[Pages S6075-S6084]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

LEGISLATIVE SESSION

______

RIGHT TO IVF ACT--MOTION TO PROCEED

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the Senate will
resume legislative session and resume consideration of the motion to
proceed to S. 4445, which the clerk will report.
The senior assistant legislative clerk read as follows:

Motion to proceed to Calendar No. 413, S. 4445, a bill to
protect and expand nationwide access to fertility treatment,
including in vitro fertilization.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Alabama.

Unanimous Consent--S. 4368

Mrs. BRITT. Mr. President, I am proud today to be joining my
colleague from Texas in support of the IVF Protection Act. I am
grateful to Senator Cruz for his leadership on this important topic.
Both Senator Cruz and I are parents. We can both attest to the fact
that there is no greater blessing in life than our children. For many
Americans, building a family, becoming a mom or a dad--that is their
American dream.
IVF makes the difference in achieving that dream for millions of
Americans who are facing infertility. IVF helps aspiring parents to
start families, to grow their family. In the United States, nearly 200
babies are born a day, so nearly 2 percent of all babies born are
because of IVF.
This treatment is really a game changer for so many families; that is
why I strongly support continued nationwide access to IVF. IVF is legal
and available from coast to coast, in every single corner of America,
and in all 50 States.
That includes my home State of Alabama, where Governor Ivey and the
Alabama legislature acted quickly to protect IVF access.
Today, we have an opportunity to act quickly and overwhelmingly to
protect continued nationwide IVF access for loving American families.
Our IVF Protection Act would do just that: It would give aspiring
parents nationwide the certainty and peace of mind that IVF will remain
legal and available in every State. Our bill is the only bill that
protects IVF access while safeguarding religious liberty.
It also could get 60 votes in the U.S. Senate, and isn't that the
point? Yet we are going to have a show vote when we have been talking
and saying that we want to protect access to IVF, but yet no one is
working to actually get to the 60-vote threshold, which makes me wonder
how serious my colleagues on the other side of the aisle are about
this.
In an era of hyperpartisanship, this bill, the IVF Protection Act,
should be the one that is on the floor today. This is the bill that
will give aspiring parents confidence and continued hope that their
dreams of bringing life into this world can come true.
Look, as I talk to families across Alabama and parents who are
hopeful they can bring a child into this world, making sure that this
process is protected and available is critically important.
However, this bill is not the one the Democrats are putting on the
floor. This is not drafted in that way. It is drafted to be a partisan
scare tactic in what we are going to see today. For example, it is not
written in a way to narrowly cover IVF; it includes completely separate
treatments and technology, even including human cloning.
Democrats are choosing to spread misinformation rather than fostering
hope. The American people deserve better. The path forward is Senator
Cruz and my IVF Protection Act. Again, I want to applaud my colleague
from Texas for his unwavering and continued support for nationwide IVF
access.
While Democrats prioritize scaring families, Republicans will
continue to fight for them. I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Texas.
Mr. CRUZ. Mr. President, I want to thank my friend Senator Britt for
her powerful and passionate defense of in vitro fertilization. Senator
Britt has been an incredible partner as she and I have worked to pass
landmark Federal legislation protecting IVF for every American.
I am proud to rise once again to speak on an issue that is personal
and vital to millions of American families: the protection of in vitro
fertilization. IVF is a medical miracle that has brought the joy of
parenthood to millions of families who otherwise might never have
experienced it.
I am an unequivocal supporter of protecting IVF, and I am grateful
that IVF has given so many parents struggling with infertility the gift
of finally holding a child, a baby, in their arms, finally having the
opportunity to be a mother or a father and to raise a son or daughter
and to give all of the love in a family that they so desperately want
to give.
Today, unfortunately, my colleagues on the other side of the aisle
are staging an empty show vote on what they call an IVF bill in order
to stoke baseless fears about IVF and push their broader political
agenda.
Let's be clear, there is not a single Senator in this Chamber, on
either side of the aisle, who wants to ban IVF. All 100 Senators, to
the best of my knowledge, support IVF. Not a single one has called for
banning it.
And yet I previously voted against the Democrats' partisan
legislation because it is not an IVF bill. It is designed to backdoor
and federalize broad abortion legislation, which I understand is the
Democrats' partisan position, but it is contrary to the views of a
great many Americans.
And the partisan Democrat bill also deliberately overturns the
conscious protections of the Religious Freedom Restoration Act. You
know, it is unfortunate that Democrats have abandoned what used to be a
bipartisan commitment to religious liberty and they are now more than
willing to overturn religious liberty protections.

