tv Key Capitol Hill Hearings CSPAN April 22, 2016 4:00am-5:11am EDT
becomes a nuclear weapon state. what i was able to get done as on theking democrat senate foreign relations committee working with senator corker, the chairman, is to make congress engaged in this so we had more transparency, more committee hearings, we had more public knowledge. i think as a result of what senator corker and i were able to do, there was a close review during the negotiation process. i think we actually got a stronger agreement and better ways of enforcing an agreement and we will continue to do that in congress. i think the congressional role is the right role and oversights as agreements are being negotiated and the president acted under his authority. there were not enough votes in congress to override what he had done. i did not think that was the best agreement moving forward. now it is time to make sure it is enforced and for congress to work with the administration and the international community to
make should that not only does iran become a nuclear weapon state, but to take action against iran for other actions such as ballistic missile testing, supporting terrorism, violation of human rights. we have to be very strong to make sure that iran is held accountable for these actions. deal has this iran nuclear changed our relationship with saudi arabia in a negative way? the headline in "the washington president stepping not air force one, was greeted not by the king but a lower ranking royal. the king personally greeting senior officials from other gulf nations arriving at an airbase. mr. obama's arrival was not shown live. you are reading too much into those issues. i think saudi arabia understands that the most important alliance withth the united states
sharing their same security interests in the middle east. they understand how important that relationship is. there were disagreements on some of but we did in syria, there are disagreements on how we handled some of the iranian negotiations. we are past those two moments. i think the saudis understand that the relationship with united states is critically it will bend that long lasting beyond one administration, and that they recognize the importance of the visit of the president to saudi arabia. host: should the victims and families of the 9/11 attacks able to hold the saudi and suent accountable them for their role in september 11, if they had a role in the september 11 attacks? have athe victims should path toward compensation and that is the key point. those who are victimized, there should be accountability and they should be able to get relief. they issue asked how that can be done is a matter that we have a bill pending in the united state
senate. the administration has voiced strong objections to it. the saudi's forest strong objections to it. it has to do with the issues of sovereign unity and accountability. we are trying to understand the administration's concerns to see whether there is a path forward to accomplish our objective. that is to give away to where the victims can be compensated. host: what about the 28 pages of the report in the investigation of what happened and what led up on september 11 that people have called for the release of them to the public? guest: the 28 pages is part of a report issued for part of the 9/11, it is being reviewed now by the administration to see whether it will be released to the public. parts of it will be redacted and released. i have reviewed those 28 pages
in a classified setting, so i cannot comment on it under my oath of office. i cannot give my view on it, but generally, we are giving as much transparency as we can make. the more transparency, the better off we are. host: what could they learn about the 28 pages? general? talk about in i don't want to get you in trouble. [laughter] guest: i don't think i can go down that path to comment on the reports. host: the decision from the supreme court yesterday, this is from "the washington post" yesterday morning. thesupreme court cleared way for american victims of terrorism to collect nearly 2 billion dollars in seized iranian assets, but not without a one from the chief justice that the court was undermining its authority.
