tv U.S. House Debate CSPAN June 22, 2013 12:25pm-2:11pm EDT
i do reserve. >> i do seek recognition. >> only to say that is is the prerogative of the committee to choose the appropriate people to manage your time. i noticed the ranking member is not managing on the democratic side. >> i will not object. i just thought it was an unusual procedure. i will withdraw my reservation. withdrawhe gentlelady her reservation? >> i do. >> so order.
>> i have to tell you. so often we come to the floor and we will hear members say we are doing this for the children or that for the children. days thate of those we truly can stand and say indeed. we are taking an action that will enable so many children to , thatthat first guarantee guarantee to life. that is the reason that we stand here. the unborn child protection act is based in science. that hasn area overwhelming public support. it is an appropriate response and theouse of horrors similar stories that we are hearing m&a from across the nation about what is happening.
what this does is to limit abortion at the sixth month of pregnancy and includes exception so that we can send the clearest possible message to the american people that we do not abortions.e it is nothing to ban abortions before the six-month of prussian -- pregnancy. it is not affect road versus wade -- roe versus wade. it is a step that needs to be taken to protect life. unborn babies can feel touch. six weeks they feel pain. at 20 weeks, some of these marvelous fetal surgery centers into ministry and anesthesia to the unborn babies. as i said, 60% of all americans
supports limiting abortion during the second trimester and 80% during the third trimester. this takes the step we bring before the chamber and recognize science and to bring the law in line with the majority of public opinion and to stand against what has transpired in the kermit got n trial. his attorney stated that he not the laws should be back to 16 or seven weeks. the 24 weeks is not a good determiner and that it would be a far better inning to have that ban at 16 or seven weeks.
we are not pushing back far. we are at 20 weeks. we think this is an appropriate step. at this time i will reserve the balance of my time. >> the gentlelady from california is recognized. >> i yield myself three minutes. >> i rise in opposition. this will be the 10th vote. there are plenty of other things we should be doing. this is unconstitutional. it is also dangerous to the health and safety of american women. the narrow health exception only allows for abortions that are necessary to save the life of a pregnant women. it is shortsighted at best and cruel at worst. this would force the dock or to wait until a woman's condition was life-threatening before
performing an abortion. treatmentsreatening cannot be included. this bill would require some woman to carry a fetus to term even in the term for that fetus has been diagnosed with a lethal medical condition. the rape and incest in sections -- exceptions are insulting and narrow. they were added to the bill after the markup. it was incredibly disappointing. law.require reporting the it shows the distrust of women and a lack of understanding of the reality of sexual assault. report sexualmen assault and there are many reasons for that including fear
of reprisal. 78% know their offender. shane. wanting to put the incident behind them. challenge to roe v wade. abortions maylity be banned only if there are meaningful examples. this is attack on women's health. importanto find medical decisions out of the hands of women. instead, and trust those decisions to congress. it is a misguided efforts. i oppose the bill and i reserve the balance of my time. >> the gentlelady from tennessee is recognized. >> at this time i yield three
minutes to one of our great pro- life advocates. she is from tennessee. >> the gentlelady from tennessee is recognized for three minutes. >> a thinker for yielding. when i first became a nurse over 40 years ago i took a bow to devote myself to the welfare of those committed to my care. that i am this spirit proud to rise today in supports capable of thein child protection act. ins legislation would be late-term abortions after 20 weeks. i want to say that again. it would ban late-term abortions after 20 weeks. this is aced on undisputed scientific evidence which tells
us that unborn children at 20 weeks and older can feel pain. these are babies. they can feel pain. late-term abortions oppose severe health risks also for the mother. seeking an abortion at 20 weeks is dirty five times more likely to die from an abortion and she was in the first trimester. there are medical reasons for this. more a womanks or is 91 times more likely to die from an abortion then she was in the first trimester. despite these undisputed facts about the baby's of development and a woman's health, there is currently no federal law to protect pain capable of unborn where their mothers by restricting late-term abortion.
even at a day and age when we are seeing the mature babies that are born at 22 week that survive. birth ofate the babies whether it is prematurely or delivered in full term. we hope and pay for the good health of that baby and the mother. that same spirit in mind i urge my colleagues to join me in celebrating and protecting the life of both the baby and the mother by passing this. i yield back. >> the gentlelady from tennessee reserves. i would yield to minister a former member of the judiciary committee debbie wasserman schultz. >> thank you. i rise to strongly oppose the child protection act.
it has been 40 years since roe versus wade. the -- women still have to fight .or the rights about our bodies we should not have to worry that our government will try to intercede in a personal healthcare decisions. this is an unprecedented reach into women's lives. thatis a clear indication the well-being of women is not something republicans care to protect. it is clear the members of the doesare not only interested in protecting the well-being of women women but are also disinterested in the medical community. we have heard a lot of downright untrue assertions by republicans including by the previous speaker. these are baseless, completely devoid of medical facts or a consensus. predicted. has been just because you say it out loud in the house chamber does
not make it true. they do not represent the voices of women in america. every time we let their voices get louder than ours we are going back to the dark ages. andave worked too hard come too far to let it all slip away dow. when i think about what kind of world i want my doctors to live in, it is where their value is recognized. that means having affordable contraception and safe reproductive services. this is not work toward treating a better world. it erodes their future by undermining their help. i urge a no vote on this piece of legislation. i yield back the balance of my time. >> the gentlewoman from california.
>> i yield 15 seconds to myself to respond. polls showed 64% of abortion should not be permitted in the second tree months. 80% in the third three months. 63% of women believe abortion should not be committed. evidence showed the baby can feel this. i would like to yield three minutes to the gentlewoman from minnesota. >> it is a privilege to be able to speak on behalf of the unborn. i have a picture from yesterday. we love to take pictures of our baby. this was an unborn baby yesterday. this is the age of a baby, the youngest age at 20 weeks that
this bill is referencing. this is a picture of the mom. .e care about women we care about the unborn. that is why i support this wonderful bill. account of aecent late-term abortionists. have made this more important than ever beef or. under the guise of being a heical professional, violently ended the life of viable unborn babies and in turn he seriously hurt or even killed some of the women who he were stationed. nancy pelosi refers to this as sacred ground on voicing opposition to this bill. i found that to be a stunning statement. what could possibly be sacred about late-term abortion or about dismembering this six month old little baby with a
pair of scissors? we know that babies at this age feel pain when a scissor is put into their body. eight weeks, the heart is beating and babies as young as 21 weeks have survived premature births. madam speaker, as a woman and a mom of five natural born children and 23 foster children, i am appalled at this average practice of late-term abortion. there is no such thing as an unwanted child and that is why this legislation is so important.
and not only protect the unborn, but it attacks the mom against the lethal practices and women deserve better than abortion. unborn children deserve their own inalienable right to life. pregnancy is wonderful. it can be difficult. we need to show patience and compassion towards every woman as they carry a human life. we are treading upon sacred ground bit because we are dealing with the sanctity of every human life. out of respect for this mom and respect for this unborn child, i urge my colleagues to vote yes on this commonsense piece of legislation. i think representative and i yield back. >> the gentlelady's time is expired. the gentlelady from tennessee reserves and the gentlelady from california is recognized. >> and may i inquire how much time or mains? >> the gentlelady from california has five and a half minutes remaining.