Instead of pushing a partisan and, frankly, cynical agenda, I invite
my Democratic colleagues to actually do what they claim they want to
do, which is work with me today and stand together to pass clear
Federal legislation protecting IVF.
IVF is profoundly pro-family. Over 8 million babies have been born
through IVF, providing millions of American families the chance to
embrace the joy of raising a child. It is an avenue of hope for those
struggling with infertility.
Misconceptions and deliberate scare tactics from the Democrats about
the legal standing of IVF will only serve to hurt families who are
desperately trying to welcome a child into their lives.
What the American people deserve is straightforward, pro-IVF
legislation. That is why my colleague Senator Britt and I have
introduced the IVF Protection Act, legislation that offers ironclad,
Federal statutory protection for IVF.
Our bill does not engage in backdoor politics. It does not infringe
on the deeply held beliefs of individuals or organizations. It simply
does what needs to be done: safeguarding the right of couples to grow
their family if they choose to use IVF. Because this should not be a
political issue; instead, it is a deeply human issue.
Our bill unequivocally prohibits any State or local government from
banning IVF, ensuring that no family will be caught in the crossfire of
State-level judicial interpretations. It provides peace of mind to
parents and to aspiring parents, while still allowing States to
implement reasonable health and safety standards.
It ensures that access to IVF is fully protected by Federal law so
that every family praying to have a child will be fully protected in
their right to pursue parenthood.
This isn't just policy. It is a promise to honor and support your
desire to welcome a new baby into your family.
I urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to support this bill.
This is a

[[Page S6076]]

