WHITE HOUSE MEDIA AND TOURISTS (1998)
Large crowds of reporters, producers, videographers, and tourists gather at the White House.
CONTEMPORARY STOCK FOOTAGE
NEWSFEED: 7/18-28/05 ARIZONA MONSOONS, BUSH/INDIAN PRIME MINISTER AT WHITE HOUSE, FIRES, FLOODS, RAIN, WEATHER, MANDELA'S BDAY ;NX-EXT: IRAQ, MORTAR SHELL HITS CAR, burning vehicle, truck looking, flames sirens, EMS on scene, firemen dose flames, EMS lights ;DX-INT: IRAN, PRES. elect greets Iraqi, prime minister, formal meeting, flags in bg, no discernible audio, cabinet members ;DX-EXT: AZ, 1st monsoon of season, wind, rain, flag blowing, wind trees, palms blowing, traffic, planes landing airport ;NX-EXT: AZ, exploding wildfires and power lines flaming sparking from weather ;DX/NX-EXT: TAIWAN, huge wave crashes over sea wall, downed motorcycles in rain, palms blowing in breeze, destruction from storm ;NX-EXT: China sandstorm, CCTV logo in corner, Chinese telecast, sand blowing, trees, people etc...logo all the way thru ;NX-EXT: SPAIN FOREST FIRE, flames in trees, fire trucks, and EMS, 14 dead, smoke over city, burned out trees, vegetation ;DX-EXT: BOMB suspicious package on train closes it down USA, police, bomb squad, helicopter in sky, t/h, more bomb squad at work ;DX-EXT: FL Valujet crash memorial defaced, vandalized, workers clean up site of vandals work, powerwashers at work ;DX-EXT: aerial shots, big rig plows into bldg, aftermath traffic, fire trucks, ext. of small restaurant with aftermath; news wrap on Evra Ortho, birth control information, don't use DX-EXT: Movie premiere Stealth Jamie Foxx, red carpet interviews ;DX-INT: Olympic Bomber, Eric Rudolph, actual bombing at abortion clinic, aftermath, Olympic bombing footage; DX-INT: Eric Rudolph, Olympic Bomber, in shackles being loaded into vehicle; DX-INT: aerial Hurricane Emily, telestar, aerial stills, good for weather backgrounds, generic ;DX-EXT: AZ, Monsoon rains, storm trees blowing some repeats, traffic, plane landing wobbles, NX traffic, power lines explode; DX-EXT: NJ, reactions from flooding victims, t/h, cars flooded, streets, people sweep water, streets flooded ;DX-EXT: TAIWAN, repeat of large flood images; DX-EXT: China, sandstorms ;NX-EXT: HARRY POTTER, sales frenzy, record sales, confetti, books sold with much fanfare, Harry Potter fans made up, crowds in store ;DX-EXT: White house, Laura Bush, India, GW Bush to podium, White House ceremony, band color guard big ceremony, speech ;DX-EXT: White House, Indian Prime Minister, gives speech, wears blue turban, GW Bush stands at his side for speech ;DX-EXT: MANDELA, birthday, band plays, Mandela with Wife listen to music, clap, Nelson Mandela, boards helicopter, fireworks ;DX-EXT: RUSSIA, increased Metro security, check id and bags of young men, traffic, sign Metro in Russian ;DX-INT: CHINA, BEIJING, talks, diplomats, MBZ pull up and exit on roadway ;DX-INT: ITALY, BEACH BEHAVIOR, very crowded masses of people, on beach, towels hanging from umbrellas, lotion, use cell phones ;DX-INT: KANSAS, CHINA DELEGATION, paparazzi, officials talk to lady delegate from Kansas ; NX-EXT: INDIANA, toddler in river, huge police presence, rescue workers in blankets, damaged car, police lights, accident aftermath ;DX-EXT: NY, storm damage, tree across road, traffic, rain, driving in rain, stuck street lights ;DX-EXT: PA, smoke and fire on industrial bldg, firemen with hoses, fire aftermath, smoke/flames from chimney ;DX-INT: MAKEUP A NEGATIVE FOR MEN, t/h men, women applying makeup, English accident, cu on women applying same ;DX-EXT: WAITER STREET CROSSING SIGN, Italy lots of waiters cross the street with orders, sign features waiter ;
US Weapons
AP-APTN-2230: US Weapons Monday, 17 December 2012 STORY:US Weapons- +4:3 School shooting restarted the debate on banning assault weapons LENGTH: 04:11 FIRST RUN: 2030 RESTRICTIONS: See Script TYPE: English/Nats SOURCE: VARIOUS STORY NUMBER: 871682 DATELINE: Various - 16/17 Dec 2012 LENGTH: 04:11 SHOTLIST AP TELEVISION - AP CLIENTS ONLY Washington, DC - December 17, 2012 ++16:9++ 1. Wide of anti-NRA (National Rifle Association) demonstration in front of their offices 2. Close-up of people chanting, UPSOUND (English): 'Shame on the NRA, shame on the NRA, shame on the NRA." 3. SOUNDBITE (English) Margaret Bowker, protester from Alexandria, Virginia: "I think it is time people said something, stood up and said something against the power of such a small group." 4. Close-up woman holding sign, reads (English): "Stop Killing Our Children" 5. Wide of people chanting, UPSOUND (English): "No, I disagree with the NRA" 6. Wide of man arguing with protesters, saying that teachers should be armed, UPSOUND (english): "How many, how many children might have been saved. (Off camera protester: How about some respect?) "How about respect for the children that died?" FOX NEWS SUNDAY - MUST ON-SCREEN COURTESY FOX NEWS SUNDAY Washington, DC - December 16, 2012 ++16:9++ 7. SOUNDBITE (English) Louie Gohmert, Republican Congressman from Texas: "And hearing the heroic stories of the principle lunging trying to protect, (FOX News Anchor) Chris (Wallace), I wish to God she'd had had an M-4 in her office locked up. So, when she heard gun fire, she pulls it out and she didn't have to lunge heroically with nothing in her hands but she takes him (the gunman) out, takes his head off before he could kill those precious kids." AP TELEVISION - AP CLIENTS ONLY Annapolis, Maryland - 15 December 2012 ++16:9++ 8. Various of guns for sale on display table at a gun show 9. Close-up man holding a handgun ABC - ACCESS ALL OUTSIDE NORTH AMERICA / NO ACCESS BROADCAST OR DIGITAL IN NORTH AMERICA Chicago, Illinois - December 17, 2012 ++16:9++ 10. Wide of Mayor of Chicago, Rahm Emanuel, walking to podium in front of graduating class of police officers 11. SOUNDBITE (English) Rahm Emanuel, Mayor of Chicago: "All of us, are residents of Sandy Hook, Connecticut. There is not a parent, there is not a grandparent, there is not a human being regardless of whether they have a child that is not a citizen of Sandy Hook, Connecticut." AP TELEVISION - AP CLIENTS ONLY Fairfield, Connecticut - December 17, 2012 ++16:9++ 12. Mid of line of police motorcycles next to funeral home 13. Wide of mourners leaving the funeral of 6 year-old, Noah Pozner, a victim of the Sandy Hook shooting 14. Pan of woman crying as she leaves funeral AP TELEVISION - AP CLIENTS ONLY Washington, DC - December 17, 2012 ++16:9++ 15. SOUNDBITE (English) Dr Alan Lipman, Founder and Director of the Centre for Study of Violence: "Studies have shown that in virtually every one of these mass killing episodes there has been mental illness and easy access to these weapons of mass killing." AP TELEVISION - AP CLIENTS ONLY Newtown, Connecticut - December 16, 2012 ++16:9++ 16. Tilt up of memorial AP Television - AP Clients Only Chantilly, Virginia - 15 December 2012 ++16:9++ 17. Various of man firing a gun at a target in a shooting range AP TELEVISION - AP CLIENTS ONLY Washington, DC - December 17, 2012 ++16:9++ 18. SOUNDBITE (English) Dr Alan Lipman, Founder and Director of the Centre for Study of Violence: "I do believe that we are at a tipping point. We are beginning to hear, obviously we've had very powerful words, and stirring words and meaningful words from President Obama on this issue, perhaps stronger than any modern President has shown, regarding these issues. And we've begun to see members of Congress speak out, as they realise this very powerful combination between vulnerability to mental illness and the easy availability of weapons that fall into their hands, so that they can act on this rage and this homicidality." OFFICE OF MAYOR HANDOUT - AP CLIENTS ONLY New York - December 17, 2012 ++4:3++ 19. Wide of news conference given by Michael Bloomberg, New York City Mayor, and families affected by gun violence 20. SOUNDBITE (English) Michael Bloomberg, New York City Mayor: "I demand a plan. The time for talk is over. Congress and the White House has to come up with something that stops this carnage no matter what the political ramifications are. Somehow or other we've come to think that getting re-elected is more important than saving lives." "I DEMAND A PLAN" HANDOUT VIDEO - AP CLIENTS ONLY Blacksburg, Virginia - Recent ++16:9++ 21. Tracy Lane, mother of Virginia Tech shooting victim Jarrett Lane, laying flowers at her son's memorial plaque 22. SOUNDBITE (English) Tracy Lane, mother of Virginia Tech shooting victim Jarrett Lane: ++SOUNDBITE BEGINS ON PREVIOUS SHOT AND INCLUDES CUTAWAYS LANE AT MEMORIAL++ "A good day is when you can see things and it reminds you of your child, you'll hear a song, you'll see a picture of him and your heart doesn't ache as much." AP TELEVISION - AP CLIENTS ONLY Newtown, Connecticut - December 16, 2012 ++16:9++ 23. Mid, people stopping at Sandy Hook Elementary School memorial STORYLINE: Americans, many grieving along with the families of Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting victims, are starting to grapple with how to prevent such mass shootings in the future. Gun control advocates are hoping the latest shooting on Friday in Connecticut, that killed 20 children aged 6 or 7, might be enough trauma to spur the country to act. A small, but noisy demonstration in Washington took place Monday in front of one of the National Riffle Association's offices. Many of the demonstrators, like Margaret Bowker, thought it was, "time people said something, stood up and said something against the power," of the lobbying group that pushes for reduced controls on gun sales across the country. For their part gun rights activists have remained largely quiet. In an interview on "Fox News Sunday," Texas Republican Congressman Louie Gohmert, defended the sale of assault weapons and said that the principal at Sandy Hook, who authorities say died trying to overtake the shooter, should herself have been armed. "I wish to God she'd had had an M-4 in her office locked up. So, when she heard gun fire, she pulls it out and she didn't have to lunge heroically with nothing in her hands but she takes him out, takes his head off before he could kill those precious kids." In Chicago, a city itself severely affected by gun violence, Mayor Rahm Emanuel said, "all of us, are residents of Sandy Hook, Connecticut." The Connecticut town shattered by last week's school massacre held its first two funerals on Monday. Family, friends and townspeople streamed to two funeral homes to say goodbye to victims Jack Pinto and Noah Pozner. Noah's twin, Arielle, who was assigned to a different classroom, survived the killing frenzy by 20-year-old Adam Lanza that left 20 children and six adults dead last week at Sandy Hook Elementary. Some analysts believe the incident could be "a tipping point" for gun control. Dr Alan Lipman, the founder and director of the Centre for Study of Violence, has been studying mass killings for decades. Urging the Obama administration to strenuously step into the issue, Lipman says action needs to be taken on both the mental health and gun control issues. "Studies have shown that in virtually every one of these mass killing episodes there has been mental illness and easy access to these weapons of mass killing," he said on Monday. "We've begun to see members of Congress speak out, as they realise this very powerful combination between vulnerability to mental illness and the easy availability of weapons that fall into their hands so that they can act on this rage." New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg and dozens of shooting survivors and victims' relatives are also calling on Congress and President Barack Obama to tighten gun laws and enforcement. The mayor appeared at City Hall Monday with 34 people whose own lives or the lives of their relatives have been affected by gun violence around the country. As part of a campaign to raise awareness, they're sending videos to lawmakers telling their stories. "I demand a plan. The time for talk is over. Congress and the White House has to come up with something that stops this carnage no matter what the political ramifications are. Somehow or other we've come to think that getting re-elected is more important than saving lives," he said. Clients are reminded: (i) to check the terms of their licence agreements for use of content outside news programming and that further advice and assistance can be obtained from the AP Archive on: Tel +44 (0) 20 7482 7482 Email: infoaparchive.com (ii) they should check with the applicable collecting society in their Territory regarding the clearance of any sound recording or performance included within the AP Television News service (iii) they have editorial responsibility for the use of all and any content included within the AP Television News service and for libel, privacy, compliance and third party rights applicable to their Territory. APTN AP-WF-12-17-12 2255GMT
The health crisis causes psychological distress among students.
