Liz Cheney

Ms. CHENEY

Ms. CHENEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Collins).

Ms. CHENEY. Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 548 and ask for its immediate consideration.

Ms. CHENEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Mitchell).

Ms. CHENEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time, and I move the previous question on the resolution.

Ms. CHENEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the gentleman from Arizona for his work on this issue and for introducing this important bill. It is undeniable that we have a much better understanding today of life inside the womb than we did at the time of the passage of Roe v. Wade. My colleagues on the other side of the aisle express a commitment to science in all cases except where it matters most, in those cases that involve the preservation of human life. They don't want to talk about babies. They don't want to talk about the horrific procedures that we are dealing with today, and we have to. It is our obligation to. Mr. Speaker, our country has banned partial-birth abortion in a decision that was upheld by the Supreme Court, and I would just urge my colleagues to look at the decision in that opinion, Gonzales v. Carhart, the decision written by Justice Kennedy: talking in specific, quoting a nurse, talking about the reaction of a 26-week-old baby who was a victim of partial-birth abortion, what their physical reaction is, the mother of little babies reading that, and the description of what happens to a baby when they are killed--watching their hands expand and then contract, as any mother of a newborn infant has watched many times. It is truly horrific, and I think, as a society, Mr. Speaker, we have to be willing to face the exact nature of what it is we are talking about. We have an obligation as elected Representatives, Mr. Speaker, to protect the lives of these unborn babies. This legislation would do that. We have a moral obligation, and it is our job. It is in the interest of the States to make sure, Mr. Speaker, that we do everything possible to protect life. In this case, Mr. Speaker, we are talking about a bill that would protect babies at moments when we know they can feel pain in the womb. Therefore, Mr. Speaker, I urge the adoption of both the rule and of H.R. 36 so that we can continue to protect and save lives.

Ms. CHENEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Lamborn).

Ms. CHENEY. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. CHENEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Let me just say, Mr. Speaker, that the scientific evidence is extensive in terms of the pain that these unborn babies feel. In particular, the standard of care, Mr. Speaker, for babies who are born prematurely, as well as for babies who are patients in vitro, is to provide anesthesia. And that standard of care is based upon evidence that these babies have pain receptors, that these babies react to pain, and that they feel pain. Mr. Speaker, I think the notion that there is no scientific evidence for this is flat wrong. I don't think we can ignore the example of babies like Micah, babies who are born, babies who grow up to lead very full and healthy lives and who deserve a chance. Mr. Speaker, I think that as individuals and as Representatives, elected Representatives, it is our obligation, in fact, to do everything we can to protect these babies, and that is what this bill is about. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. CHENEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I think that it is important to acknowledge the pain of the cases that those on the other side of the aisle are mentioning. But I would note, Mr. Speaker, that there has been no mention, no discussion on the other side of the aisle about the pain that these babies feel, and that when you are in a situation like the ones that have been described, what is happening is those babies are being subjected to really, oftentimes, a horrific procedure. The question is, because a baby is found to have some chromosomal anomaly, to have some very severe handicap, whether or not they deserve to be subjected to the pain we now know they feel. In fact, Mr. Speaker, we have seen work done by Northwestern University that demonstrates that the pain that these young preemies feel may, in fact, be even worse than the pain that older babies feel, because the pain inhibitors develop later in life than the pain receptors do. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues on the other side of the aisle not to ignore the challenges and the issues involved here with respect to the pain that these babies feel. I would also note, Mr. Speaker, that the CBO, in a very unusual step, has assessed that this bill itself would save 2,750 lives annually. That is something that the CBO doesn't often do, but it is very important for us to recognize. I don't think we can have a discussion about this bill, about these issues, without acknowledging the pain that these babies feel, and I would urge my colleagues on the other side of the aisle to focus on that as well. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. CHENEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Pittenger).

Ms. CHENEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from Tennessee (Mrs. Blackburn).

Ms. CHENEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Kelly).

Ms. CHENEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Rothfus).

Ms. CHENEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentlewoman from Utah (Mrs. Love).

Ms. CHENEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Smith).

Ms. CHENEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from Missouri (Mrs. Hartzler).