moment for us to unite political divides and affirm our shared belief
in the sanctity of family and the promise of life.
In just a moment, I will propound a unanimous consent request to take
up and pass the Cruz-Britt bill. Because if we truly stand with
families, we must act now to ensure that IVF remains protected today
and for generations to come.
Now, for those of you in the gallery, those of you at home, there are
times when Senate procedure can sound confusing. I want to explain what
you are about to see. I am going to ask this body for unanimous consent
to pass Senator Britt's and my legislation protecting IVF, putting it
into Federal law, a clear Federal statutory protection for IVF.
After I ask for consent, we are going to see a Democrat Senator stand
up and begin speaking. When she begins speaking, you should listen to
two magic words: ``I object.''
If the Democrats say those words, ``I object,'' it will defeat this
bill. And I want you to understand all that is necessary is for the
Democrats not to say those words, ``I object.'' We could have Democrat
Senators stand up and give speeches about all of their policy
priorities, but understand, the show vote this afternoon is not about
IVF, because if the Democrats wanted to protect IVF, this bill would
pass 100 to nothing right now.
What the show vote this afternoon is about is Democrats want to spend
hundreds of millions of dollars running TV ads in an election season
falsely claiming that Republicans oppose IVF.
So listen carefully, if you hear the words ``I object'' from Senate
Democrats, then you will understand the only reason that IVF is not
protected with strong, ironclad protection in Federal statute is
because Senate Democrats cynically object to protecting IVF.
And I would note to the members of the media who are writing on this,
the Democrats are staging the show vote to get the headlines. They want
you to write headlines: Every Republican opposes IVF.
Well, if you are going to write those false headlines, at least
include the facts that today the Senate would have passed 100 to
nothing strong, clear Federal protection of IVF for every mom and dad,
every parent in America but for the fact that Senate Democrats
cynically object while they claim to support IVF.
Well, let's listen and see what happens. Let's hear if we hear the
words ``I object.''
Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Finance Committee be
discharged from further consideration of S. 4368 and the Senate proceed
to its immediate consideration. I further ask that the bill be
considered read a third time and passed and that the motion to
reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
The Senator from Washington.
Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, reserving the right to object. I have
been perfectly clear about the glaring issue with this Republican bill.
The cold, hard reality is this Republican bill does nothing to
meaningfully protect IVF from the biggest threats from lawmakers and
anti-abortion extremists all over this country.
It would still allow States to regulate IVF out of existence. And
this bill is silent on fetal personhood, which is the biggest threat to
IVF. It is silent on whether States can demand that an embryo be
treated the same as a living, breathing person or whether parents
should be allowed to have clinics dispose of unused embryos, something
that is a common, necessary part of the IVF process.
Talk to the experts who provide this care. Talk to the families who
are seeking it. And that question looms large in their mind.
What are we supposed to do if our State says these embryos are
living, breathing people? Do we have to do this process in another
State? What is our legal risk here?
That uncertainty is at the core of the chaos Republican bans have
caused. The last time Republicans offered this hollow gesture of a
bill, I asked the junior Senator from Texas point-blank: Do you support
letting parents have unused embryos disposed of? And a funny thing
actually happened: He said on the floor ``I will answer that
question,'' but he never did. He spoke about what the laws in some of
our States are, but he never actually said what he supported; he never
said what he believes should be Federal law; he never mentioned that he
once pledged to support a constitutional amendment to establish fetal
personhood as the law of the land.
So I ask all of my Republican colleagues once again: As a matter of
national policy, should parents be allowed to dispose of unused
embryos? If so, why is that key provision missing from your bill? Well,
we all know why. If not, how can you look the American people in the
eye and say you support IVF? It doesn't compute.
Mr. President, I object.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Objection is heard.
The Senator from Texas.
Mr. CRUZ. Mr. President, I would note there is one reason and one
reason only that the Senate has not passed 100 to nothing a clear,
unequivocal Federal protection of IVF: because Senate Democrats
cynically chose to object.
The Senator from Washington raised all sorts of issues that are,
frankly, red herrings. The issues she raised are current State law in
multiple States, including Louisiana, including Missouri, including
Georgia. Yet, IVF is fully protected and available in those States.
Senator Britt and I very consciously focused this bill on issues that
could command bipartisan agreement. There is not a word in this bill
that any Senator, Democrat or Republican, disagrees with.
Understand why the Democrats are objecting. The Democrats are
objecting because they do not want to protect IVF in Federal statute.
It is cynical because we are 49 days away from Election Day, and they
intend to try to scare voters in elections across the country by
misleading the voters--I will point out, at the same time that we have
a Presidential election.
Many of us served with the Vice President, Kamala Harris. I remember
Vice President Harris voting again and again and again against border
security, against a border wall. Yet, right now, Vice President Harris
is spending millions of dollars running ads with pictures of Donald
Trump's border wall. It is deeply cynical, and it is because she is
running away from her open borders record.
The same is true here. The Democrats are going to spend millions of
dollars arguing that Republicans are opposed to IVF and ignoring the
fact that it is Democrats standing up and objecting that prevent it
from being protected in Federal law.
The Democrats don't want to protect IVF because if we pass this law,
do you know what? They couldn't run their misleading campaign
commercials. So from a partisan perspective on the Democrat side, it is
far better to block strong Federal legislation protecting IVF than to
actually come together in a bipartisan way and pass this. I wish we had
done that, but this is an election season, and perhaps that is asking
too much from my colleagues.
Mr. CORNYN. Will the Senator yield for a question?
Mr. CRUZ. I would happily yield to Senator Cornyn for a question.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Texas.
Mr. CORNYN. I am a little confused. If the Democrats sincerely want
to pass a law relative to IVF, wouldn't they ordinarily work to have an
amendment process where we can actually have debate and maybe achieve
some consensus?
It seems to me that by introducing a bill that they know is bound to
fail and blocking the bill that you and the Senator from Alabama have
offered, they are guaranteeing there will be no Federal protection for
IVF. Am I missing something?
Mr. CRUZ. As usual, my friend, the fellow Senator from Texas, you are
not missing something. That is precisely what is going on. This is not
lawmaking. This is politics. This is partisan politics. This is an
election campaign commercial that the Democrats are engaging in.
To make clear, Leader Schumer knows the result of the vote this
afternoon. Why? Because we had the same vote just a couple of months
ago. He knows exactly the result. Why are we voting on it again?
Because they want

[[Page S6077]]

reporters to write the same headlines again to deceive the voters.
Again, I invite my Democrat colleagues, this should be an easy bill
to support if--and this is a big ``if''--in good faith you actually
want to protect IVF legislation.
If you want a campaign issue, the worst thing for Democrats is
actually to pass the Cruz-Britt bill because then it takes the issue
off the table because every mom and dad and every woman or man who
wants to be a mother or father knows IVF is protected. The Democrats
don't want that.
Mr. CORNYN. Would the Senator yield for one more question?
Mr. CRUZ. I am happy to yield to Senator Cornyn.
Mr. CORNYN. So if Senator Schumer and Senator Murray--the Senate
Democrats who offered this bill--were actually serious about passing a
bill to protect IVF, wouldn't the logical approach be to make sure
there was an opportunity to offer and vote on an amendment? If they
were to prevail in their version of the bill, well, 60 Senators could
determine that and make that happen.