Méditerranée
United States Senate 1800 - 1900 LYNCHING APOLOGY
THE SENATE Morning business followed by general debate on the Thomas Griffith nomination to the US court of appeals in the district - vote on Tuesday --- senate expected to debate resolution that apologize to the families of victims of lynchings. 18:16:06.7 quorum call: ms. landrieu: mr. president? 18:18:19.3 the presiding officer: the senator from louisiana. ms. landrieu: thank you, mr. president. i ask unanimous consent that the remaining debate is time on the griffith nomination be yielded back -- the presiding officer: a quorum call is in progress. ms. landrieu: i ask unanimous consent to dispense with the quorum call. the presiding officer: without objection. ms. landrieu: torsion mr. president. i ask unanimous consent that the 18:18:35.1 remaining debate time on the griffith nomination be yielded back and the senate proceed to legislative session in order to consider senate resolution 39. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: senate resolution 39, apologizing to the victims 18:18:51.6 of lynching and the decendants of those victims for the failure of the senate to enact antilynching legislation. ms. landrieu: mr. president, i'd like to ask unanimous consent that the clerk proceed with the reading of the resolution. the presiding officer: without 18:19:05.9 objection. the clerk: whereas the crime of lynching succeeded slavery as the ultimate expression of racism in the united states following reconstruction, whereas lynching was a widely acknowledged practice in the united states until the middle of the 20th century; whereas lynching with a a crime that occurred throughout the united 18:19:22.0 states with documented incidents in all but four states; where as about 4,742 people predominantly african-americans were reported lynched in the united states between 1882 and 1968; whereas 99% of all perpetrators of 18:19:38.1 lynching escaped from punishment by state or local officials; whereas lynching prompted african-americans to form the national association for the advancement of colored people, naacp and prompted members of b'nai b'rith to form the 18:19:54.9 antidefamation league; whereas nearly 200 antilirchling bills were introduced in the congress; whereas between 1809 and 19 a 52 whereas between between 1940 and 18:20:10.8 19 the -- the house of representatives passed three strong antiiferling measures, whereas protection against lirchles was the minimum and most basic of federal responsibilities and the senate considered but failed to enact antilynching legislation despite repeated requests by civil 18:20:24.7 rights groups, presidents and the house of representatives to do so; whereas the recent publication of "without sanctuary: lynching photography in america" brought proper recognition of the vick itself of lynching with whereas by only 18:20:43.9 come to terms; whereas as an apology offered in the spirit true repentance moves the united states towards reconciliation upon which true relationships can be forged. 18:20:57.7 be it resolved the that the senate apologize to the victims of lynching for the failure of the senate to enact antilynching 18:21:06.5 legislation, sprees the deepest thinks and most solemn greets of the sna to the decendants of the victims of lynch, the anne set offers were deprived of the constitutional protections afforded all citizens of the united states; and, three, remembers the history of 18:21:20.9 lynching to ensure that these tragedies will neither -- will be neither forgotten nor repeated. ms. landrieu: thank you, mr. president. 18:21:38.9 the united states senate will belatedly but most sincerely apologize, issue a formal apology, for its failure to pass antilynching legislation to the victims of lynching and their families, some of whom are with 18:21:56.9 us tonight in this chamber. without question, there have been other grave injustices committed in the noble exercise of establishing this great democracy. some have already been acknowledged and addressed by 18:22:13.3 this and previous congresses, and our work continues. however, there may be no other injustice in american history for which the senate so uniquely bears responsibility. 18:22:29.8 for in refusing to take up legislation passed by the house of representatives on three separate occasions and requested by seven presidents, from william henry harrison to harry truman, the senate engaged in a 18:22:46.4 different kind of culpability. beginning in 1881 this tragic phenomena of domestic terrorism was documented in large measure through the groundbreaking and heroic efforts of barnett and the independent newspapers and 18:23:04.7 publications. from that year until 1864, 4,742 american citizens were lynched. these are the recorded numbers. historians estimate the true 18:23:20.3 number to be much higher. an apology alonees, mr. president, can never suffice to heal the harm that was done and for many victims, justice is out of reach. yet i believe -- and this 18:23:37.5 resolution lays forth the principle -- that a sincere and heartfelt apology is a necessary first step towards real healing. it's important that the people of our country understand the true nature of this 18:23:54.7 unprecedented rampage of terror. many americans have images from popular books and movies like "to kill a mocking bird" that cloud their understanding of lynching. a group of angry white men take an accused and likely guilty 18:24:13.8 black man deep into the woods and hang him. those are the images, although accurate and tragic, but they delude us from the true nature of lynching in this dark period of american history. the thought of a small, angry mob murdering black prisoners in 18:24:30.0 the dead of night ignores the reality of lynching in most respects. we are fortunate and grateful that a passionate and resolute, independent scholar named james allen saw something catalytic in 18:24:48.0 the photographic evidence of lynching and he began to collect these gruesome and horrific photographs. his work, "without sanctuary" showed the real faces of 18:25:02.2 lynching and the images he unveiled began to change the way people viewed these tragic events and called to several of us in the senate to issue this apology tonight. it is because of his work this book, the committee for a formal 18:25:19.5 apology, and the families of the lynching victims and some victims themselves who are here tonight that we are here today and that this important historic resolution is before the senate. i'd like to show 18:25:35.7 some of these photographs, mr. president, now. this is one of the hundreds -- thousands of photographs of men, 18:25:54.4 women, and children who were lynched in this nation, lynching that occurred -- a citizen of our nation lynched. 18:26:05.3 and as your eyes look at this picture, they're immediately, of course, drawn, mr. president, to the victim. these hangings were sometimes, in most instances, very brutal events. 18:26:20.1 sometimes the hanging itself came after hours of torture and just excruciating fear and humiliation. mr. president, as this book was published and these pictures came into more full view of the american public, what happens is 18:26:39.6 your eyes leave the figure of the victim and move to the audience. this, mr. president, is part of a story that has not been completely, in my mind, told and that needs to be told tonight 18:26:55.2 and every day into the future. as you can see, there are children gathered here. there are children that are looking up at this man hanging from a tree. the history will record that some of these children were let 18:27:10.3 out of sunday schools to atendz the lynchings. the history will record that some businesses closed down so that the whole towns could aextend these lynchings. history will record that these lynchings did not occur mostly at night or in the back word 18:27:32.2 lynchings were a community event. in many instawns it was a form of public entertainment. it was mass violence, an open act of terrorism directed primarily against 18:27:43.1 african-americans and others that sympathized with their cause. if we are truly to understand the magnitude of this tragedy, we must study the stories behind this grim parade of deaths. in march of 1892, three personal 18:28:01.7 friends of i had did a b. wells opened the people's grocery company, a store located across the street from a white-owned grossry store that had previously been the only grocer in the area. airngd by the loss of business, a mob gathered to run the new 18:28:18.5 grocers out of town. forewarned about the attack on their store, the three owners armed themselves for protection and in the riot that ensued, one of the businessmen injured a white man. all three were arrested and 18:28:33.0 jailed. days later the mob kidnapped the men from jail and lynched them. this was the case that led ida b. wells to begin to speak out against this injustice. her great-grand son is with us today. 18:28:46.9 he's told the story through the halls of congress. to give testimony to her life and to her courage and to her historic efforts. without the work of this extraordinarily brave journalist, this story could never really have been told in the way it's being told now today and talked about here on 18:29:05.1 the senate floor. 0 to her we owe a great deal of gratitude. she knew she is men personally. she knew that they were businessmen. they were not criminals. she knew that they were 18:29:19.9 successful sales people, not common thugs, and she wrote and she spoke and she tried to gather pictures to tell a story to a nation that simply refused to believe. 42 years and thousands of 18:29:35.8 lynchings later is the case of claude neal of mariana, georgia. after ten hours of torture, claude neal -- quote -- "confessed to the murder of a girl with whom he was allegedly having an affair." 18:29:51.8 for his safety, he was transferred to an alabama prison. a mob took him from there. they cut off his body parts, they sliced his sides and stopple altion action and then people would randomly continue to cut off a finger here, a toe there. 18:30:08.6 from time to time they would tie a noose around him, throw the noose over a tree limb. the mob could keep him there until he almost died, then lower him again to begin the torment all over again. and after several hours -- and i guess the crowd exhausted themselves -- they just decided 18:30:26.0 to kill him. his body was then dragged by car back to mariana and 7,000 people from 11 states were there to see his body in the the courthouse 18:30:41.4 of the town square. pictures were taken and sold for 50 cents apease, and one might ask, how do we know all the grizzly details of claude neal's death? it's very simple. the newspapers in florida had 18:30:57.4 given advanced notice and they recorded it one horrible moment after another. 18:31:05.6 one of the members of the lynch mob proudly relaid all the details that reporters had missed seeing it in person. yet even with the public notice, 7,000 people in attendance, and people bragging about the 18:31:21.5 activity, federal authorities were impotent to stop this murderment, state authorities seemed to condone it, and the senate of the united states refused to act. time went on, mr. president. 18:31:36.5 in 1955, just nine years before congress passed the civil rights act, the world witnessed the brutal lynching of emmett till. 14 years old, emmet till was excited about his trip from his 18:31:51.3 home in chicago's south side to the mississippi delta.ñ emmett. like many children during the summer, he was looking forward to visiting his relatives. prior to his depar tuesday, his mother, mamie till bradley, a 18:32:06.9 teacher, had done her very best to advise him about how to behave while in mississippi. with his mother's warning and wearing the ring that had belonged to his deceased father, on august 20, 1955, till set off with his cousin curtis jones, on 18:32:24.5 a train to mississippi. once there, he and some friends went to buy some candy at the general store. according to his accusers, this young 14-year-old wheufld at a store clerk -- whistled at a store clerk as he left. 18:32:39.6 she happened to be a white woman. armed with pistols, the mob took emmett from his uncle's home -- his uncle is with us tonight -- they took him in the middle of the night. three days later, his little body was discovered in the tallahatchie river. 18:32:56.4 it was weighed down by a 75-pound cottin gin fan that was tied around his neck with barbed wire. his face was so mutilated that when wright identified the body, he could only do so based on the ring that he had been wearing. 18:33:14.8 coincidentally, through no asking of our own, but i guess it's appropriate, that the trial of his accused murderer, edgar ray killen, begins today in mississippi. 18:33:28.4 while the details that led to the lynching are not always clear from these just few that i've described, there is little doubt what took place at the lynching themselves. in most instances, prelynching newspaper notices, school closings to allow children to view the spectacle, 18:33:46.3 special-order trains to carry people to the event -- these are all part of a gruesome but true part of america's history. jazz legend billy holiday provided us with some real texture in her story and song, 18:34:03.2 "strange fruit," which i will submit to the record. she defied her own record label and produced and published this song on her own, was threatened by her life because she continued to sing it. but like so many things, words 18:34:19.1 can't always describe what's happening, even though speeches were given, words were written, newspapers were published. but something in the way she sang this song, something in the pictures that describe the event 18:34:35.2 must have touched the heart of americans because they began to mobilize. and men and women, white and black, people from different backgrounds came to stand up and begin to speak. and they spoke, mr. president, with loud voices and with moving 18:34:50.3 speeches and with great marches. but the senate of the united states, one of the most noble experiments in democracy, continued to pretend, to act that this was not happening in america and continued to fail to 18:35:07.6 act. it would be a mistake to look at this ugly chapter in our democracy's development with pity and hopelessness, however. the truth is, today's apology should be seen as a tribute to the endurance and the triumph of 18:35:23.3 african-american families. there's a particular family here, the crawford family, i think there are over 150 of them. earlier today, i talked with some of the leaders of the family and said, you know, what doesn't kill you, makes you are 18:35:37.5 stronger. and they nodded because that's exactly what happened to this family. the town tried to kill this family, to run them out and, in fact, ran them out of the town. but this family just grew stronger. and with their love and lack of 18:35:53.6 bitterness, but with a determination to find justice some way, they're here today. in fact, it was really the progress of african-americans 18:36:03.6 that spurred this terrible reaction to them in the first place. as i stated earlier, the early lynchings weren't of criminals. the early lynchings were of successful farmers, of successful businessmen, leaders in their community. because these lynchings were an 18:36:20.4 act of terrorism to make american citizens feel they had no voice and no place. w.e. deboise summarized the motivations behind these sayings perfectly when he said, "the south feared more than negro 18:36:35.8 dishonesty, ignorance and incompetence say, negro honesty, knowledge and efficiency." with slavery abolished by the civil war, a group of americans had to mentally justify as inferiors and subhuman -- 18:36:50.6 americans that they had justified suddenly were equals and competitors. having lost the war throughout the south, watching the progress of former slaves was simply too much in that region but in other regions throughout the country as well. 18:37:05.2 as the senior senator from the state of louisiana, i feel compelled to spend just a few moments before i acknowledge my friend and cosponsor on the floor, senator george allen, that has brought this resolution to the attention of our senate colleagues. louisiana has a distinct history 18:37:22.4 from much of the united states due to its long colonial ties with both france and spain. one consequence of this history is that louisiana had more free people of color than any other southern state. nearly 20,000 louisianans were 18:37:37.4 largely concentrated in new orleans, formed a large and very prosperous african-american community in the 1860's. they enjoyed more rights than most free men of color. a large percentage spoke only 18:37:51.7 french and educated their children in europe. the community, the records show, owned more than $2 million worth of property, which was quite a large sum in those days. and dominated skilled labor areas like masonry, carpentry, 18:38:08.2 cigar making, and shoemaking. that he is why louisiana -- that is why louisiana's prominent role in lynching is so bitter. it marchs a -- is pha rs a long history of tolerance and integration that to this day distinguishes louisiana from other places in 18:38:22.6 the south. still, the difficult fact remains that only three states have had a higher incident than louisiana of these occurrences. the naacp, which was founded over the issue of lynching, recorded 391 such murders in my 18:38:38.5 state. at this time, mr. president, i ask unanimous consent that a list of all the louisiana victims come piled by professor -- compiled by michelle professor, author of "rough justice, lynching and the 18:38:52.9 american society," be placed into the record. the presiding officer: without objection. a senator: it is also true that members of the senate delegation from louisiana participated in the actions that led us to not act. however, i am very, very proud to stand here with my colleague 18:39:10.5 from virginia and to note that the other senator from louisiana, a republican, now stands with me. we are united in our support to support this legislation, to offer the sincere apology, to 18:39:25.4 try to bring to light the facts about lynching. ms. landrieu: to encourage people to seek the truth. i said earlier today, mr. president, people are entitled to their own opinions. but they're not entitled to their own facts. 18:39:41.7 and the facts about this terrible domestic terrorism and rash of terrorism stand today and will not be pushed aside. and so it is with humility but with pride that i support and 18:39:59.5 put forth before the senate today with the senator from virginia this resolution. i want to just say in closing -- i'm going to submit the rest of my statement for the record because i don't want to take up too much time, and i see there 18:40:13.6 are other senators that have come to the floor to speak -- but i would like to just acknowledge several members of my staff, jason matthews, kathleen stratman, gnash mulpus, 18:40:32.1 sally richardson and many others that have helped along with others that have put this resolution before the senate today. i also want to end with one of the most moving comments that i 18:40:47.0 read in the book "without sanctuary." and as i have read excerpts from publications and magazines and newspapers about this situation and have been reading now for 18:41:04.4 months on this. it is taken from macclure magazine in 1905 by ray standard baker, who wrote about one of the lynchings, i think it was of a mr. curtis. 