[Congressional Record Volume 168, Number 13 (Thursday, January 20, 2022)]
[Senate]
[Pages S365-S367]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
Cloture Motion
Mr. SCHUMER. Mr. President, I send a cloture motion to the desk.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The cloture motion having been presented under
rule XXII, the Chair directs the clerk to read the motion.
The legislative clerk read as follows:
Cloture Motion
We, the undersigned Senators, in accordance with the
provisions of rule XXII of the Standing Rules of the Senate,
do hereby move to bring to a close debate on the nomination
of Executive Calendar No. 654, Leonard Philip Stark, of
Delaware, to be United States Circuit Judge for the Federal
Circuit.
Charles E. Schumer, Richard J. Durbin, Richard
Blumenthal, Gary C. Peters, Robert P. Casey, Jr.,
Sheldon Whitehouse, Martin Henrich, Sherrod Brown,
Patty Murray, Tammy Duckworth, Tim Kaine, Elizabeth
Warren, Mazie K. Hirono, Alex Padilla, Tina Smith,
Christopher A. Coons, Amy Klobuchar, Jon Tester.
Mr. SCHUMER. And, finally, I ask unanimous consent that the mandatory
quorum calls for the cloture motions filed today, January 20, be
waived.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Mr. SCHUMER. I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Washington.
Unanimous Consent Request--S. 401
Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, this weekend is the anniversary of the
landmark Roe v. Wade decision. It is a decision that, without a doubt,
changed lives for the better. It prevented a lot of harm and helped
keep many patients healthy. It opened doors for women to pursue their
career and education goals and affirmed the right to control our own
bodies and our own futures.
Roe was a giant leap forward, and a majority of Americans want to
protect it. But since Roe was decided, extreme Republicans have peddled
blatant misinformation, filled our judicial system with anti-abortion
judges, and passed State laws designed solely to make it harder to get
abortions--laws that are now hurting people of color, the LGBTQ+
community, immigrants, young people, people with low incomes, and
people with disabilities the most. And they are not stopping at
abortion. They are pushing to make it harder to get birth control and
defund family planning clinics--including Planned Parenthood--which
provide critical healthcare for so many communities.
In Texas, Republicans have passed, and the Supreme Court green-lit, a
law that essentially bans abortions and is enforced by pitting neighbor
against neighbor. And even though medication abortion pills are safe to
take at home, extreme Republicans are now pushing to pass laws that not
only dictate what happens in a doctor's office but also make it harder
for patients to take a pill in their very own living room.
You know, Republicans do like to talk about Big Government, but
overriding people's individual decisions and science to dictate what
people can do in their own homes sounds like a lot of overreach.
The Senator from Oklahoma is here with a bill today that has one
goal: to make it harder to get abortion care by allowing someone else's
personal beliefs, rather than a patient's best interest, to determine a
patient's care. And that is just one example of the extreme agenda
Republicans are pushing, today and every day.
I have heard from so many people about the problems and the harm this
has caused in their lives. I have heard from many patients who had to
jump through unnecessary or even harmful hoops to get the abortion care
they needed: patients who had to endure invasive ultrasounds that were
medically unnecessary before they could get an abortion; patients who
were harassed going in and out of a clinic; patients who had to drive
hours or even days to get to the nearest abortion provider or who
zeroed out their bank account to afford a plane ticket or childcare;
patients, including many in Texas, who didn't have the means to get the
abortion care they needed and were forced to stay pregnant when they
did not want to be.
And then the Supreme Court took on a direct challenge to Roe that
threatens the constitutional right to abortion. I have heard nonstop
from people who are very anxious about their future, people who are
scared and frustrated, people who, like the majority of Americans, want
to protect Roe, who want to live in a country where everyone can make
their own decisions about pregnancy and parenting--free from political
interference.
That is exactly why I am fighting so hard to protect the right to
abortion at the Federal level by passing the Women's Health Protection
Act. That bill will safeguard Roe and help make its promises a reality
for everyone, no matter their ZIP Code, by ensuring their
constitutional right to abortion is not undermined by State abortion
bans and restrictions.
But Republican attacks from every angle, like the one we will witness
now, means there is no one easy fix.
We have got to do everything we can to undo the damage the extreme
Republicans have caused in our laws and in our lives. And that is why I
am fighting so hard for the over-the-counter birth control and to make
health insurance companies follow the law rather than forcing patients
to pay out of pocket for contraception.
