Political Quotes

Christopher Shays: I support the fiscal year 2005 Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education Appropriations Bill, but I would like to…

On the recordSeptember 9, 2004
I support the fiscal year 2005 Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education Appropriations Bill, but I would like to state my opposition to the Weldon refusal clause provision. The Weldon provision would exempt health care companies from any federal, state or local government law that ensures women have access to reproductive health services, including information about abortion. If passed, this provision would have many negative effects. It would override federal Title X guidelines that ensure women receive full medical information. A fundamental principle of Title X, the national family planning program, ensures pregnant women who request information about all their medical options, including abortion, be given that information, including a referral upon patient request. I am also concerned this bill does not include an increase in funding for Title X. Each year approximately 4.5 million low-income women and men receive basic health care through 4,600 clinics nation wide that receive Title X funds. This program reduces unintended pregnancies and makes abortion less necessary. Had funding for Title X kept pace with inflation since 1980, with no additional increases, it would be funded today at double its current budget. While Title X is receiving flat funding from last year, H.R. 5006 gives abstinence-only programs an increase of $35 million. Unlike Title X, abstinence-only programs do not provide clinical health services.
Said by
Christopher Shays
Connecticut

Editor's note · Context

Addressing concerns about the Weldon refusal clause in the 2005 Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education Appropriations Bill.

Share

More from Christopher Shays

Sep 9, 2013

Rather than focusing on destroying elements of the Syrian government forces and choosing sides in a truly brutal civil war, our focus should be on how do we get these chemical weapons out of Syria.

congress.gov
Apr 22, 2008

Right. Because what we do is we cap the payroll at $120,000. And so it ends up being $12,000 an employer would pay. But when I was speaking of someone with 500 employees, they would pay $21,000 salary, they pay 5.25, 5¼ percent of payroll…

govinfo.gov
Sep 9, 2013

What are we hoping to achieve in Syria, and why do we think doing what we are planning on doing will give us the results we want?

congress.gov
Apr 22, 2008

I would love to, if you wouldn't mind, just point out that what we have done in this legislation is that when the bill passes, it will take 2 years to be implemented so that as we vote out the legislation with whatever changes are in…

govinfo.gov

Other voices in this conversation