18:41:19.8 and i will submit that to the record. he says, "so the mob came finally and cracked the door of the jail with a railroad rail. the jail is said to be the strongest in ohio, and having 18:41:36.2 seen it, i can well believe the report is true. but steel bars have never kept out a mob. it takes something much stronger. it takes human courage backed up by the consciousness of being 18:41:52.7 right. mr. president, the senate was wrong not to act -- it was wrong to not stand in the way of the mob. we lacked courage then. we perhaps don't have all the courage we need today to do 18:42:10.9 everything that we should do, but i know that we can apologize today, we can be sincere in our apology to the families, to their loved ones, and perhaps now we can set some of these 18:42:25.9 victims and their families free and most of all set our country free to be better than it is today. however great it is, we can most certainly improve. i yield the floor to my colleague, senator allen, from 18:42:42.7 virginia. mr. allen: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from virginia. mr. allen: thank you, mr. president. i rise today to speak in support of the resolution of apology 18:42:58.5 that senator landrieu of louisiana and i have offered. i thank the senator from louisiana for her leadership on this matter. it's been a pleasure to work with her on this and other matters, but this is undoubtedly the most historic. i got involved in this because i 18:43:14.6 received a letter from dick gregory. i know members of the senate receive thousands of letters and e-mails and phone calls, and he asked me to join with senator landrieu back last year on this, and it was to -- he was signing 18:43:30.0 this letter on behalf of dr. efay williams, martin luther king iii, dr. c. delores tucker, and others. but he asked me, he said, "i respectfully ask you to serve as an original sponsor of this resolution with senator 18:43:49.0 landrieu. we realize life will go on and your world will not be affected if you choose to do nothing." and that struck me as, well, i'm going to choose to do something. and he asked me to response they are on the republican side 18:44:06.1 because it's the right thing to do. that says it all really, is that when we see an affront to the basic principles that were annunciated in the spirit of this country in the declaration of independence, when we is a seeded from britain, we talked -- when we seceded from britain, we talked about liberty, 18:44:24.0 justice, trying to constitute in this country fighting for so many years to free ourselves from the monarch to construct a free and just society with freedom of religion, freedom of expression, due process of law, equal protection, as well as the 18:44:39.3 rule of law. and in so many of those key pillars of a free and just society when one looks at what happened with the lynchings, the torchings, the whipping to death of people because of their race, because of their religion, 18:44:53.5 because of their ethnicity, the coldhearted hatred of it and the countenance of it and the fact that this wonderful united states senate, with these -- these historic desks that you pull out drawers and you see some of the great minds, the great orators of our history had argued magnificent, inspiring 18:45:12.3 things here on this senate floor, you see that there were times in our history where senators ended up looking the other way. they did not take a stand. they turned their eyes, they turned their heads when 18:45:25.3 something positive could have been done to disprove, deplore and obviously pass a law to make lynching a federal crime. this chamber is part of our representative democracy. 18:45:41.3 we are to represent the will of the people. we're also to represent those foundational principles of our country. and unfortunately, that has not always occurred. now, daniel webster once said, standing in the old senate chamber, he told his colleagues in 1834 that "a representative 18:45:58.9 of the people is a sentinel on 18:46:03.0 the watch tower of liberty." indeed, the u.s. senate has been a great watch tower of liberty. many individuals have been outstanding orators, brilliant men and women in the world's greatest deliberative body. 18:46:19.0 unfortunately, this august body has a stain on its history and that stain is lynching. ññ americans died from hangings, from whippings, from a torch, from evil hearts outside of this chamber. 18:46:35.4 three-fourths of the victims of these injustices -- and these have been documented and researched by the respected archives of the tuskegee institute, which reported, and these are documented, 4,749 americans died by 18:46:51.8 lynching, whipping, torturing, mutilation, starting in 1882. three-quarters of these acts of hatred were perpetrated against african americans. many times these lynchings were not lone 18:47:06.7 acts by a few white men, rather they were angry gang, as senator landrieu talked about. they were occasion, events, mobs whipped into frenzies by the skewed mentalities of why is right and what is 18:47:21.1 wrong. the victims of these cruel and unjust acts are so contrary, these acts are so contrary to the rule of law, dew point and equal pro-- due process and equal protection that we pride ourselves on in the 18:47:35.5 united states. again, three-quarters of the victims were african american. this hatred was also perpetrated against those who are asian, primarily chineseious against american indian, against latinos, against italian, primarily from 18:47:52.2 sicily, and against people who are jewish. they found themselves unprotected. mr. president, senator landrieu and i, i see senator kerry, senator pryor, all of us are rising this evening to 18:48:08.2 make history to try to write history. we're standing to give our heartfelt and formal apology, not for what anybody here presently in the senate had done, but what this body, this continuous body failed 18:48:21.7 to do in the past. and it's an apology to all the victims and descendants of those who were lynched, who were whipped to death, who were torched to death, who were mutilated to death. many are in our gallery. this is a somber, not 18:48:40.2 happy time, but one of reflection, and it's one of the failure of the senate to take action when action was most needed. it was a time where we're trying to make sure all americans had equal opportunity, 18:48:56.6 however, that clearly wasn't the case. senator landrieu showed those photographs. these were vile killings. they captivated front-page headlines. they drew crowds with morbid curiosity and 18:49:10.7 they left thousands and thousands, mostly african americans, hanging from trees or bleeding to death from the lashing of whips or being torched to death. and not acting, this body failed to protect the liberty of which 18:49:26.7 daniel webster spoke. one of those who suffered this awful fate was an african american named zakaria walker from coatsville, virginia. in 1911, walker was dragged from a hospital bed where he was 18:49:41.3 recovering from a gunshot wound. accused of killing a white man, which he had claimed was in self-defense, walker was burned alive at the stake without trial. such horrendous acts were not just a regional 18:49:58.4 phenomenon of the south. states like illinois, ohio, and even washington, d.c., experienced this sort of mob violence and injustice. lynching was not just a regional problem, while it was more prevalent in the south, it happened 18:50:13.8 in 46 states of the union. indeed it was a crime throughout our nation, and, in fact, that is why a national scope, the national scope of these acts meant that the senate should act. the senate, of course, 18:50:28.9 failed to pass any of the nearly 200 antilynching bills introduced in congress during the first half of the 20th century. three bills passed the house of representatives, but what happened? they were filibustered 18:50:44.2 on this floor. seven presidents, as my colleague from louisiana said, seven presidents had asked that such laws be passed. now, you say, well, what impact would such a federal law have made? would that have saved all 4,749 people who 18:51:00.5 were lynched, torched, mutilated or whipped to death? probably not in all cases, because some had occurred before such bills were passed, however, what it would have sent as it's in 18:51:15.0 newspapers across the land, whether in small towrngs big cities or out in the country, is that the united states senate as a nation said that we must stop such horrendous injustice being perpetrated on people in this country, 18:51:30.9 that we stand for the rule of law and equal protection and dew point, but by the senate not acting, guess what message that sent? it's very clear it sent the message that, well, there are some people 18:51:44.3 who may not think this is a good idea, but the united states senate apparently condones it because they filibustered, they failed to act, not withstanding the court request of presidents in the passage of such laws in the house of representatives. 18:51:59.2 why was it needed, federal legislation? because out of these over 4,700 injustices of lynching, torching and whipping, only 1% were prosecuted, in many cases, local authorities 18:52:15.3 were complicit and involved in these cruel acts of injustice. i want to note, though, that virginia was one of the states that actually passed an antilynching law, which logically means why you see in 18:52:30.4 virginia while there were 100 such lynchings, torchings, burnings and so forth, 100 is too many by compared to other states in the south, that was less. i've learned a lot since we've introduced this bill. north carolina's 18:52:45.1 governors in the early 1900's removed and protested against such mob silence in that state -- violence in that state and therefore they had less than in other states. but let me explain to you another reason why i got involved in this, and that is the carrying 18:53:01.4 on of a tradition from man named champ clark, a senator from missouri whose son was actually one of my mentors when i first got involved in organized publics. he moved to the charlottesville area when i was governor i appointed him to the 18:53:17.5 university of virginia board of visitors. he just died a few years ago, and i find that his father, senator champ clark from missouri, posted photos very similar to those that senator landrieu had, photos in these rooms 18:53:36.7 here, cloak room, of mutilated bodies, and unlike -- and i'm going the read from the document called "the u.s. senate filibusters against federal antilynching legislation" -- and it 18:53:50.2 states, "unlike in 1935 when senators killed an antilynching bill just in six days, the 1937-1938 filibuster took six weeks. one reason, in april 1937, a mississippi mob in collusion with local 18:54:06.3 law enforcement removed two african americans from their jail cells, whipped them with chains, gouged out their eyes with ice picks and put them to death with blow torches." senator champ clark of 18:54:21.5 missouri posted photos of these victims' mutilated bodies in the senate cloakroom with the caption: there have be no arrest, no indictments and no convictions for any one of the lynchers. this is not a rape case. 18:54:39.4 one month later, a mob in georgia consisting partly of women and teenage girls forced its way into a funeral home and seized the body of a lynched 24-year-old african american. 18:54:52.3 after dumping the body into the trunk of a car and carrying it through town in a horn-blowing motorcade, the mob took it to a baseball field and burned it. horror struck by these 18:55:13.8 incidents senators sought to invoke cloture. if nothing else they recognized that not only were african americans in high lynch states at risk, but their own constituents were unprotected if they were 18:55:27.2 black and travelling through these areas. sadly, after courageously battling on the senate floor for six weeks, they had to abandon their efforts because they could not get cloture. now, my friends, my colleagues, six weeks 18:55:46.1 with all this and no action. historians, mr. president, will no doubt disagree as to is there some single reason why senators blocked antilynching legislation in the 1920's through 18:55:58.9 the 1940's. my desire here is not to get into motivations. regardless of their reasoning, one reason that i can see from all this is that there is no reason. 18:56:12.2 that is there is no rationale. they were clearly wrong. they turned their eyes. they turned their heads. that's why it is so important that we set aside these hours to apologize for this lack of action by the united states senate because there was no reason. 18:56:28.9 there was no tolerance. there was an acceptance and the condemnation of vile, hate-filled activity. thankfully, mr. president, justice in our nation has moved forward and left such despicable acts to history. 18:56:44.9 in ignoring the protections of our founding fathers that everyone is innocent until proven guilty, the senate turned its back on our foundational principles of justice and freedom. i look around the chamber and know that all of us serve with a great deal of honor and 18:57:02.1 integrity, and many have throughout our history. as we are taught, all things that are reproved are made manifest by light. my fellow senators, this apology has been a long 18:57:17.1 time in coming, and i do want to thank my colleague, senator landrieu, for her tireless effort in getting this resolution passed. i thank also leader frist for making this legislation a priority and taking time on the senate schedule to 18:57:33.2 recognize the significance of the moment. i thank the co-sponsors. we have nearly 80 co-sponsors of this legislation. they, our colleague, recognize the importance of this resolution and 18:57:48.1 knew that the senate owed an apology to the victims of lynching, their families and descendants. i also want to thank james allen, as senator landrieu has, for his authorship without sanctuary: lynching 18:58:03.7 photography in america, for bringing to us these horrendous but important issues and making us react, recognizing how vile and hate-filled they were. i also want to thank janet langhart cohen for her spirited teemwork in 18:58:21.2 getting support for this resolution. i'm going to ask that her letter to senator landrieu and i be made a part of the record, but i want to share with my colleagues some excerpts from her comments. while some members of the senate question why 18:58:37.4 so many of us have been seeking the passage of this official expression of apology at this time, the real question is why the senate action was not forthcoming decades ago. ms. cohen continues -- and this is important 18:58:55.6 for us to understand the meaning for hose who are descendants of victims of lynching and torching and whippings. she writes, "consider the scope and depth of the crimes committed against humanity. 18:59:10.8 more than 4,000 men and women for hung from tree, many of them disembowelled, their limbs and organs amuptated and then set on fire. these heinous acts were designed to terrify african american citizens, remind them that they had fewer rights and protections 18:59:27.0 than animals, and drive them from their land, all while serving as entertainment to society." the point is this was to intimidate people. ms. cohen also says that she comes to the 18:59:42.0 united states senate today -- and i assume she's in the gallery with many other descendants -- she comes for many reasons. , as a black woman, as the spouse of a former senator and as one who had a family member lynched, i need to bare 18:59:57.9 witness to an an act of decency that has been deterred, indeed filibustered, for far too long. we know you're here with many others and recognize it has been filibustered far too long. she also states -- and this is an important
Black Friday: sales at any price?
France 5
HOUSE OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE HEARING ON PLANNED PARENTHOOD 1000 - WITNESS
House Oversight and Government Reform Committee Holds Hearing on Planned Parenthood Funding PURPOSE: To examine the use of taxpayer funding by Planned Parenthood Federation of America, Inc. (PPFA) and its affiliates. BACKGROUND: PPFA supports 59 independent affiliates operating 667 health centers across the United States. For the fiscal year ending June 30, 2014, Planned Parenthood reported approximately $1.3 billion in total revenue, of which $528.4 million (41%) is attributed to "government health services grants and reimbursements." CBO estimates that Planned Parenthood receives approximately $450 million annually in federal funds, nearly all of which is from programs administered by the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). WITNESSES AND TESTIMONIES Ms. Cecile Richards President Planned Parenthood Federation of America, Inc CHAFFETZ: The Committee on Oversight and Government Reform will come to order. Without objection, the chair is authorized to declare a recess at any time. The chairman is responsible, under the rules of the House and the rules of the committee to maintain order and preserve decorum in the committee room. Members of the audience are reminded that disruption of congressional business is a violation of law, and a criminal offense. We welcome your presence, but we will not tolerate disruption. We hope to have a good, lively debate. This is what Congress is intended to do, and we need everybody in this room -- we need everybody's participation along the way. This is an important topic. The risk of getting a little -- a little personal. My wife, Julie and I have been married some 24 years. Have our 25th wedding anniversary coming up in February. I'm proud of my wife. She -- she got her degree in psychology later in life after helping to raise three kids, some are still at home. She has just started to work a plastic surgeon. The plastic surgeon is involved in helping women who are having to have their breast removed. And my wife (inaudible) helping these women. And I'm proud of her for doing that. My mother -- she passed away when I was 28 years old. She fought cancer for more than 10 years. She had breast cancer. And I miss her. I lost my -- I lost my father to cancer as well. Cancer, in this country, kills about 1,500 people a day. A day. And yet, our federal government only spends about $5 billion to fight it. If they were shooting 1,500 people a day, if there were rockets coming -- we would be fighting this with everything we have got. And as I said before I came to Congress and I'm saying here today, as fiscally conservative as I can possibly be, we don't spend enough on cancer. We don't spend enough. We need to spend more. I would quadruple the amount of money if I had my chance to fight cancer and win. And the reason I'm passionate about the hearing today is we got a lot of health care providers, who, I think, in their hearts know that they're trying to provide good. The question before us is, does this organization -- does Planned Parenthood really need federal subsidy? Does it need federal dollars? every time we spend a federal dollar, what we're doing is pulling money out of somebody's pocket and we're giving it to somebody else. What I don't like, what I don't want to tolerate, what I don't want to become numb to is wasting those taxpayer dollars. And as best I can tell, we're (inaudible) have a hearing here, this is an organization that doesn't need federal subsidy. For the year end date June 14th -- June of 2014, I should say, Planned Parenthood reported $127 million in revenue over expenses. They had $127 million more in revenue than they had in expenses. Yet between 2005 and 2013, in large part under Ms. Richards' leadership, there was a 53 percent reduction in cancer screenings, 42 percent reduction in breast exams and breast care. I don't understand why. I don't understand why. Let me give you a sense of the numbers that we're talking about here. Government dollars from taxpayers going to Planned Parenthood is roughly $528 million, $450 million of that comes in federal funds. Roughly $390 million comes in the form of Medicaid. There's going to be a lot of bluster today about shutting down the government over Planned Parenthood. The funding amount that we're talking about under Title 10 is $60 million. Remember, I just told you that last year -- last year, they had more than $100 million in revenue without expenses. And we're talking about $60 million. Roughly 4.6 of their total revenue. Planned Parenthood is an organization with massive salaries. Ms. Richards makes nearly $600,000 a year, the affiliate -- the person that runs the affiliate in Minnesota, North Dakota and South Dakota makes roughly $450,000 a year. And I could be here for a long time listing out fairly (ph) exorbitant salaries. This is also an organization that seems to have exorbitant travel expenses. 