Commerce, Justice, Science; Energy and Water Development; and Interior and Environment Appropriations Act, 2026

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. LANKFORD. Mr. President, this year, 2026, is the 50th anniversary of the Hyde amendment. Now, that may not mean a lot to a lot of people, but 50 years ago, the U.S. Senate and the U.S. House and the President of the United States came to a compromise agreement over the issue of abortion. It was a long, drawn-out process. At the end of that long, drawn-out debate, they came to a compromise agreement that Americans would not have to pay for elective abortions. It didn't outlaw abortion in America, but it said: We have disagreements on abortion as Americans, but at a minimum, we should agree American tax dollars should not pay for the taking of human life; that healthcare is about protecting life, not taking life; that in a controversial issue like abortion, at least we should all agree we don't use tax dollars to pay for abortion. That was 50 years ago this year.

It is amazing to think about how many things have changed in American attitudes in 50 years. But what hasn't changed is we still haven't come to an agreement about abortion. We still haven't been able to resolve that issue.

Now, science has resolved that issue, but we in American values and culture have not. Science would say that a child's life begins at conception, that that is the moment the DNA is different than the mom's DNA. Every single cell in the mom's body has the same DNA except for those cells. Those cells are different. They have a unique DNA in the world because that is a different person that is there. The cells are dividing and growing. There is no difference between a child in the womb and a child outside the womb other than time. That is a separate child.

Science has settled that issue, but, culturally, we haven't been able to settle this issue: Are some children valuable and are some children disposable? Our culture still believes there are some children that are disposable. I don't. I think every child is valuable. Whether you are a child born in a wealthy household or in poverty, that child has opportunity in America if they are allowed to live.

It is this ongoing dialogue that we have as a country: Do we value the most vulnerable in our society? It is a conversation that has been going on now five decades, and next week, there will be tens of thousands--probably, actually, hundreds of thousands--of students and adults that will all come to Washington, DC. I am sure, as it always is on that January day, it will be cold outside. And they will walk down the Mall and gather for a rally that is simply called the March for Life. They will talk about the beauty of life. They will talk about the value of every child. There will be testimonies of people that their family has personally experienced abortion. There will be testimonies of folks that they directly have experienced the pain of abortion. There will be folks who will stand up as physicians and talk about the medical issues. But, ultimately, there will be conversations about every single child being valuable and beautiful.

There will be people in the crowd that were born in poverty, people in the crowd that were born in wealth--just like every other child in America that is in the womb--except those folks that will be at the rally will be celebrating the fact that they were born, No. 1, and that they had an opportunity to be able to speak out for the next generation of people that so much desires to be born and to have the same opportunities all of us in this room have: to grow, to learn, to love. That is all that child wants, and they had the opportunity to be able to have that.

As I mentioned, 50 years ago, the Hyde amendment was put in place. Every single part of our healthcare operation with Federal dollars is all covered by the Hyde amendment. Whether it be Department of Defense healthcare, whether it be Veterans' Administration, whether it be Indian healthcare services, whether it be CHIPS services for children, all of those are covered by Hyde protections with this basic compromise agreement that we will not fund abortions with American taxpayer dollars--well, except for one area, and that is actually ObamaCare.

When the Affordable Care Act was passed, there was an attempt to be able to have the Hyde amendment actually included in that. That was actually put in in the House of Representatives when they sent it over to the Senate to say: No, let's include the Hyde amendment in this like we do every other part of our healthcare agreement.

When it came to this body, though, my Democratic colleagues stripped that out, and they included in a different section saying: No, we are actually going to create a workaround around the Hyde amendment so that we can quietly fund elective abortion, for the first time, with Federal tax dollars. That workaround still exists today.

The original agreement and the conversation was that every State would allow some options that would have elective abortions for your healthcare coverage and some options that you could choose without that--except now that there are 12, maybe 13 States working that don't allow any option of the Affordable Care Act, of ObamaCare, to be in their State that doesn't also require abortion coverage. So even people that are morally opposed to abortion and the taking of human life don't have an option to buy coverage in their State for healthcare without having abortion coverage built into it.

Now, the issue became, well, there will be some kind of set-aside dollars that will be separate, that you will have a separate premium that you will have to pay, and that separate premium will pay for the abortion coverage--except the insurance companies can't actually show where that separate premium is. In fact, after the law passed that required a separate payment for abortion coverage there so there would be a type of Hyde, is what they called it, the Obama administration immediately came out and said: Actually, the word ``separate'' actually means ``together''--I am not making this up--and so you now have your premiums together, but it is defined as being separate.

Only in government can you define ``separate'' as meaning ``together.''

So we still have this one form of healthcare in America that violates this 50-year-old compromise: We don't use taxpayer dollars and compel Americans who actually value children to pay for the taking of the life of a child.

