security Act to state that nothing in this part may be construed to restrict TANF funding for pregnancy centers, this bill actually overrides TANF's statutory purposes, reporting requirements, penalty authority, and HHS enforcement provisions.

As a result, any future Federal effort to limit condition or review TANF funding for these crisis pregnancy centers could be challenged as prohibited by this statute.

Even if that center engages in deceptive advertising and does actions that even result in the death of a woman, there would be nothing that could be done about that crisis pregnancy center.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from Wisconsin (Ms. Moore).

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

Mr. Speaker, the truth is abundantly clear. Both the American Medical Association and The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists have raised serious ethical and medical concerns about so-called crisis pregnancy centers.

These facilities are unregulated. They have no obligation to provide accurate medical information. They are not subject to HIPAA. They are not required to protect patient confidentiality. Yet, Republicans are determined to send them Federal taxpayer dollars anyway.

I talked about this very comprehensive report by the Alliance for Women's Rights and Gender Equality, which studied 607 crisis pregnancy centers across 9 States. They documented patients' experiences at the centers.

In one case, a patient seeking abortion care was misled into believing she was too early in pregnancy to receive medical care and was encouraged to delay seeing a licensed provider, despite experiencing symptoms consistent with a pregnancy complication.

In another documented case, a patient was falsely told that abortion would cause infertility and severe mental illness, information that directly contradicted established medical evidence.

Several patients reported being reassured that severe pain or bleeding was normal, only to later require emergency medical intervention when complications were left untreated.

If Republicans truly cared about TANF oversight, they would have spoken out when millions of TANF dollars were stolen from struggling families in Mississippi to build a volleyball stadium and when the Trump administration stepped in to shield the perpetrators from accountability. Instead, they were silent.

The bottom line is simple. Anti-abortion centers that spread misinformation and put women at risk should not receive taxpayer dollars. Certainly, they should not receive taxpayer dollars that are completely unregulated.

If we want to support parents and pregnant women, let's continue helping them. That is why the House should reject this particular bill, and I urge my colleagues to vote ``no.''

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

Mr. Speaker, I include in the Record a news article titled: ``Child care providers reporting unnerving stakeouts'' by Kristen Taketa.

[From the Union-Tribune, Jan. 21, 2026]

Child Care Providers Reporting Unnerving Stakeouts

(By Kristen Taketa)

Some San Diego child care providers say they are being

harassed and fear for their safety amid a campaign by

conservative activists and the Trump administration over

broad but unsubstantiated suggestions of fraud.

Meanwhile, billions of dollars in child care funding is up

in the air after the Trump administration last week moved to

freeze $10 billion in funding for social services, including

child care and cash assistance for low-income families, in

five Democratic-led states until it investigates.

A New York federal judge temporarily halted the freeze on

Friday, a day after the five states challenged the freeze in

court.

The states called it a politically motivated,

``extraordinary and cruel action'' and said the

administration has shown neither evidence of fraud nor the

legal authority to withhold mandated program funding.

The freeze could affect $5 billion in funding due to

California that helps pay for state child care subsidy

programs serving more than 300,000 children of low-income

families. The subsidies come in the form of vouchers that

families use to pay child care providers.

In the past week, conservative activists have been posting

on social media the names and phone numbers of child care

providers, including in San Diego County, suggesting without

evidence that they are benefiting from public funding but not

actually providing child care.

Several local providers say that since then, they have

begun seeing people loitering outside their homes or sitting

in parked cars with cameras, watching them.

One San Diego child care provider whose name and phone

number were posted online by a local activist said that ever

since then, her phone has been ``flooded'' with calls, and

she has seen people loitering around her home with recording

devices. The San Diego Union-Tribune is not identifying her

due to safety concerns.

``This has raised serious safety concerns for my family and

my business. It's not right!'' she wrote in a text message.

The harassment is also racist, providers say--those in San

Diego who have been targeted are overwhelmingly of African or

Middle Eastern descent.

Samsam Khalif, a Somali American who has been a family

child care provider in San Diego for 18 years, was frightened

last week when, as she was driving children to her home for a

day of child care, she saw two men with a camera sitting in a

car outside her home.

She circled the block a few times, but they didn't leave

until she got out of her car and walked the children to her

home. They drove away, she said, after they saw her with the

children.