2013, they spend more than $5 million in travel, first class tickets, private chartered aircraft. Roughly, they are spending $14,000 a day on travel. That's a lot. That's money that isn't going to women's health care. In 2012 and 2013, spent roughly $600,000 on blowout parties, chocolate champagne events, and Salt and Pepper came and performed a concert. All kinds of celebrities and other hoopla. These are things they lost money doing, according to their tax record. In the past three years, they spent more than $67 million on fund-raising. They're pretty good at it. That's partly my point. They're pretty good at fund-raising. They don't necessarily need taxpayer dollars to go pay for it. CHAFFETZ: And this part I really hope we do get -- have a deeper discussion about. And we may not learn everything that we need to, but over the past five years, more than $22 million has been transferred from their 501(c)(3) to 501(c)(4) organizations as well as PACs. This is advocacy, it's lobbying, it's get out the vote, and in one case in Alaska, it was about redistricting. Ladies and gentlemen, that has absolutely nothing to do with providing health care to young women who need a breast exam or need to get a mammogram. None of that money goes to that. It's a political activity. I was, I guess, naive but surprised that you could take 501(c)(3) money and simply give it to the 501(c)(4). Shared employees -- if you look at Planned Parenthood and the other organizations underneath it, you're going to find shared employees, shared facilities, mailing lists, shared assets. It's a political organization and that's something that needs to ferreted out. And then when you start saying, "Oh, they have to have federal money, they have to have federal money," over the past five years, they spent more than $32 million spending -- spending money overseas. It didn't even come to the United States of America, didn't affect people in low-income situations. They're so flush with cash, they started sending and giving out money overseas. I don't understand that. We have USAID, we have the State Department. We have all kinds of foreign aid. We don't need Planned Parenthood foreign aid, but that's what we got, and their desire for more of taxpayer dollars is just insatiable. There are going to be some discussions today, I'm sure, about the video -- videos. Let me just explain that. I know I've gone over time, but we're going to have to address it one way or the other, so let me address it. I think it was legitimate to look at all of the videos, all of the videos. So we issued a subpoena to get all of the videos. Now, in California, there's a court case where there is a temporary restraining order that doesn't allow the producers of these videos to release them publicly. So we actually sent a letter asking for the videos. Democrats, I think the record will reflect, didn't want us to ask for the videos. They wanted to that language out. Nevertheless, we moved forward and actually went to the extraordinary step of subpoenaing, something I think that actually both sides of the aisle should support. If you want the totality of the record, let's send a subpoena for all of the videos. Now, with a temporary restraining order in place, there is conflict between the legislative branch and the judicial branch, and so what we're seeing here is they on one hand have a restraining order, can't send the videos, on the other, they have a dually issued subpoena from the United States Congress. That is going to have to work itself out. There has been discussion about the producer of this video coming and testifying before Congress. I don't know which direction we're going to go to that. The first step though is seeing all the videos. All the videos. Democrats have said, well they've been doctored, they've been edited, even though they haven't even necessarily seen them, and then they have videos they want to show that show that. The reason they're out there is that they are publicly available. So there is more to this story, there is more that needs to come out, but that's going to have to play itself out. The prime thrust of this hearing today is about the finances. That -- we were very clear and blunt in our -- in what we were talking about in terms of what we're trying to accomplish here today. I have great latitude to members. They can ask what they want to ask, but the focus of what we're doing today is how this organization is funded and how they spend their money. If they're going to accept taxpayer dollars, they're going to have to withstand the scrutiny of Congress asking tough questions about how they spend that money and that's the direction that I'm coming from today. If there's more clarification needed, please let me know. But I now recognize the ranking member, Mr. Cummings. CUMMINGS: Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Let me -- let me be clear from the very beginning. We have -- we have asked for all of the tapes, Mr. Chairman. We wanted all of them -- everything and we would welcome a subpoena for everything, because we think that that goes to the integrity of this committee and it goes to the integrity of this Congress. Today's hearing is very important. It will reveal whether this committee is more interested in facts or fiction. The questions members pose will show whether they are engaged in an even-handed search for the truth or a partisan attack based on ideology. The way we conduct ourselves will demonstrate whether this committee is seeking integrity in our investigation or is being usurped by the most extreme forces of partisan warfare. Let's look at the facts. David Daleiden and his group engaged in a three-year campaign of deceit against Planned Parenthood. They set up fake companies, created fake identities, repeatedly lied about who they were and secretly recorded Planned Parenthood employees without their knowledge or consent. These are facts that Mr. Daleiden admitted to. He admitted to this. His goal for the past three years was to entrap Planned Parenthood into selling fetal tissue for profit. Selling it for profit. He deceived, misled and essentially conned Planned Parenthood employees to try to achieve his goal. He gave them illegal contract proposals. He offered them huge sums of money and he pursued them relentlessly. Some would say he was obsessed. Despite his best efforts, Mr. Daleiden failed. There's no credible evidence before this committee that any Planned Parenthood employee agreed to any proposal to sell fetal tissue for profit in violation of the law. Republicans keep making this claim over and over again, but that does not make it true. When Mr. Daleiden was faced with the failure of his three-year effort, he did not relent. Instead, he took the video footage he had, manipulated it and put it out to the public. He removed every single time Planned Parenthood employees rejected his offers. He edited out all of this exculpatory evidence and he twisted what was left to distort the truth. Something is awfully wrong with that picture. Last week, all the committee members on this side of the aisle asked for Mr. Daleiden to testify here today. Since his video was the fundamental basis of this committee's investigation, we wanted to ask questions about his tactics and his evidence. That's only fair, but Republicans refused. They did not want him to testify. They don't want him -- to subject him to the difficult or uncomfortable questions that relate to the actual facts. But the facts are indeed critical and here are some of the key facts we now know. Federal law authorizes fetal tissue research and it expressly allows for recouping reasonable costs. That's a fact. That law was passed by Congress with strong bipartisan support based on the work of President Ronald Reagan's blue-ribbon panel on fetal tissue research in 1988. This is also a fact. Planned Parenthood receives no federal funding for fetal tissue donation programs and only one percent of Planned Parenthood's health centers participate in these programs. Those are facts. Unfortunately, I suspect these facts will have little impact on the Republican talking points and they will just keep accusing Planned Parenthood of selling fetal tissue for profit. Today's hearings are supposed to be about federal funding. So let me highlight one more fact. Republicans have been saying that Planned Parenthood receives a half a billion dollars in taxpayer funds. They make it sound as if the Federal Government writes a check to Planned Parenthood each year. But the vast majority of the funding, approximately $400 million, comes from reimbursements from individual health services under Medicaid. CUMMINGS: Medicaid provides health care services for people who are poor, elderly and have disabilities. In my home state of Maryland, banning funds for Planned Parenthood would have a negative and disproportionate impact on poor women who rely on Planned Parenthood for a host of health care services, including pap tests, breast exams and cancer screenings. And Mr. Chairman, as I listened to you talk about cancer and breast cancer, I agree with you. We need every dollar we can get for research with regard to these diseases. As you know, on Friday, I will be funeralizing my mother-in-law, who was very dear to me, who died from breast cancer less than a week ago. So, I understand what you are talking about. I get it. And a lot of people who need these services are the people who live in our districts, and they live in areas where they do not have these services. And I'm sure Ms. Richards will testify with regard to that. And so, for many poor women, Planned Parenthood may be one of their only sources of medical care in underserved or rural communities. That brings us to the big question for my Republican colleagues. Do you really want to do this? Do you really? Do you want to align yourselves with the radical extremists who manipulate the facts? And most importantly, do you want to attack millions of women who have a constitutional right, affirmed by the Supreme Court of the United States of America, to make their own health care decisions with the advice of their doctors? Based on the evidence of last week, it appears that you do. You threaten to shut down the government. You ousted your speaker. And now, you want to set up yet another select committee to investigate. It looks like you have made your choice. Unfortunately, I think your actions will result in even more chaos and discord in this Congress, which is exactly what the American people don't want. They do not want the discord. Ms. Richards, I want to thank you very much for being here today to give us the facts. Your group has been extremely helpful during this investigation, providing tens of thousands of pages of documents. Your cooperation stands in stark contrast to Mr. Daleiden, whose notable absence speaks volumes. And with that, Mr. Chairman, I yield back. CHAFFETZ: We have agreed to allow the subcommittee chairman to also make opening statements. So, we will now recognize the chairman of the Subcommittee on Health Care Benefits and Administrative rules, Mr. Jordan of Ohio for his opening statement. JORDAN: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you for this hearing. And thank you for your heart felt remarks in your opening statement. Here is the troubling truth. A picture is worth a thousand words. You can say all you want that these things were heavily edited, they were changed. But if that's the case, why did Ms. Richards apologize for the videos two days after they first surfaced? Everyone knows these videos are, as the speaker of the House said, barbaric and repulsive. And this argument, this argument that we keep hearing from the other side, Republicans want to shut down the government. Are you kidding me? We want to fund the government at the levels everyone agreed to. The Ryan-Murray budget -- the levels of the -- the levels president agreed to. We simply want to shift the money from an organization caught doing what they were caught doing, and give it to the community health centers. Shift it from the 700 Planned Parenthood clinics, give it to the 13,000 federally approved community health centers. Take the money from the guys doing bad things, and give it to the ones who aren't. Take the dollars from one private company doing what the speaker said, "barbaric things," and give it to federally approved health centers. Now, if the Democrats insist that in spite of all that, this organization should still get your tax dollars and that that somehow is more important than funding our troops, our veterans, and frankly, women's health issues and some of the things the chairman talked about in health care, if they're their position, then they can defend that position. So, let's just be honest here. This is what this -- what this is really all about, plain and simple, money and politics. Here is how it works. Politicians give money to Planned Parenthood, who give it back to politicians at election time, who get elected and give it back to Planned Parenthood, who give it back to politicians who get elected, and the game plays on. In 2012, in that election cycle, Planned Parenthood spent almost $12 million in advertising. Fact, $11,874,052, 100 percent of that went to Democrats. Every penny, every single penny went to Democrats. No wonder they are defending this repulsive game. Politicians give money to Planned Parenthood. They give it back to politicians. And it keeps on going. The nice thing about these videos, it has lifted the curtain. We can see what's going on there. And that's why we should fund the government and shift the money from this organization to organizations who didn't do this kind of behavior. With that, I yield back, Mr. Chairman. CHAFFETZ: Thank the gentleman. We will now recognize Ms. Maloney of New York for her opening statement. MALONEY: Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Welcome Ms. Richards. Last week the Democratic members of this committee sent a letter warning our chairman that the relentless campaign by the conservative House Freedom Caucus to attack Planned Parenthood was, in fact, part of a broader power struggle to unseat Speaker Boehner led by an extreme wing of the Republican party that is using this issue to force a government shutdown, unless the speaker bows to their demands. Our warnings proved prescient. On Friday, Speaker Boehner announced he will resign at the end of next month, but not before creating a new Select Committee to investigate Planned Parenthood. Make no mistake, despite what we hear from the other side, Republicans are doubling down on their war against women. I request unanimous consent to place this letter in the record from the Republicans threatening to close down the government unless Planned Parenthood is defunded. And there is... CHAFFETZ: Without objection, so ordered. MALONEY: And when you read this, there are certain things that jump out. All of the signatories are men. None of whom will get pregnant, or need a cervical screening for cancer, or a mammogram, or a pap smear, or other life-saving services that are provided by Planned Parenthood. We will hear today lots of arguments to justify the extreme actions of the Center for Medical Progress, those who created these videotapes. But there is one simple reason we are at this point. Republicans want to outlaw a woman's right to choose. Republicans say that this is all about videos purporting to show violations of our laws. But when the facts come out, that contradict their narrative and it comes to light, it never seems to matter. For example, when we learned that the videos had dozens of unexplained edits, removing phrases like, quote, "We do not profit from tissue donation," from those who work for Planned Parenthood, that did not matter. When we learned that less than 1 percent of Planned Parenthood centers had any involvement whatsoever in fetal tissue donation, that did not matter. When we learned that some Planned Parenthood centers involved in tissue donation took the extra precaution of accepting no reimbursement for their cost, far beyond what is even required by federal law, that did not matter. When we learned that the Planned Parenthood centers that lawfully accepted reimbursement recouped only their costs and repeatedly refused offers from anti-abortion extremists to entrap them into accepting far larger amounts, even in one case ten times more, Republicans still insisted they were trying to profit from these donations. The righteous rhetoric we have heard for weeks about Planned Parenthood trafficking in baby parts has one fundamental law, it is not true. It never has been true. But it makes for a great sound bite. The reason the facts don't matter is that this whole episode is not about tissue donation, or the Hyde amendment or Medicaid reimbursement. The core issue is that Republican members of Congress now almost universally oppose a woman's right to choose. They oppose the constitutional right of abortion. MALONEY: An increasing number, like Senator Marco Rubio, support banning abortion with no exceptions, none whatsoever, not even in cases of rape, incest or when the life of the mother is threatened. The majority of Americans disagree with these extreme views and we will do everything we can to stop them because if we don't, there will be serious consequences for women across this country that rely on the services -- life-saving services. It is their choice of over 2.7 million women to have their basic health care services provided by Planned Parenthood. In 103 counties with a Planned Parenthood health center, Planned Parenthood serves all of the women obtaining publicly supported contraceptive services. There aren't any community health centers that can step in to fill the void. If we don't continue this life- saving service, women will be denied health care across this great nation. This continued assault on constitutionally protected reproductive freedoms is based on outright falsehoods and lies, backed up by fraudulent recordings, selectively edited by radical anti-choice activists. And if they have their way, over 630,000 patients will lose access to birth control, STD screenings and other reproductive health care, mammogram, cervical cancer screenings. We need to recognize this fight for what it is. It's about banning a woman's right to choose and it is being driven by politicians, most of whom are men, who think they have the right to dictate to women about their most private health care decisions, and I might add that Planned Parenthood polls four times stronger than Congress. I might add that we should be investigating this group that did fraudulent edited tapes and not a distinguished health care providing, health -- life-saving group that is across this nation saving lives and providing basic reproductive health care to American women, many of whom are very poor and many of whom are very vulnerable. So I want to publicly thank Planned Parenthood. One in five women in America have gone to Planned Parenthood for services, including myself, at times in their life when they need it, and I want to thank you for the work that you are doing to provide basic health care, reproductive health care services to American women and men. CHAFFETZ: I will hold the record open for five legislative days for any members who would like to submit a written statement. We have had wide interest from a number of our colleagues from broader House membership. I would ask unanimous consent that the Congresswoman, Ms. McMorris Rodgers of Washington, Congresswoman Sheila Jackson Lee of Texas, Congresswoman Black of Tennessee and Congresswoman Love of Utah be allowed to fully participate in today's hearing. If there are additional Democrats that would like to participate, I would be happy to waive them in as well to have an even balance. Without objection, so ordered. We will now recognize our witness. Pleased to welcome Ms. Cecile Richards, president of Planned Parenthood Federation of America. Ms. Richards, pursuant to committee rules, all witnesses will be sworn in before they testify. If you will please rise and raise your right hand. Do you solemnly swear or affirm that the testimony you are about to give will be the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth? Thank you. Let the record reflect that the witness answered in the affirmative. In order to allow time for discussion, we would appreciate if you would limit your testimony to five minutes and obviously, your entire written statement will be made part of the record. Ms. Richards, you are now recognized for five minutes. RICHARDS: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I'm proud to be here today speaking on behalf of Planned Parenthood, a leading provider of high-quality reproductive health care in America. One in five women in this country have sought care from a Planned Parenthood Health Center, and they trust us because our rigorous health care standards have been developed with the nation's top medical experts over our 99 year history. There's been a great deal of misinformation circulated out Planned Parenthood recently and I want to be absolutely clear at the outset. The federal funding that Planned Parenthood receives allows our doctors and clinicians at our health centers to provide birth control, cancer screenings and testing and treatment for sexually transmitted infections. Now, while the federal policy, in my opinion, discriminates against low-income women, no federal funds pay for abortion services at Planned Parenthood or anywhere else, except in the very limited circumstances allowed by law. These are when the woman has been raped, has been the victim of incest or when her life is endangered. Planned Parenthood operates just like all other health centers and hospitals that provide medical care to Medicaid patients. Medicaid reimburses us for the preventive health services that we provide and the Department of Health and Human Services conducts routine audits of the Medicaid program to ensure that these funds are used