If, in fact, 60 Senators agreed with the bill that you and the
Senator from Alabama have offered, then that bill would prevail and go
to the House and then presumably to the President for his signature.
But apparently they are afraid to allow the Cruz-Britt bill to even get
a vote. They have so little confidence in the likely electoral outcome
of their proposal that they don't even want a vote on the Cruz-Britt
bill.
So, again, I just wanted to ask the Senator a couple of questions
because I was wondering whether I was missing something. This seems
like, as you said, a cynical show vote and certainly not one to
accomplish a result. I appreciate your answering the question.
Mr. CRUZ. The Senator from Texas is exactly correct. As Senator
Cornyn knows well, there are multiple ways to draft a bill. What the
Democrats have drafted is a bill that is intended to force Republicans
to vote no because that is the objective. They want the ``no'' vote.
They deliberately have put poison pills in this bill. They call it an
IVF bill, but it is a radical pro-abortion bill, and it is a radical
anti-religious liberty bill. Their objective is they want their bill to
fail because this is all about misleading campaign commercials.
The bill that Senator Britt and I drafted--we worked very carefully
to draft a bill that every Senator could agree with. There is not a
word in our bill that the Democrats disagree with.
Look, abortion is an issue that divides this Chamber. There are some
of us who are pro-life; there are others who are pro-choice. Senator
Britt and I recognized we were not going to resolve the disagreements
on abortion on the floor today, so we deliberately drafted a bill that
is focused on IVF specifically.
There are no poison pills in our bill. There is nothing designed to
force the Democrats to vote no.
Senator Cornyn is exactly right that if our bill were on the floor, I
believe it would pass. I believe any Democrat voting honestly would
vote for it, but I think, at a minimum, we would get 60 votes and
enough to pass it, which is why the Democrats object to taking it up--
because they want their bill to fail in order to be misleading.
Mrs. BRITT. Would the Senator yield for a question?
Mr. CRUZ. I am happy to yield to the Senator from Alabama.
Mrs. BRITT. So it is my understanding, as the 2 of us came together,
49 Republicans-strong, sent a letter--a statement saying we strongly
support IVF. Now, if the Democrats were serious about needing to
protect IVF--which, by the way, is legal and accessible in every
State--then wouldn't they have come to us to figure out a pathway
forward? Yet, today, instead of taking our bill and, if they feel like
it needs to be improved, working to do that, they are choosing to do a
show vote just to give themselves something to campaign on.
Has anyone approached you about working together to find a pathway
forward for IVF? Because I am a strong supporter of IVF. I am proudly
here pro-family and believe that we need to find ways to make sure that
people do have access and that it continues that way, and I think we
have been very clear. But no one has approached me. And you have to get
to 60.
So if you really believe that IVF is in trouble and in jeopardy, then
wouldn't we be the first two people you would come talk to? And no one
has talked to me. Yet this bill is going on the floor, which means they
know they can't get to 60. There are only 51 of them. Maybe they have a
few more.
My question is, has anyone approached you? Because if they
authentically wanted to protect IVF, if they really cared about women
and parents who are wanting to bring a child into the world and they
want to give them certainty, they don't just want something to campaign
on, I think we would be the first two people you would come talk to to
figure out how to have a path forward. No one has spoken to me. It is
so ingenuous. This body is supposed to be more than that. Has anyone
spoken to you?
Mr. CRUZ. I thank Senator Britt for that question. No, no Democrat
has spoken to me.
I am, like you, unequivocally in support of IVF, but, understand, the
Democrats do not want to pass legislation protecting IVF. If you are
trying to pass legislation, you don't put poison pills in it. That is
what the Democrats have done. Their objective, their goal, is to have
their partisan bill fail so that they can use it for political
campaigns across this country. It is designed to fail, and it is
cynical. It is also predicated on, sadly, the failure of the media--I
would note there are no reporters that I see sitting in the Gallery. It
is predicated on what they know the media will refuse to cover--that
they are the ones blocking IVF. They are counting on the media to be
partisan and to push their deceptive messaging.
We should be protecting IVF. We should be standing unequivocally. As
Senator Britt noted, all 49 Republicans stood and signed a joint letter
saying we support IVF, we support protecting IVF.
I would note, the last time Senator Britt and I came to this floor,
we were joined by Senator Roger Marshall from Kansas. Senator Roger
Marshall is a physician--he is an OB/GYN--who has performed IVF for
years. He has helped hopeful parents become parents through IVF. And it
is literally the cynical position of Democrats that an IVF doctor is
opposed to IVF.
I want to repeat that for you because it is such an absurd statement.
It is the partisan political position of Senate Democrats that an IVF
doctor--Roger Marshall has helped hundreds of parents conceive through
IVF, and yet Senate Democrats claim he somehow opposes IVF. That is not
true. Use your common sense.
This is cynical, and it is wrong. But for those of you at home about
to be subjected to millions of dollars of false campaign ads from the
Democrats, just understand that if they are telling you that there are
Senators who are trying to ban IVF, they are deliberately misleading
you, and they are doing it because they don't want to defend their
actual position on the issues.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The majority leader.
Mr. SCHUMER. Mr. President, by all accounts, a vote to protect
something as basic and as popular as IVF shouldn't be necessary, but
sadly it is very necessary thanks to attacks against reproductive care
by Donald Trump and his Project 2025.
From the moment Donald Trump's MAGA Supreme Court reversed Roe, the
hard right made clear that they would keep going. As we saw earlier
this year in Alabama, IVF has become one of the hard right's next
targets.
Today, Senate Republicans must answer a simple question: Do they
support American families' access to IVF or not?
If they support it, the only option is to vote yes on the Right to
IVF Act, but if Senate Republicans vote no today and block IVF
protections yet again, it will be further proof they stand against the
well-being of families. If Senate Republicans vote no today, it will be
further proof that Project 2025 is alive and well when it comes to
women's rights and reproductive rights as well.
Republicans cannot claim to care about supporting families while
voting against IVF protections, but that is