Khalif said she is so scared that she avoids going out

unless she has to go shopping. She reactivated her home

security system last week.

The safety concerns are especially acute for family child

care providers, who run child care businesses out of their

own homes. Some providers have their own children or other

family members living at their place of business.

Yessika Magdaleno, a family child care provider of 25

years, said last week she hasn't faced harassment yet but

worries she will, considering she is an officer with a child

care providers union.

She counseled her young-adult children last week on safety,

telling them to look out for anybody who may be watching or

following them, and to be ready to call 911 if anyone

threatens them.

``You do your work with fear. You don't know who's going to

show up at your place, and you have all of these little

children in your care,'' said Magdaleno, who lives in Orange

County and is the United Domestic Workers union president for

the district that includes San Diego County.

``They're doing things that, as a child care provider, you

will never think will happen to you. Because all you're doing

is taking care of the children and educating them, right?''

The harassment has drawn attention from local Democratic

leaders.

``What the hell are we doing here where children, at day

care, might be subjected to extremists showing up at the door

of the home that they're receiving care, to investigate

whether or not there's actually child care happening?'' San

Diego City Councilmember Sean Elo-Rivera said at a UDW news

conference Thursday. ``Child care should be universal and

should be affordable for everyone, and it sure as hell should

be saved from extremists.''

The targeting--plus the potential loss of funding--has

shaken an industry in California that has been historically

underpaid, understaffed and run almost entirely by women,

most of them women of color and many immigrants.

Government subsidies for child care cover only some of the

cost of care, despite California's recent additional

increases in subsidy rates for providers and funded child

care slots.

Child care providers frequently make personal sacrifices to

run their businesses, often putting in long days, enlisting

family members to work unpaid or forgoing adequate pay and

benefits, such as time off for themselves.

In 2024, the median annual wage for a child care worker in

California was $38,220, according to the Bureau of Labor

Statistics.

``Child care providers are some of the most hardworking,

selfless, incredible humans that are raising our future

generation,'' said Kimberly McDougal, senior vice president

at YMCA Childcare Resource Service in San Diego County. ``The

fact that they're even having to go through this is sad.''

Child care leaders now worry that losing funding could

force some child care providers to close their doors, which

would exacerbate California's child care shortage.

``It's very fragile. Child care providers operate . . . on

a very, very razor-thin line, subsidies being so low,'' said

Max Arias, chair of Child Care Providers United, a union that

represents more than 40,000 family child care providers in

California.

The harassment comes as the White House targets child care

providers and Somali communities, part of a growing

conservative focus following years of state and federal

investigations into allegations of fraud in Minnesota's child

care system and social services, some involving Somali

American business owners.

That has culminated in what the Trump administration has

called its largest immigration enforcement action, with

thousands of officers deployed last month to Minnesota in

part to investigate the child care fraud allegations.

That crackdown led to last week's killing of Renee Good by

an ICE officer Wednesday.

In early December, Trump shocked observers with his

comments during a Cabinet meeting in which he called Somali

people ``garbage'' and said, ``They contribute nothing. I

don't want them in our country.''

Weeks later, a conservative YouTuber named Nick Shirley

posted a video in which he recorded Minneapolis Somali-run

child care businesses and accused them of fraud, claiming

they got public funding but did not serve children.

Afterward, Minnesota investigators visited 10 businesses he

identified and found that nine were operating normally; the

10th had not yet opened for the day when officials arrived.

Shirley's video prompted other conservative activists

around the country, including in San Diego, to follow his

lead.

In San Diego, one proponent of unfounded fraud allegations

has been activist Amy Reichert, who founded Restore San Diego

in 2020, an organization whose stated goal is to ``get the

government out of our lives.''

In the past week, Reichert has promoted her claims on Fox

News and identified by name more than a dozen San Diego

County family child care providers on the social media

platform X, saying they do not actually serve children.

Her posts contained excerpts from publicly available state

reports, with providers' names and phone numbers listed, that

noted if there were no children present at the time of their

unannounced visits; some reports also noted violations of

state regulations, such as missing child or employee records.

Child care providers have called the claims reckless and

based on false assumptions. ``There are many reasons why

children may not be present when an inspector is on-site,''

said McDougal of YMCA's Childcare Resource Service.

Providers identified on social media said children weren't

there at the time of inspection because they serve children

after school or at night; others had kids absent due to

illness.

