Statement of the Honorable John Conyers, Jr. for Hearing on “The Ultimate Civil Right: Examining the Hyde Amendment and the Born Alive Infants Protection Act” Before the Subcommittee on the Constitution and Civil Justice

Dean of the U.S. House
of Representatives
John Conyers, Jr.

In Roe v. Wade, the Supreme Court recognized a woman’s constitutional right to make what is perhaps the most profoundly personal of healthcare decisions –when to start a family – free from undue government interference.

Unfortunately, since 1976, Congress has sought to undermine this important constitutional right by attaching the so-called “Hyde Amendment” to annual appropriations measures funding the Department of Health and Human Services.

The Hyde Amendment – named for its original sponsor, former Judiciary Committee Chairman Henry Hyde – prohibits the use of federal Medicaid funds to pay for an abortion except to protect the mother’s life or in cases of rape or incest.

There are many reasons why this restriction should be rescinded. 

To begin with, the Hyde Amendment is a blatant example of politicians inappropriately interfering in women’s health care decisions.

For more than 40 years, Roe v. Wade has been the law of the land.  Yet, it is clear that the Hyde Amendment’s purpose is to undermine the Roe’s constitutional guarantee of a right to choose to terminate a pregnancy by limiting low-income women’s access to safe, legal medical care.  

           

Politicians, most of whom are not doctors, have no business interfering in a woman’s constitutionally protected private healthcare decisions in order to impose their own moral views about women’s rights and healthcare. 

In addition, the Hyde Amendment has a disproportionately detrimental impact on the health of low-income women and the wellbeing of their families.

According to research by the Guttmacher Institute, many low-income women lacking medical coverage are forced to delay paying utility bills, rent, or grocery bills for themselves or their children; to seek out financial assistance from relatives or friends; or to sell personal belongings in order to pay for an abortion.

  

Moreover, women who cannot afford an abortion procedure may, in desperation, resort to self-inducing an abortion or turn to unsafe, untrained, or unlicensed practitioners – heightening the risk of injury or death from what is supposed to be a safe, legal medical procedure. 

           

Finally, the Hyde Amendment disproportionately affects women of color

Medicaid provides medical coverage to 20% of women of reproductive age. 

But, as a result of social and economic inequality tied to the persistence of racism in our society, 30% of African American women and 24% of Hispanic women of reproductive age are enrolled in Medicaid, compared to just 14% of white women of reproductive age.

           

Clearly, the consequences of the Hyde Amendment disproportionately fall on women of color.

While 15 states permit the use of their own funds to provide abortion coverage for Medicaid enrollees, 60% of women of reproductive age enrolled in Medicare live in states that only cover abortion in limited circumstances.

Rather than undermine the constitutional rights of low-income women and women of color, Congress should look to these states as an example and act to ensure that women -- regardless of their financial situation -- have access to quality, comprehensive reproductive health services.    

I thank the witnesses for participating in this hearing and I look forward to hearing their testimony. 

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

Statement of the Honorable John Conyers, Jr. for the Markup of H.R. 5578, the “Survivors’ Bill of Rights Act of 2016,” by the Committee on the Judiciary

Dean of the U.S. House
of Representatives
John Conyers, Jr.

H.R. 5578, the “Survivors’ Bill of Rights Act of 2016,” would provide needed protections and rights to victims of sexual assault.

I am proud to be an original cosponsor of this compassionate and thoughtful piece of legislation.

And, I want to congratulate my colleagues -- Representatives Zoe Lofgren and Mimi Waters – for their leadership on this bill, which will help ensure that victims obtain justice.

This legislation would provide victims of sexual assault the right to receive -- 

·         a free medical forensic examination, also known as a rape kit;

·         written notification before their rape kit is destroyed;

·         notification of the results of any forensic examination request; as well as 

·         written notification of their rights and all policies regarding collection and preservation of their rape kit.

In addition, H.R. 5578 would require a rape kit to be preserved for 20 years or for the applicable statute of limitations. 

And, the bill would allow the Department of Justice to award Victims of Crime Act grant funding to entities that provide written notice of rights and policies to survivors.

