Political Quotes

Jerry Nadler: I rise to oppose the Istook amendment calling for a $33 million increase in abstinence-only education. First, everyone…

On the recordOctober 11, 2001
I rise to oppose the Istook amendment calling for a $33 million increase in abstinence-only education. First, everyone should understand one thing--this program is already receiving a 100 percent increase in its funding over last year. That is without the Istook amendment. To put that in perspective--the President's number one priority during his campaign (besides tax cuts) was education--and that receives a 17 percent increase. So, make no mistake about it, the Congress is already spending large sums on the abstinence-only program, and we won't know the effectiveness and results of the program until the congressionally mandated report comes due in 2005. What we do know is that publicly funded family planning has a significant effect on teen pregnancy. Each year, family planning services prevent an estimated 386,000 teenagers from becoming pregnant. Title X funding plays a critical role in the lives of teens across America--in preventing unwanted pregnancy and in providing needed services to young people. Through title X teens receive gynecological exams, screening for breast and cervical cancer, STD treatment, HIV testing, contraceptive care, and counseling. These services are desperately needed since we know that more than 750,000 teenagers become pregnant each year, and 80 percent of those pregnancies are unintended.
Said by
Jerry Nadler
Democratic · New York

Editor's note · Context

Opposing the Istook amendment for increased funding for abstinence-only education.

Share

More from Jerry Nadler

Dec 17, 2024

We are going around in circles, but let me just add one thing. We call this the Midnight Rules Relief Act, but it is a big midnight. It extends the entire year, the last year of any President's administration. A whole year, that is hardly…

govinfo.gov
Jan 16, 2025

Let's be very clear. Sexual offenses and domestic violence are serious crimes and are already grounds for deportability and inadmissibility, as they should be. Unfortunately, this bill is so poorly drafted that it would result in extremely…

govinfo.gov
Jun 29, 2025

If their operations are legitimate and above-board, why is there a need for anonymity, and why don't they need warrants to come onto private property?

commondreams.org
Dec 10, 2024

It's a gross abuse and ought to be investigated, although with Trump coming in, he's not gonna investigate it.

alternet.org

Other voices in this conversation