[[Page S6078]]

precisely what they did 3 months ago. Today, Republicans get a second
chance: Either stand with families struggling with infertility or stand
against families and with Project 2025.
Kudos and great thanks to Senators Duckworth and Murray and Booker
and to everyone who has championed this bill. Thank you to all of my
colleagues who have raised their voices on this most personal of
issues. I urge everyone to vote yes.

Motion to Proceed to the Motion to Reconsider

Mr. SCHUMER. Mr. President, I move to proceed to the motion to
reconsider the vote by which cloture failed on the motion to invoke
cloture on the motion to proceed to Calendar No. 413, S. 4445.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the motion.
The motion was agreed to.

Motion to Reconsider Cloture Vote

Mr. SCHUMER. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote by which
cloture was not invoked on the motion to invoke cloture on the motion
to proceed to Calendar No. 413, S. 4445.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the motion to
reconsider.
The motion was agreed to.

Cloture Motion

Pursuant to rule XXII, the Chair lays before the Senate the pending
cloture motion, which the clerk will state.
The senior assistant legislative clerk read as follows:

Cloture Motion

We, the undersigned Senators, in accordance with the
provisions of rule XXII of the Standing Rules of the Senate,
do hereby move to bring to a close debate on the motion to
proceed to Calendar No. 413, S. 4445, a bill to protect and
expand nationwide access to fertility treatment, including in
vitro fertilization.
Charles E. Schumer, Tammy Duckworth, Richard Blumenthal,
Alex Padilla, Tammy Baldwin, Tim Kaine, Richard J.
Durbin, Jeanne Shaheen, Benjamin L. Cardin, Debbie
Stabenow, Patty Murray, Catherine Cortez Masto, Tina
Smith, Elizabeth Warren, Sheldon Whitehouse, Kirsten E.
Gillibrand, Christopher Murphy.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. By unanimous consent, the mandatory quorum
call has been waived.
The question is, Is it the sense of the Senate that debate on the
motion to proceed to Calendar No. 413, S. 4445, a bill to protect and
expand nationwide access to fertility treatment, including in vitro
fertilization, shall be brought to a close?
The yeas and nays are mandatory under the rule.
The clerk will call the roll.
The senior assistant legislative clerk called the roll.
Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from New Jersey (Mr. Booker)
and the Senator from West Virginia (Mr. Manchin) are necessarily
absent.
Mr. THUNE. The following Senators are neccessarily absent: the
Senator from South Dakota (Mr. Rounds), the Senator from North Carolina
(Mr. Tillis), and the Senator from Ohio (Mr. Vance).
Further, if present and voting: the Senator from North Carolina (Mr.
Tillis) would have voted ``nay.''
The yeas and nays resulted--yeas 51, nays 44, as follows:

[Rollcall Vote No. 242 Leg.]