appropriately, and the same is true for the Title X, the Federal Family Planning Program, which was signed into law by president Richard Nixon. Planned parenthood has been in the news recently because of deceptively edited videos released by a group that is dedicated to making abortion illegal in this country. This is just some of the most recent in a long line of discredited attacks, the tenth over the last 15 years. The latest smear campaign is based on efforts by our opponents to entrap our doctors and clinicians into breaking the law and once again, our opponents failed. To set the record straight, I want to be clear on four matters. First, using fetal tissue in life-saving medical research is legal according to the 1993 law passed by the Senate 93 to four, and based on recommendations from a blue ribbon panel that was created under the Reagan administration. Second, currently less than one percent of Planned Parenthood Health Centers are actually facilitating the donation of tissue for fetal tissue research. Third, in those health centers, donating fetal tissue is something that many of our patients want to do and regularly request. Finally, Planned Parenthood policies not only comply with but indeed go beyond the requirements of the law. The outrageous accusations leveled against Planned Parenthood based on heavily doctored videos are offensive and categorically untrue. I realize though that the facts have never gotten in the way of these campaigns to block women from health care they need and deserve. Mr. Chairman, you and I do disagree about whether women should have access to safe and legal abortion. At Planned Parenthood, we believe that women should be able to make their own decisions about their pregnancies and their futures, and the majority of Americans agree. We trust women to make these decisions in consultation with their families, their doctors and their faith and not by Congress. Is it unacceptable that in the 21st century, women in America are routinely harassed for accessing a legal medical procedure. Doctors who provide abortion, as well as their families, often face harassment and threats of violence and after this recent smear campaign, it's only gotten worse. These acts against women and health care providers don't reflect American values or the rule of law and I hope this committee will condemn them. For 99 years, Planned Parenthood has worked to improve the lives of women and families in America, and largely as a result of access to birth control, women are now nearly half the work force in America and more than half of college students. As a result of better sex education and more access to birth control, we are now at a 40-year low for teen pregnancy in the United States. For all the progress we have made, there is much still to do. For many American women, Planned Parenthood is the only health care provider they will see this year and it is impossible for our patients to understand why Congress is once again threatening their ability to go to the health care provider of their choice. Two weeks ago, I was in Plano, Texas with one of these patients, Dana Faris Fischer (ph), and Dana can't be here today because she has a new job and she's supporting her family. But if she were here, Dana would tell you what she told me, that Planned Parenthood saved her life. In 2013, her husband lost his job and, therefore, their health insurance, and not long after, Dana found a lump in her breast and the only two clinics that would take a patient without health insurance couldn't see her for at least two months. RICHARDS: So Dana came to Planned Parenthood for a breast exam. There, our clinician of 21 years, Vivian, guided her through the process of follow-ups and referrals and helped make sure that her treatment was covered, and she called Dana repeatedly to check on her as she entered treatment. And I am really happy to say today that Dana is now cancer-free. Mr. Chairman, I wish this Congress would spend more time hearing from women like Dana. All women in this country deserve to have the same opportunities as members of Congress and their families for high quality and timely health care. So I want to thank you to be here today and the opportunity to testify on behalf of Dana and the 2.7 million patients who rely on Planned Parenthood for high quality, essential health care every year. Thank you. CHAFFETZ: Thank you. I now recognize myself for five minutes. Ms. Richards, Planned Parenthood has sent 32-plus million dollars in grants overseas. Does any of the funds go to the Democratic Republican of the Congo? RICHARDS: Congressman, let me... CHAFFETZ: No, no, no. We don't have time for a narrative. I'm just wan to know... (CROSSTALK) CHAFFETZ: Yes or no. RICHARDS: You asked me a question. Any of the money that is -- Planned Parenthood raises and is given by foundations and individuals to support family planning services is in Africa and Latin America, and they go to individual organizations. I'm happy to provide you a list of those organizations, but I did not bring them with me. CHAFFETZ: If could you give us a list of those organizations. Does Planned Parenthood have any ownership in foreign companies? RICHARDS: I don't believe so. I don't know what you mean by ownership. CHAFFETZ: Well, in your 2013 tax return, it lists $3.3 million marked as, quote, "investment," unquote in Central America and the Caribbean. I'm just asking if that investment was an actual investment? RICHARDS: We don't own anything in those countries. What... CHAFFETZ: OK. Let me keep going. I have to keep going. I need to -- I would appreciate a list. You have been very cooperative so far. RICHARDS: We have been extremely cooperative. CHAFFETZ: Yeah, and I just cited that. If you can give us a listing, as you said you would, of where those dollars go overseas, we would very much appreciate it. Your compensation in 2009 was $353,000. Is that correct? RICHARDS: I don't have the figures with me. But... CHAFFETZ: It was. Congratulations. In 2013, your compensation went up some $240,000. Your compensation, we're showing based on tax returns is $590,000, correct? RICHARDS: That's not my annual compensation. I -- actually, my annual compensation is $520,000 a year. I believe there was a program that the board sort of put together for a three-year -- I'm happy -- again, I think we have been extremely forthcoming with all of our documents. CHAFFETZ: Let me go to the next one. (UNKNOWN) Will the gentleman yield? CHAFFETZ: No, I won't. Planned parenthood and its lobbying arm, Planned Parenthood Action Fund, controls two 527 organizations that have their own political activities. Planned Parenthood Votes and Planned Parenthood Action Fund PAC. Do they receive money from Planned Parenthood to conduct these activities? RICHARDS: The Planned Parenthood Action Fund is a totally separate corporation, receives no federal dollars whatsoever. CHAFFETZ: What about the management? Who manages it? Do you manage it? RICHARDS: It's managed by a team of people who are employed by the Planned Parenthood Action Fund. CHAFFETZ: Are you one of those who helps manage it? RICHARDS: I don't directly manage it, no sir. CHAFFETZ: Do you help manage it? RICHARDS: Some of my time is allocated to it. But I do not oversee -- the -- oversee... CHAFFETZ: In 2013, you were listed as a shared employee. In fact, you were compensated with $31,000 to help run that organization, correct? RICHARDS: You asked me -- excuse me, sir, you asked me if I ran the organization. CHAFFETZ: Or do you help run it? RICHARDS: Some of my time -- some of my time is allocated to the Planned Parenthood Action Fund, which is required by law and we meet all of the legal requirements. CHAFFETZ: And so, you also involved in the Planned Parenthood Action Fund. What - if you could help us understand what the duties are for your $31,000 of contribution. My guess is you running the mothership here when you show up, and want to have something done, it's probably done. Does Planned Parenthood control any organizations that lobby? RICHARDS: The Planned Parenthood Action Fund is a separate organization that has its own board and its own fund-raising, and no federal employees... CHAFFETZ: Shared employees (ph), shared assets. Shared lists. Shared e-mails, assets. This is the concern. Tell me about... RICHARDS: I just -- could I -- I want to make sure you understood my statements, as I know we're talking about federal funds. Zero federal funds are related to the... CHAFFETZ: It's the co-mingling that bothers us. Now, hold on. Every dollar that you get in a federal -- from federal dollars means you don't necessarily have to allocate it for these particular assets. So, that's what we're concerned about. Tell me about the $200,000 you gave to the Ballot Initiative Strategy Center. What was that for? That was in 2013 as well. RICHARDS: So, I'm not familiar with that exact payment, but I'm happy to... CHAFFETZ: But you gave them $200,000. If you don't know -- you are running this organization. RICHARDS: Sir, I -- sir, I -- excuse me, sir. CHAFFETZ: Let me -- no, hold on. No, hold on. Let me list out what their goal is. Their mantra is, quote, "Envisioning a future where progressives change the game and use ballot measures as a political and civic engagement tool for victory." And you gave them $200,000. RICHARDS: Sir, I ran an organization that has a budget of roughly $200 million. And so, when you pull out one figure out of the last five years, I'm trying to be responsive. It's important to -- and perhaps you are not aware there have been many efforts in states over the last several years to pass ballot initiatives that restrict women's access to birth control and reproductive health care. CHAFFETZ: But you also... RICHARDS: We've absolutely been involved in ballot initiative measures that have been introduced by people who want to restrict women's health care. CHAFFETZ: This is why I don't think you need -- if you want to be private entity, be a private entity. But you don't need federal dollars in order to do this. RICHARDS: I don't use federal dollars to do that, sir. CHAFFETZ: You do to run the organization. Planned parenthood has given Planned Parenthood Action Fund more $22 million to exercise -- to involve in their lobbying expenditures and their advocacy efforts. RICHARDS: None of these -- none of the dollars that you are discussing are federal dollars. And the Planned Parenthood Federation of America receives almost no federal dollars. I think, at this point, $21,000 for clinical trial network for birth control. CHAFFETZ: It goes to the same organization -- and you just separate all that out. RICHARDS: We are highly accountable. Excuse me... CHAFFETZ: My time -- I have gone over time. I need to show this last slide. This one I don't understand. In the case of Dana, when she came to Planned Parenthood, did she get a mammogram? RICHARDS: No. She was referred for a mammogram. Absolutely. CHAFFETZ: That's part of the challenge is that you don't do mammograms. So, if you... RICHARDS: We... CHAFFETZ: Go ahead. RICHARDS: I'm sorry. I've never... CHAFFETZ: You don't do mammograms, correct? There's like one or two places that does them, but you don't do mammograms. RICHARDS: That's -- if you would give me one moment to explain. CHAFFETZ: Sure. RICHARDS: Planned parenthood is woman's health center, just like every -- where I go for my breast exams every year. If you need a mammogram, you are referred to a radiological center, and that's how women actually receive their care. We provide breast exams to -- I could get you the numbers of how many hundreds of thousands of women received breast exams at Planned Parenthood last year. Has nothing to do with -- I don't -- again, you created the slide. I have no idea what it is. CHAFFETZ: Well, it's the reduction over the course of years in pink, that's the reduction in the breast exams, and the red is the increase in the abortions. That's what's going on in your organization. RICHARDS: This is a slide that has never been shown to me before. I'm happy to look at it and -- it absolutely does not reflect what's happening at Planned Parenthood. CHAFFETZ: You are going to deny that if we take those numbers... (CROSSTALK) RICHARDS: ... I'm going to deny the slide you showed me that no one provided us before. We have provided you all the information about everything -- all the services that Planned Parenthood provides. And it doesn't feel like we're trying to get to the truth, here. You showed me this. I'm happy to look at it. CHAFFETZ: I pulled those numbers directly out of your corporate reports. RICHARDS: Oh. CHAFFETZ: My time is... RICHARDS: Excuse me, my lawyer is informing me that the source of this is actually Americans United for Life, which is an anti- abortion group. So, I would check your source. CHAFFETZ: Then we will get to the bottom of the truth of that. We will now recognize Mr. Cummings for a generous seven minutes. CUMMINGS: I thought it was eight, Mr. Chairman. I think it's eight. CHAFFETZ: Go ahead. CUMMINGS: Thank you very much. Ms. Richards, I often hear women, you know, including my wife, talk about the way women are treated as opposed to men. Not being a woman, I, at the same time, try to be sensitive. So, I want to just -- the chairman gave you a series of questions. I have a few other ones. Ms. Richards, I find it extremely hypocritical that the Republicans criticize the salaries of Planned Parenthood officials when you have violated no law, especially while the same Republicans completely ignore the CEOs of huge companies that are actually guilty of breaking the law. Earlier this year, Citigroup, J.P. Morgan and other major banks pled guilty to manipulating markets and interest rates. They were fined more than $5 billion for their actions. Yet Citigroup CEO still received $13 million last year, and J.P. Morgan's CEO received $20 million. These banks get extensive federal support in the form of borrowing through the Federal Reserve discount window, and access to deposit insurance through the FDIC. Ms. Richards, do you know if House Republicans made any effort to strip the banks of their federal support that I just talked about? RICHARDS: I'm not aware. CUMMINGS: Well, I can tell you they didn't. Johnson & Johnson, another one, was fined more than $2 million for illegally marketing drugs and paying kickbacks to doctors and nursing homes, yet the company's CEO still received $25 million last year. Ms. Richards, do you know if the House Republicans conducted an investigation of this company or other drug companies that violated the law? Do you? RICHARDS: I do not. CUMMINGS: Well, I can answer that for you. No, they didn't. And they also never sought to deny federal funding through Medicaid or to block their NIH grants. Let me go on. Last month, Lockheed Martin was fined millions of dollars for using taxpayer funds to lobby Congress, to maintain its hold on a multi-billion dollar Pentagon contract. Lockheed's CEO received a stunning $33 million last year. Ms. Richards, do you know if there has been any investigation or any effort -- any -- to eliminate Lockheed Martin's federal funding? RICHARDS: It sounds like there hasn't been. (LAUGHTER) CUMMINGS: You got it. Of course, there wasn't. These are huge companies that are actually guilty of breaking the law, and their CEOs make millions of dollars. Republicans never criticize the salaries of their CEOs and they never try to strip their federal funding, their government subsidies or their tax breaks. But when it comes to women's health, when it comes to women's health, the Republicans' approach is is completely different. Republicans targeted Planned Parenthood which provides essential high-quality care to millions of American women more aggressively than all of these companies combined. With no evidence of wrongdoing, these Republican investigations multiply, and the political theater continues. This whole defunding fight is just a pretext for the real Republican agenda. It's a pretext. Take away the constitutional right of women and their doctors to decide what is is best for them. I reject these shameful attacks on women's health. Let me go on. Now, Ms. Richards, I want to -- again, I want to thank you for being here. And Republicans accuse the -- Planned Parenthood of selling tissue from abortions for profit. Federal law explicitly allows for the reimbursement for tissue samples. But the Republicans say that Mr. Daleiden's videos are proof that Planned Parenthood was making a profit. So at this time, I'd just like to -- do you know who Dr. Deborah Nucatola is? RICHARDS: Yes sir. CUMMINGS: And who is that? RICHARDS: She works for us in our medical division. CUMMINGS: I was going to show some clips, but the -- our friends had some problems with it, so I want to just do some quotes from some of the stuff that Mr. Daleiden left on the cutting floor when he was doing his -- working with the tapes. Dr. Deborah Nucatola said, and I quote, "to them, this is not a service they should be making money for," end of quote. That's left on -- that was left on the floor. She said also, no -- quote, "No one is going to see this as a money-making thing," end of quote. She went on to say "We're not looking to make money from this. Our goal is to keep access available," end of quote. Another quote that was left on the cutting room floor. "We really just want it to be reasonable for the impact it has on the clinic. This is not something -- this isn't a new revenue stream that affiliates are looking at. This is a way to offer patients a service that they want, do good for the medical community and still maintain access at the end of the day," end of quote. She went on to say -- another piece on the cutting room floor -- never -- you know, this is on the -- on the floor. Are there -- quote, "Are there affiliates that would just donate the tissue for free or -- and then there is another one. And then I'll just end with this one. Dr. Nucatola said, and I quote, "Probably -- I mean, really, the guidance is this is not something you should be making an exorbitant amount of money on", so... And so let me -- let me ask you this. Ms. Richards, I cannot imagine a more clearer answer than these. I mean, as far as I can tell, Dr Daleiden and his group spent the better part of three years -- three years, Ms. Richards -- trying and failing to entrap Planned Parenthood employees. They tried to get someone to sign a contract, agree to a sale or provide one tissue sale at a price above the reasonable expenses that are allowed under the law. But nobody, nobody has identified a single, a single incident where that occurred. Is that right Ms. Richards? RICHARDS: That's correct. CUMMINGS: It's amazing how hard Mr. Daleiden and his group tried to get your affiliates to accept more than reasonable expenses. Over and over again they pressed, they pushed, they cajoled, but they never succeeded. So after they failed in the three-year effort, when they were unable to get even one agreement, they put out these misleading videos instead and they cut out every single time an employee said no, no, no, no. Ms. Richards, my final question as I run out of time, in the clips that I just talked about, Dr. Nucatola was not aware that she was being secretly recorded. Do you know whether that's accurate or not? RICHARDS: That's completely accurate. CUMMINGS: So she was sharing the truth, that is Planned Parenthood does not seek to profit from its participation in fetal tissue research. Is that correct? RICHARDS: That's correct. CUMMINGS: My time is up. CHAFFETZ: Thank the gentleman. We'll now recognize the gentlewoman from Wyoming, Ms. Lummis, for five minutes. LUMMIS: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you, Ms. Richards, for being with us today. My first question is how many Planned Parenthood clinics have mammogram machines? RICHARDS: There aren't any Planned Parenthood clinics -- I believe, to the best of my knowledge, that any have mammogram machines at their facility. LUMMIS: And how many Planned Parenthood clinics are there? RICHARDS: On any given day, between 650 and 700. LUMMIS: OK. So none, to your knowledge, have a mammogram machine. RICHARDS: Right. We have different kinds of arrangements with -- depending on the state, to refer women for mammograms. As I said earlier to, I think, the question to the chairman... LUMMIS: And what surgical services does Planned Parenthood provide? Surgical Services? RICHARDS: Well, we provide surgical abortions and we provide polyposcopy. We do -- we do a variety of services and... LUMMIS: Can you point... RICHARDS: ... Ms. Lummis, to be responsive, you know, we have core services across the country. But some Planned Parenthoods provide broader services. Some provide primary care, et cetera. LUMMIS: OK. I was just asking about surgical services with that question. Can -- tell me -- so abortion is included