in the gentlelady from tennessee has 21. >> before yielding, i would just like to note the situation of my friend vicki wilson who found out unfortunately in the 20th week of her pregnancy that her much wanted and desired child had her brain formed outside of the cranium and would not survive. if she carried the fetus to term, it is likely that her uterus would have ruptured. under this bill, she would have been forced into that heartbreaking situation and i think it is simply wrong. i yield three minutes to the ranking member of the judiciary committee, the gentleman from michigan. >> the gentleman from michigan is recognized for three minutes. >> thank you. i appreciate this important
debate and participating in it. members of the house, by imposing a nationwide ban on abortions performed after 20 weeks, hr 1797, the so-called pain capable unborn child protection act is nothing less than a direct attack on a woman's constitutional right to make decisions about her health. it criminalizes pre-viability with only a narrow exception for the woman's life. it fails to include any exceptions for the woman's health and it utterly disregards the often difficult personal circumstances that women face. when confronted with the need to terminate their pregnancies. the amendment version of 1797 made it by the rules committee
last night and it attempts to address the nationwide outcry in response to comments by the bill's author and the judiciary committee's markup that " incidents of rape resulting in pregnancy are very low." as amended, the bill now includes only a very limited exception for rape and. there would only be available if the victim could " demonstrate" that she has reported the crime to the proper authority. this reporting mandate does not even require things in the hyde amendment and it ignores the reason why rapes go unreported including the fear of the abuser, fear of how the legal system may treat the them, and shame.
for an exception. on the contrary, rape-induced pregnancy unfortunately, i'm sad to say occurs with some frequency. the rape and abuse national network reported during 2004 and 2005 64,000 women were raped and of those raped, 3002 hundred four pregnancies resulted. >> the gentlelady from california. >> i reserve my time. >> the gentlelady from tennessee is recognized. >> i yield three minutes the gentleman from virginia, mr. goodlatte. >> the gentleman from virginia is recognized. >> i want to thank the gentlewoman from tennessee and the other pro-life women speaking out in this debate today. since the supreme court's controversial decision in roe v wade, medical knowledge regarding the development of unborn babies and their capacities at various stages of growth has advanced radically.
even "the new york times has reported on pain focusing on the research of an oxford trained neonatal pediatrician who has held appointments at harvard medical school and other distinguished institutions. as he has testified, if the fetus is beyond 20 weeks of just a nation, i assume there would be paying caused to the fetus and i believe it would be severe and excruciating. congress has the power to acknowledge these developments by prohibiting abortions after the point by which scientific evidence shows the unborn can feel pain with limited exceptions. hr 1797 does just that. it includes provisions to protect the life of the mother and additional exception for cases of rape and. the terrifying facts uncovered during the course of the trial of the late-term abortionists and the success of reports of similar atrocities committed across the country remind us how an atmosphere of insensitivity can lead to horrific brutality. the grand jury report contains references to a neonatal expert who reported that the cutting of
the spinal cord intended to be late-term aborted would cause them "a tremendous amount of pain." they found 64% of americans would support a law such as the pain capable unborn child protection act and only 30% would oppose it. supporters include 47% of those who identified themselves as pro-choice in the poll as well as 63% of women. in the 2007 case, the supreme court made clear that the government may use its voice and its regulatory authority to show its profound respect for the life within the woman and that congress may show such respect for the unborn through specific regulations because it implicates additional ethical and moral concerns that justify special prohibition. as "the new york times" story concluded, pain has been used to exclude some of the privileges and protections. the charmed circle of those
considered fully human has widened to include members of other religions and races, the poor, the criminal, mentally ill. thanks to the work of the stock around others, the very young. when newborn babies are cut with scissors, they whimper, cry, flinch from pain. unborn babies also flinch from pain. delivered or not, babies are babies and they can feel pain at least by 20 weeks. time to welcome your children who can't feel pain. i urge my colleagues to support --
>> madam chair, before yielding, i would just like to note that we do not change the law. he is convicted for two life sentences in prison for murder under current law. i yield to the ranking member of the constitution subcommittee for three minutes. >> we are back considering crew linen and usual legislation that would curtail a woman's reproductive life. supreme court have protected them under the constitution. they struck down a nearly identical errors on a statute saying "since roe versus the supreme court caseload with respect to the decision on an abortion has been clear regarding one basic point. a woman has a constitutional right to choose to terminate her pregnancy before the fetus is viable. exercising that right is constitutional." perhaps most truly, this
provides no exception to protect a woman's health. it is so narrowly written and convoluted that even a physician wanted to comply with the laws would have trouble determining when the condition is extreme enough to qualify. she must bear the calamity by carrying her pregnancy to term. it is supposed to take the heat over the absence of the rape and which would be provided only if the victim first reported it to the authorities. we all know that there are many reasons why rape and often does not get reported. the humiliation, harassment, psychological trauma. the only reason we have been
given is that women lie about having been raped. women are not only not competent to make this very crucial decision for themselves we are more competent that we should attach our judgment to theirs. this direct another unnecessary and cruel barrier. the exception applies only to win the victim was a minor. today believe that this was nice, consensual sex? if they get pregnant at 18 bit it does not count? she was asking for dan deserves it? the rape exceptions have no such restrictions. even the hyde amendment says " the limitations established the
preceding should not apply if the pregnancy is the report of an act or rape, no if's, aunts is, or butts. >> the gentleman's time has expired. >> reject what the constitution -- click the gentlelady from california reserves. the gentlelady from tennessee is recognized. >> at this time i yield two minutes to one of our bright young attorneys from alabama. >> the gentlelady from alabama is recognized for two minutes. >> i rise to support hr 1797, the pain capable unborn child protection act. this would at last prohibit
dangerous late-term abortions of young children at 20 weeks. that is the stage of development where we feel pain. i say we for a reason. many supporters of this are taking to facebook and twitter using the hash tag to demonstrate and i applaud their support of this bill. i use the phrase "we feel pain ," because too often we speak of this like it is someone else we are talking about, some other species. we're talking about human beings far enough along in development if eland respond to touch. we were all 20 weeks at one time. every member in this chamber. we all reached a particular point in development in which the prayer for all hope for life
becomes precious. these babies right now having been premature, they are laying in a protective environment reaching to hold the fingers of their mommies and daddies. babies at 20 weeks are still at the risk for being painfully killed. this must end because we feel pain. i reached out a few hours ago via facebook to my constituents to ask for stories about children and they want to share one. her baby was born at 24 weeks weighing only two pounds, three ounces. after struggling her child grew strong and healthy and it was 19 years ago. her son is now an adult. if time is expired.