Ms. CHENEY. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of House Resolution 548, which provides a closed rule for consideration of H.R. 36, the Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act. This important bill protects and extends compassion to the most vulnerable among us, the unborn, by prohibiting abortions, with limited exceptions, after the point at which scientific evidence shows that an unborn child can feel pain. Mr. Speaker, this really should be called Micah's bill in honor of a little boy named Micah Pickering, who was here on the Hill last week with his mom. He was born at 20 weeks old. And we saw, and we see from babies like Micah, that with the right medical care, babies born at 20 weeks can survive and grow into healthy adults. Micah's mother spoke last week about her experiences: ``When Micah was born, his eyes were still fused shut. His bones were not hardened yet. He couldn't breathe on his own. He was medicated to stay comfortable from pain. We were told not to touch his skin, as his skin was so sensitive it could hurt him and tear the skin. I was there to see his first set of hiccups, his first sneezes, and his first drop of milk placed on his lips. His first smile, his first laugh. He was alive. He was fighting. He wanted to live.'' Today, Mr. Speaker, Micah is a healthy 5-year-old boy. Babies like Micah at 20 weeks have well developed brains and central nervous systems, developed enough so that medical evidence has increasingly confirmed these babies feel pain, and not only pain, but intense and possibly excruciating pain. Research also indicates that, after 20 weeks, an unborn baby's responses to painful stimuli are similar to adult responses, to the extent that when surgeons, Mr. Speaker, are performing in-utero surgery, corrective procedures on these unborn children, surgeons have seen babies flinch, jerk, and recoil from those sharp objects and incisions. In response to this, Mr. Speaker, surgeons routinely now administer anesthesia to unborn children in the womb before performing surgery. This anesthesia has been associated with a significant increase in babies' stress hormone levels during medical procedures. Mr. Speaker, late-term abortions, usually performed by inducing labor after the fetus has been injected with a lethal pharmacological agent or by the horrific practice of dismemberment, causing babies intense pain, should be illegal, and that is what this bill ensures. I believe, Mr. Speaker, that this bill also takes important steps to protect women, providing exceptions for those cases of rape, and incest, and the life of the mother. H.R. 36 also provides women with a cause of action, allowing them to sue abortionists who don't provide protection for aborted babies who are born alive. The Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act protects the sanctity of life by ensuring protection from pain for the most vulnerable among us. Mr. Speaker, this is a moral obligation of this House and of our government. Therefore, I urge support for the rule to allow for consideration of H.R. 36. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. CHENEY. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks.

Ms. CHENEY. Mr. Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentlewoman from New York (Ms. Slaughter), pending which I yield myself such time as I may consume. During consideration of this resolution, all time yielded is for the purpose of debate only. General Leave

Ms. CHENEY

Ms. CHENEY. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of House Resolution 481, which provides a closed rule for consideration of H.R. 3180, the Intelligence Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2018. Mr. Speaker, there is nothing we do in this body that is more important than actions we take for the defense of our Nation. We now face a more complex array of threats than we have at any time since the end of World War II. North Korea continues to test ballistic missiles, has successfully tested an ICBM, and is continuing to move rapidly towards achieving the capability to strike U.S. soil. A resurgent Russia is imposing its will across Europe, occupies Crimea, and is now using its military to support the Assad regime in Syria. China is increasingly belligerent, continues to expand the size of its military and create bases on artificial islands in the South China Sea. And Iran, Mr. Speaker, continues to work on its ballistic missile program and expand its influence as it supports terror across the Mediterranean and the larger Middle East. Terrorist groups like al-Qaida and ISIS continue to carry out attacks across the West and threaten the United States. We have seen a dramatic increase in tensions on the Temple Mount, Mr. Speaker, in just the last few weeks, and we have men and women in uniform deployed around the globe fighting to defend our Nation. Our intelligence community plays a crucial role in ensuring our decision-makers and our warfighters have the information they need to keep our Nation secure. H.R. 3180 provides the intelligence community with the authorization it needs to continue working to protect and defend the United States, supports critical national security programs, such as those protecting Americans against terrorism, cyber attacks, and hostile foreign nations. The bill maintains critical congressional oversight of the activities of the intelligence community, and the bill makes no changes to any surveillance authorities, including those set to expire, which we will take up later this year in legislation separate from this bill. Mr. Speaker, as you know, earlier this week, H.R. 3180 was considered under suspension of the rules, which is not at all uncommon for bills, like this one, that receive unanimous bipartisan support in committee. While the bill received well over 50 percent of the votes of the House, it did not achieve the required two-thirds majority to pass under suspension, which is why we are here today debating this rule. A large portion of this bill, Mr. Speaker, is understandably, as it should be, classified, which requires Members of this body to review the bill in the SCIF. I want to personally thank members of the Intelligence Committee and their staff for facilitating that process and making it so easy for Members of this House to undertake. A bipartisan notice was sent out, provided to Members, informing us of the availability of the text for review. And the text, Mr. Speaker, was available for 10 days, twice as long as last year's bill. My staff simply had to call and inform the committee that I would like to review the bill, and the committee asked when I would be available, and they made sure that a member of the committee staff was also there to answer any questions I had. The process itself was seamless, was very easy, and was facilitated by the members of the Intelligence Committee staff. Mr. Speaker, this is a good and important bill. It supports the men and women in our intelligence community and the work they do to keep us safe. This is not an issue we should politicize or subject to partisan debate. The intelligence community plays a critical role in the defense of our Nation, and we need to support them, Mr. Speaker, by supporting this bill. Therefore, I urge support for the rule to allow consideration of H.R. 3180. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. CHENEY. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks.