guest: i have not read the specifics, but i have read the news accounts of the supreme court decision. i think that is good news. i think it is saying that congress is the legislative branch of government out of concern parameters, they are permitted to act on issues of compensation. in this regard, congress has passed a law, provided relief in regards to a certain issue involving iran, and the supreme court has withheld the congressional power to provide that type of avenue for relief. host: does that set the precedent for the 9/11 bill or is it not related? guest: it could be related. we would have to read the specifics of the case. raised by theing administration and the saudis may not necessarily be the constitutional power of the congress. i'm not sure about that. , [indiscernible]
which is long-standing. congress does this, with the saudis take action that could compromise u.s. interests in saudi arabia? 9/11, those responsible need to be held accountable. i think congress has a right to move in that direction and the local administration will hopefully to europe how to get this done. host: you will go to st. louis, has been earl waiting. good morning. caller: i am watching your program this morning and you listed the number of countries in the middle east that were receiving american arms and how much they would receive, but you left out one country that received the majority of military hardware and that is israel. i was just curious, why wasn't israel mentioned? host: this is the list together
by "the wall street journal." in 2015 by the millions, and you can see the list there for yourself. can you explain, senator? guest: this is different. we're talking about arm sales, and arms sales, the saudis are number one and they purchased united states weapons and it goes through the notification process, and there is involvement to make sure that it is acceptable. it is not a native country and it goes through different scrutiny, so that is the arm sales. there is also military assistance which involves israel and other countries in which the united states is providing help. host: illinois, a republican. feelr: senator, do you there is a [indiscernible] going on with the sunnis and the shiites working together and how
does russia fit in with that? guest: it is very interesting. when i was in saudi arabia, i asked the king and crown prince and deputy crown prince, if there was a leader elected in syria from one of the religious parties, does that person represent all the religious parties for sects? and the answer is, we do not care. we have shiites in a country that are part of our society and government, not a matter of what is the sunni or shiite. it is someone who will represent all the people of the country, so what they're looking at in syria, a leader that will represent all of the communities of syria and to has the confidence of the people that will defend their communities. we have got to stop the bundling that is going on. that i think is the key to
stability in the region, and that is the type of leadership we need in syria, iraq, and the type of leadership that we want to see iran stopped to interfere with countries in an effort to the shia stir up minority in countries the cause military problems or stability problems leading to isil's ability to attract fighters. host: does that leader exist in syria? guest: i don't know. not president assad, he has to leave. i am sure the president is hearing the message clearly, there can be no peace in syria with a leader who has killed so many people and has dislocated so many people, so assad has no credibility in that region as the person to head syria, but it a shiite or sunni, but that is not the issue.
the question is whether they will represent all the people. host: what credibility does president obama have in that region? it is not the president but the united states. they look at the united states as the most important single player of leadership in that region. under president obama, the united states has breath and the ties to that region -- has strengthened the ties to that region. we have been engaged in libya. they look at the united states as a key partner in their desire to create stable regimes representing all of their citizens, not creating voices for extremist. they need to get rid of extremists, so they look at the united states, president obama as a key partner in a, pushing those objectives. having as that mean presence at all times in these regions so that extremists as a have seen, one america withdraws, then extremists come
in? guest: i think united states must be engaged in the middle east. there is no question. do not want to see american roots on the ground. that would be counterproductive. withember the conversation the king of jordan that said, we don't want this to be a western crusade. the people of the region must , and theemselves challenge we see today in iraq and syria, is whether the sunni aibes can be protected by government that has had its governmentin getting forces to protect sunni communities and the shiite militia will have to be the national force. is tok the challenge develop that type of security in the region. the united states is critically important. our airis our military, support, our technical training that can help provide that climate and it would be for an
extended period of time, but ultimately, it is up to the syrians, the iraqis, saudis to defend themselves. host: in massachusetts, democrat. good morning. caller: hi. senator, i am a fan. there's [indiscernible] under committee? guest: yes, he is the chairman. caller: what about environmental? guest: yes, that is the environmental committee. caller: are you a climate change denier? guest: no, i will be giving a speech today, tomorrow is worth is earth day, and president obama will see many countries signed the top 21 agreement for 196 countries. 98% of global emissions of the world will sign a commitment toward working together to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. of thestrong supporter
u.s. leadership globally and in this country to dramatically reduce our emissions. caller: did you hear senator on and those 192 countries are going to be sorely disappointed? how do you work with someone like that? guest: i have known jim everson second to congress. we came to congress in 1987. he is a good person. he is just wrong on climate. look,y i answer that is, let's let the scientists determine what we need to do in healthy.keep our globe but can we do in order to protect our environment and future generations? scientists tell us what we need to do. the overwhelming opinion is that the activities of us on this earth is affecting climate and that we have the ability to change for the better, and if we do not do it soon, it will have
had this topic impact, so we need to act. host: this bill that the senate passed, it is tailored to a modern energy landscape, that is the headline that the "new york times a quote put on it. a bipartisan measure to better align the electric and gas systems with the changing ways that power is produced in the united states. approved-- it was 58-12. guest: i think you have them -- host: oh, 85. i mixed them up. sorry. [laughter] guest: it was a major advancement of an energy bill. we were very proud about that. by partisans are working on it now. it contains many provisions that many of us are working on. the main goal is to increase our energy supplies. our carbon source energy supplies, we ask questions to
deal with the friendlier environment, and it also deals with energy conservation and a major way, so we use less energy. it is a major bill. also included in that bill, some of our major environmental programs that are being reauthorized. there are bills that i have filed that i was able to get into this legislation. those are major bills. host: "the new york times" says it needs fixes. guest: if i would write the bill, i would write it differently. i was disappointed we cannot get the tax reductions that would've to have for new opposed the same tax advantages that the fossil killing industries have, the so-called -- fossil puling industries have, the so-called provisions. host: that's go to virginia, independent caller. the house of the gaveling in at 9:00, so we will go there, but go ahead with the question. caller: good morning. good morning, senator.