the gentlelady from tennessee reserves. the gentlelady from california is recognized. >> i would like to yield to the democratic leader, congresswoman nancy pelosi from california one minute. >> the gentlelady from california is recognized. >> madam speaker, do you ever wonder what the american people think when they tune into c- span to see what business is being attended to on on the floor of the house? do you ever wonder what the
american people think what is happening to create jobs? what is happening to agree to a budget to promote growth, reduce the deficit for our country, what is happening to make progress for the american people? do you ever wonder about that when they tune in and see the debate going nowhere? well, here it is, just another day and the life of the majority controlled -- republican controlled congress. day without a jobs bill. our constituents have made it clear time and time again that we must make us work together to grow the economy. once again, republicans refuse to listen. instead, we are debating legislation that endangers women's health and disrespects the judgment of american women and their doctors on how to make judgments about women's health.
this bill would deny care to women and the most desperate of circumstances. it is yet another republican attempt to endanger women. it is disrespectful to women, unsafe or families, and unconstitutional. at the start of the congress, the republicans take great pride in reading the constitution, but then they proceed to ignore it. one example is this clearly unconstitutional bill. they claim to reduce the role of government, except when it comes to women's most personal decisions about their reproductive health. leading medical experts believe this legislation is dangerous and wrong. that is the message we have seen from doctors and health- care providers who point out that this would put medical professionals in the untenable position when treating women in need -- women in need. that is the same message we have heard from national religious organizations who have called on us to respect for a woman and her family.
challenges facing all americans. the american people want bipartisanship. they want progress. they don't want obstruction and delaying tactics. a enough is enough, let's vote no on this dangerous bill. let's get to work together to work on a fair budget that replaces the across-the-board cuts of the sequester. a plan to create jobs, grow the economy, and strengthen the middle class as we reduce the deficit. let us act now to put people to work. i will say it over and over. let's end the assault on women's health and work together to make real progress for the american people i urge my colleagues to vote no. >> the gentlelady from california reserves. he gentlelady from tennessee is recognized. we found out from delaware to virginia, west virginia. the house of horrors goes on and on. at this point, i would like to yield three minutes to a member of our house republican leadership team, the gentlewoman from missouri. >> the gentlelady from missouri is recognized for three minutes.
>> i thank the gentle lady from tennessee for advancing this legislation. i rise today and support of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. life begins at conception. throughout the years, science, technology have evolved in continue to advance, we are changing hearts and minds. we have more and more evidence that life does indeed begin at conception. we know that after three weeks, the baby has a heartbeat. after seven weeks, the baby begins kicking. by week eight, the baby begins to hear and fingerprints start to form. after 10 weeks, the baby is able to turn his or her head, frown, hiccough. by week 11, the baby can grasp and by week 12, the baby can suck his or her phone.-- from.
-- thumb. by week 20, not only can the baby recognize his or her mother's voice, but that baby can also feel pain. while killing an unborn child is unacceptable at any time, it is especially important at the 20 week mark when a child is able to feel the pain of an abortion. madam speaker, it is not only the pain of the child we must he concerned with but also the pain of the mother. the other side has deemed abortion a sacred right. they tout their champions for women telling them they have the right to do with their bodies whatever they want. the problem is that everyone talks about the right to choose, but no one discusses the
implications of that choice. i recently have the opportunity to speak with a woman who run multiple abortions between the ages of 15 and 26. she told me they told her everything would be over very quickly and that they did not tell her about the psychological implications that would stay with her for life. not once did they relate to her the physical risks that she suffered later. that does not include the emotional damage she's suffered anger, depression, seclusion, the inability to trust. madam speaker, i am for life at all stages. i am for the life of the baby, and i am also for the life of the mother. i will continue to work towards a day when abortion is not only illegal but is absolutely unthinkable. i yield back. >> i have a parliamentary inquiry.
>> the gentlelady from tennessee reserved. for what purpose does the man from california seek recognition? >> i have a parliamentary inquiry. >> will the gentleman state. >> can the speaker inform us when we might consider legislation to address the needs of college students whose interest rates are about to double instead of this bill, which is a direct attack on women's rights? >> the gentleman has not stated theyrliamentary inquiry. gentlelady from california is recognized. >> madam speaker, i would yield to a member of the judiciary committee, congresswoman sheila jackson-lee for two-and-a-half minutes. >> the lady from texas is recognized for two and a half minutes. >> i ask unanimous consent to address the house. >> without objection.
>> madam speaker, to those gathered here today, i have already heard my leader indicate partially why we are here, taking away from the serious work of this place and trying to provide jobs for the thousands and millions of americans unemployed, but i have another question. while we all floor of the house debating a dangerous and inhumane legislative initiative why are we on the floor? why there are those who would rise presumptuously and arrogantly to suggest that they know my heart. why is someone suggesting in this body but i have not experienced pain, do not know pain, do not know the pain of my
constituency, the same question can be asked. how do they know what a mother, whose health is in jeopardy is feeling? why would they be so presumptuous to suggest that we could not or that we are saying to some woman that you cannot do with your body is your desiring. it is between you, your doctor, your family. how outrageous is this legislation? it is patently unconstitutional. it is a violation of the right to privacy. this specifically said that the health of the mother had to be taken into consideration. this violates any kind of adherence to the health of the mother. for us to refer to the heinous, disgusting actions in pennsylvania to suggest that i don't care -- i'm glad the justice system persecuted and prosecuted this villain and said that dr.
to jail, but i don't want america's doctors, mothers, people of faith to be turned around to the jailhouse because we are so presumptuous and arrogant. let's be very clear. the young woman, a diabetic who discovered months into her pregnancy that the fetus suffered from several major anomalies with the chance of survival, they wanted to induce labor, but her physician said she could not survive them they had to use another procedure. if they have not used the procedure like an abortion, she would not be able to have children again. do we want to go back to the time where women are running back to back alleys? can i get another 15 seconds? >> the gentlelady from california reserves and the gentlelady from tennessee is recognized.
>> thank you madam speaker. at this time, i recognize the lady from missouri for three minutes. >> the gentlelady from missouri is recognized. >> we do a lot of things here in washington and discuss many types of legislation. sometimes the impact of what we do get lost in the debate. i want to remind my colleagues that this will impact people. there is an injustice occurring in our society one unborn baby who was six months along develops a medical condition. the doctor gives him a seizure in the well because it can feel pain and an operation is conducted to correct the problem so the baby can be brought to full form. another baby down the street does not receive anesthesia and is ripped apart limb by limb by an abortion who crushes his crushes his skull.
