Right to Contraception Act

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. HOYER. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding.

I have three daughters. They are all adults. They are all amazed that we are here debating this issue. The ranking member said, me too; obviously, for different reasons.

In 1965, the Supreme Court--long before any of the present Justices had these theories about what due process is and is not--said that women had a constitutional right and, in addition, men, to seek services related to family planning.

Madam Speaker, women's rights are under assault in America. From the very beginning, of course, women were second-class citizens until we radically, in the beginning of the last century, decided, oh, well, women are part of America and we are going to let them vote. And successively, we have taken steps to treat women equally.

The Supreme Court's extremist Dobbs v. Jackson decision overturned 49 years of legal precedent and erased decades of progress toward women's equality. This bill deals with 57 years of constitutional law, since 1965, when Griswold was decided 7-2. It was not a controversial opinion with the American people nor, frankly, is this bill controversial, of whatever faith you may be.

Not only did Republican-appointed Justices strip women of their constitutional right to access safe, legal abortions, they also opened the door for lawmakers to restrict women's ability to make reproductive healthcare decisions.

Justice Thomas, of course, as all of us know, issued a radical concurring opinion that called for a reconsideration of landmark legal precedents, one of which we are dealing with today, Griswold v. Connecticut, as I said, decided in 1965, which established Americans' constitutional right to contraception.

Birth control allows women and their partners to make essential decisions about their health and their lives, including whether to have children and start a family. That is the consensus in America, overwhelmingly.

Nevertheless, the Supreme Court has put all forms of contraception in jeopardy with this decision. Now, some say, No, it doesn't. But Justice Thomas points out that the rationale of Dobbs is equally applicable from his perspective and, in my opinion, from his perspective, he is probably right, for himself and for radical members of the Court.

Restricting contraceptives means undermining women's health, personal privacy, and bodily autonomy. Now, there are many authoritarian regimes in the world that don't take any consideration into the rights we have over our own bodies.

Madam Speaker, we need to do everything we can here in Congress to ensure that all Americans have access to safe, reliable contraceptive care. That is why I am pleased to bring this bill to the floor.

And I thank Kathy Manning for her leadership on the Right to Contraception Act. I also want to thank Representatives Williams, Jacobs, and Craig, as well as Lizzie Fletcher, who just spoke, for their leadership on this bill. I am grateful to them for standing up on this issue, as well as to Chairman Pallone, for moving quickly to advance this bill through the Energy and Commerce Committee.

This legislation will enshrine the constitutional rights established by Griswold v. Connecticut and Eisenstadt v. Baird in Federal statute, ensuring that Americans can access contraceptive care legally wherever they live.

As I said at the beginning, my three daughters are amazed that this legislation is on the floor; amazed that there would be a premise that somehow the Constitution did not guarantee to my three daughters the right to make these decisions and not all of us.

This is about freedom. This is about individual integrity. And this vote will show the American people where Members stand on this question of whether it should continue to be legal for people in this country to pursue family planning as they perceive they want to do.

So let's vote ``yes'' to promote women's health. Let's vote ``yes'' to prevent further restrictions on women's basic rights to privacy and autonomy.

Let's vote ``yes'' for freedom. There is a lot of talk about freedom, right up until the time one decides to restrict that freedom, and then it is okay.

I urge all my colleagues to vote ``yes'' to protect the Constitution, the constitutional precedents, and freedom.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source