Today we consider H.R. 7, the misleadingly named No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion bill. Congress, unfortunately, already prohibits Federal funding of abortion. This bill does not simply codify existing law. Rather, it modifies and extends…

I think that it is improper, under the precedence of the House, to have the Subcommittee reconvene prior to or while H.R. 7 is still being debated on the floor.

Report from the Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board, January 23, 2014, submitted by the Honorable Jerrold Nadler, a Representative in Congress from the State of New York, and Member, Committee on the Judiciary.

I do believe that we have to do a better job of protecting content owners, artists, musicians and creators.

The Affordable Care Act requires participating insurance plans to segregate monies for abortion services from all other funds, a measure my anti-choice colleagues insist was necessary to prevent Federal funding of abortion.

As I have said in the past, never in more than 20 years as a Member of this body have I seen a colleague treated as contemptuously as our colleague from the District of Columbia is being treated today.

The District of Columbia is not a colony, it is part of the United States, and its people are entitled to be treated with the same respect that we demand for the people we represent.

This bill, for the first time ever, denies tax deductions and credits for women who use their own money to pay for an abortion.

The common courtesy of the House demands that Ms. Norton be able to testify.

I regret that the Chairman objects. I would hope that he would reconsider what is normally a fairly pedestrian request.

The right of a woman to decide whether to become pregnant and whether to continue or terminate her pregnancy is protected by the Constitution.

H.R. 7 is not the mere codification of existing law. This bill seeks to extend current funding restrictions.