this is wrong. i rise today in support of hr 1797, the pain capable unborn child protection act which would prohibit an abortion of an unborn child that has surpassed 20 weeks on the basis that children at the stage of invelopment can feel pain. light of the recent trial, we have seen firsthand the gruesome nature of the abortion industry. the reality that it involves not a choice but the taking of a human life, late term abortions are agonizingly painful and they happen all around the nation. a doctor says they can feel pain from 20 weeks of gestation and the pain felt may be more intense than perceived by full- term and older children. this pain is inflicted through a procedure where the doctor literally tears apart the little
body of a child after removing it from the womb and crushes the child's skull. science in the american public are united on this issue. it has no place in our society. 63% of women believe abortion whenld not be permitted. substantial evidence of the m1 child can feel pain. in addition to the bill, there's also a risk to the mother. drawing the line at 20 weeks weeks is not arbitrary. the child suffers pain in the mother is drastically placed in danger. a woman seeking an abortion at 20 weeks is 35 times more likely to die from an abortion than she was in the first trimester. at 21 weeks or more, the chance of death is 91 times higher. this abortion is done in a residential condominium complex in baltimore and last february,
a tragic end to her young mother and an agonizing death for her child. as a society, it's time to speak out for those who cannot speak for themselves and to stop this hideous practice. >> the gentlelady will suspend. the gentlelady from tennessee reserves. for what purpose does the gentlelady seek recognition. >> i have a parliamentary inquiry. >> when will the house consider legislation to address the veterans -- >> the gentlelady has not stated a proper parliamentary inquiry. the gentlelady from california is recognized. >> madam speaker, i would like to recognize a much valued member of the judiciary committee from california for two minutes.
>> imagine a world where the federal government actually prevents women from receiving the medical procedures that would save their lives. innocent, law-abiding americans young and old with live and die by government decree. if you think this is some kind of orwellian fantasy, think again, and take a good look at the abortion bill being pushed by republicans today. with only a narrow exception to protect life but not the woman's health. it could very well be a death sentence to countless women in the most desperate of circumstances. this bill infringes on a woman's right to choose and it will affect those most in need of help. i urge my colleagues to vote no on this nationwide 20-week abortion ban bill. i call on the republican party to stop pushing bills that endanger american women. >> the gentlelady from california reserves.
>> at this time i yield one minute to the gentleman from louisiana who chairs the republican study committee. >> the gentleman from louisiana is recognized for one minute. >> i thank you for yielding. i rise proudly in support of life and in strong support of hr 1797. studies have shown that babies can feel pain as close as 20 weeks after conception. passage of this bill is a major step forward in the protection of life. the pain capable unborn child act sends a loud message that our great nation stands in defense of life.
i am proud that americans united for life ranked in louisiana as the number pro-life state in the nation. if a woman who is pregnant is murdered, not only is the murder were charged with the murder of the mother but also the mercy of the -- murder of the unborn child. it's a proud day we are here standing in of those babies saying this country will not allow those babies life to be terminated. i proudly support this legislation and they urge my colleagues to support it as well. >> the gentlelady's time has expired. the gentlelady from california is recognized. >> may i inquire how much time remains? >> the gentlelady from california has 14 remaining in the gentlelady from tennessee has nine minutes remaining. the gentlelady from california is recognized. >> madam speaker, i would like to recognize another member of the judiciary committee for two minutes. >> the gentleman from florida is recognized for two minutes.
>> madam speaker, today i want to give a voice to real women and girls who look for an abortion after 20 weeks. for disenfranchised women and often takes more than 20 weeks to encounter the roadblocks for what is constitutionally retracted. they risk losing their jobs if they request time off, lack the information about their bodies, however never received the information. each one of these women is unique. their voices have gone unheard in this chamber, but they are americans who deserve laws to protect them. i just wanted to share their stories. sandra and her husband had no car, no internet, no healthcare. it took weeks to find an abortion provider. they had to save up for the procedure, time off work, child
care, for the 80 mile taxi ride from clewiston to west palm beach. the facility they found could not help her. they had to start over, save up even more, take more time off to see a fort lauderdale doctor who could help them. at 17, she was in a witness protection program raped as a child and her daughter was taken. she was 20 weeks pregnant, but she wanted the chance to leave that past behind her and it was only the compassion and generosity of her abortion provider who gave her that chance. today, she is taking care of herself and reconnecting with her daughter. at 13, michelle had irregular periods yet when she skipped two, she got scared and told her mom. she didn't know she was pregnant. her disabled mother was barely able to feed her and her four siblings as it was so they agreed she needed to have an abortion, but the whole process took time.
finally in 22 weeks, they secured an abortion with a provider who could assume the costs. i asked my colleagues to please answer these women with compassion. >> the gentlelady from california reserves. the gentlelady from tennessee is recognized. >> i yield two minutes to the gentlewoman from south dakota. >> the gentlelady from south dakota is recognized. >> a few moments ago, we heard the minority leader say we needed to do serious work, deal with bills dealing with the jobs and economy that the american people cared about. american support ending late- term abortion. look at the graphic that we have that says 64% of americans believe abortion should not be permitted in the second three months of pregnancy.
they believe it should not be permitted in the last three months of pregnancy. americans recognize that hr 1797 needs to be passed and needs to be done because it's the right thing to do. i have always been pro-life. i have a duty to protect those who are the most vulnerable. we have seen atrocities committed against unborn babies, babies that were born alive, atrocities against the men and their mothers. the details of the trial only highlight the need to protect these babies from people like this and prevent crimes like this from ever happening again. this bill stops abortions after the 20th week of pregnancy. scientific evidence shows that babies can feel pain at this point in the pregnancy. if they were born and simply given a chance, they could survive outside of the womb. they just need a chance. the topic of abortion is very personal for many stirring emotions on both sides. if we disagree on this issue, i
hope we can do it professionally. i don't find much of the rhetoric very respectful. they say there is a war on women. i'm not waging a war on anyone, my two daughters, or any other woman in this country. i would hope that stopping atrocities against little babies is something that we can all agree to put an end to. this would do exactly that and i encourage my colleagues to support its passage. >> the gentlelady from tennessee reserves and the gentlelady from california is recognized. excuse me. the gentlelady -- for what reason does the gentleman from new york raise -- >> i have a parliamentary inquiry. under house practices and procedure, is it not customary for someone on the committee of jurisdiction to manage time on the floor? or is it because the republicans have no women on the judiciary
committee that the gentlewoman from tennessee manages time on the floor? >> the gentleman in new york is engaging in debate. the gentlelady from california is recognized. >> i am pleased to recognize a member of the judiciary committee from new york, an excellent lawyer and a new member of the house of representatives for one and a half minutes. >> the gentleman from new york is recognized for one and half minutes. >> this bill is a violent assault on reproductive rights. this is an intrusion and the doctor-patient relationship and it is a continuation on the republican war against women and an unconstitutional effort to repeal a 40-year supreme court decision.
it is dead on arrival in the senate. the white house and the senate will veto it. a majority of the supreme court will declare it unconstitutional. why are we here wasting the time and the money of the american people on a few thailand extreme -- on a futile and extreme legislative joyride? this is not very goldwater conservatism. this is not even ronald reagan conservativism. this is conservativism gone wild. we can only hope for the good of the country that our friends on the other side of the aisle can get the extremism out of their system today so that we can return to the business of the american people tomorrow. i urge a no vote in yield back the balance of my time. >> the gentlelady from california reserves.