was, we are a country that fights for human rights, against aggressors, oppressors, so the question is, why are we not doing anything against the aggression of saudi arabia? they have their army going into another country, oppressing people who are just demonstrating against the government. they do not have any arms or anything. they are being killed every day. nothing has been said about that. saudi arabia is funding the boko haram, and all the other groups all over the world. planeshe people who flew into the world trade center's or saudis -- were saw this. the only people against the 9/11 bill were saudis. we don't say anything about them.
always say is, you are on this, on that, why can't we have a peaceful relationship with iran? guest: i want to know your comments about that. we do say that. objections to my how they handle foreign labor, human rights, and you are absolutely right about how the saudis to handle these issues. it is also true that in the gulf countries, they do support organizations that we believe are terrorist organizations. we have seen that between several of the gulf countries and terrorist organizations. aggressive in changing that behavior, so meetings that i held in the region couple of weeks ago, i'm sure the president is following up on those in his visit, we have gotten their cooperation to change their behavior, to change and share information about
their banking system to make sure nothing gets into extremist hands and terrorist groups. we are getting better cooperation. is it where we want it to be? you are right, it does not trade too much of their resources and the people are going to terrorist organizations. it is complicated for what do i mean by that? the royal family in saudi arabia is huge. huge. [laughter] yes, are a lot of arms and some way think are doing things that are against our interests and we will very much be vocal about that. that word has different connotations now. president obama speaking right now to the gulf nations at this summit, not just with saudi arabia leaders, but with other arab leaders as well. an update for all of you, we told you that the campaign manager for bernie sanders said , evena democrat for life post election if he does not win in the presidential primary, but reporter that he is
already filed for election in the senate as an independent. there is the paperwork at the top of that tweets for the 2016 committee information. that bernie sanders is filing as an independent to run again two .ears from now in vermont we asked our viewers earlier, if the nominating process, if it is dividing the party. , to think that bernie sanders in his campaign, given the gap right now, needs to tone it down? campaign hask the been healthy for the democrats, and i think it will help hillary clinton be our nominee and the next president of the united states. host: you have endorsed her. have endorsed it. senator sanders is a good friend terry p has raised a lot of important issues. in the heat of the campaign,
there will be days where i wish things were handled differently, there is no question about that, but i think overall, the campaign has been healthy for the democratic party in our country. host: should he stay in the race all the way until july? guest: that is his decision. he has to make that judgment based upon the way that he is running his campaign, the supporters and how he thinks it is best to manage the remainder of days for the nomination. host: your colleague barbara mikulski retiring. quite a primary underweight for her seat. you are not endorsing and that primary. why not? guest: let me remind marylanders that this is the last to vote until it :00 tonight, and if you have not voted by today, tuesday, the polls open early morning, until late night. vote on tuesday. i believe we have to the people running. it is up to democrats to make that judgment as to who they
believe will be the best. host: donna edwards, african-american woman, she is saying in making the case that it should be a woman and it should be an african-american ,hat represents maryland, not no offense, and other white man. guest: each candidate brings certain strengths and weaknesses to the campaign. there is no question about that. i want the marylanders to nominate the person they believe will be the best to represent their interest in the united states senate. we have had an incredible leader and we want to make sure we have our very best to fill her shoes. host: senator ben cardin
website, released to the entity. in order to take comments down, they have to be personal in nature. so with that, let us begin with our opening statement. and then, we will receive our first panel of witnesses. as i was beginning earlier, i want to welcome all of our witnesses who are here today. i'm going to introduce each of you later. as we move forward with our testimony on the pricing of fetal tissue, as part of my opening statement, i will present a narrative about the exhibits that today's hearing will discuss. i have said many times that my hope is that both parties can work together on some things. and today's subject matter should be an opportunity to do so for a couple of reasons. first, at our initial hearing on bioethics and fetal tissue, all witnesses from both sides agree