Ms. CHENEY. Mr. Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Hastings), pending which I yield myself such time as I may consume. During consideration of this resolution, all time yielded is for the purpose of debate only. General Leave

Ms. CHENEY. Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 481 and ask for its immediate consideration.

Ms. CHENEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. My colleague from Florida, with whom I have had the privilege of spending many hours in the Rules Committee debating this and a range of other issues, raised a number of points I think that are important to clarify. First of all on the issue of minority recruitment, last night, in the Rules Committee, in open session, Chairman Nunes was asked about this, and he testified very clearly and directly that diversity is very important, that it is mission-critical for the reasons that my colleague from Florida stated. I can report that there are several provisions in the classified annex--I won't go into the details about them--with which my colleague may or may not be familiar that support the whole notion of Centers of Academic Excellence, which are particularly focused on recruiting young people, recruiting minorities and young people across the board for service in the intelligence community. We tend, in these rule discussions, Mr. Speaker, to have a lot of arguments and criticism of procedure. The Democrats this morning seem to be particularly concerned about our same-day authority. But I would just note, Mr. Speaker, I am certainly confident that my constituents who are watching this--and, I would say, probably most Americans watching--would understand the importance of the House of Representatives getting its work done in a timely manner. And certainly, when it comes to healthcare, the arguments and the criticism from the other side of the aisle lose a little bit of their credibility when they simultaneously attack the Republicans for moving too slowly and then also for moving too quickly. What I can tell you is we are debating hugely important issues and hugely important topics. We are absolutely committed to repealing and replacing ObamaCare. It is a system that is collapsing. It is a system that has devastated the lives of people across this country. It is a system that has driven premiums and deductibles through the roof. It has absolutely limited people's choice in terms of insurance plans, in terms of healthcare providers. It is a system that is failing. We have seen the Democrats' fundamental approach was a government mandate and their attempt to force people across this Nation to buy health insurance. They thought that, through a government mandate, they would be able to force young people into these insurance pools and, therefore, drive the cost down. That is not what happened. It didn't work. We know we have got to put in place a system that will be able to provide people the kind of care that they need, access, as well as lowering the cost and increasing availability. So there are a whole range of very important substantive efforts going on. I think that it is clear that the folks on the other side of the aisle don't support the direction we are going in, may not support the policy, but the people across this Nation--certainly, in my home State of Wyoming--spoke very clearly last November that they wanted a change, that they wanted to see the government reduce its role in their lives, and that they wanted to see us begin the process of building our military, rebuilding what has been lost over the course of the last 8 years, as well as rebuilding the facilities and the capabilities of our intelligence community, and that is exactly what this bill does. That is exactly what we are here doing this morning. Mr. Speaker, I think that is why it is so important that my colleagues support this rule, that we provide the authority that the intelligence community needs through this bill to continue to do its important work to keep us safe. I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. CHENEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, House Resolution 481 and the underlying bill, H.R. 3180, ensure the men and women of our intelligence community have the tools and the resources they need to continue the vital role they play in helping us address the threats facing our Nation. I do want to point out, Mr. Speaker, my colleague is accusing the Republicans of being brazen and reckless because of our same-day rulemaking authority. I would only note that in the 111th Congress, when they were in the majority, they enacted this process 26 times; in the 110th Congress, 17 times. It is an important ability for us to have when we know we might need to move quickly on something. As a member of the Rules Committee, I am committed to ensuring we do everything possible to make sure that we are able to bring bills to this floor that carry out the kind of changes and improvements that the people of this Nation sent us all here to undertake. I was really disappointed, Mr. Speaker, earlier this week when this bill was defeated under suspension of the rules. There are many things that are partisan issues in this body, and it is too bad when the minority uses the Intelligence Authorization bill as part of a political stunt to make what should be a bipartisan process and a bipartisan committee appear partisan. The bill, H.R. 3108, received unanimous support in committee, and I certainly hope today, Mr. Speaker, that the minority members of that committee, and frankly all on the minority side who understand the importance of the intelligence community in keeping our Nation safe, will put aside the partisanship, will put aside the games that the American people are so tired of, and will join me in supporting a good, effective, and important bill, that, frankly, the minority members in the Intelligence Committee worked very hard to help craft. Mr. Speaker, I urge adoption of both the rule and H.R. 3180. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time, and I move the previous question on the resolution. The previous question was ordered.