It is why I am fighting to make a historic investment in title X
family planning centers, which help make healthcare like birth control,
STI screenings, and more available to everyone, regardless of their
income.
And it is why I am asking for everyone to join me in this fight. It
is going to take all of us working together to protect reproductive
rights, and there is no action too small.
Share your story. Speak up about what reproductive rights mean to
you. Support a local organization helping to get patients the
reproductive healthcare they need. Work to combat Republicans'
misinformation. Fight to pass local and State laws protecting abortion
rights.
And here is something to remember while you do it: It is true that
extreme Republicans have worked nonstop to roll back progress on
reproductive rights and that abortion access is at risk like never
before.
But this is also true: Since Roe, millions and millions of American
women and men grew up knowing access to abortion is a constitutional
right. Millions and millions more saw how much Roe opened doors for
women and empowered people to make their own personal decisions about
their body and their future.
The vast majority of Americans believe people should be trusted to
make their own decisions about whether or not to get an abortion and
that whether and when to get pregnant is a personal decision, not a
decision that should be made by any politician or taken away from them
because of how much money they have or where they live.
[[Page S366]]
We can make this a reality, but we have got to fight for it. That is
what I am doing; that is what I am going to keep doing; and I am very
glad to have so many people alongside.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Oklahoma.
Mr. LANKFORD. Mr. President, I guess I am one of those extreme
Republicans that believe that a child who sucks their thumb, wiggles
their toes and fingers, feels pain, has a beating heart, has a
functioning nervous system, has DNA that is different than the mom or
the dad is a baby.
I didn't think that was an extreme position to see a child as self-
evident. That is a child. Now, I understand Americans are divided on
whether children in the womb are convenient or inconvenient, and if
they are inconvenient, they can be thrown away as medical waste, but if
they are convenient, they are kept.
I just think every child is precious, and I think every child should
be honored and protected. So I guess that makes me extreme.
The bill that I bring today is a bill that just looks at the millions
and millions and millions of Americans who believe like I do. Many of
them work in hospitals, and they joined the healthcare profession and
got a medical degree because they wanted to save life. They wanted to
be a part of protecting individuals at their most critical times, but
they also had this real belief--that is a science-based belief, by the
way--that a child in the womb is just like a child outside the womb,
the only difference is time.
Forty weeks ago, you were 40 weeks younger. That child in the womb at
conception and the child outside the womb is just 40 weeks older, just
like you are 40 weeks older than what you were 40 weeks ago. It is
still a child.
For the millions of Americans who believe like that, we have had
conscience-protection laws on the books, for a long time. In fact,
there are 25 conscience-protection laws on the books in America right
now. Many of these have not been controversial. In fact, if we go
through the church amendments, when they were done, they protect the
conscience rights of individuals and entities that object to performing
or assisting in the performance of abortions or sterilizations against
their religious beliefs or moral convictions.
When that passed, almost 50 years ago now, it passed 92 to 1 in this
body. It just wasn't that controversial. We understood that people
disagreed on the issue of abortion. And why would you ever compel
someone to be able to perform an abortion when their conscience objects
to that?
In 2004, Congress created the Weldon amendment. It is on all of our
annual appropriations bills. The Weldon amendment bars Federal
Government, State and local government, and recipients of Federal funds
from discriminating against healthcare entities that refuse to provide,
pay for, or provide coverage or refer for abortions. It has not been
that controversial.
In fact, it was on the Consolidated Appropriations Act last year,
which passed 92 to 6. This has not been that controversial to be able
to honor the rights of individuals.
Now, there are some things that have changed. Some of these 25 laws
have not been enforced. In fact, these 25 conscience protections that
are on our books right now are dependent on the executive branch to
actually enforce those laws. If I go back during the Trump
administration, they confronted California because California mandated
that insurance providers had to provide abortion coverage. Well, that
is not consistent with our law.
And so the administration pushed them and said: No, you can't compel
a religious institution that has a moral objection to abortion in your
State; you can't make them buy abortion coverage and actually pay into
that system--though California is.
So the Trump administration said to them: No, you have got to allow
those folks to have the option; that is the Federal law. And that was
in the process of being enforced until this administration took the
leadership and Xavier Becerra, who was the attorney general of
California, then moved to HHS and immediately dropped the suit against
California, his old State--curious.