that no one should profit from the sale of baby body parts. nobody. second, the democrats overwhelmingly supported a prohibition on profiting from fetal tissue sales during the 1993 passage of the national institute of health's revitalization act. passr congressman dingle this legislation out of the energy and commerce committee. and a former congressman henry bill onmended the nih the floor to make clear that profiting from the sale of baby body parts was a crime. folks, these two democrat leaders took the offense so seriously that they may profiting from the sale of fetal tissue punishable by a 10-year felony. unbornderstood that children do indeed have constitutional rights. now there is been a lot of heated debate about the horrible
videos that came out last year. but today's hearing will present business documents, invoices, marketing brochures, and management documents that reveal that one for-profit procurement business and several abortion clinics may have violated the intent of the statute. and the waxman prohibition passed overwhelmingly by a democrat-controlled house. we have invited attorneys to help us understand this, in light of the statue. we look forward to working through this material in a thoughtful way. and i asked my colleagues on the other side to join in a productive discussion about the statute that your side past. to introducing the documents i want to call your attention to five posters that will help to visually follow the discussion. the first chart presents three entities involved in the business of selling the body parts.
that chart depicts the middleman , the procurement business, pays the abortion clinic for fetal tissue, and is then paid by the researcher. the second chart is a website screen grab of from the procurement business on how to buy baby body parts online. there is a new website, and the business has been spun off to a new entity. that chart shows the drop-down box for every part imaginable. by liver, and then you pick the destination. then you check out to select your form of shipping. the third chart shows the daily tasks inside the abortion clinic. once the order is communicated, the procurement tech starts to work, checking gestation periods. getting consent, procuring tissue, and ascending to the
customer. ahese are clear hipp violations. i would hope that, at a minimum, they will join us in condemning obvious violations of hippa, which was signed into law by president clinton on august 21, 1998. the fourth chart summarizes several sample payments from the procurement business to the abortion clinic, and from the customer to the procurement business. is the samples for a discussion today. they do not present the entire financial picture. and the fifth chart shows you who bears the responsibility. next i want to walk the witnesses for the exhibits. i know that the lawyers and the n the room like to focus on the detail. that is why you're here. but it is important to understand the big picture of what the german business is
trying to do, in spite of the waxman prohibition on profiting from the sale of baby body parts. please turn to the exhibits, beginning with b2. this is the procurement company broke sure that is handed out at national conferences, where abortion clinic managers are in attendance. notice that it says financially profitable. fiscal rewards, financial benefits to your clinic. aok at exhibit b3, which is website screen grab of the procurement business. once again, financially profitable. while also providing a financial benefit to your own clinic. evidently, the procurement business is not familiar with the waxman prohibition. now, turn the page and look at exhibits b four and five. it started in 2010 with three clinics. in two more years, it had nearly 100. further, they were negotiating a
contract to have over 250 clinics by this year. negotiationsketing with the national abortion trade organization fell apart, just about the time the videos came out last year. now, you do not have to be a lawyer to see what is going on here. you put up a website that offers the part imaginable, and why on earth would anybody ever need a baby scalp? then you pick the destination period and you checkout. you need abortion clinics, a lot of abortion clinics. so you grow your number of clinics, and you offer the clinics money to sign up. you offer them financial benefits to join. youtell the clinics that will do all the work, all of the items on the chart that show the workflow of the procurement technician. this does not sound to me like tissue donation for research. this sounds like someone who wants to make money, a lot of money.