Advocacy groups, like RISE, are largely responsible for bringing to our attention that the treatment which victims of rape and other sexual offenses receives varies from state-to-state.

In some cases, victims feel their voices go unheard in a system that they are initially told is there to help them through the arduous and sometimes traumatic process that comes after being sexually assaulted.

Victims of sexual assault feel victimized again when they find themselves alone and without help to navigate policies and procedures that block their access to the justice system and, thus, their ability to obtain actual justice.

H.R. 5578 will help ensure that the rights it establishes will be uniformly provided throughout the United States to victims of sexual assault, in federal courts, in every state and every territory. Geographic location would no longer dictate the quality of attention or degree of information provided to victims.

Most importantly, this legislation encourages the use of rape kits and ensures their preservation.  

DNA, obtained from rape kits, is probably the most useful and significant piece of physical evidence in the prosecution of an offense involving nonconsensual sexual contact, enabling investigators and prosecutors to link perpetrators to their crimes.

Accordingly, I support this bill and hope that my colleagues will do the same.

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

CONYERS & COHEN Laud Supreme Court Pro-Choice Decision

Washington, D.C. - House Judiciary Committee Ranking Member John Conyers, Jr. (D-MI) and Subcommittee on the Constitution and Civil Justice Ranking Member Steve Cohen (D-Tenn.) today released the following joint statement in response to the U.S. Supreme Court’s Whole Woman's Health v. Hellerstedt decision, which ruled that Texas’ abortion law was unconstitutional: 

Dean of the U.S. House
of Representatives
John Conyers, Jr.

“We are deeply heartened that the Supreme Court has reaffirmed the fundamental constitutional right of women to make their own decisions about their health, their bodies, their families, and their lives. This right, a pillar of women’s equality and a key to ensuring women’s health, has been well-established since 1973 when the Court held in Roe v. Wade that a woman had a constitutional right to choose whether to have a pre-viability abortion. 

“The Court correctly saw the Texas law for what it was, which was an attempt to severely restrict abortion rights and not one to protect women’s health.  The Texas law required abortion providers at clinics to obtain admitting privileges at a nearby hospital without also requiring the hospitals to grant or even consider granting such privilege, and would have required abortion clinics to comply with completely unnecessary and cost-prohibitive requirements applicable to ambulatory surgical centers.  The Court rightly held that these requirements placed such substantial obstacles to a woman’s choice to have an abortion that its provisions were an “undue burden” on women’s constitutional right to choose. 

“While today’s decision was a victory for all Americans who care about the Constitution’s guarantees of freedom and equality, we must remain vigilant against continuing attempts by states and anti-choice politicians to block women’s access to safe and legal abortions that threaten to undermine women’s health and their constitutional rights.”

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

Statement of the Honorable John Conyers for the Hearing on H.R. 4924, the “Prenatal Nondiscrimination Act of 2016"

Dean of the U.S. House
of Representatives
John Conyers, Jr.

H.R. 4924, the “Prenatal Nondiscrimination Act of 2016,” is the latest attempt to erode the constitutional right to an abortion guaranteed by Roe v. Wade more than 40 years ago.

Among other things, the bill would make it a crime for a doctor to perform an abortion if she or he knows that the procedure is being done because of the race or sex of the fetus or the race of one of the parents, regardless of viability.

As I noted in the 112th Congress, when we last considered this bill, the bill is deeply flawed for a number of reasons.

To begin with, the bill is patently unconstitutional because it bans certain pre-viability abortions.

Roe is clear that a woman has an absolute constitutional right to have an abortion prior to fetal viability.

This legislation is simply yet another deliberate attempt by anti-choice activists to undermine and ultimately overturnRoe. 

In addition, this measure has nothing to do with civil rights. 

For instance, the bill’s proponents offer no evidence that women are choosing race-selective abortions.

Indeed, these proponents do not even bother to make the claim that African-American women, for example, choose to abort their fetuses because the fetus or one of the parents is African-American.

They do not make this argument because it is absurd on its face.  Yet, that is exactly the type of conduct that the bill supposedly prohibits.