>> at this time, i yield one minute to nebraska. >> the gentleman from nebraska's recognized for one minute. >> madam speaker, there is something especially disturbing about the cruel violence that accompanies the termination of unborn children who, as evidence shows, could survive if they were just given the chance. this is not a waste of time. this is not an exercise in extremism. we are having this date and it demonstrates that our society is actually failing women. our culture is conflicted. there is something very dark about the topic of late abortion. it's uncomfortable to enter into this conversation, but we must. the marvels of science have opened up a window to show us life in the womb, which the prophets of old tell us is sacred.
the images of children developing week by week, month by month's feet to us more eloquently than any can. madam speaker, there are some lines where we should all agree -- should bepable. drawn. i think we are able. i hope we are capable. >> the gentleman's time has expired. the gentlelady from tennessee reserves. the gentlelady from california is recognized. >> i'm honored to yield two minutes to the gentlelady from the district of columbia, eleanor holmes norton. >> the gentlelady from d.c. is recognized for two minutes. >> i thank the gentlewoman from california for yielding to me. anti-choice groups try and fail to use d.c. to nullify roe versus wade just last year and they are now choosing a single criminal case in philadelphia to go after the reproductive health of all the nations women.
we will defeat this bill, too, with its bogus science, man- made myths about rape reported to the floor by an all-male majority of the judiciary. they are already losing ground with the challenges of forced on them and the language of the bill and the splitting of its manager. this bill is part of a parade of 20-week abortion bills moving through conservative states. none will succeed. they will not succeed not only because they are clearly unconstitutional but because women won't have it. the bill goes down the same road that helped elect barack obama president of the united states. in the end, women will win. i yield back the remainder of my
time. >> the gentlelady from tennessee >> thank you,. madam speaker. at this time, i yield two minutes to the chairman of the republican women policy committee, ms. elmers from north carolina. >> the gentlelady from north carolina is recognized for two minutes. >> thank you, madam speaker. thank you to my esteemed colleagues for handling the time here on the floor. on this very important issue. madam speaker, i rise today in anport of hr 1797, important bill that will protect women and unborn children. this legislation is supported by reliable, scientific research that shows that an unborn child at 20 weeks just nation can feel pain. couples with the now known danger fax of abortion is like gosnell, it is clear
that congress must act. we can all agree that a woman facing an unexpected pregnancy can be in a crisis situation. not knowing what she should do or what choices she can make. to put why it is faisal into place protections for women -- it is vital to put into place protections for women and ensure that people like kermit gosnell can never harm again. we have a duty to protect the american women and the unborn children of this country from harm. i urge my colleagues to vote for this important bill and support hr 1797. thank you, madam speaker. >> the gentlelady yield back. the gentlelady from tennessee reserves, and the gentlewoman from california is recognized. >> madam speaker, i am honored to yield to a leader for women's health, the gentlelady from .olorado, two minutes >> the gentlelady from colorado
is recognized for two minutes. >> thank you, madam speaker. at a time when americans want their elected officials to focus on jobs, and building our economy, here we are again focusing our efforts on limiting a woman's ability to make her own healthcare decisions. . as i have heard time and time again from women across this nation, women do not want politicians imposing their extreme beliefs on them when they are making tough decisions. i keep hearing from my colleagues on the other side of the aisle. here is a poll -- we just heard it today. congress's popular he is at an all-time low of 10%, and built like this are exactly why. is at an all-time low of 10%, and bills like this are directly why. there was legislation designed solely to take a women's health care decision out of her hands and that of her daughter, and instead to allow politicians to
in and substitute their judgment. now, this time, it did take the majority six months of the new session, but here we go again. right back down that same rabbit hole. today, we are voting on another extreme policy that is dangerous to women's health, interferes with the doctor-patient relationship, and is also unconstitutional. billtroduced, the provided no acceptance for victims of rape and, but last week, after some of us pointed that out, the bill sponsors maneuvered to add an exception for rape and victims. even this latest attempt is deeply offensive. the bill now requires the woman to prove that she had reported the rape to authorities in order to have access to legal medical procedures. limited again -- a woman would now have to prove she actually reported the rape to obtain a necessary medical procedure, making her a two-time victim.
this kind of logic that mr. is the callous, almost willful ignorance of the women's need across the nation, and it shows how the proponents have no respect for women abilities -- >> the gentlelady's time has expired. the gentlelady from california is reserving, -- >> how much time is running on a side? >> the gentlelady from tennessee have five minutes remaining, and the gentlelady from california have seven minutes remaining. the gentlelady from tennessee reserves, the gentlelady from california is recognized. >> modest figure, i would be delighted to yield to my loisague from california, capps, a nurse and a valued member of our delegation to minutes. the gentlewoman from california is recognized for two minutes. >> thank you, madam chair.
thank my colleagues for opposing this concert -- unconstitutional and cruel bill, and i rise in strong opposition to it. this legislation ignores the very real medical challenges that are faced by so many women. a breaking barriers to women who are trying desperately to access medical care, who are making some of the most personal and difficult choices and decisions -- this is a coldhearted, political maneuver that is being played out upon this house for today. women need the confidence to be able to make these difficult decisions and consults with their doctors, their families, their spiritual advisers. politicians have no place in that equation. if we really wanted to protect life, let's support efforts to readers -- to reduce unintended
pregnancies, improve maternal health, it improved funding for wake, for early child care, for supports for women who are raising children in the most difficult -- and families -- raising children in difficult circumstances. let us trust women to make decisions that are right for them. let us show a little compassion instead of offering condescending lectures, as the other side did last month to a very courageous witness who shared her life's story. it is long past time that this congress learn to trust women to make their own decision to i yield back. >> the gentleman yields back. -- the gentlelady yields back. >> at the time, i would continue to reserve. >> the gentlelady from tennessee will reserve. the gentlelady from l 20 is recognized. >> madam speaker, i am pleased to yield to the gentleman from massachusetts, a former prosecutor and valued member of
our congress. to me -- two minutes. >> the gentleman is recognized for two minutes. greg fratello minutes, i have worked -- >> for 12 years, i have worked with women of rape and. if you are truly carving out an exception, you would not be making it contingent on things that silence victims, things they have no control over. like being traumatized, like being threatened with your life if you talked, like not knowing the law because you are a minor and a victim of statutory rape, these are reasons why more than half the rates are never reported -- the rapes are never returned it -- reported. as a district attorney, i had cases with victims that not
even reports, yet we were able to convict the arbitrators with -- thevidence perpetrators with other evidence. reporting was not even necessary to convict criminals, but in this dill, it is necessary for to exercise their constitutional rights to privacy. fundamentally, those who support the land which in this bill don't understand that rape and are crimes. these are crimes of violence. crimes that should bring penalties to the perpetrator this bill brings penalties to the victim. i yield back. >> the gentleman yields back. the gentlelady from california reserves. from tennessee is recognized or >> thank you, madam speaker. at the time, i will continue to
reserve your >> the gentlelady from tennessee continues to reserve, the gentlewoman from california is recognized or greg i wonder if the gentlelady has a demo -- has additional speakers because -- >> is recognized. i wonder if the gentlelady has additional speakers. , madam speaker. we have no additional speakers, and if you want to complete, then i will close. >> if the gentlelady with suspense, the gentlelady from ur minutes fore fo many, any gentlelady from tennessee has five mr. manning. the gentle lady from california is recognized. >> i yield myself as much time as i may consume. i think this is in many ways a very sad day for this house. as we know, last week there was an uproar in the country relative to a statement that few
women become pregnant from rape. that's, of course, is not correct. there is no science to report that. of course, this week, we have a bill that has been authored to at a very limited exception for rape and that would be available only if the victim has reported the crime to the authorities. as our last speaker had indicated, this actually makes the situation for the victim of filings, a victim of rape, more onerous than four the perpetrators of the violence. something that i think is really quite wrong. the bill attacked the rights of women guaranteed by our ,onstitution to seek a safe legal procedure when they need
it. now, i have two children, i was thrilled when i became pregnant. most women are thrilled. look forward to a safe childbirth. premise he can be gamers. and the restrictions that are imposed in this bill that do not have adequate health exceptions can endanger this -- these women. at the subcommittee, we heard from a witness, a professor at george washington university, christy zink, about her story. she courageously told her story of seeking abortion care after her much wanted pregnancy was diagnosed with severe fetal anomalies at the 21st week. in fact, on anomalies that would mean that the much-wanted child would not survive, and that in fact her health could be compromised had she proceeded.