selling the baby body parts. so, i thank our witnesses for their generous time today. i welcome them. and at this time, i yield 10 s.nutes to mysti >> from the outset, this investigation has not been an objective or fact-based search politicaluth, but a weapon to attack women's health care and life-saving research, and harass and intimidate those who provide these services. this was clear during our first hearing, where one of the witnesses invited by the republicans drew comparisons between researchers who use fetal tissue and nazi war efiminal, dr. joseph mengele. women who have abortions "are morally disqualified" from
choosing to donate tissue for research purposes. for today's hearing, republicans have again invited witnesses who believe that abortion should be illegal, that women should not be permitted or trusted to decide whether to carry a pregnancy to term. some continue to declare that planned parenthood is selling fetal tissue for-profit, despite the fact that three house committees, 12 states, and a texas grand jury have already cleared the organization of wrongdoing. these witnesses, like a republican colleagues, rely on the video allegations of antiabortion extremists and his support theo inflammatory claims. anyone who is been following the facts knows the truth. the videos are not reliable. and they do not show the unlawful sale of fetal tissue. and the will argue today that
the so-called exhibits do not make that case either. a grand jury in texas already put him to the test under oath, and he failed. that grand jury, instructed by the republican lieutenant governor to investigate planned himnthood, instead indicted for breaking the law through his efforts to entrap planned parenthood. the district attorney handling the case refused to represent it to another grand jury, explaining that "we must go over the evidence leads us." end as she explained, "anyon who pays attention knows that i'm pro-life. i believe abortion is wrong. but my personal believe does not relieve me of my obligation to follow the law." that standard should apply with equal force here. there is no reason to believe that a proven liar when it comes to plan claritned parenthood
would be any more reliable on fetal tissue research. instead of correcting the record on the video, the chair continues to invoke them. today, my republican colleagues likely will claim that it is not just the videos actually -- the chair has a reclaimed that. they may assert that documents, that this panel has received or that republican staff have created, show the need for further investigation. and this is also false. 16 years ago, the subcommittee on health and environment of the house commerce committee considered similar materials. 16 years ago. that hearing titled "fetal tissue: is it being sold in violation of federal law?" schedule" "service showing amounts. logs," andn
agreements between providers and procurement organizations. and that also featured an employee who had worked at two tissue procurement organizations. the antiabortion group "life had filmed and released a video interview where alberti claimed to have witnessed fetuses "born alive." and unauthorized payment for fetal tissue, exactly the types of claims made in this video. in statements under oath however, alberti contradicted his inflammatory claims, and admitted during the 2000 hearing that his sworn statement, not the remarks on the heavily edited video made by antiabortion extremists, were
the truth. the department of justice also investigated the allegations of unlawful profiteering, that was in the heart of that hearing. and concluded that no laws have been broken. no one believes that companies should be allowed to profit by selling eagle tissue. fetal tissue. we strongly support the prohibition. however, the law expressly allows reimbursement for costs. provision we are focusing on today is modeled on the national organ transplant act, which similarly prohibits consideration," but allows reimbursement, which can be considerable. possiblens regarding unlawful profit from adult organ would not result in
a call to ban all organ donations. yet, republican lawmakers in the house want to ban fetal tissue donation and research altogether. something some states of oregon. florida for example recently unveiled the bill attacking fetal tissue. this is tragic for women and families on the gulf coast, at researchers race to understand the zika virus. despite care blhair blackburn's claim, fetal tissue increases our understanding of the zika virus. these bands have been proposed, despite the fact there is still no evidence of wrongdoing related to fetal tissue donation. instead, the.net received by this panel actually show that areth care providers looting money for research
purposes. this is not what congress intended when it voted on a bipartisan basis to allow reimbursement of costs. it is absurd that even when they are losing money, providers are still attacked by those who appear motivated by the opposition to abortion, not the actual facts regarding fetal tissue donation. this panel is a perfect example. over the course of the investigation, the chair has targeted one clinic, one university, one tissue procurement organization, all of whom were operating voluntarily before the chair served them with unilateral subpoenas. the panel has known since january that the southwestern women option does not take any money for ensuring that women who want to donate tissue to the university can do so. and let me underscore that fact, no money is exchanged in connection with a woman's choice to donate fetal tissue
researchers at the university of new mexico. already knowing this, the chair served subpoenas and issued press releases tied to what she describes as an investigation into the unlawful sale of 80 body parts. which we heard today. as a result, the university and clinic have been subject to unwarranted accusations from state and federal officials on the additional target of harassment and antiabortion extremists, it is no wonder that others reluctant to hand over the names of their researchers for students, clinic personnel, and doctors so that the chair can amass a dangerous database of their names. for its part, the tissue procurement company, stem express, already offered to have its procurement director explain the structure. andchair ignored that offer instead called this public hearing, inviting witnesses who have no firsthand knowledge of the facts to opine about the
potential criminal misconduct. on its own initiative, stem submitted anow letter to make sure the panel has the information needed to bring this investigation to an end. this investigation has never been and has no promise of becoming fair or fact-based. a republican colleague disdain and doctors is putting women at risk. it is time for republican leadership to bring this investigation to an end. have unanimous consent to the april 18 letter from stem express included as part of the record for this hearing. i yield back the balance of my time. >> the gentlelady yields back on her request. we have already agreed to put that into the record. at this time, i want to welcome our first panel. senator jeanne shaheen is a u.s. senator from new hampshire.