The bill’s proponents try to sidestep this obvious flaw by arguing instead that the bill is needed because abortions are disproportionately common in communities of color.

But to the extent abortions are performed disproportionately in minority communities, the disparity points to broader socioeconomic inequalities that banning abortion will not solve.

The African-American and Hispanic communities are underserved when it comes to prenatal, maternal, and child health care services. 

This lack of access to reproductive health care results in African-American women being 3 to 4 times more likely to die from pregnancy-related causes than white women.

And, barriers to effective contraceptives and effective sex education, among other things, leads to the unintended pregnancy rate for African-American women being 67% versus 40% for white women.

Minority communities lack access to adequate health care, yet rather than addressing these disparities, the bill only reinforces them through its criminal penalties, which will create a chilling effect on doctors serving these communities.

Finally, I reject in the strongest possible terms the slander that Planned Parenthood and other abortion providers are inherently racist. 

Planned Parenthood is a leading provider of high-quality health care for women, serving 2.7 million Americans a year.

It provides many critical health services, such as annual wellness exams, cancer screenings, contraception, and the study of sexually transmitted diseases.

Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. strongly supported the work of Margaret Sanger, Planned Parenthood’s founder, and emphasized the importance of access to family planning resources for African-Americans. 

On accepting the Margaret Sanger Award from Planned Parenthood in 1966, Dr. King stated:

There is a striking kinship between our movement and Margaret Sanger’s early efforts. She, like we, saw the horrifying conditions of ghetto life.  Like we, she knew that all of society is poisoned by cancerous slums. Like we, she was a direct actionist—a nonviolent resister. . . .[African-Americans] have no mere academic nor ordinary interest in family planning. They have a special and urgent concern.

I concur with Dr. King and reject the sponsors’ preposterous and offensive argument that legalized abortion and its providers are racist.

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

Conyers and Johnson Introduce Legislation to Equalize Women’s Pay, End Forced Arbitration

WASHINGTON, D.C. – Today, House Judiciary Committee Ranking Member John Conyers, Jr. (D-Mich.) and Ranking Member of the Subcommittee on Regulatory Reform, Commercial and Antitrust Law (RRCAL) Henry C. “Hank” Johnson, Jr. (D-GA) introduced H.R. 4899, the Restoring Statutory Rights Act of 2016, legislation to ensure that state, federal, and constitutional rights of all Americans are enforceable. 

Dean of the U.S. House
of Representatives
John Conyers, Jr.

“Forced arbitration clauses in countless employee and consumer contracts have whittled away our nation’s core civil rights protections. This concerning development has enabled widespread sex discrimination and systemic wage theft in the workplace. The Restoring Statutory Rights Act will turn the tide on these abuses and ensure women are not left shouldering the brunt of corporate lawlessness and institutional discrimination,” said Rep. John Conyers, Jr.

The Restoring Statutory Rights Act would ensure that when Congress or the states have established rights and protections for individuals, including protection against wage discrimination, that they are able to enforce these rights in court. The bill amends the Federal Arbitration Act to prohibit mandatory pre-dispute, commonly known as “forced,” arbitration agreements for claims rising under federal or state statute, the U.S. Constitution, or a state constitution. The bill would further require that a court determines whether an agreement is unconscionable, legally invalid, or otherwise unenforceable as a matter of contract law or public policy. Under current law, parties may resolve statutory claims, including claims rising under anti-discrimination statutes, through forced arbitration instead of the justice system.

“As we continue the fight for equal pay, equal promotion, and equal rights in the workplace, we need to ensure that we do not lose our footing on the critical milestones we have achieved through the enforcement of civil rights in our justice system,” Rep. Johnson stated. “Forced arbitration has created a rigged system that blocks women from enforcing their legal rights against unaccountable and unlawful corporations for wage violations in the workplace.”

