So for all of those reasons, of course this rule steps into the relationship between a patient and a provider.

I mean, in my opinion, what good does it do the public to have a rulemaking process that goes on and on and never produces a rule?

A major overarching problem with the Federal pipeline safety program is that it takes the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration--PHMSA--too long to finalize congressional mandates.

Today's hearing is the latest step in this committee's ongoing work to hold the Trump administration accountable for the dramatic changes it has proposed to our nation's Title X Family Planning Program.

But I mean were there any OIG audits?

The Final Rule would create a class of women who are barred from receiving care consistent with accepted and established professional medical standards.

Applying an ambiguous legal standard of recklessness will not advance pipeline safety.

I commend the bill sponsors for their thoughtful effort and I am hopeful we can include several ideas from their proposal in a final pipeline safety reauthorization bill.

I am just afraid that you know they are just going to give out Title X funds to some group that you know just wants to narrowly focus their medical advice or whatever, or their advice on just a few things and not the full range of options…

I hope and expect that the final product the committee reports will be a strong bipartisan bill.

Now you said, I guess in response to Dr. Ruiz, that there has been confusion whether Title X funds have been inappropriately used to perform abortions.

It seems very clear the rule was written to open the door to ideological providers and completely walks away from our commitment to be client-centered in family planning care.