This bill violates the conscience of the American people. It violates the principle that we should not spend more than we have. This bill is not reform. It just makes our existing entitlement crisis even worse. This bill violates the belief held by more than 70 percent of Americans that money collected by the government should not be used to pay for abortion or abortion coverage, but that's what this bill does. Regardless of the colloquy, an Executive order is not a statute. It doesn't trump a statute. The government will end up directly paying for abortions at community health centers. Taxpayer subsidies will, for the first time in decades, subsidize insurance coverage that includes abortion. The bill and the accompanying Executive order turns over the protection of the unborn to the most pro-abortion President in our history. This extreme legislation is being forced on an unwilling Nation. It is the most pro-abortion bill and the largest expansion of abortion in our history. No Member who votes for it will ever be able to claim again that they have always stood on the side of the unborn. I'm sad to say this. This is a career-defining vote. There will be no living it down. I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on this terrible bill.
Joe Pitts: “This bill violates the conscience of the American people. It violates the principle that we should not spend more than…”
Editor's note · Context
Speaker Pitts is opposing a bill related to abortion funding and its implications for American values.
Share
More from Joe Pitts
Today's hearing will be taking a close look at the United States Preventive Services Task Force, created in 1984 as an independent, volunteer panel of 16 national experts in prevention, primary care, and evidence-based medicine and tasked…
Medicaid already provides a critical safety net for providing care for some of our youngest and most vulnerable patients.
So, moving forward, the committee welcomes feedback on how we can improve care for children with medical complexity without disrupting the successful approaches already in place.
Explicitly creating a program exclusively for catfish seems to be unnecessary, and it directs resources away from high-risk foods.