Forced arbitration clauses that circumvent state, federal, and constitutional protections against discrimination are particularly harmful to women, who file more than 41% of charges against employers for sex-based discrimination in the workplace, and nearly 83% of sexual-harassment charges. For example, an hourly hospital employee was forced to arbitrate her claim that her employer’s payroll system rounded down her time, undermining her ability to hold her employer accountable for wage theft. In another example, former female employees at a large financial institution were forced into arbitration following their attempt to bring a class action accusing the firm of widespread gender discrimination, alleging unequal pay based on their gender, fewer promotions for female employees, and other systemic discriminatory practices that were inherent to the firm’s corporate culture. 

The following organizations support the Restoring Statutory Rights Act and are dedicated to eliminating sex discrimination in the workplace: the National Partnership for Women & Families, National Women’s Law Center, 9to5, National Association of Working Women, AFL-CIO, African American Ministers In Action, American Association of University Women (AAUW), American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME), Center for WorkLife Law at the UC Hastings College of the Law, Equal Rights Advocates, Family Forward Oregon, Institute for Science and Human Values, International Union, United Automobile, Aerospace & Agricultural Implement Workers of America – UAW, the Legal Aid Society - Employment Law Center, National Center for Transgender Equality, National Council of Jewish Women, National Employment Law Project, National Employment Lawyers Association, National Latina Institute for Reproductive Health, National Organization for Women (NOW), NETWORK, A National Catholic Social Justice Lobby, Public Justice Center, Sargent Shriver National Center on Poverty Law, USAction, Women Employed and the Women's Law Project. The Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights also supports restoring civil rights protections comprised by forced arbitration.

The H.R. 4899, the Restoring Statutory Rights Act is an identical companion to S.2506, the “Restoring Statutory Rights and Interests of the States Act of 2016,” introduced by Senators Patrick Leahy (D-VT) and Al Franken (D-MN) on February 4, 2016.

Original cosponsors of the Restoring Statutory Rights Act include Reps. Sheila Jackson Lee (D-TX), Judy Chu (D-CA), and David Cicilline (D-RI).

Restoring Statutory Rights Act 4.12.16

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

Statement of the Honorable John Conyers, Jr. Markup of H.R. 4771, the “Help Efficient, Accessible, Low-cost, Timely Healthcare (HEALTH) Act of 2016"

Dean of the U.S. House
of Representatives
John Conyers, Jr.

Today’s markup of H.R. 4771, the so-called “Help Efficient, Accessible, Low-cost, Timely Healthcare Act of 2016,” or “HEALTH Act,” is the eleventh time since 1995 that we have considered legislation intended to deny medical malpractice victims the ability to be made whole and to hold wrongdoers accountable.

Notwithstanding the fact that this measure has repeatedly failed to become law because of its many problems, the rushed consideration and timing of this markup are not a coincidence.  We are taking up this bill because the Majority cannot keep its Members together on what to do about the federal budget.   

To begin with, H.R. 4771 is a solution in search of a non-existent problem.

Although the bill’s proponents claim too many medical malpractice lawsuits are driving up medical malpractice premiums, the facts do not support this claim.

It is not the frequency of litigation or the size of jury awards that determines medical malpractice insurance premiums.  Rather, insurance premiums are largely driven by the investment practices of insurance companies that invest premium dollars for maximum return. 

So, when the stock market plummets or interest rates drop, insurers sharply increase premiums and reduce coverage. H.R. 4771 does nothing to address this boom-and-bust cycle in the investment practices of the insurance industry.

And, it does nothing to address the McCarran-Ferguson Act’s unjustified antitrust exemption for the “business of insurance,” repeal of which would go a long way towards stabilizing the medical malpractice insurance market. There is simply no evidence that premiums are going up because of malpractice lawsuits. While not addressing a real harm, this bill would cause real harm by severely limiting the ability of victims to be made whole.

For instance, it imposes an unjustifiably low cap on noneconomic damages.

           

The bill’s $250,000 limit for noneconomic damages – an amount established more than 40 years ago pursuant to a California statute – would have a disparately adverse impact on women, children, the poor, and other vulnerable members of society.

These groups are more likely to receive noneconomic damages in medical malpractice cases because they are less able to establish lost wages and other economic losses. For instance, women recover lower amounts in economic damages than men because they receive lower overall wages, and, not surprisingly, they are 3 times more likely than men to receive noneconomic damages. 

