Executive Session

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mrs. SHAHEEN. Mr. President, I came to the floor this morning to address what has been an alarming and inaccurate information campaign that is being spread about the international family planning amendment included in this year's State and Foreign Operations appropriations bill.

I would note that while this amendment is referred to as the ``Shaheen amendment'' in alarmist and inaccurate blog posts, it is actually bipartisan language that was agreed to by both the subcommittee and full committee chairs of the Appropriations Committee and ultimately approved unanimously by Republicans and Democrats in the committee. Yet articles and op-eds online have condemned the amendment as pro-abortion. I was surprised to hear this given that, despite my objections, the amendment does not address the Mexico City policy--or the global gag rule, as it is known--abortion services, or information. In fact, this is the first time in 18 years--I am going to say that again. It is the first time in 18 years that members of the Appropriations Committee were prevented from offering a bipartisan amendment that would strip the bill of the Mexico City provision.

Instead of allowing the established committee process to amend the SFOPs bill with this provision, the entire bill was pulled from consideration. In response to that, in an effort to ensure the bill wasn't endangered, I worked with my colleagues Senator Collins of Maine and Senator Murkowski of Alaska and with Republican leadership to limit the scope of the amendment so we could allow the appropriations bill to go forward.

It is false--absolutely, positively false--to say this amendment funds abortions abroad. In fact, it is wrong to say, and inaccurate to say, that any U.S. assistance goes to funding abortions at home or abroad. In compliance with U.S. law, family planning funding does not and never has gone to abortion services. I hope everyone is clear about that. Under our law, family planning funding does not go to support abortion services.

Now that I have outlined what this amendment does not do, let me discuss what it does do. It provides an increase of $57.5 million for a total of $632.5 million for existing international family planning accounts. This money funds programs and services that provide modern contraceptives, which 214 million women around the world who want to avoid pregnancy are not able to access.

Again, I don't know when the debate around abortion came to include contraceptives and family planning. It also would allow for the healthy timing and spacing of births, which is very important to the health of infants and it is important to the health of women to be able to space the births of their children to recover between births. It provides education information and counseling about family planning issues. It ensures access to antenatal and postnatal care for a healthy mother and baby. It provides for HPV vaccination and prevention, something very important to the health of children.

These are a few of the critical services the assistance provides. The impact of these services is very real.

According to the Guttmacher Institute, with each additional $10 million the U.S. dedicates to family planning and reproductive health programs, 400,000 more women and couples receive contraceptives services and supplies. With the $57.5 million increase provided for in this amendment, more than 2.2 million women and couples will have that access. That will result in 654,500 fewer unintended pregnancies, 291,500 fewer unplanned births, 280,500 fewer induced abortions. If you care about abortion and you don't believe that is the right alternative, then you should support family planning because that gives families and couples an option to ensure they can have the children they want, and it would provide for 1,320 fewer deaths of women.

While these numbers are stark, the transformative effect of simply having access to family planning information and services on the lives of women and their families should not be underestimated.

The most vulnerable women who are reached by family planning programs report that learning about family planning options, receiving services to prevent unwanted pregnancies, and ensuring that wanted pregnancies are healthy and happy so the babies they want to have are healthy and happy gives them some control over their lives. Many women are making healthcare choices for themselves and their families for the very first time with help from these programs.

These critical programs change lives, and our partners who implement these programs are indispensable. In October, USAID Administrator Mark Green said he could not ``imagine an effective development Agency that doesn't partner with the community of faith.'' Luckily, he doesn't have to. For those people who were worried that family planning programs are not going to be implemented by our faith community, that is just wrong.

The family planning account goes to a range of program implementers, including healthcare providers, international NGOs, and faith-based organizations alike. All of these organizations have the goal of saving women's lives and saving the lives of their children. They need more resources, not fewer, to do this work.

What else does the international family planning amendment do? It includes an additional $33 million to USAID's family planning account for money that is rerouted away from the U.N. Population Fund.

Again, unlike what the blogs are mistakenly saying, this is not money that currently goes to UNFPA's lifesaving operations. Instead, it will be redirected back into the family planning account and contribute to the programs I just outlined.

Third, the amendment requires the Government Accountability Office to produce a report that evaluates the efficacy of family planning programs and their structure. Again, this was another bipartisan effort with my Republican colleagues to ensure that our U.S. dollars are most effective and they contribute to programs and services that are most effective. Again, if you have a concern about how family planning dollars are being spent, then you should support this amendment because it is going to give us data and information to show what is effective and what isn't.

Finally, the amendment includes language to reaffirm an existing nondiscrimination policy within USAID. This is an existing nondiscrimination policy. This is not a new policy. That policy within USAID ensures the services funded by these accounts reach all segments of the population.

As I said, this is not a new policy. The anti-discrimination policy has existed for several years, and it is not targeted toward faith- based organizations, despite what some of the blogs mistakenly are putting out there. In fact, the complaints I have heard in my office about single women being rejected for services didn't touch on work that faith-based organizations are doing.

I hope all of our colleagues in the Senate will not allow misinformation about the family planning dollars that are in the State and Foreign Operations bill to dismantle what has been a very important bipartisan achievement. Its impact is too great and its programs are too important to let them be killed by a campaign to try and mislead people about what is in the amendment.

NOMINATION OF AURELIA SKIPWITH

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source