under this bill, she would not have the opportunity to preserve her own health. she would be required to carry a non-viable fetus to term. i just think that it's wrong. i do not think that is something that the country is asking the congress to do. that the exception for only applies to those under 18 is another mystery. if a girl is molested and raped by her father at age 18, is she less worthy of the protection of to health and the rights get abortion care than her sister at age 17? i think not. it simply makes no sense at all for that provision.
i would like to comment also briefly on the repeated discussion of dr. kermit gosnell. he is a monster. there is no one that i have heard in this congress or in this country who defends what dr. gosnell did. in fact, he is in prison serving a double life sentence for murder. what he did was illegal in addition to being a poor rent in every way. abhorrent in every way. we do not need to change the law to put someone like dr. gosnell behind bars. in fact, he is behind bars now. of this case ase a rationale for denying american women healthcare they may need is terrible. quite the time is expired or greg i would -- >> the time is
expired. the gentlelady from tennessee is recognized. correct thank you, madam speaker. we have heard every descriptive adjective that there can possibly be coming from the negative of why our colleagues on the other side of the aisle think that this debate is inappropriate. i do think that some of the most interesting has been a parliamentary inquiries to ask about what we're doing about jobs and student loans and veterans. i have to tell you all -- i agree this obama economy has to especially women and the female workforce and indeed we would like to see our colleagues in the senate and the administration will work with us on those issues. we let me refocus us on why are here. we are here because it is take anve that we
action and that we address -like abortions. we have stood on the floor today, and we have talked about what transpired with the conviction of hermit gosnell -- of kermit gosnell in philadelphia, performing abortions you want the 24 week limit, manslaughter for a woman seeking abortion at his clinic, three counts of killing babies born alive, and dozens of other heinous crimes. we have heard about how the necks are snipped, the heads are conjured, we even heard the statement from his attorney, who 17 weeks should be the limit. we are going at 20 weeks. atrocities,d other whether it is a case in texas, the case in new mexico, nurses, nurses in- pro-choice
delaware recently quit their business abortion because they said the letter was "ridiculously unsafe with meat market style smb line abortions were -- style assembly line abortions were happening." stated said he recently he performed more than 20,000 abortions on babies after 24 weeks just nation, and he is perfectly happy to do it like to have abortions on babies at seven months just nation. we know that it it -- just station. we know that it eight weeks, babies feel pain. we know that they are given indices you in prenatal surgeries. we know that they respond to pain, and we know these late- term abortions are incredibly painful. so that is why we stand today.
we want parity for these babies. for these unborn children. , we have seenm some of the ultrasounds, and you know what is so amazing, when you see these ultrasounds, and when people are waiting for the arrival of these precious children, they go ahead, they name them. they are expecting them. they are waiting for them. and they know that these children feel pain when they are harmed. .cience tells us so the american public is with us on this. 64% of all women think abortions should be eliminated when these unborn babies feel pain. -- of all americans, 60% this is a gallop usa today poll say second trimester
abortions should be eliminated. say third trimester abortions should be eliminated. so for those reasons, that is why we stand here today to support these women and these end theseldren to atrocities, to stand together, to make certain that that first guarantee, the guarantee to , so, the guarantee to life that you can pursue liberty and enter into the pursuit of happiness. today. why we stand here that is speaker, i have been honored to work with my colleagues. i know some will like the fact
that a former judiciary committee member has come to the floor to handle this bill. i have been so honored to be joined by so many pro-life women as we have discussed this issue, as we have come together to stand for this. i yield the balance of my time. >> the gentlelady time has expired. all time for debate has expired. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2013] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] >> next, barbara murray and senator boxer response. this is about 20 minutes. mrs. boxer: mr. president, a couple of us are going to come down here to the floor and talk ab >> mr. president, number of us are going to talk about an action that was taken in the house yesterday with all the issues that we have to confront, whether it is continuing the economic recovery and job creation, dealing with immigration, like we're trying to do here in the senate, dealing with going to conference on the budget, which
chairman murray has been pushing for it day after day after day, you would think that the house would take up one of those matters. but instead, what do they do you an extreme anti- choice bill. clearly they have not learned anything when voters rejected their efforts to defund planned parenthood, restrict women's access to birth control, and/or event of care for women and families. so the debate that they had in the house yesterday echoes of last year when republicans talked about "legitimate rat pregnancy as a "gift from god." the incident from premises of pe was "very low," and assertion that is flatly
contradicted by the facts. my colleague senator murray is here, and i would like to posit an her if she needs to speak first. i so thank her for organizing us this morning. in november, voters sent the message that they wanted to focus on real concerns, jobs, education, immigration reform. but now they are back. they're back in full force with an even more extreme anti-women, antichoice agenda. they should know this -- the women of america are watching and so are the men who support them. this house republican bill that was passed by them yesterday is a frontal assault on women's health. it puts women in danger of ofoming infertile, in danger suffering serious complications arising from cancer, blood
clots, kidney disease, or diabetes, just to name a ship you -- name a few of these conditions. it is an attack on 40 years of settled law, and it criminalizes doctors. furthermore, there is no real rape or exceptions. a date bans abortion i certain with no real rape or exception. let me explain that. the republican sponsored the bill claims there is an exception for clay -- four rape and insets. it was not in there, and they quickly added it, but seriously they don't fix the problem. yes, aey do is say woman can and a premises she is raped, but she has to report thatrape, and it is true many women choose not to report the rape. for their own private and personal reasons. so when you tell a woman, who
has been raped and who is too scared to report it, that she has to carry the rapist's child to term, that is not a rape exception, that is an outrage. when you tell a victim of who was too scared to reported that she has to carry that child to anm, that is not under -- exceptioincest acception. 60% of women do not report these crimes. there is no protection for those women in bill. there is also no health exception. the house republican bill has no health exception at all. it is a reckless disregard for the health of women. so for example, if the woman will face serious complications, even life-threatening publications if they continue a pregnancy, where they could suffer kidney failure, and a worsening of breast cancer and ovarian cancer, there is help for those women.