Women are also more likely to suffer noneconomic loss, like disfigurement or loss of fertility, or to be the victim of conduct that is likely to lead to punitive damages, such as sexual assault.

           

These harms are furthered heightened by the bill’s new burdens on proving punitive damages and its expansive application to all “health care lawsuits,” not just medical malpractice suits. Whatever the short term savings, the bill would impose broad social and financial costs in the long term, including the additional strains on Medicare, Medicaid, and other government programs caused when malpractice victims are denied full restitution.

Finally, the bill represents a deep intrusion into state sovereignty. As any first-year law student knows, tort law is supposed to be the domain of states.

Yet this bill preempts medical malpractice and product liability law in all 50 states to protect insurance companies, providers, and pharmaceutical manufacturers at the expense of victims.

Accordingly, I strongly oppose H.R. 4771 for these and many more reasons and urge the Committee to reject this bill.

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

CONYERS: House Republicans Continue Attacks on Women and Affordable Healthcare

Calls for Renewed Focus on Jobs and Expanding Healthcare

WASHINGTON, D.C. – Today, Rep. John Conyers, Jr. voted against the so-called, “Restoring Americans’ Healthcare Freedom Reconciliation Act of 2015” (H.R. 3762), a conservative effort to dismantle the Affordable Care Act and defund Planned Parenthood, which is a leading provider of affordable health care for women and working families. If enacted, this Republican Reconciliation bill would strip 22 million Americans of their health coverage, and would end family planning services and life-saving cancer screenings from millions of women across the country. Fortunately, the White House has promised a veto should this bill reach the President’s desk.

Dean of the U.S. House
of Representatives
John Conyers, Jr.

“The calendar has changed and the Speaker has changed, but the Republican playbook remains the same: more Republican attacks on women’s health care and affordable health insurance for working families,” said Rep. Conyers.  “Instead of going after Planned Parenthood and attempting to dismantle the affordable health coverage of 22 million Americans, Speaker Ryan and House Republicans should be working on a real priority for Americans: job creation and leveling the playing field for struggling American workers who haven’t yet experienced any economic recovery.”

The Republican Reconciliation bill, which passed the House along party lines:

·      Defunds Planned Parenthood, leaving millions of American women without key preventive health services – including life-saving cancer screenings, women’s health exams, birth control and advice on family planning; and

·      Destroys the Affordable Care Act, effectively dismantling the newfound health and economic security of millions of Americans.

According to the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO), this Republican Reconciliation bill would take away health insurance from 22 million Americans. 

With this bill, House Republicans have now voted 62 times to repeal or undermine the Affordable Care Act, even though the U.S. Supreme Court upheld the law in 2012.  In addition, the conservative legislators in the House have now voted 11 times in the 114th Congress alone to disrupt women’s access to affordable health care.

“We’ve turned the calendar and now it’s time to turn the page. Congress must focus on growing the economy, creating jobs and improving the lives of working families,” continued Conyers. “I implore my Republican colleagues to end their attacks on the health care of women and working families, and work with House Democrats to accelerate our economic recovery and make the American dream accessible again to every hard-working American.”

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

Full Employment Caucus Co-Chairs Conyers, Wilson, and Kaptur Applaud DOL’s Proposed Rule to Diversify Apprenticeship Programs

WASHINGTON, D.C.—Representatives John Conyers, Jr. (MI-13), Frederica S. Wilson (FL-24), and Marcy Kaptur (OH-09), co-chairs of the Congressional Full Employment Caucus, applaud the Department of Labor’s proposed rule to promote equal opportunity for Americans seeking positions in apprenticeship programs. The proposed rule comes in response to the Full Employment Caucus’s June 2014 letter asking DOL’s Employment and Training Administration to update apprenticeship regulations.

Dean of the U.S. House
of Representatives
John Conyers, Jr.

“Apprenticeships—sometimes called the ‘other four-year degree’—empower hardworking students to become successful employees.  When employers work with our education system to provide a smooth transition from the classroom to the shop floor, everybody wins.  But as we expand this new pathway of opportunity, we must ensure that women and minorities are able to fully enjoy the benefits.  I am pleased to see the Department of Labor has proposed this rule, and I will closely monitor it going forward,” said Congressman John Conyers, Jr.