in surgical services, but can -- I want to find out where you get your 3 percent figure that you cite for abortion procedures. That's your self- reported abortion statistic. RICHARDS: That's 3 percent of all the procedures we provide and all the services we provide. LUMMIS: OK. Well, let's talk about Planned Parenthood revenue from abortions. If you look at the 2013 statistics that you report, abortions from -- if you -- from revenue would have been over 86 percent of your nongovernment revenue. How do you explain this massive disparity between the amount of revenue you collect from abortion and the fact that you only report 3 percent of your services being abortion? RICHARDS: Well, I think there's two questions you've sort of mixed in there, so let me try to address both. One is, as we've already stated, federal money does not go for abortions, so the federal portion that we were discussing is reimbursement for preventive care services. I think the other -- so that's why they're not -- those numbers don't -- aren't connected. LUMMIS: How many -- can you tell me how many of your affiliates receive the majority of their revenue from abortion? RICHARDS: I don't know that answer. LUMMIS: Could you get it for me? RICHARDS: I'll talk to my team. LUMMIS: Thanks. RICHARDS: But I do think it's important to understand that abortion procedures are probably more expensive than some other procedures that we -- that we provide, which might -- you know, might explain what you're trying to get at. LUMMIS: OK. According to your 2013 tax return -- I'm switching now to travel expenses -- Planned Parenthood spent over $5.1 million on travel last year. So as the chairman said earlier, that's nearly $14,000 per day. What is all that money being spent on? RICHARDS: Well, we're an organization that -- we're in 50 states. We also, as the chairman has noted, we have programs in Latin America and in Africa as well, where we support family planning programs in those -- so I can certainly -- and I think we have provided very detailed information, thousands of pages of both our financial statements, our audited financials, our annual report. If there's anything that we need to break down further, I'm happy to do that, but I would say that, again... LUMMIS: I -- I would very much appreciate it if you would break it down, because the taxpayers are funding over 40 percent of Planned Parenthood, and my point is... RICHARDS: I think it's... LUMMIS: ... they just have a right to know how this money is being spent. RICHARDS: Absolutely. LUMMIS: And if taxpayer dollars are being used to free up services that you provide that are abhorrent services in the view of many taxpayers when there are alternatives in this country. Many, many -- 13,000 clinics that cater specifically to women's health. RICHARDS: Congresswoman Lummis, I would like to address that, because one of the comments that was made earlier, and I wasn't able to respond, is that we don't get a federal subsidy. Really, it's important to understand for all -- everyone here how... LUMMIS: Can you function... RICHARDS: ... the Medicaid... LUMMIS: Let me ask you this. Could you function on non-federal dollars? Why -- why -- why do you need federal dollars? You're making a ton of dough. RICHARDS: I don't get -- we don't make any profit off of federal money and if I could just have a moment to explain. LUMMIS: But you are using federal dollars... RICHARDS: $1.6 million... LUMMIS: ... and displacing money that could go to the 13,000 health care clinics. My time is up. I yield back. RICHARDS: Could I answer the question? I'm not sure exactly what the whole question was. But I do think it is really important that you understand that 60 percent of our patients are receiving -- they are either Medicaid patients or they may be Title X patients. Seventy-eight percent of our patients live at 150 percent of poverty or below and for many of them, Planned Parenthood is the only family planning provider that will see them in their area. Half of our health centers are in medically underserved communities. So it is not a -- we are getting -- we don't just get a big check from the Federal Government. We, like other Medicaid providers, we are reimbursed directly for services provided. LUMMIS: Mr. Chairman, thank you for allowing Ms. Richards to answer the question. CHAFFETZ: Thank you, and just as a point of clarification, Ms. Richards, I want to make sure there's no ambiguity here. The gentlewoman from Wyoming asked for a listing of affiliates where the majority of revenue comes from abortion services. You said you'd talk to your team. Will you actually provide us that list? RICHARDS: I will talk to my team. I don't -- we have -- if I -- just for the record, we have -- I am here voluntarily. We have provided tens of thousands of pages of documents to you, we have provided audited financial statements. I will talk to my team and we will work -- do everything we can to... CHAFFETZ: For the record, you have been very cooperative. I just want to keep that rolling and you were very good at agreeing to give other bits of information. Why not this part of information? RICHARDS: I want -- I don't want to commit to anything that I don't necessarily have. I -- I -- I said I will work with you is and your team. We are -- have no interest in hiding any information. CHAFFETZ: If you have it, will you give it to us? If you have it, will you give it to us? RICHARDS: I don't have it. So I'm just saying to you I will work -- I will work with my team and we're working with your staff to provide any and all information that we can. CHAFFETZ: I would hope that that would include the request from Ms. Lummis of Wyoming as well. I now recognize the gentlewoman from New York, Ms. Maloney, for five minutes. MALONEY: Thank you, Mr. Chairman and I -- I first I would like to register my -- my -- my opposition and my objection to the chairman beating up on a woman on our witness today for making a good salary. In the entire time I've been in Congress, I've never seen a witness beaten up and questioned about their salary. Ms. Richards heads a distinguished organization providing health care services to millions of Americans and I -- I find it totally inappropriate and discriminatory. Ms. Richards, are you aware that there are over 285 rallies in support of Planned Parenthood, including one in my district today, and that many are calling today National Pink Out Day in support of the services and life-changing and life support services of Planned Parenthood? Are you aware of that? RICHARDS: I am aware of that and I look forward to changing into pink as soon as these proceedings are finished today. MALONEY: And are you aware that 2.7 million men and women in America choose Planned Parenthood as their primary health provider and that there are two Planned Parenthood clinics in the district that I am privileged to represent, and if you go at the end of the day, young women and men are lined up through the waiting room, out the door and on some days clear down the block waiting for the health care services of Planned Parenthood? RICHARDS: I'm glad to hear that, and again, we're pleased to provide services to anyone who walks in our door. One of the things that I think is very important and refers a little bit to the question earlier is that 60 percent of our health centers are able to see patients on the same day, and I know for many women, if they are concerned about a lump in their breast or need birth control for some of them they haven't had an annual exam in many, many years. We are proud to be able to serve them with high quality care when they need it. MALONEY: And are you aware that this -- this hearing today is promoted by a series of deceptively edited and purposefully misleading videos that have been found to be deceptively edited by leading fact- checking organizations in this country, including five states, five states have their own individual investigations? Now it's six. Missouri did their own review and they found they are complying -- that Planned Parenthood is complying with all state laws and regulations regarding tissue donations. Now are you aware of any other efforts by Republicans and others to defund other organizations that provide health care -- reproductive health care to women in this country? RICHARDS: I am not aware of any, but there may be. MALONEY: What about a tax on Title X? RICHARDS: Well, I think it has been concerning that not only are we seeing in this country efforts to end access to safe and legal abortion, which is an important right of women in America, but the reductions in support for family planning are equally disturbing. I'm encouraged, actually, that finally we are beginning to see some breakthrough. As I said earlier, we have now the lowest teen pregnancy in 40 years in America. We are seeing much better birth control and through the Affordable Care Act, now 50 million women getting access to no cost birth control. I think there is a lot we can do to reduce unintended pregnancy in America. MALONEY: Well, what do you say to -- to those who want to defund Planned Parenthood and outlaw abortion altogether in our country? RICHARDS: Well, I think what's important to me is at Planned Parenthood, we trust women to be able to make their own health care decisions and to make their decisions about where they want to go to for health care and I know that a lot of the members of this committee feel strongly that people should be able to go to their own doctor. This isn't really an attack on Planned Parenthood. This is 2.7 million patients who each year choose Planned Parenthood as their health care provider. And I think they should have that right. MALONEY: I agree with you completely. We in Congress can choose our health care provider, vulnerable men and women should likewise be able to choose their health care provider. I would just like to end by saying that using these videos to justify efforts to defund Planned Parenthood is extreme abuse, it is deceitful and it undermines the integrity of this committee. Thank you. My time has expired. CHAFFETZ: The gentlewoman's time has expired. I now recognize the gentleman from Ohio, Mr. Jordan. JORDAN: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Ms. Richards, if the videos were selectively edited, heavily edited, if this was entrapment, if this was all untrue, then why did you apologize? RICHARDS: Well, Congressman, first, I think everyone has agreed they were heavily edited and that certainly, I think even the perpetrator agreed... JORDAN: My question is why did you apologize? RICHARDS: ... perpetrator has agreed they were done undercover. I spoke with Dr. Nucatola, who was featured in one of the videos and I thought it was important in my opinion -- in my opinion... JORDAN: OK. RICHARDS: ... it was inappropriate to have a clinical discussion of -- in a nonconfidential, nonclinical setting and I told her that. JORDAN: What were you apologizing -- what were you apologizing for? RICHARDS: That she used, I think, in my -- in my judgment, it was bad judgment to -- to have a clinical discussion in a non-clinical setting. And that's... JORDAN: I mean, the first video comes out July 14th. Two days later you issue an a apology. You said this, "It is unacceptable. I personally apologize for the tone and statements." RICHARDS: That's what I felt like... JORDAN: I want to know -- no, no. Here's the question. What statements were you a apologizing for? RICHARDS: It was really the situation that she was in. And I believe that -- again, at that... JORDAN: But Ms. Richards, that's not what you said. You said I apologize for statements. I would like to know and I think the American people would like to know, which statements in the video were you apologizing for? Were you apologizing for statements that are untrue? Because you normally don't do that in life; if you -- if something is untrue and false, you don't apologize for that. You correct the record. But that's not what you said. You said, "I personally apologize for the tone and statements." And I'm asking you a simple question. There was only one video at the time you issued this statement. When you did the video, there was only one video. I want to know in that video that you were referencing which statements were you a apologizing for? RICHARDS: Congressman, at the time as you, I'm sure remember, that video was released. We have had no time to actually evaluate how much editing had happened. It was days later that we were able... JORDAN: Which true statements in that video were you a apologizing for? RICHARDS: And so, I was reflecting that on that video, not any particular statement. That given -- did not reflect the compassionate care that we provide... JORDAN: Well, that raises an important question. So is what you said in your video untrue? You weren't really apologizing for statements made? RICHARDS: I was apologizing for what was said in a nonclinical setting in a non-appropriate way. And I don't believe -- and I don't believe... JORDAN: You can't have it both ways. You can't say I'm apologizing for statements in one video, and then not tell us what those statements were. RICHARDS: I don't believe that Dr. Nucatola... JORDAN: Or you can do this -- you can say, you know what? What I said in the video I produced wasn't true. I really wasn't apologizing for any statements. You can tell us that here on the record if you'd like, but it can't be both positions. It has to be one. And I want to know which one is it, and frankly, the American people want to know which one is it? RICHARDS: In my judgment -- in my judgment, it was inappropriate to have that conversation in a nonclinical setting in a nonconfidential area about clinical matters. And I have told that to Dr. Nucatola. I will also tell you, Dr. Nucatola... JORDAN: Why didn't you say that? Why didn't you say that? This wasn't a reporter sticking a mic in front of your face, this was a video you produced to send out to the whole world... (CROSSTALK) RICHARDS: We may have to just agree to disagree on this matter. JORDAN: I don't think we need to agree on to disagree. I think you're not answering my question. RICHARDS: Well, I've answered it, I think, repeatedly here. And I want to say also for the record... JORDAN: Mr. Chair, real quickly. Just for the record. And I -- I apologize. But this, to me, is critical. Because at the moment you did this, there was one video. And then you do your video in response to that video. And you made a specific statement. I'm sure your staff worked on this. This probably went through a number of drafts. And you were very specific in what you said. "I apologize for the tone and statements." So there is obviously statements in that first statements in that first video that were accurate that you didn't think needed to be out there and you wanted to apologize for it. And you wanted that message heard by the American people. And I'm asking you a simple question. In that first video -- in that first video, tell me what you needed to apologize for? RICHARDS: That highly edited video, that now, of course, as we have gotten further and I've read pages... JORDAN: That highly edited video that you apologized for. RICHARDS: Pages and pages -- now, excuse me, I have now read hundreds of pages of all the things that were said, and what is clear now that there were many -- I think, 10 times during that conversation in which Dr. Nucatola... JORDAN: It's a simple -- Ms. Richards. It is a simple question. RICHARDS: Well, I've answered it... JORDAN: It is as simple and basic as it gets. You don't apologize for things that are inaccurate. You apologize for things that are accurate. And you said there were statements in that first video that I want to a apologize for. I'm asking you to tell this committee chairman, this committee and the American people, what were those statements? RICHARDS: Well, I think I have already made my explanation. And for the record, Dr. Nucatola is an excellent doctor, and a really great... JORDAN: I'm not saying she is not. RICHARDS: Well, I'd just like... CHAFFETZ: The gentlemen's time is expired. RICHARDS: You've had your moment. I wanted to make sure that you understood what -- that she provides incredibly compassionate care and I'm proud of her. CHAFFETZ: Thank you. I now recognize the gentlewoman from the District of Columbia, Ms. Norton. NORTON: Ms. Richards, first, I want to thank you for the Medicaid funds you do receive. The fact that they are Medicaid funds makes its own statement about who you are serving. You are serving low-income women in my community and throughout the country. I want to thank you for that. I want to congratulate you on raising your own funds. You receive a very small grant. You are being investigated by four committees of the United States Congress, and the speaker wants a standing committee. None of them have indicated they want to investigate this deceptive take, which at the moment is enjoined, because it may indeed be legal. Yet this committee is about uncovering illegal matters, not providing a cover for such matters. You know, when I saw this tape, I had a sense deja vu. And I asked the staff to look and see, you know, isn't there some kind of pattern here? And discovered there were nearly 10 of these deceptive sting operations over the past 10 or 15 years. RICHARDS: Correct. NORTON: May I ask you, has any one of those stings uncovered wrongdoing on the part of Planned Parenthood? RICHARDS: Absolutely not. And thank you, Congresswoman Norton. I think it is important to recognize this is a tactic that's been used repeatedly, as you say, 10 times of the last 15 years. And every single time, has been thoroughly discredited. NORTON: You know, it seems they never learn, Ms. Richards. I want to bring to your attention a sting from 2000 that looks remarkably like this one. An anti-abortion extremist approached a committee -- I think it was the House Energy and Commerce Committee -- to say they have evidence that Planned Parenthood was selling fetal tissue for profit, which is of course, what has been alleged by Republicans consistently. Of course. there was an investigation. The hearing with this whistle-blower ,who claimed he had helped Planned Parenthood sell fetal tissue for profit, and that he had seen intact fetuses at a Planned Parenthood clinic. By the way, does that not sound familiar? He said there was an affidavit at the hearing. He swore that in his affidavit -- this is somebody who was watching out for perhaps being prosecuted -- at the hearing that he had no personal knowledge of anyone at Planned Parenthood selling fetal tissue for profit. During his testimony, this is about 15 years ago, he admitted that he was paid by an anti-abortion group to appear in the sting video. And I want to quote what he said. "When I was under oath, I told the truth. Anything I said on the video when I was not under oath that is a different story." Does that not sound like the story of this video? RICHARDS: I think it does. NORTON: I want to know how you can protect yourself, as an institutional matter, how do you deal with these repeated stings, unsuccessful though they are, being approached year after year as you attempt to provide health services for low income women? What do you do as an institutional matter with repeated stings to keep going in the face of this activity? RICHARDS: Well, I think what keeps us going, and I think I could speak here for the thousands of folks that work here at Planned Parenthood, many of whom deal with threats and -- to their own personal safety, it's the patients. That's what keeps you going. NORTON: But is there anything you can do to protect yourselves when people come off the street? You presume they would be in good faith. Is there anything that an organization could even do to protect themselves against unethical activity of this kind? RICHARDS: Well, we work -- I mean, we work very hard to protect our patients. They're our number-one priority always. And so we have security. We take it very, very seriously. It's a shame to think that there are people in this country who are so committed to ending women's access to both birth control and safe and legal abortion, that they'll really resort to any means to try to entrap people, twist the truth, in order to reach their ends. But again, we believe, and why I'm here voluntarily today, is that the facts are on our side. We're proud of the health care that we deliver every single year, despite the animosity by some. And we're grateful that the American people stands with Planned Parenthood, as I think the Wall Street Journal's polls showed last night. NORTON: Sixty-five percent. RICHARDS: Thank you, Congresswoman. CHAFFETZ: Thank the gentlewoman. We'll now recognize the gentleman from Florida, Mr. Mica, for five minutes. MICA: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you, Ms. Richards, for