she is the only woman in u.s. history to be elected both a governor and a u.s. senator. say thee me, can i just letter i wanted inserted in the record is a different letter. that we receive from yesterday. >> so moved. >> sorry. shaheen is a member on foreign relations, appropriations, and is ranking member of the small business and entrepreneurship committee. senator shaheen is a form of small business owner and formerly served as the director of harvard university's institute of politics at the kennedy school of government. welcome. senator ben sasse is a u.s. senator from nebraska. comes to the senate having spent the last five years as a college president, one of the youngest in the nation. during the first and second terms of george w. bush, he worked in the department of
justice and the department of homeland security. before becoming assistant secretary for planning and a valuation at the u.s. department of health and human services. welcome to you, senator sasse. we will begin with senator shaheen for your five-minute remarks. shaheen: thank you very much. members of the committee, i very much appreciate the opportunity to appear before you this morning. but i do so with great concern. i know you will hear from my colleagues, senator sasse from nebraska, and i respect his deeply held personal beliefs. but if we want to have a civil discussion on this issue, we should begin with the facts. already, news articles today have called into question the validity of the exhibits that will be presented to the panel. e'ss committee i;s/
very existence -- it proven false across the country. in january, after thorough investigation into the videos, a texas grand jury cleared of planned parenthood of any wrongdoing. and indicted the individuals responsible for their creation. fact, 12 other states have also cleared of planned parenthood of any wrongdoing. and eight additional states have declined to investigate, citing a lack of evidence. i believe it is now time for the special investigations to end. and i would also like to point out that fetal tissue research has long had bipartisan support. in 1993, congress passed the national institute of health's revitalization act. that bill passed with overwhelming support. 290-130 ine senate,
the house. and i think it is important to about bill was passed on recommendations of the blue-ribbon panel convened under president reagan, which was tasked with studying the efforts of fetal tissue research. millions of people have benefited from fetal tissue research. rubella,for polio and and research on health issues that touch so many of us -- parkinson's, diabetes, hiv, aids, spinal for injuries have also benefited from the 1993 law. if it is the desire to change the law, obviously, u.s. legislators are able to do that. but i believe it would be a grave error. sadly, it is my belief that this panel was formed with political motivation. there is very little real interests in an unbiased
investigation to uncover facts related to women's health or research. instead, i believe that this panel serves as an opportunity for some to once again attacked the health care providers, who millions of women and families reliable. i joined colleagues in both chambers to disband this panel and all other congressional investigations that would undermine women's access to health care. not only do i believe that this panel is an inappropriate and wasteful misuse of federal resources, but i'm gravely concerned that it puts researchers, providers, and atients across the country rest. unfortunately, as result of the political rhetoric surrounding this issue, we have seen violent acts and threats against researchers across the country. and i am very sad to report that this fall, the same month that this panel was formed, a woman's
health clinic in claremont, new hampshire was vandalized not once, but twice. the second attack caused so much damage, it was forced to close for nearly six weeks. this was a real disservice to the women, men, and families who rely on the full range of services that the clinic provides. and unfortunately, new hampshire is not alone. after the release of the deceptive, highly-edited videos, incidents of harassment against some health centers increased ninefold in just one month. i do not believe that today's hearing is a fact-based, objective investigation. rather, it is a taxpayer-funded political attack, based on discredited evidence. i hope that we will finally have time to move on. madam chair, i apologize for the need to leave early and go back to a hearing. i appreciate the opportunity to be here.