“An apprenticeship is a pathway to better wages and secure employment for many Americans. As apprenticeship programs expand and are utilized in new industries, we must ensure they remain available to all Americans, including women and minorities,” said Congresswoman Frederica S. Wilson. “I applaud DOL’s work to promote diversity in the proven apprenticeship model.”

“Apprenticeships and other forms of on-the-job training have consistently proven to be the most effective path to enter or re-enter the workforce,” said Congresswoman Marcy Kaptur. “Building these initiatives forward to create and grow opportunity is an effective way to expand our workforce. And we have the opportunity and responsibility to ensure that apprenticeships and workforce training work for all people, including for women and minority candidates. The Department of Labor is to be applauded for their work on this rule and in the broader effort to improve our best apprenticeship models.”

The proposed rule, the first proposed update since 1978, was announced during the Department of Labor’s first annual National Apprenticeship Week.

Full Employment Congressional Caucus Letter To POTUS Requesting Update To Minority Workforce Regulations

More information on the proposed rule can be found here.

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

Pelosi Names Democratic Members to Republicans’ Select Committee to Attack Women’s Health

    November 4, 2015

Washington, D.C. – Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi today announced she will appoint the following six Democratic Members of Congress to serve on Republicans’ latest radical Select Committee.  Pelosi also announced that Congresswoman Jan Schakowsky of Illinois will serve as Ranking Member.

“I am proud to name six strong champions of women, families and facts to stand up against the latest Republican assault on women’s health,” Leader Pelosi said.  “Hard-working families deserve better than a taxpayer-funded Republican Select Committee fixated on dismantling women’s health.  As Republicans try to take affordable family planning and lifesaving preventive care away from millions of American women, Democrats will be in the room to fight for the truth.”

Each of the Members to be appointed has served on one of the three committees with jurisdiction over women’s health issues: Energy & Commerce, Judiciary and Oversight & Government Reform. 

The following Democratic Members will serve on the Select Committee to Attack Women’s Health:

•          Congresswoman Jan Schakowsky of Illinois

•          Congressman Jerrold Nadler of New York

•          Congresswoman Diana DeGette of Colorado

•          Congresswoman Jackie Speier of California

•          Congresswoman Suzan DelBene of Washington

•          Congresswoman Bonnie Watson Coleman of New Jersey

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

Statement of the Honorable John Conyers, Jr., Ranking Member Full Committee Hearing on “Planned Parenthood Exposed"

 " Examining the Horrific Abortion Practices at the Nation’s Largest Abortion Provider”

§  “In the weeks or months prior to their public release, Mr. Franks and others in the Majority—including, we have learned, his subcommittee staff—received and previewed these surreptitiously recorded videos.

§  “On July 15, 2015, the first video was released to the public.  Others were posted online over the August break.

§  “Three different House committees then launched simultaneous congressional investigations.

§  “On September 9, this Committee held its first hearing on the topic—at which the Majority’s witnesses refused to discuss the videos at the heart of the matter. 

§  “There have since been two other hearings on this topic, making this hearing the fourth in the House in less than a month.

§  “And, finally, the Majority has announced that it will create a new, taxpayer-funded select committee to extend this so-called ‘investigation’ indefinitely.

“As I reflect on these events, I think we are able to draw a few conclusions.

“First, there is no evidence in the record whatsoever of illegal activity at Planned Parenthood. 

“On behalf of its 59 affiliates, the Planned Parenthood Federation of America has provided this committee with hundreds of pages of documents.  The organization is cooperating fully with all three investigations in the House. 

“The documents we have reviewed so far allow us to go point-by-point to correct the false impressions created by the highly edited, highly misleading videos that nominally inspired these investigations. 

“Chairman Chaffetz, who sits on this Committee and is running his own investigation into these matters in the Oversight Committee next door, has agreed with this conclusion.