Not all children who are enrolled are present in child care

at the same time, depending on their families' schedules.

``They (are) just accusing us. And that's lying. And that's

wrong for you to put lie(s) out there,'' Khalif said.

Reichert told the Union-Tribune she had not contacted any

of the providers; she said she ``didn't want to give any

appearance of harassment.''

The child care subsidy system has several procedures in

place to protect against fraud, McDougal said. Her

organization and Child Development Associates are the two

nonprofits that administer subsidies to providers in San

Diego County.

The nonprofits check providers' enrollment with their

licensed capacity, review thousands of monthly attendance

sheets, validate signatures and verifications of employment

and eligibility and compare providers' rate sheets to

invoices, among other things, McDougal said.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to H.R. 6945.

Despite the grandiose title, Supporting Pregnant and Parenting Women and Families Act, this bill carves out--let's keep the main thing to main thing. What it does, it carves out an earmark for an industry with a narrow ideological mission to provide, I guess what I call anti- abortion, but Mr. Chairman over there, he called it pro-life counseling services.

Actually, this just does not fit within the four core purposes of the TANF bill, which is why the Biden administration prohibited this. No more that we provide moneys for abortion counseling, which if you stop and think about it, it would fit more neatly into the core provisions of the TANF bill, and that is to prevent unwanted pregnancies. We don't provide abortion clinics with TANF moneys nor should we provide it to these clinics.

Mr. Speaker, I hear the tortured explanation of how this fits into the core duties of the TANF bill, and I hear them talking about the diapers and the formula and all the wonderful things. The March of Dimes provides all that stuff, too, but we don't provide them with TANF funds.

No. This is a diversion from the already underfunded TANF program which has been flat funded for 30 years at $16.5 billion and now we have, according to the chairman, millions of women, 2 million, and 7,000 centers that are now going to be able to access TANF dollars.

These TANF dollars were meant not to provide baby wipes and diapers for babies up to 6 months old, but to help a woman navigate her way into the workforce to get job training, to have cash assistance until she can get on her feet, not to provide moneys to stand up this ideological and, quite frankly, religious organization.

That is why I oppose this bill. Mr. Speaker, I am going to later on offer an amendment that would allow States to use TANF dollars, again, not undermining this bill, but adding a section that would allow States to use TANF dollars for security at childcare facilities and to be able to gather evidence of harassment of childcare providers and to give local law enforcement the ability to secure a place for children because one of the core responsibilities of the TANF funding is to provide childcare.

This all comes because there have been vigilantes showing up at childcare centers.

These are people who are not Health Department officials, not auditors showing up and harassing TANF recipients who need childcare as we deny

States' moneys for childcare, but we have vigilantes, right-wingers that are showing up and they are creating safety concerns in our daycares.

Mr. Speaker, I include in the Record my amendment.

Ms. Moore of Wisconsin moves to recommit the bill H.R. 6945

to the Committee on Ways and Means with instructions to

report the same back to the House forthwith with the

following amendment:

Strike all after the enacting clause and insert the

following:

Mr. Speaker, I have a motion at the desk. I am closing. I have an amendment at the desk, Mr. Speaker.

As I indicated, my amendment, Mr. Speaker, would be added onto section 2 of the bill and would just enable childcare centers--TANF to fund childcare centers, which are now under siege and really compromising the security of our children.

Yes, Mr. Speaker, I ask for unanimous consent.

Mr. Speaker, I have a motion to recommit at the desk.

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

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 1009, I call up the bill (H.R. 6945) to amend part A of title IV of the Social Security Act to clarify the authority of States to use funds for pregnancy centers, and for other purposes, and ask for its immediate consideration in the House.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and submit extraneous material on the bill under consideration.

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

Mr. Speaker, I rise in favor of the Supporting Pregnant and Parenting Women and Families Act led by Representative Fischbach.

What this bill does is really pretty simple. It ensures States will be able to continue to use TANF funds for pregnancy resource centers and the maternal care they provide to pregnant women and moms. That is it, Mr. Speaker.

Pregnancy resource centers offered material support and care to over 2 million women at more than 2,700 locations in 2024 alone, including diapers, prenatal vitamins, parenting classes, and transportation, just to name a few of the many services provided to these mothers.