we know you have to leave and get back. that you have those this morning, but thank you for the courtesy of your time and waiting. senator sasse, you are recognized. se: good morning, thank you for including me. many of us in the senate, like you in the house, and more importantly like millions of americans, watched with grief the video footage of abortion doctors and others discussing the sale of a be body parts for profits. as alexander, but more importantly as a father, i have three little kids that one of my little kids traveled with me this weekend. she is here with us today. more importantly as a father, i support your investigation to get to the bottom of what is going on here. let us begin by stating clearly that we should not have to be here today.
henry waxman said, that this would prevent any sale of fetal tissue for any purpose. not just for the purpose of research, but any sale for any toson's would be abhorrent allow for the sale of fetal tissue and a market to be created for that sale. words are important. debateguage in the floor created a very clear legislative intent that no one should profit from the sale of fetal tissue. yet, here in the documents and exhibits, we see a business brochure and a website urging "partner with us and improve the probability of your clinic, improve your bottom line, the financial profitable." these are quotes. it offers to do all of the work. that would appear to mean that the abortion clinic has no cost
, and it would thus appear to be about profit. questions of profit and legality matter because we are talking about people. it matters whether or not procurement businesses broke the law. it matters whether or not abortion clinics are lining their profits through the dismemberment and distribution of children, all while receiving tax dollars. it matters because we are talking about the tiny limbs of little babies that have dignities. they are broken, yet still precious children of actual mothers and fathers. as the committee exhibit indicates the webpages exist where a customer can click on a drop-down box that list every organ of the baby for sale. you can click on a brain, heart, eyes, scalp. you proceed to checkout and you decide the method of shipment. should cause to linger here. our humanity should be repulsed. we should all be sad by this. and this committee room and
across the country, we will have passionate disagreements and discussions about the legality, the justice. like many in this room, like a nebraskans, idradfof believe each baby should be protected. i also understand that many others disagree on abortion policy. our disagreements on abortions will sometimes be heated. but wherever possible, we should be looking for consensus. reality, we basic can and should agree that babies are not the sum of their body parts. they are not meant to be bought. and they're not meant to be sold. they are just that, babies. they are meant to be welcomed and rejoiced over, held and nurtured. outside of our responsibilities here, many of us do in fact welcome, hold, nurture little
children. we adopt and foster them, offer hope to the parents. does chairman, your work and can transcend politics. i appreciate your concern with children born alive inside abortion clinics, and with the treatment that they received. when i think about all the survivors of abortion, and i think about your investigation into the sale of baby body parts, it makes born alive legislation more important. the born alive's abortion survivors act as are ready survived by a bipartisan vote. and i've had the privilege of introducing the companion legislation in the senate. i invite my senate colleagues on both sides of the aisle to be working together to pass this bill in our chamber. this law would simply ensure that babies who survive abortions get a fighting chance, by requiring medical attention that is equivalent to what will be offered to any premature baby born at the same stage. no life is disposable.
no child deserves to have life and a cold and alone, struggling for breath outside of the womb and an abortion clinic. we americans frequently cheer for the vulnerable. we fight for the minority. we protect the powerless against the powerful. and boys ares fighting for the lies. i encourage my colleagues to support senate 2066, the born alive protection act. madam chairman, we look forward to monitoring the progress of your investigation. thank you for including me in this investigation. >> thank you, we appreciate your time. we are sorry for the delay. we know that you have to go back to the senate for votes. thank you for your time. at this time, i would like to call forward our second panel. forward to beve seated on the panel, i will move forward with introducing this panel to our audience.
forwardwe can move expeditiously. with robinson and clayton, practicing civil litigation for a wide range of clients, from major corporations to individuals in cases involving fraud, rico securities, contract disputes, and director liability partnership concerns. abo robert r n, where he drove attorney seneral janet le reno' legislation, and congressional oversight of the department. he founded a public policy group in 2002, serving as president. he is a graduate of the wharton school and the university of new
york law school. trialg as a attorney for the civil division. as deputy chief of the criminal division for the u.s. attorney's office in the western district of michigan, he supervised the health care fraud and computer-related crimes unit, among others. he also spent four and a half years as a judge advocate for the u.s. marine corps, handling both civil and c