being with us. I guess we're all products of our personal experience. We heard the chairman, we heard the ranking member, how their lives are affected. I guess when I was young, I had a different opinion. But when my wife and I lost our first child, your life and your philosophy change. From that time, I tried to be a champion for the unborn. They don't have advocates; a lot of groups that get a lot of money advocating. But they don't have a very good lobby. You are an advocate for abortion. And your organization provides a significant number of abortions. I think the staff told me there are about 300,000 abortions last year in the United States; is that approximate? RICHARDS: About 300,000 at Planned Parenthood. MICA: At Planned Parenthood? RICHARDS: That's correct. MICA: What's the total in the United States? RICHARDS: I think it's about a million. Actually, don't hold me to that, though. I'm not -- I don't have the numbers in front of me. MICA: So basically, you provide about a third of the abortions. So you're the leader. You would probably have to be the leading provider of abortion in the country, your organization? RICHARDS: I don't know that's exactly true. I just only know what we do. MICA: You know, I've had believe of some exceptions. But there are many people that I represent myself who object to any public money going into -- into abortions. I think the majority of Americans would oppose public federal dollars going into abortion. Would you agree with that? RICHARDS: I don't think -- I don't think the polling reflects that. But I guess it depends. I'm not familiar... MICA: You ask people, I think they would. And that's part of it. Now, your most recent controversy raised questions about public money and your organization. I looked at it. I was kind of stunned. It's about 41 percent of your total money is federal money. That's not just a small amount, because if you add your -- the money you get from different programs, grants, et cetera, it's 41 percent. And I've had that figure confirmed. That's a significant amount of money. Nobody -- I don't think most people have any problem with you spending the money on women's health care. I'm a strong advocate for that. You have 650 clinics? RICHARDS: Roughly. There are new ones opening all the time. MICA: You told Ms. Lummis that you don't -- you don't have one mammogram machine in one? RICHARDS: We've never -- mammograms have never... MICA: So you don't do that, but you... RICHARDS: We do breast exams, just like my own doctor does for... MICA: But your breast exams actually are down significantly. And I've got the numbers from your reports from 830,312 exams in 2009, to 487,029 in 2013. And those are from -- those are your statistics. So you're getting more money. You're not spending it there. Now do all 650 of the clinics perform abortions? RICHARDS: No, sir. MICA: How many? RICHARDS: Roughly half provide abortion services. MICA: So half of the clinics. Again, this is when 41 percent of the money is coming out of the public treasury, people become concerned. And there are people who, their religion, their principles, they feel very strongly, as do I, that no public money should go into this. Mr. Cummings said we should do everything we should to put money into research. You're not putting money into research. You know, you're criticized for your salary, which is -- you know, it's a big organization. But then you look at where's the money going? In Minnesota, North Dakota, South Dakota, one employee got $459,000. In Southern New England, one employee got nearly $400,000, $398,000. Another one in Mar Monte, $387,000. Another one, $377,000. Another one, a quarter of a million dollars. There are dozens of employees with over a quarter -- in the quarter of a million dollar range. If people want the money to go for research, people want the money to go for helping women with their health care, identifying the problem, or putting the money where it can do the most good. And again, we don't -- we have at least the perception of it not being the case. And the chairman outlined travel, lavish parties and expenses. Maybe you separate that money out. But I'm telling you, it does not look good. I yield back. CHAFFETZ: Thank the... RICHARDS: I would love that chance to respond. I guess that wasn't really... CHAFFETZ: It was more of a comment than a question. We need to keep the pace here. We'll now recognize the gentleman from Virginia, Mr. Connolly, for five minutes. CONNOLLY: I thank the chair. Welcome, Ms. Richards. RICHARDS: Thank you, Congressman. CONNOLLY: Wish your mama were here today. She'd be handing out Texas boots to a lot of my colleagues. RICHARDS: She's here in spirit. CONNOLLY: Yeah, thank God. You know, I hope every American woman is watching today's hearing, because just the visuals, as well as the audios, tell you a lot. My colleagues say there's no war on women. Look at how you've been treated as a witness; intimidation, talking over, interrupting, cutting off sentences, criticizing you because of your salary. How dare you. Who do you think you are? Making a professional salary as the head of a premier national organization, and daring to actually make decisions as the head of that organization. Lord Almighty, what's America coming to? The disrespect, the misogyny, rampant here today, tells us what is really going on here. This isn't about some bogus video, the author of whom does not have the courage to appear here, nor would the majority call him, because they know he'll make a bad witness under oath. This is about a conservative philosophy that says we are constitutionalists that hold it up. We believe in rugged individualism and personal liberty, with one big carve-out, though. There's an asterisk in that assertion; and that is except when it comes to women controlling their own bodies, and making their own health decisions. You would never know that the Constitution, according to the Supreme Court, guarantees the right of choice. Hopefully, apparently, we're going to erode that choice and that right by using insinuation, and slander, and half-truths to besmirch their organization, whose primary mission is to provide health services both to men and women, but primarily women. You know, this notion, one of my colleagues said, "Well, getting rid of Planned Parenthood will just hand over these functions to community health clinics, and other non-profits that can take up the slack." Now, if you were really committed to that principle, surely you would agree to the expansion of Medicaid, as provided under the Affordable Care Act, to, in my home state of Virginia, 400,000 people who aren't currently covered. RICHARDS: That's correct. CONNOLLY: Make your job a lot easier, wouldn't it? RICHARDS: A lot of women, a lot of families in this country, need access to health care that aren't getting it. CONNOLLY: So for really -- if we really need it, that's what we do. But of course, the very same people who are saying that vehemently oppose the expansion of Medicaid, which would be funded in the first three years by 100 percent of federal dollars and thereafter 90 percent -- a good deal for any state, which might be why the governor of Ohio -- the Republican governor of Ohio, actually agreed with that and expanded it. RICHARDS: That's right. CONNOLLY: Is there you want to add uninterrupted with some sense of respect, Ms. Richards? Let me at least provide that to you. RICHARDS: Thank you, Congressman. And I did -- I did want to respond to some of the -- what's been said. We are a health care provider to 2.7 million people every year. They come to us by choice. So when I -- when I think about what's really at stake here, particularly for folks who think about ending access to Planned Parenthood, I think about those folks. Last year, we provided 3.5 million birth control services in this country, 4.4 million STD testing and treatments, 378,000 pap tests and almost half a million breast exams and more than a million pregnancy tests. I think it's interesting, one of the things we do at Planned Parenthood is we -- we work to the highest level, most current level of health care for women, and so it's interesting we are being criticized for the decline in pap smears, but in fact, that's because we actually have adopted the recent -- the best medicine, which is that not every woman needs a pap smear every year. To me, that's what we're about, is making sure that every woman in this country, regardless of where she live, regardless of her income, her immigration status, whether she is insured, can get access to health care. That's what we do at Planned Parenthood and we're proud to do it. CONNOLLY: And there's one other thing. CHAFFETZ: I thank the gentleman. CONNOLLY: And that's called respect. Thank you, Ms. Richards, for being here. RICHARDS: Thank you. CHAFFETZ: Thank -- thank the gentleman. I now recognize the gentleman from Tennessee, Mr. Duncan, for five minutes. DUNCAN: Ms. Richards, this is my 27th year in Congress. I can assure you, I've seen many male witnesses treated much tougher than you've been treated here today, and, surely you don't expect us -- I can assure you, I'm not going to be tough on you, but surely, you don't expect us to be easier on you because you're a woman? RICHARDS: Absolutely not. That's not how my mama raised me. DUNCAN: Right. Alright, let me ask you this. You -- you say in your testimony that a lot of women wouldn't have access to certain types of health care were it not for Planned Parenthood. Do you -- do you know that the Department of Health and Human Services says there are 9,727 health care service delivery sites, there are 4,082 rural health clinics, 1,200 federally funded qualified health centers that also operate 9,000 other sites -- over 9,000? Do you know about that? And do you also know that there -- there are over 2,000 pregnancy health centers, over 80 percent of which received no federal funds at all? And that doesn't even count many hundreds of thousands of private doctors and nurses and health care delivery services, walk-in clinics and so forth. Have you taken all of that into consideration? RICHARDS: I can -- what I -- certainly. I mean, what I can speak to is what I know about, is the patients that choose, again, voluntarily to come to us. I think one of the interesting things is that for nationally a third of the women who access family planning services through a safety net provider, a third of the women get that from Planned Parenthood, even though... DUNCAN: But my point is there are many, many thousands of other alternative health care providers. Let -- let me ask you this. According to our reports, there are 2.3 million private charitable organizations, almost all of whom receive no federal funds. But do you know how many received 41 percent of their funding from the taxpayers? RICHARDS: I don't know how many see as many patients as we do. We see 2.7 million patients a year. DUNCAN: Well, I'm saying do you know of any other private charitable organizations that are receiving 41 percent from the government or $528 million from the taxpayers? RICHARDS: Well, again, I think the comparison -- the fair comparison would be who is seeing 2.7 million patients because, as I said earlier, those are -- we don't get a big check from the federal government. We actually are reimbursed for services delivered, for birth control, for STD testing and treatment, for well woman (ph) visits. DUNCAN: Well, I can tell you that almost every one of those 2.3 million charitable organizations would, I'm sure if given the opportunity, would tell us that the government -- taxpayers benefit from what they are doing also. And just to give you an example, the national Boys and Girls Club in their last annual report said they received $26 million from the Federal Government, compared to your $528 million. Seems a little bit lop-sided to me. RICHARDS: I think the cost of providing health care to 2.7 million people and I very much respect the Boys and Girls Club, but we work are actually jut -- we work like hospitals and other health care providers and being reimbursed for -- directly for services that we provide. It's -- again, I think it's -- the comparison is a little apples and oranges. DUNCAN: Let me ask you this. Do you think it's right, in a free country, to force people to contribute to your organization because that's what you're doing, taking taxpayer money from people that are totally opposed to what you are doing? RICHARDS: We provide health care, under the Medicaid program, just like every other hospital and health care provider that sees Medicaid patients, and I think one of the things that's important to understand is in many areas, there aren't -- there aren't new doctors or health care providers that will see Medicaid patients. Particularly when you are talking OB/GYN services, it's not always easy for women, particularly in the southern United States, to find someone who will actually provide a well woman visit, birth control services... DUNCAN: Let me ask you this, because my time is running out. I know you apologized for the discussion and the tone and maybe the laughter. I don't know whether you a apologized for the laughter or not on the videos, but do you -- do you -- I'm not clear on this, do you defend the sale of baby body parts? RICHARDS: No, and I think that is really a total mischaracterization. Fetal tissue research, which as I mentioned, was started -- the whole commission that legalized and -- and created the structure under fetal tissue research was started under the Reagan administration and it is actually -- what it does is facilitates fetal tissue donation and that is actually, as I said, fewer than one percent of our health centers, do any facilitate fetal tissue donation for the patient, but fetal tissue research has read... DUNCAN: My time -- my time has run out. I just want to say this. It seems to me that the apology you offered was like what some criminals do. They're not really sorry for what they have done. They are sorry they got caught and it seems to me that your apology is more because you got caught on these videos. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. RICHARDS: I respectfully disagree. CHAFFETZ: I think the gentleman. The gentle lady from Illinois, Ms. Duckworth, is recognized. DUCKWORTH: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Ms. Richards, thank you for being here and testifying today. I'm troubled by the ongoing attacks to defund Planned Parenthood, an organization that provides such extensive preventive health care services to millions of women, and in fact, I ask unanimous consent to submit for the record a letter from 92 organizations that work closely with Planned Parenthood talking about all of the great high-quality health care Planned Parenthood provides to women and men across the country. CHAFFETZ: Without objection, so ordered. DUCKWORTH: Thank you. I myself have received services from Planned Parenthood. In fact I, like many young men and women in this country, when I was in my early 20's and first in college, I came from a very poor family and I wasn't really able to afford college, and in fact, I went to college based on student loans and Pell Grants and two jobs, one of which was as a waitress. I couldn't get that waitressing job without getting a health exam and I couldn't afford to go to a doctor and the job was there. You can start Friday if you come in -- if you come in with a valid health exam. Go to your local Planned Parenthood. They will do it for you today and you can start work in two days. It was a life saver. And so, I remember what it was like to be a young person needing the health care and being able to trust that I could go to my local Planned Parenthood to get all the care that I needed, so thank you to the organization for providing those services for me when I was in need. I want to talk a little bit about what you do across the country and focus a little bit, as an example, on my home state of Illinois. I think it's a critical point that 96 percent of the services that Planned Parenthood, according to your most recent a annual report, are for preventive and screening services. In fact, in Illinois for 2015, and I think -- tell me if these sound accurate to you, nearly 60,000 patients were served over the course of approximately 110,000 visits in Illinois, nearly 50,000 were for contraceptive services and over 34,000 visits were for STD testing and treatment. Seven thousand visits were for cancer screenings. Does that sound about right to you, Ms. Richards? RICHARDS: That does, that does, thank you. Yes, Congresswoman. DUCKWORTH: I would like to address an issue that started very early on in this hearing, which was this implication that by allowing Medicare and Medicaid to reimburse Planned Parenthood, we are shifting money away that could be used for military defense and our servicemen and -women. DUCKWORTH: As a military woman who just retired after 23 years of service, I would like to ask you to talk a little bit about the services that Planned Parenthood has provided to military men and women and their families for the past several decades, and also include the women of the Peace Corps. You know, I think it is especially important to note that the very women who are willing to lay down their lives to defend the Constitution of this great nation were denied services under the Hyde Amendment for abortion services especially as a result of rape or incest. And especially, you know, this is tragic in light of the many tens of thousands of women who are victims of military sexual trauma every single year. So can you go over what you have done for military men and women and Peace Corps volunteers for the past many decades. RICHARDS: Well, thank you. And I'm glad we were able to provide you health care when you needed it. I know for many young women -- I too -- my first real doctor visit was at a Planned Parenthood when I had gone away from Texas, so I'm grateful as well to the organization. We do serve everyone, and that is really our mantra is care no matter what. We believe it's so important that no matter what walk of life someone comes from, whether they're insured, whether they're in the military, that they get services. In fact, I remember the last time that this House of Representatives went through this -- a similar exercise. I remember hearing from a woman in North Carolina who said -- you know, she wrote in. She said I don't know if they know that us military wives go to Planned Parenthood when a doctor on base can't see us. And so I do know that we serve military families all over this country, and we're proud to do so. DUCKWORTH: Can you talk a little bit about Senator Murray's bipartisan legislation to allow -- Women Veterans and Families Health Services Act which allowed us access to IVF treatment, many of us, for infertility issues caused by military service, being withdrawn as a result of the attacks on Planned Parenthood? RICHARDS: Well, I'm not that familiar with all the details of her bill, but I know Senator Murray has been a strong advocate for addressing -- ensuring that women in the military get the same types of services that women do here in the States. And I think -- we are highly supportive of that. It's incredibly important to me that women -- we equalize women's access to health care both globally and in the U.S. DUCKWORTH: Thank you very much, Ms. Richards. I yield back, Mr. Chairman. CHAFFETZ: Thank the gentlewoman. We'll now recognize the gentleman from Michigan, Mr. Walberg, for five minutes. WALBERG: I thank the chairman and I thank the witness for being here. And I want you to note I'm wearing a pink tie in solidarity with women's health issues today. My wife, my daughter-in-law, my daughter, my two granddaughters... RICHARDS: Congratulations. WALBERG: -- are extremely important to me. I'd just go back to some of the statements on the video. I think -- videos. And I'm not going to spend time there. But Planned Parenthood commissioned a report by Fusion GPS examining the authenticity of the videos. The conclusion of that report says the analysis did not reveal widespread evidence of, quote, "substantive video manipulation" and it, quote, "shows no evidence of audio manipulation." Full versions of the videos are available on the Center for Medical Progress website and the CMP YouTube channel. Showing that only parts that have been edited out are, one, bathroom breaks and, two, breaks where no conversations took place. I just want that stated for the record, Mr. Chairman, as we have a lot of controversy about the videos, and yet the eyes show but ears even more so here what was said. Let me go... RICHARDS: Could I -- could I address that? WALBERG: Very quickly because I want to go on to more crucial issues. RICHARDS: I understand. Well, I do think it's important that -- and that -- we at Planned