YEAS--51

Baldwin
Bennet
Blumenthal
Brown
Butler
Cantwell
Cardin
Carper
Casey
Collins
Coons
Cortez Masto
Duckworth
Durbin
Fetterman
Gillibrand
Hassan
Heinrich
Helmy
Hickenlooper
Hirono
Kaine
Kelly
King
Klobuchar
Lujan
Markey
Merkley
Murkowski
Murphy
Murray
Ossoff
Padilla
Peters
Reed
Rosen
Sanders
Schatz
Schumer
Shaheen
Sinema
Smith
Stabenow
Tester
Van Hollen
Warner
Warnock
Warren
Welch
Whitehouse
Wyden

NAYS--44

Barrasso
Blackburn
Boozman
Braun
Britt
Budd
Capito
Cassidy
Cornyn
Cotton
Cramer
Crapo
Cruz
Daines
Ernst
Fischer
Graham
Grassley
Hagerty
Hawley
Hoeven
Hyde-Smith
Johnson
Kennedy
Lankford
Lee
Lummis
Marshall
McConnell
Moran
Mullin
Paul
Ricketts
Risch
Romney
Rubio
Schmitt
Scott (FL)
Scott (SC)
Sullivan
Thune
Tuberville
Wicker
Young

NOT VOTING--5

Booker
Manchin
Rounds
Tillis
Vance
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Welch). On this vote, the yeas are 51, the
nays are 44. Three-fifths of the Senators duly chosen and sworn not
having voted in the affirmative, the motion on reconsideration is not
agreed to.
The motion was rejected.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Illinois.

Right to IVF Act

Ms. DUCKWORTH. Mr. President, I come to the floor today to speak on
the bill that recently failed, despite my colleagues' assertion that
they support access to in vitro fertilization for all Americans.
You know, this morning I was able to pack my daughters' lunchboxes.
It sounds mundane, I know, but when I spend just a second thinking
about it, even that kind of everyday moment with my girls isn't mundane
at all--it is a miracle.
Because after 10 years of struggling with infertility, after being
wounded in combat, I was only able to have my two darling girls through
the medical marvel that is in vitro fertilization.
The only reason there are PB&Js for me to make for their lunch, the
only reason there are teeny sneakers for me to Velcro closed is because
after I came home from war, I had the freedom to seek the healthcare I
needed to make my dream of going from ``Tammy'' to ``mommy'' a reality.
I was one of the lucky ones, because now, that freedom to get
reproductive care is at risk for millions of other women whose most
desperate hope in the world is to have a little one of their own. Make
no mistake, that isn't some future nightmare; this is our present
reality.
Countless women already had their IVF treatments interrupted this
year after an Alabama Supreme Court ruling painted women seeking
fertility treatment as criminals.
And in this perilous moment for our country, as we stare down
November and all the uncertainties that come with it, there is no
telling how many more will follow.
Look, I doubt that Donald Trump even knows what the acronym IVF
stands for, and half the time I wonder if he can even spell IVF. But
despite the incoherent, delusional, and, frankly, embarrassing rambling
that came out of his mouth last week, the reality is that he is the
reason that IVF is at risk in the first place.
The Dobbs decision is what led us to today's nightmare, taking the
power to decide how and when to start families from us women and
handing it to politicians in statehouses across the country.
Donald Trump is the one who brags about taking down Roe. Donald Trump
is the one who acts like that is something to be proud of. He is like a
bank robber who steals cash out of the till and flees the scene and
then still expects a reward for calling the police to report a crime.
So while it may now be convenient for him to claim that his support
of IVF is as huge as the made-up crowd sizes at his rallies, we know
the truth. He is the reason that IVF is in danger. He is to blame. He
and every other Republican who cares more about staying good with Trump
than about doing good for the Americans they are supposed to be
serving.
Many--too many--of those Republicans are in this very Chamber. I know
that because today marked the third time in the past 7 months that I
have come to the floor begging my Republican colleagues to help me pass
legislation I wrote that would protect every American's right to IVF,
regardless of what State they live in--a bill that would ensure no
doctor or hopeful mom could be criminalized for trying to start a
family; one that would permit all health insurers to cover the
treatments; and one that would require the Federal health insurance
plan to cover reproductive technologies, allowing our troops to
preserve their sperm or eggs before deploying to a combat zone.
When I tried to pass it in February, it took the junior Republican
Senator from Mississippi what seemed like not even one full Mississippi
second to block its passage. Then when I tried to pass it again in
June, nearly every GOP Member voted it down.
Today it was the same old cynical story, as Republican after
Republican voted no, no, no. And at this point, it is obvious, despite
whatever talking