listen to the women who have suffered these problem's. for method ford was or her pregnancy, she had a pregnancy induced blood clot in her arm the only guarantee that she would not die and leave behind her five-year-old son was for judy to end the pregnancy. she and her husband made the difficult decision to terminate , and theancy congressman playing doctor over their are telling her what she should do for her family. they are not doctors. christy breaks up for jenny appeared kristi was pregnant with her second child. after an ultrasound, she found out her daughter would be born with a severe structural or its effect and would suffocate at birth. decisionthe difficult of ending that pregnancy at 22 weeks. vicky,ere is the key --
a woman who discovered month that her privacy that the fetus she was carrying suffered from major anomaly that had zero chance for surviving. because of her diabetes, the doctor determined that induced labor and cesarean were riskier than an abortion. that procedure not only protected vicky from the immediate medical risks, but adventure that should have more children in the future. and those congressmen over there want to get into her life. and tell her what to do, and tell her family what to do. why this bill is so extreme, it would throw doctors in jail for five years for providing women with the care that they need. and they talk about this brutal dr. that is now serving two consecutive life terms over there for what he did. that is the way the system should work. i you break the law, as
doctored it, you go to jail, but do not change the law so that if a good doctor is trying to help a good patient, he or she risks going to prison. , as bill is so extreme broad array of groups opposed that bill. the american congress of obstetricians and gynecologists. ofy represent thousands ob/gyn's nationwide. they said that this bill is dangerous for patient safety and health. a coalition of 15 religious groups oppose the bill. here's what they said -- we ,elieve, and americans including people of faith, overwhelming groups, that the decision to end a premises best left to a woman in the patient with her family, her doctor, and her face. our laws should not support -- excuse me, our laws should support and safeguard a woman's health, not deny access to care. we hearng, and before from i colleague, let me tell you this -- speaker boehner said
last week that creating jobs is "really our number one priority." majority leader eric cantor said house republicans are focused on creating jobs and restoring faith in government. no they are not. they are continuing the war on women. if this is what their agenda is, why are they doing that? why are they attacking 40 years of settled law? president obama has threatened to veto this law -- this bill saying it shows contempt for women and their rights, and here in the senate, my friend and i and many others are going to block this dangerous and extreme bill, and with that, i yield the floor. >> senator from washington. >> i want to thank the senator from california for coming out today to let everyone know how extreme this really is. we how important it is that send a message today that this bill is going to be what most republicans know deep down already the anti-choice bill
that they passed yesterday, a bill the "new york times called" the "most restrictive abortion bill to come to a bilvote in either chamber in a decade" is not going anywhere. the bill that they passed yesterday is a nonstarter here in the senate. with theonstarter overwhelming majority of american women. it is an attack on women's rights under the constitution. it is an attack on a woman's ability to make her own health care decisions. mr. president, there was a bill that was motivated politics, pure and simple. it amounts to little more than a charade designed to appeal to a dwindling faith -- a dwindling base. it is a charade that will and here in the senate today. mr. president, even more than reminding house republicans this bill has no chance of moving
forward, i am here today to provide a reality check. because apparently despite the -- millions of americans provided last november, house republicans need another one. despite the fact that in states across the country, voters rejected one candidate after d rape ando politicize went -- and ran on restricting a woman's right to choose. house republicans are now back at it again. despite that they had to bring in a paid pollster to tell the entire republican house caucus to stop talking about rape, clearly the message has not found in -- has not sunk in. for many republicans, it is 2012 all over again, which is more like it's 1950 all over again. in time when an all-male house republicans judiciary panel can join together among all-male, just like they did last
wednesday, to pass a bill that clearly ignores roe v wade. at a time when the same panel could reject efforts to protect the life and health of a mother or even reject efforts to make exceptions for rape or, a time when one of those panel members, a republican representative from arizona, can even try out the idea that women are not likely to become pregnant if they are raped. it is not 1950. that you're responsible and shameful lamed has been debunked experts of all stripes time and again. mr. president, it has been 40 years since roe v wade but the healthcare choices of women in the hands of women. we are not going back. need a house republicans reality check that american women are not going to have it turned back on them, i also
believe the american people need to know that house republicans and those on the far right targeting women's healthcare aren't going away anytime soon either. in fact, i wish i could say new restrictions on women's healthcare choices that the house passed yesterday were a surprise. or that i thought that after last fall, republicans would magically see the light. i wish i could say i bought the rhetoric from some republicans who criticized their own because they believed we should be focused on jobs and the economy at such a difficult time. the truth is -- attacks on women's healthcare have not stopped and apparently they will not stop. that is because they are a core part of that party's philosophy. in fact, all we have to do is look back at the moment that republicans in the house took power. we all remember back to 2010 after campaigning, by the way, across the country on a platform of jobs and the economy, the first three bills that they introduced were each direct
attacks on women's health in this country. the very first bill that they 1, what haver totally a limited funding for family planning and teen pregnancy prevention and included an amendment that would have clearly defined and planned parenthood. defunded planned parenthood. another one of their opening round of bills would've permanently caught a flight of the hyde amendment the d.c. abortion ban, the original version do not even include an exception for the health of the mother. finally, they introduce a bill right away that would have rolled back every single one of the gains we made for women in the healthcare reform bill. that republican bill would have cap on out-of- pocket expenses that protect women from losing their homes or their life savings if they get sick. it would have ended the ban on lifetime limits on coverage or
it would have allowed insurance companies to once again discriminate against women by charging them higher premiums. and it would have rolled back the guarantee that insurance companies cover contraceptives. and those were just their first three bills. since that time, we have seen women targeted on everything from contraception to violence against women act protection, to stripping the new protections divided under the affordable care act. through economic peril, budget crisis, record on implement, the attacks on women's health health remains constant. on capitol hill, and statehouses across the country, and in courtrooms at all levels, the fight against women making their own decisions about their health rages on. madame president, republicans have shown they will go to just about any links to limit access to care. they have put politics between women and their own health care. they put employers between women
and their health care. they have even threatened to shut down the government over this very issue. they have shown that this is not about what is best for women or men, in their own family landing decisions. instead, it is about political calculations. it is about appeasing the far right. it is about their continued effort to do whatever it takes to push their extreme agenda. but, as we have seen with this latest effort, the deck is stacked against them because the constitution is not going anywhere. he cut senators like me and senator boxer -- we are not going anywhere either. because women who believe republicans should not be making their healthcare decisions aren't going anywhere. and therefore, this bill is not going anywhere. >> will the senator yield? >> yes. >> i would like to engage my friend in a colloquy. we're very fortunate,, you and i, because we share important