So the religious entities don't have any recourse in California
because the executive branch won't enforce it.
Let me give you another example. There was an employer, University of
Vermont Medical Center. They were pressed with a lawsuit against them
for knowingly, willfully, and repeatedly violating the Church
amendments. They had nurses that were there that said: I have a
conscience issue. I don't want to participate in abortion, and the
University of Vermont Medical Center would compel them to perform
abortions or they would lose their job.
It is in direct violation of Federal law and the conscience
protections. So there was a lawsuit against them to be able to have
them actually carry out Federal law.
When the Biden administration came in, Xavier Becerra immediately
dropped that lawsuit. There was no settlement. There was no statement
about it. Though it is Federal law that you can't violate someone's
conscience protections, they said: We are not going to enforce that
Federal law--though it was in the process of being enforced.
So the question is, For religious entities in California or for a
nurse in Vermont, where do they go? If the entity that is charged under
Federal law--25 Federal laws, to be exact, to actually allow people to
have conscience protections--if that entity says, ``We won't do it,''
what happens?
Well, this bill is very straightforward. It just gives the ability
for that individual to be able to press a suit for their own rights.
If the Federal Government will not enforce the law, this allows that
individual to step up and say: Then, I will then file charges that you
are in violation of Federal law for this--to protect their rights as a
citizen.
Quite frankly, it is not any different than what any other citizen
would do anywhere else--that if they had some civil violation against
them that was clearly in violation of their rights, they would be able
to go to court and be able to say: My rights have been violated; here
is the statute. And they would have their day in court.
That is not allowed currently in Federal law. It has to be the
executive branch to carry it out. And, as we have learned, it is under
the whims of the executive branch whether they are going to carry that
out or not.
But, listen, this is really not that controversial in America. The
most recent survey that was done by the Knights of Columbus that
actually just came out this week asked a question about conscience
protections. It was a very straightforward question. And the answer
came back: 75 percent of the individuals surveyed said that doctors and
nurses should not be forced to perform abortions if they have a
religious objection.
Now, we are very divided on the issue of abortion, but our Nation is
really not that divided on the issue of conscience protections. This
is, Can an employer compel someone to do something that violates their
religious beliefs or moral beliefs? And if they don't, they lose their
job. That is the only question that is in this, and that is why I bring
it to this body today. That is my simple request.
Now, this body knows, and Senator Murray, who is on the floor with me
today, knows full well of my beliefs about the value of every single
child. I do look forward to a day that we are post-Roe as a nation and
the Supreme Court of the United States is not compelling every State to
have abortions carried out that are elective abortions in their State.
A post-Roe nation is not a nation that has no abortion. It is a
nation where, State to State, each State makes those decisions.
I have brought bills dealing with everything from chemical abortions
to 20-week, pain-capable bills dealing with Down syndrome children,
dealing with Planned Parenthood, dealing with all sorts of different
issues.
This issue today is very specific, though--just about conscientious
objectors. Should they be compelled to violate their beliefs by their
employer?
So as if in legislative session, I ask unanimous consent that the
Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions be discharged from
further consideration of S. 401 and the Senate proceed to its immediate
consideration. I further ask that the bill be considered read a third
time and
[[Page S367]]
passed, and that the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid
upon the table.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
Mrs. MURRAY. I object.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Objection is heard.
Mr. LANKFORD. Mr. President, to the Chair, we will as a nation
process through this in the days ahead. This body has very strict laws
that cover my State and many other States for a lot of other things.
In my State, if you go to build a building in the southeast part of
my State, you have to do frequent inspections to make sure the burying
beetle is not going to be harmed in that area because it is considered
threatened.
If you are in the western part of my State, you can't build certain
buildings in certain places or carry out certain farming activities
because the lesser prairie-chicken is there.
If you are in California, they pour their water--their great water--
out of the mountains into the ocean because if they don't, it may harm
the smelt.
If you are building a bridge in Oklahoma, at certain times of the
year, and a migratory bird puts up a nest in that construction area,
you have to stop construction, because migratory bird eggs are
valuable, burying beetles are valuable, prairie-chickens are valuable,
smelts are available, but we throw children in the trash.
We have got to figure this out as a nation, and, currently, we seem
to be afraid to talk about it or even to protect the rights of
individuals who disagree about this in the workplace. We have got to
figure this out as a nation.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Van Hollen). The Senator from Wyoming.