[[Page S6079]]

points they force through gritted teeth on cable news, when the rubber
hits the road and the vote is called, Republicans will do anything to
get out of actually passing legislation that would protect women's
right to access reproductive healthcare.
Women in this country have been through enough. What women don't need
is a man who was found liable for sexual abuse controlling what we can
or cannot do with our bodies. What we don't need are politicians who
have sworn fealty to a convicted felon treating us like we are the ones
who are criminals.
It is tragic. Republicans only seem to care about protecting life
when it supposedly consists of some cells in a medical lab freezer. But
what about when that life is a fifth grader whose school day gets
shattered by a man with an AR-15 who wants to turn their math class
into a massacre?
What about when that life is their neighbor's, who is yet one more
woman to bleed out on the delivery table, as the maternal mortality
crisis among women of color rages on? Well, then those same Republicans
couldn't seem to care less about defending the sanctity of life.
Listen, I am sure that some of my colleagues will try to slink away
from taking any accountability here. Per usual, they will shout some
ridiculous excuse, like this bill would allow for human-animal hybrids,
as if anyone would ever believe that. And, for the record, it would
not.
Well, to those folks I say that this afternoon's vote was your chance
to put your vote where your mouth is. It was your chance to prove that
you believe that every woman in this country deserves the chance to be
called ``Mom'' without also being called a criminal. Instead, your true
policy beliefs, your hypocrisy, your misogyny showed through.
Look, I went to war to defend this Nation's rights and freedoms. I
did it because I believed so deeply in the importance of that mission.
I wasn't asking my GOP colleagues to head into combat to show that they
cared deeply too. I wasn't asking them to do anything hard at all,
actually. All I was asking them to do was to simply support a bill that
could have represented millions of women's only chance of starting
families.
All I was asking of them was to vote in a way that reflected the
position they claim to have when they were spouting talking points on
FOX News. They couldn't even do that. So on behalf of every woman who
has faced a heart-shattering struggle of infertility, all I can say to
my Republican colleagues this afternoon is: Shame on you.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Minnesota.
Ms. KLOBUCHAR. Mr. President, I first want to thank our colleague
Senator Duckworth from Illinois for her leadership. Anyone that sees
the beautiful pictures of her two girls with their different
personalities, both of whom would not be here without these procedures,
would understand once you see those kids. As we all know people in our
families, our friends, our neighbors who, literally, their families are
there because of this procedure, we understand how disappointing this
vote was. That is a Minnesota euphemism for what happened in just the
last hour, where we only had two of our Republican colleagues--the same
two who voted with us last time--who were willing to stand up for IVF.
IVF is a miracle medical treatment for families who couldn't
otherwise have children. Over the last four decades, 8 million babies--
8 million babies--have been born around the world thanks to IVF. Yet
today we are moving backwards.
The right to IVF is under attack because 2 years ago, the Supreme
Court decided to shred half a century of legal precedent and strip away
women's right to make their own healthcare decisions.
Now American women are at the mercy of a patchwork of State laws, as
my colleague from Illinois just described, which governs their access
to reproductive care, including fertility treatment. What has happened
in Minnesota now is way different than what happened in our neighboring
States of South Dakota and North Dakota where, in fact, women have
crossed the border to get the kind of healthcare they need instead of,
as my colleague noted, what has happened in Oklahoma and other States--
bleeding out in parking lots because they have no choice.
We saw it happen, of course, when it comes to IVF in Alabama. Their
February Supreme Court decision brought IVF procedures in the State to
a halt, leaving more than 2 million women in that State without access
to this treatment.
Whatever happens legally, court cases and the like that change
things, that go back and forth, it really is the same thing, all of
this. All of this angst, all of this actual disastrous effect on
women's rights could have been prevented. But instead, we have a group
of people--which does not reflect where 70 to 80 percent of the
American people are--who have decided that politicians should make
these decisions about women's health; that politicians should be the
ones who are going to decide about IVF or are going to decide about
whether or not people can get abortions or the kind of birth control
that they want or even have access to mifepristone.
I used to think that the people who were opposing us on this wanted
to bring us back to the 1950s, but now it looks like it is the 1850s.
The people of this country deserve better.
I am thinking of Meta, a woman from Minnesota, who became a mom
thanks to IVF. In her own words:

I am the proud mother of twin girls, but without IVF and my
ability to access treatment, they would not be here today.
Our twins are . . . almost 8 years old and I cannot imagine
my life without them. They are incredible humans who are
already bringing so much love, joy, and hope into this world.