We are still working on that. Ironically enough, there is still an ongoing debate on the Affordable Care Act--on ObamaCare--still raging in this body, even this week, and much of it circles around ``Is this going to be about healthcare or is this going to be about the taking of human life?''

I have no issue if we are working on a healthcare policy. I have a big issue if we are working on taking the life of an innocent child.

There is also an ongoing debate that is happening right now over chemical abortions--``mifepristone'' if you want to use the medical term, and there are several generics that are out there as well. This is an abortion drug that is literally now mailed to you without seeing a physician. Now, that didn't used to be so. It is a prescription drug; it is not an over-the-counter drug. It is a prescription drug for a reason--because it has very, very serious side effects.

But this prescription drug--during the COVID time period, the Biden administration said: You know, there is a COVID crisis. People can't get in to see their doctor right now, so we will allow them to call in, and there will be this medicine mailed to them.

So for the first time, suddenly mifepristone, which actually causes an abortion for a woman--that drug is now being mailed without ever seeing a doctor.

Now, some folks have alleged ``Oh, that is no big deal. It is used all the time, so it must be completely safe.'' In fact, my favorite term that I hear--I hear it even from some folks in this body--is that mifepristone is as safe as Tylenol. I have heard that so many times: It is as safe as Tylenol. It is as safe as Tylenol. It is as safe as Tylenol.

Let me start with some basics. When you take Tylenol, it doesn't take a child's life. Mifepristone, by design on the label, takes the life of a child. So let's just start there.

The second issue, though, is also interesting. If you follow the label instructions for mifepristone and take it exactly as it is labeled and if you take a Tylenol and take that exactly as it is labeled--if you take mifepristone, though, you are 8,000 times more likely to end up in the hospital than taking a Tylenol.

Let me run that past you again. For all the folks that say it is as safe as Tylenol, mifepristone, according to the stats that we have that are public--you are 8,000 times more likely to end up in the hospital taking mifepristone than you are taking a Tylenol.

Stop saying it is as safe as Tylenol. The facts do not bear that out. It is not.

Mifepristone also has a strong likelihood of and a side effect of causing infertility among women. If the baby has a different blood type than the mom and if the combination is not correct, the mom then suffers from infertility the rest of her life. Now, if you go see a doctor, they can tell you that, but if you just get it in the mail, you have no idea.

How about this issue: If you have an ectopic pregnancy, which you don't know unless you have an ultrasound, taking mifepristone can not only kill the baby but could also kill the mom.

This is a big issue. The Biden administration became flippant about this chemical abortion drug because the Biden administration was focused on having more abortions in America. They weren't just pro-choice; they were pro-abortion, trying to increase the number of abortions in America, but to do that, they did not take into account the health and life of the mom because they were so eager to increase the number of abortions.

Even in my State--in my State, we made a decision based on the Dobbs decision from the Supreme Court that now each State can make their own decisions about what they are going to do about this issue of life. After decades under Roe v. Wade, the Court has now said that this is up to every State.

So in my State, we would say this is a settled issue, except for doctors out of State now were mailing abortion pills to women my State, intentionally going around our State laws--intentionally.

This morning, the Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee, chaired by my friend Dr. Bill Cassidy, held a hearing talking about mifepristone.

One of the witnesses that was there was the attorney general from Louisiana talking about the number of women who have experienced coercive abortions, where a parent or a boyfriend or some other loved one compelled them to be able to take these chemical abortion drugs against their will--compelled them to do that--or slipped it into their food or into a drink to be able to sneak it into their system, literally taking the life of that child.

Do you know how they could do that? Because you don't have to see a doctor to get access to these drugs. They can just be mailed to you as if they are a Tylenol when they are not.

We have to have an ongoing conversation here. Decades into this dialogue about the value of children, we are still talking about this issue. Are children valuable? Let's keep talking about it because at some point, as a country, we have to resolve this most simple, scientific, ethical decision: Are some children valuable and some children disposable or is each child valuable?

I am going to stand with the marchers that are coming in next week to joyfully celebrate the beauty of every child.

Yesterday, I was emailed the photo of a longtime friend of mine who just had her first child. It has been a long process for her and her husband. I got a beautiful picture of baby Benjamin yesterday, and he is adorable. I know you are not supposed to say that about a boy, but he is adorable, and we are excited to see him.

Last year, there were a million abortions that were done in America-- a million. We will never see their faces. Those children either were thrown away in the trash or ended up in a toilet after a chemical abortion. What is the difference between those two children? Not a thing. Not a thing.

All children are valuable, all of them, and I pray for the day when all of them have an opportunity to live, to experience this glorious Nation that we get to experience the freedom of every day.

Thanks to the marchers who will speak out next week for life and for all those around the country that continue to look at the science and continue to look at the face of a child and say: You are beautiful.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source