Parenthood asked, I think even perhaps prior to this committee, that all the original source footage be released. And that's actually -- that has still not happened because, again, we want to know -- we want all of it out there. WALBERG: We want to know too. And I think that will be an opportunity... RICHARDS: Yeah. So I think we can agree on that. WALBERG: But what we've seen so far, the ears have heard what were said. Also, I would address -- the unnecessary attacks coming from some on the other side, especially on men taking an interest in the lives of people most important in our lives. If men in this society aren't allowed to stand to defend the women and children we love, what has our country fallen to? It's a shame we're even having this type of hearing today when we're -- we've been brought into a frenzy and a concern about what happens to our babies, our most defenseless. I just held in my arms my brand-new granddaughter three weeks ago in an African country where she was born, and I thank God for that life, that unique special life. And I told my son-in-law on the way home, I said it's amazing, Prince, that as we drive home today, having never met this little girl before, I would give my life for her. I love her. She's unique and special. And that's why we have this hearing today. We want to get to the truth. We want to make sure women's health care issues are dealt with and dealt with appropriately. In that same country, meeting with the president of the country the next day and the speaker of parliament who is a female, they pleaded with me as a member of Congress to stop hurting their women and families and children trying to change their culture with organizations like our State Department, USAID and Planned Parenthood. Let me ask some questions here, and I take this information from Planned Parenthood Federation of America, your website, and I take it from Medicare Benefit Policy Manual. It says both federally qualified health care centers, 13,000 of them in this listing, and Planned Parenthood centers provide pelvic exams, PAP/HPV testing, STD testing, manual breast exams, birth control. Both entities provide that. Is that correct? RICHARDS: I don't know what all the entirety of all FQHCs provide, but I know that we provide all of those. WALBERG: But you provide all that I just mentioned? RICHARDS: Yes. WALBERG: But emergency first responder care, mammograms, immunizations, diabetes and glaucoma screenings, cholesterol screenings, pediatric, eye, ear, dental screenings, well child services, radiological services, cardiovascular blood tests, bone mass measurement, nurse on staff, all of those, according to your website, you don't provide. RICHARDS: We provide in some places but it's not a core service. So it depends on the state. WALBERG: It's not a promised service. RICHARDS: It depends on the state. WALBERG: According to the Medicare Benefit Policy Manual, the Federally Qualified Health Care Centers provide those services. Now, if we're talking about care for women, I would suggest that the care is there in 13,000 without the controversy of the abortions, the fetal manipulation and potential use of body parts in the wrong way. And I think for the record if we're talking about women's health care, the issue of where we find it is found in 13,000 plus centers available to women, and Medicaid isn't dealing with it, and oh, by the way, your opening statement indicated great problems with Medicaid, and "Obamacare" is supposed to take care of that. I hear my time has ended, and thank you, Mr. Chairman. RICHARDS: I'd be happy to... CHAFFETZ: The gentleman yields back. I now recognize the gentlewoman from Michigan, Ms. Lawrence, for five minutes. LAWRENCE: Thank you. There is a couple of things -- this is very troubling to sit here as a woman and to hear some questions that obviously are insensitive. One, the continual question of why don't you provide the X-rays for a mammogram where every woman here knows you have a primary doctor and that doctor examines you. And if there is a lump, you are referred to a specialist. So I wish those who would sit here to ask those questions would actually have the sensitivity to understand what a woman goes through with her health care. That would allow us to ask more pertinent questions. Secondly, it is exhausting to keep hearing about federal dollars being spent on abortion when repeatedly the facts state -- and it's not a controversy, read the facts, do your research before you ask these exhausting, sometimes I feel insulting questions. We cannot use federal dollars for abortion. This is not a lump sum budget item that we give to Planned Parenthood. It is reimbursement. How many times does that have to be repeated for this to become an embraced fact? If there were no citizens of the United States going to Planned Parenthood to receive these medical approved services that we approve as a Congress, there would be no reimbursement going to Planned Parenthood, they would not receive any funds. I just -- for the life of me sitting here today, I know my colleagues are more intelligent than this, and it is exhausting to hear just a philosophy of attack, to just use information that is totally incorrect, as if I keep saying it, some kind of way, it will become factual. LAWRENCE: My question: Ms. Richards, there seems to be this continuous thought that if Planned Parenthood went away, that there would be these other health care services from millions of women, because you went away. There is a suggestion that all of these community health centers would just step in and fill in. Sara Rosenbaum, a professor of health and law and policy at George Washington, has worked with community health centers for years. And I quote, "A claim that community health centers readily can absurd the loss of Planned Parenthood it is a gross misrepresentation." I would ask you, Ms. Richards can, -- in your experience in health care, the question of, if you went away, it would be totally absorbed, would you respond to that? RICHARDS: Thanks, Congresswoman. Yes, I think this is a really important point, and I know there's been a lot of discussion. First, just for the record, we see 2.7 million patients a year, 78 percent of them are at 150 percent of poverty or below. So, these are a group of women and men and young people who are often uninsured, and certainly have fewer -- less access to care. I know there have been a lot of reports that have come out since Congress has suggested eliminating access to Planned Parenthood for patients. I know the CBO -- own -- studied the Congressional Budget's Office, estimated that 390,000 women would lose care next year if women could no longer go to Planned Parenthood. And I think to some of the questions that have been raised, it's really important for folks to understand, just as you talked about how women actually get breast exams and breast care in this country, in some areas, we are the only safety net family planning provider. And that is the care for most women, and particularly young women -- what the care that they need is family planning, it's access to their cancer screenings and their (inaudible) visits. For many -- in many areas, there are long waits. Sixty percent of our clinics will see folks the same day. In some areas, they won't take any more Medicaid patients, and Planned Parenthood is the only entity. So... LAWRENCE: And it is true that Medicare, and the targeted audience or group that use Planned Parenthood, are often those who are most at risk. African-American minority women die at a higher level than any other population when it comes to breast cancer, when it makes to actually dying from having pelvic or cervical cancer. So, we are actually giving opportunities. I want to interject or ask, Mr. Chairman, unanimous consent to enter a letter into the record from Latino organizations that stated that they know for a fact in their communities, the community health centers could not absorb this. I just want to close, because I only have two seconds. CHAFFETZ: Without objection, so ordered. But the gentlewoman's time has expired. LAWRENCE: Thank you. CHAFFETZ: OK, thank you. We will now recognize the gentleman from Arizona, Mr. Gosar. GOSAR: Mr. Chairman, I yield my time to the gentlewoman from Utah, Ms. Love. LOVE: First of all, I want to say thank you for coming and answering questions. I want to be very clear that there are no "gotcha questions" here. I just want to be able to get as much information as possible. I'm not here to try and change your mind or the minds of my colleagues. I'm just trying to get as much information out to the public as we possibly can, because these -- some of these funds are taxpayer dollars, and I think they deserve to have some answers. First of all, Ms. Richards, in the annual report, Planned Parenthood's annual report, says that you are providing over 489,000 breast cancer screenings. And you've stated that none of your clinics actually have the mammogram machines. How many of your affiliates have those mammogram machines? RICHARDS: Well, our health centers are part of our affiliates. We have more than 650 health centers. So an affiliate is simply the corporate structure for those health centers. LOVE: And how many of them have mammogram machines? RICHARDS: An affiliate isn't a health center. I think I spoke earlier, we do have mammogram machines at our health centers. And we've never stated that we did. As I -- because was mentioned earlier, for women who go for a breast exam, just as I go for my annual, you get a breast exam, and if you need a mammogram, your referred to a radiological clinic. And that's what we do at Planned Parenthood. LOVE: OK, so you refer them to radiological clinics? RICHARDS: Or whatever -- we have partnerships with the Komen Foundation. We have a lot of different ways in which we refer for mammograms. LOVE: That's what I want to know, OK. So, how much does Planned Parenthood make from cancer screenings? Do you know how much you make, how much your... RICHARDS: How much we make? LOVE: Yeah, how much you -- yes, the revenues you make. RICHARDS: For federal -- for federal -- so, just talking to federal funding, we don't make money off of cancer. LOVE: OK, that's what I -- that's great. How many -- how much -- well, you don't get anything from mammograms, either. How much is made from abortions? What's the revenue that comes in from abortions? RICHARDS: Let me just -- you're going to have to bear with me a minute, so I can be responsive. LOVE: I don't -- I don't have very much time, so if you -- if you could respond as quickly as possible? OK. RICHARDS: There's 59 -- I will. There are 59 affiliates. Each of them are completely different, right. They all run their own operation. And I can't tell you -- I think this question was raised earlier. LOVE: You can't tell me how much you actually make from abortions? you can't give that number? OK. RICHARDS: The national office -- just also so you know, we do not provide health services at the national office. We've provided information for all 59 affiliates, their annual -- their audited financial statements. LOVE: I wasn't even asking about the affiliates. I'm just... RICHARDS: Well, that's where health services are provided. So I think that's relevant to your question. LOVE: OK, OK. So, but you don't -- OK, but you don't have those numbers. All you're saying is that the health care affiliates have these numbers and you don't have them. So, you don't know. RICHARDS: Certainly not with me here today. LOVE: OK. So, for the year ending in June 30th, 2014, according to Planned Parenthood reports, 1 million -- one -- sorry, excuse me, 127.1 million in revenue over expenses. From 2005 to 2013, Planned Parenthood reported a 53 percent reduction in cancer screenings and prevention services, and 42 percent reduction in breast exams and breast care, while abortions have increased 24 percent. Can you understand a little bit of the hesitancy in trying to figure out why those numbers have gone down, where abortions have actually gone up? We're... RICHARDS: OK, so we're talking about -- so we don't mix apples and oranges here, so federal funding pays -- Medicaid funding and Title 10 pays for specific preventative care services, as we've discussed. LOVE: So... RICHARDS: And federal funding does not pay for abortion except in very limited circumstances. LOVE: So, what I'm trying to say is, what is -- what -- why would it be offensive if we took funding and put it into clinics that actually provide -- where those numbers are actually increasing providing health care exams, providing mammograms? That actually have those? RICHARDS: You're providing -- the Medicaid reimbursements, if they are going up, if the numbers are going up, that's because more services are being provided. And as you know, many women now, because of the Affordable Care Act and Medicaid expansion, there are more patients on Medicaid that are coming to us for health care. So, that's -- all the reimbursements are directly related to health care delivery services. That's exact -- we work, Planned Parenthood is -- you were not here earlier, but I'll -- Planned Parenthood is just like any other hospital or health care provider that provides services to patients. LOVE: OK. So -- but you have also made it -- you've also made it very clear that if Planned Parenthood wasn't around, this would be very difficult for low income families. So, what is the responsibility of hospitals and other clinics that -- you know, that you actually -- that people can actually go to? I mean, many of them -- you can't say that Planned Parenthood is, like, the only place that is available. RICHARDS: No, but there -- obviously it's a place that 2.7 million patients choose voluntarily to come to every year. And I think what's important is that in a lot of areas in the country, they won't take more Medicaid patients. LOVE: Chose to go. But what is our job here? It is to provide as many options as possible. So, all I'm saying is that... RICHARDS: I would agree. LOVE: There is no reason why we can't provide those options elsewhere, where people can have their choice as to where they go. RICHARDS: Exactly. Congresswoman, I think, actually, this may be an area where you and I agree. LOVE: My time is up. But Mr. Chairman, I would -- if you could... RICHARDS: I would like a chance to answer the question. LOVE: You did, actually, you answered my questions. Mr. Chairman, if you could help in getting some of the information about these -- the numbers that I asked for, that would be really helpful. CHAFFETZ: I appreciate it. The gentleman from Arizona who yielded to you, his time is expired. I would ask unanimous consent to take four pages from the annual reports, where we have the documentation on the reduction in the breast exams and breast care. And so, without objection, I would like to enter that into the record. No objection. So ordered. We now recognize the gentleman from California, Mr. Lieu, for five minutes. LIEU: Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you, Ms. Richards, for your testimony and the gracefulness with which you've answered the questions today. I want to also thank you for running an organization that has helped millions of men and women across America. And on behalf of the majority of women and men in this great nation, I want to say thank you. And having sat here for the last hour and a half, I feel like I'm in some sort of bizarre alternate universe. I think it's crazy that we're having this hearing, based on heavily edited videos and misleading videos that actually showed the opposite of what was happening. LIEU: What was happening was that Planned Parenthood was following the law. I think it's also crazy that we're here when we have fetal tissue research that is not only entirely legal but has bipartisan support. And I think it's insane that in my district now, because of these misleading videos, women have in some cases had to go through two sets of bomb-proof doors just to access health care. And I thank you for your courage. And I note the cowardliness of the maker of these videos, who was too scared to come to us to testify. So let's just come to reality for a few minutes. Abortion is legal in the United States of America; isn't that correct, Ms. Richards? RICHARDS: It is correct. LIEU: And -- and we don't live in a theocracy. The law of the land is not the Old Testament or the New Testament or the Koran or the Torah. The law of the land is the Constitution of the United States. Isn't that correct, Ms. Richards? RICHARDS: Correct. LIEU: And abortion is a constitutional right, isn't that correct? RICHARDS: Correct. LIEU: And Planned Parenthood allows women to access that constitutional right, isn't that correct? RICHARDS: Yes, we do. LIEU: And none of that gets any federal funding. Is that correct? RICHARDS: That is correct, except in the very limited circumstances allowed by federal law. LIEU: Thank you. Now, there are multiple medical clinics across America that also provide abortion services, correct? RICHARDS: I'm sorry, could you... LIEU: There are multiple medical clinics and hospitals... RICHARDS: ...and hospitals. LIEU: ...across America that provide abortion services, correct? RICHARDS: Correct. LIEU: And they also provide services that have Medicaid reimbursement. Is that correct? RICHARDS: I believe that's correct, yes. LIEU: And -- and no one is saying, "let's shut down medical clinics and hospitals because they also happen to provide abortion services." Isn't that correct? RICHARDS: I don't think that's been proposed. LIEU: Right. In fact, they're going right after Planned Parenthood, even though you do the same thing as many of these medical clinics, because you actually, like any organization, have separate line items. That's not a new or novel concept. Correct? RICHARDS: Correct. LIEU: OK. So let's talk about fetal tissue research. It has made enormous lifesaving changes for millions of Americans and people across the world, isn't that correct? RICHARDS: That's right. LIEU: In fact, fetal tissue research has resulted directly in the development of the polio vaccine, vaccines for hepatitis A... RICHARDS: Right. LIEU: ...rubella, chicken pox, shingles, and rabies. Anyone in America that has had a family member or themselves been affected by multiple sclerosis, ALS, and other central nervous system diseases, you can thank fetal tissue research for making advancements in that field. If anyone has been affected by age-related macular degeneration, by all sorts of cancer, by diabetes, by cardiovascular disease, by immune system issues, and by glaucoma, you can thank fetal tissue research for making advancements in those areas. It is crazy that we're here because the other side wants to shut down government because Planned Parenthood was following the law, because fetal tissue research is something that is helping lots of people, and now we want to shut down government because we want to defund all of that. That doesn't make any sense to me. And let me sort of conclude now by asking you to respond to further (ph) questions about why there's been a reduction in cancer screenings. Isn't it true that it's because guidelines have changed? RICHARDS: That's correct. LIEU: They've said, "let's have -- do less mammograms." And then, in terms of Medicaid reimbursements, guidelines changed there too. About Pap smears. "Let's do less of those, too." Isn't that correct? RICHARDS: That's correct. And we always follow the best science and the best medicine at Planned Parenthood. LIEU: And then let me read a quick letter from one of my constituents who saw that Planned Parenthood might get defunded. She said that she grew up in a small desert town, made some poor choices, ditched (ph) school at age 15, started having sex, and she didn't want to end up pregnant, "like a lot of young girls in my town," so she went to the one place she knew would help her, Planned Parenthood. They made her feel comfortable, they gave her an exam, gave her birth control pills, told her that she had an STD, when do you (ph) take antibiotics. RICHARDS: Yep. LIEU: She says, "without that, the STD could have made me permanently infertile." But because of what Planned Parenthood did, she corrected herself, graduated with straight As, and is now a medical doctor, and she thanks Planned Parenthood for helping her and her family. RICHARDS: I'm so pleased to hear that. Thanks for sharing that.
19 20 Edition Languedoc Roussillon: [25 September 2019 issue]
Midi Atlantique
[Records of Johnny Hallyday]
A2 / France 2
Hustle and bustle at rungis walk before Christmas
TF1 News (Private - August 1982 ->)
[Christmas shopping: the success of destockages]
TF1 News (Private - August 1982 ->)
Cyprus: the party frenzy
A2 / France 2
La Rinermania is rampant in Toulon.
L'Equipe
Blow up the bank
France 5
The value of a great holiday
RTF / ORTF