“Last week, Wolf Blitzer asked the gentleman from Utah: ‘Is there any evidence . . . that Planned Parenthood has broken any law?’  Mr. Chaffetz answered with the truth: ‘No, I’m not suggesting that they broke the law.’

“Second, I am led to conclude that this hearing—much like the Majority’s broader attack on Planned Parenthood—is largely political theater, designed to rally the conservative base and roll back the constitutional right to choose wherever possible. 

“In practice, these investigations have had little to do with the videos—which the Majority went to great lengths not to discuss at our last hearing.  They have everything to do with appeasing the most extreme elements of the Republican Party during an intraparty leadership crisis and a fractious presidential primary.

“We may have a legitimate difference of opinion on Roe v. Wade, but it remains the law of the land—and the Majority’s attempt to re-litigate a forty-year-old decision places thousands of lives at risk.

“Many women enter the health care system through a family-planning provider.  In fact, 6 in 10 women who receive services at a publicly funded family-planning center consider it their primary source of medical care.

“Planned Parenthood alone serves 2.7 million Americans every year.  Abortion procedures make up an incredibly small amount of the services it provides—only 3 percent. 

“For example, in 2013, Planned Parenthood provided 900,000 cancer screenings to women across the country.  88,000 of those tests detected cancer early or identified abnormalities that might signal a greater risk of cancer.  In short, in this way and so many others, Planned Parenthood saves lives. 

“The attempt to defund Planned Parenthood places each of those lives at risk.  We should be grateful that the effort has been almost entirely unsuccessful, at least at the federal level.

“Finally, it is important to observe all of the good work this Committee might be doing instead of meeting for the second time on this subject in thirty days.

“As we head into our second election season since Shelby County v. Holder, this Committee has done very little to restore the enforcement mechanisms of the Voting Rights Act. 

“We have done nothing to advance comprehensive immigration reform, even though the proposal remains overwhelmingly popular and would easily pass the House. 

“11 million men and women are waiting to come out of the shadows and contribute to our economy and communities.  At this pace, I fear they will wait much longer.

“Although the scourge of gun violence has touched every one of our districts—including yours, Mr. Chairman—we have all but ignored calls to strengthen background checks and close the gun show loophole.  All of these solutions would save lives; and all of them are consistent with our constitutional rights.

“The list of missed opportunities is long, Mr. Chairman, and our time is short.  We should not spend one more minute—or one more taxpayer dollar—vilifying Planned Parenthood without a speck of evidence to back these claims. 

“This Committee simply has too much important work to do.  I urge my colleagues to put this moment of political theater behind us.  We can do better. I thank the Chairman, and yield the balance of my time.”

# # #

Click HERE to read the testimony of Democratic witness, Caroline Fredrickson, President, American Constitution Society for Law and Poverty.

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

CONYERS: CHAFFETZ CONFIRMS PLANNED PARENTHOOD DID NOT BREAK ANY LAWS

Washington, D.C. – Last night, during an appearance on CNN’s Situation Room with Wolf Blitzer, Rep. Jason Chaffetz (R-UT), Chairman of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, admitted that he has not identified any evidence that Planned Parenthood has violated any laws:

Blitzer:      “Is there any evidence in your opinion that Planned Parenthood has broken any law?”

Chaffetz:   “No, I’m not suggesting that they broke the law.” 

Despite this stunning admission, the House Judiciary Committee has announced its intent to hold its second hearing in thirty days to examine the medical services provided by Planned Parenthood and its affiliates.

Today, House Judiciary Committee Ranking Member John Conyers, Jr., released the following statement in response:

Dean of the U.S. House
of Representatives
John Conyers, Jr.

“I am somewhat relieved that Mr. Chaffetz has admitted what Democrats have been arguing all along: there is no legal basis whatsoever for the allegations against Planned Parenthood.  Ultimately, these ideologically-charged attacks are part of a broader campaign to change existing laws that protect a woman’s right to access safe and affordable healthcare. 

“Now that we agree these hearings have been pure political theater, perhaps we can move on to the important work facing this Congress—finding a long-term solution for funding the government, enacting comprehensive immigration reform, tackling the scourge of gun violence, and restoring the Voting Rights Act.”

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©