These services meet the core purposes of TANF. Yet, the Biden administration proposed a regulation to discriminate against the pro- life mission of pregnancy resource centers by forbidding States from using TANF funds for these centers. It was a deliberate attempt to sidestep the law to achieve a partisan political agenda. Nothing, Mr. Speaker, in the TANF statute gave the Biden administration or any other future administration the ability to target pregnancy resource centers.

Following pressure from the Committee on Ways and Means and this Chamber, the Biden administration withdrew the rule in its final days. Think of what would have happened to maternal care in this country. One of the few places women can get care and support would have been closed.

In my home State of Missouri, $3 out of every $4 the State gives to pregnancy resource centers comes from TANF, and it is not just Missouri. Women in other States would have had fewer choices for their own care.

That is why we are passing this bill, to give pregnant women and moms a choice about where they receive maternal care and to stop any future administration from taking the same action as the Biden White House.

Democrats will talk until they are blue in the face, Mr. Speaker, about a woman's right to choose, but they oppose this bill, which is all about empowering women to make their own choices.

Why is that, Mr. Speaker? Simply because it doesn't align with their political agenda. The hypocrisy is absolutely stunning, Mr. Speaker. Democrats only believe in choice when it is the choice that their party would make.

Republicans are on the side of pregnant women, moms, and children who choose to get the help they need at one of these centers.

Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this bill, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentlewoman from Minnesota (Mrs. Fischbach), the sponsor of this bill.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Smith), an incredible advocate for the unborn.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from California (Mr. Fong).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from South Carolina (Mrs. Biggs).

Mr. Speaker, Democrats are fear-mongering today. The majority of pregnancy resource centers have voluntarily signed on to industry standards, a call to commitment of care and competence created by Heartbeat International. These standards set an ethical code where they agree to adopt a transparent and honest service model.

According to a recent report that surveyed 2,750 different pregnancy centers in 2025, there were 4,779 licensed medical professionals on staff, and 5,396 licensed medical professional volunteers.

I include in the Record a copy of Heartbeat International's ``Our Commitment of Care and Competence.''

Our Commitment of Care & Competence

Clients are served without regard to age, race, income,

nationality, religious affiliation, disability or other

arbitrary circumstances.

Clients are treated with kindness and compassion, in a

caring manner.

Clients always receive honest and open answers.

Client information is kept securely and confidentially and

only released with the client's signed authorization or as

required by law.

Clients receive accurate information about pregnancy, fetal

development, lifestyle issues, and related concerns.

We do not offer, recommend, or refer for abortions or

abortifacients, or contraceptives. We are committed to

offering accurate information about related risks and

procedures.

All of our advertising and communications are truthful and

honest, and accurately describe the services we offer.

We provide a safe environment by screening and equipping

all staff and volunteers interacting with clients.

We are governed by a Board of Directors and operate in

accordance with our articles of incorporation, bylaws, and

stated purpose and mission.

We comply with applicable legal and regulatory requirements

regarding employment, fundraising, financial management,

taxation, and public disclosure including the filing of all

applicable government reports in a timely manner.

All services are provided in accordance with pertinent and

applicable laws. Medical services are provided in accordance

with medical standards, under the supervision and direction

of a licensed physician (or advanced clinical provider as

permitted by law).

All of our staff and volunteers receive appropriate

training to uphold these standards.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Yakym).

Mr. Speaker, holy cow. The things that you hear from the other side in this body could not be so--not truthful-- false.

They paint with a broad brush and say the most ridiculous items, saying that pregnancy resource centers do not help anyone. Give me a break. Where I come from, whenever someone says something useless, we call it hogwash. They are swimming in hogwash on that side of the aisle.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I object.

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

Mr. Speaker, Democrats will make all kinds of wild and ridiculous claims about pregnancy resource centers. They have tried to twist giving diapers and ultrasounds to moms into some sort of nefarious activity, giving diapers to moms.

The millions of women who have sought and received care at a pregnancy resource center know the truth. I hope every American is watching this debate today on this floor.

Democrats distract and fearmonger because they can't admit that pregnancy resource centers fulfill the purposes of TANF. These centers provide material support and assistance to women in need and reduce dependence on government assistance. They are eligible for State TANF funds, period.

I thank Representative Fischbach for her very hard work on this bill. She has been a champion--a champion for women, mothers, and children her entire career. I am glad she once again led the effort this Congress to preserve funding for pregnancy resource centers.

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