committees here. all the committees are important. you the budget committee and iv environment of public works committee. and both of us have worked hard to get important bills through the united states senate. you the budget of the united states of america, and for me, the water resources development act, which deals with making sure that the infrastructure around our water is found. 500,000 jobs go along with it. and yours is critical because you attack the issue of jobs and deficits and the rest. so it seems to me, and i want to know if my friend agrees with me, that there is an agenda that the house republican house can embrace to deal with what really is concerning the american people. , theas taking your bill budget bill, to conference after they went out and campaigned all
over the country saying we did not want a budget, we passed a budget, and now they're stopping the budget. picking up and passing the water resources bill, passing their own version of it. certainly dealing with copperheads of immigration reform, which is critical, and i was disheartened to see speaker boehner say -- i'm not that interested in conference of immigration reform. why doesn't he take a look at the budgetary impact, which is so positive for our nation, of doing this, and eating people out of the shadows, so does my friend agree that there is no shortage of important and critical issues facing the american people that they could take up their other than an attack on women and women's health? >> let me just respond this way. when i go home and i go home every weekend, my constituents talk to me about this big word called sequestration and its
impact on their lives, whether they've been furloughed and their paycheck is much smaller or whether they are running a violence against women center and having to close down facilities or whether they are sending their kids to preschool and teachers have been laid off or whether or not their small little pizza shop is going to have to close because so many people have been furloughed and cut back because of sequestration. and what they want us to do is to invest in our infrastructure to invest in our education, to make our country strong for the future, and to quit governing by crisis. which is why i've come to the floor as the snample california knows constantly to say we have passed our budget. the house has passed our budget to sol this and to replace sequestration in a responsible and fair way we need to get to conference but we are being blocked by a handful of republicans here on the senate floor and over in the house
they are not appointing conferees because apparently they want to take the floor time to attack women's health care. this is not what the country is telling us to do. they are telling us to do our job and get a budget done so they have certainty. they are telling us to do our job and make sure that we invest in the bill that senator boxer has worked so hard to do so that the corps of engineer projects that provides jobs and provides the kind of economy that they need is taken care of. they elect us to come back here and do the job of this country. so yes, it is frustrating to me to have to come to the floor one more time to talk about abortion when we should be talking about the investments that need to be made, when we should be passing a budget, we should be investing in our children and their future and providing people with jobs and job training and research that is so important at universities across this country so that we can be a good place 30 years from now in this country and be
competitive. i would is a my colleague yes it appears to me that the country has an agenda that is vastly different than the house and republicans in the far right. >> the senator from california. >> i think it really says it all here. we need to do our work on the issues that matter to people. we need to make sure this economic recovery gains steam. we need to make sure we look at the sequester and fix it. we need to make sure we have deficit reduction but investment. and we need to stand strong here in the senate, and we will. and hopefully our house colleagues will change their mind. the republicans over there set the agenda. get to the business of the people and stop attacking women. and with that in mind, scuke to set aside the pending amendment and call up my amendment number 1240. >> last week on capitol hill the senate continued debate on the immigration bill. thursday republican senators
hovepb and corker announced a border security amendment that would increase the u.s. mexico border patrol fencing and high tech monitoring. here's a look at their amendment from the senate floor. t's just over an hour. >> i rise today to discuss an amendment that i will be introducing to senate bill 7 4, the comprehensive immigration reform legislation that the senate body is carefully considering and debating. that amendment is the hoven, corker, border security eafment it is being finalized and i plan to introduce it this afternoon along with the senator from the great state of tennessee senator bob corker who is here with me. and i want to thank him for the tremendous work that he has done on this legislation. he has been absolutely
inspirational to work with. a great leader. and somebody who is really working to do immigration reform the right way, to get a bipartisan solution that truly addresses the challenges that we face with immigration reform and to get it done the right way. in addition to senator corker and myself, other sponsors include senator john mccain, senator lindsey graham, senator marco rubio, senator jeff flake, senator kelly ayotte, dean he willer and others joining us on this legislation. i believe a number of them will be down here to provide their comments as well. i believe that the first order of business for immigration reform is to secure the border. i will repeat that. the first order of business for immigration reform is to secure the border.
americans want immigration reform. of that there is no doubt. but they want us to get it right. and that means first and foremost securing the border. in 19 86 president reagan and the congress granted legalized status to between 3 and 4 million illegal immigrants. the intent was to once and for all resolve the immigration problem. obviously it didn't. here we are today with more than 11 million illegal immigrants in this country. and here we are today with a border that is still not been secured. ironically, while illegal immigrants continue to come into our country because we have not secured the border, at the same time, our immigration laws do not meet the needs of our modern day workforce for stem trained workers and other specialty and high demand
areas. in fact, one of the strengths of the underlying bill drafted by the gang of 8 on a bipartisan basis along with amendments that have already been added in committee one of the strengths is that it includes provisions that will help us with our workforce needs. these provisions were adopted from legislation that myself and other senators sponsored like legislation led by the esteemed senator from texas, senator john cornen which would allow an increased number of college graduates, post college degreed individuals, stem, science technology engineering and math trained individuals, and other highly skilled, highly trained people who will -- who could stay in this country, people we need to help grow our economy, and to help create jobs. we also want people who can bring capital and job creating opportunities to come to our country.
and i believe the underlying bill has captured these concepts. the immigration innovation legislation that i was proud to cosponsor with senators hatch and clobe char, coons, and others, is included in this bill. we're not done. we're not done. we must do more to secure the border in this legislation. that's exactly what we are offering here today. it is a very straightforward way to secure our border and to do so before allowing a pathway to legal permanent residency for those who came here illegally. furthermore, it will ensure that we do not repeat the error we made before. failure to secure our border will while at the same time fixing our congration laws. it builds on what is already in the underlying bill and provides objective verifiable standards and met rirks to do
so. our legislation will provide significantly more resources to secure the border. more man power, more fencing, more technology. and those resources must be fully deployed and operational before green card status is allowed. the legislation provides five specific conditions which must be met before anyone in rpi status, registered provisional immigrant status, can be adjusted or transitioned to lpr, lawful permanent resident status. green cards. these conditions are first we're including a comprehensive southern border security plan right in the legislation. this is a 3.2 billion high teck plan. the plan is detailed. border sector by border sector. and it includes combinations of conventional security infrastructure like observation towers, fixed and mobile camera
systems, helicopter, planes, and other physical surveillance equipment to secure the border. the plan also includes high-tech tools like mobile surveillance systems, seismic images, infra red ground sensors and other equipped with long-range they remember comblaging cameras. the secretary of homeland security together with the secretary of defense and the comptroller general of the u.s. must certify to the congress that this comp hebsive southern border security strategy is deployed and operational. that means in place and operating other than routine maintenance. that's the first requirement before the adjustment to lpr status. second, dhs must deploy and maintain