Every parent deserves that hope. No court, no politician should
interfere with that hope. But right now that hope is under attack, and
today many of my colleagues chose to deny that hope to women across the
country. In doing so, they are working against the will of 86 percent
of Americans who believe IVF should be protected and legal.
Attacks on reproductive freedom and freedom in general is not what
today should be about. I refuse to settle for a reality in which my
daughter has fewer rights than I did or her grandmother did. And I will
never stop fighting for a future where women--and not politicians--are
in charge of their own healthcare decisions.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from North Carolina.
Mr. BUDD. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to use a prop during
my speech.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

125th Anniversary of Appalachian State University

Mr. BUDD. Mr. President, today, I have the distinct honor of
recognizing my alma mater, Appalachian State University, on the 125th
anniversary of its founding.
Established in Boone, NC, as Watauga Academy in 1899, App State began
as a teachers college with 53 students.
Today, it enrolls over 21,000 students, employs more than 3,500
employees, and boasts more than 150,000 living alumni who exemplify the
Mountaineer spirit every day.
This strong and steady growth has established App State as a premier
public institution and one of the largest in the UNC System.
Given its worldwide reputation, App State has remained true to its
mission as a rural institution known for service to its local and
regional communities. App State is committed to increasing enrollment
of students from North Carolina's rural populations and ensuring timely
graduation with as little debt as possible.
The university's regional impact is undeniable, contributing nearly
$2.2 billion to our State's economy. App State continues to maintain a
low student-to-faculty ratio and offers more than 150 undergraduate and
80 graduate majors at its campuses in Boone, Hickory, and online.
The university is committed to supporting the workforce needs of
North Carolina as one of our State's leading producers of graduates in
business, education, and healthcare.
Moreover, App State has stepped up to meet the growing needs in the
areas

[[Page S6080]]

of veterinary technology, health sciences, and cyber security.
App State's successes reach beyond the classroom to competitive
sports, with more than 400 Mountaineer student athletes in 17 NCAA
Division 1 varsity sports. These student athletes earned a cumulative
GPA above 3.0 for the 12th consecutive year during the spring semester
of 2024.
Since joining the Sun Belt Conference in 2014, Mountaineer athletics
programs have won 13 conference championships. Four of those titles
belong to the nationally ranked football team--the legendary triumphs
of which are known from Ann Arbor, MI, to College Station, TX.
On behalf of the citizens of the State of North Carolina, I
congratulate Appalachian State University on 125 years of service to
our State and our region.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Arkansas.

Farm Bill

Mr. BOOZMAN. Mr. President, last week, hundreds of farmers and
ranchers, from all regions of our country, representing operations of
all sizes and all the major crops, traveled to the Capitol to encourage
us to pass a strong, farm-focused farm bill before the end of this
year.
I met with many of these individuals, and I am grateful they took the
time away from their families and their farms and ranches to tell us
what is at stake if Congress fails to pass a farm bill this year.
For these farmers, this trip came with the additional stress of being
away from the farm at the height of harvest season. Their visits
clearly articulated the anxiety gripping farm country at this crucial
moment.
For the past few months, farmers, ranchers, the organizations that
represent them, and the agricultural banking sector have all warned of
an impending crisis in farm country.
Producers are struggling to make ends meet in an environment where
costs for farm inputs have ballooned from inflation; interest rates
have doubled; and market prices are far below the cost production.
Coupled with consecutive years of losses, the financial stress
borne--particularly by our row crop farmers--is now being revealed. The
reality is, there will be fewer farmers in 2025 if Congress does not
respond.
We have been warned that many farmers will struggle to secure
operating loans for next year. This is a devastating realization. The
outdated farm safety net they are operating under is doing nothing to
address these realities. That is why the Senate needs to take two
immediate actions.
First, we need to provide emergency assistance to address the
economic losses that farmers are facing associated with the 2024 crop.
Even with record yields, farmers are still not breaking even. This is
not a crisis that they can handle, in any way insure themselves, or
conserve their way out of it. Farmers across the country need a bridge
to help their family farmers survive in the next year.
We have seen previous ad hoc assistance programs established in a
period of weeks, as demonstrated by then-Secretary Perdue when the
COVID-19 pandemic created disruptions for producers. That level of
timely and urgent response by Congress and the administration is once
again warranted.
In Southern States like Arkansas, in Mississippi, and Texas, many
producers have harvested their 2024 crop, and many are losing hundreds
of dollars per acre of ground they farm. That same experience is
beginning to creep into the Midwest and Northern States as harvest
begins in these regions.
What do losses of this magnitude actually translate to? Not only are
producers not able to pay their bills, but they won't be able to secure
an operating loan for next year's crop, let alone have any income at
all to survive on. This has a devastating ripple effect on rural
businesses and communities.
Now, let me be clear, emergency assistance does not reduce the need
to make meaningful investments to the commodity and crop insurance
titles of the next farm bill. In fact, the clear necessity of providing
ad hoc assistance for economic losses demonstrates how inadequate the
2018 farm bill has become.
The next farm bill is the appropriate place to make the necessary
long-term corrections to our farm safety net, but farmers need timely
support addressing the 2024 losses as they enter the winter months when
they make planting decisions and secure financing for the upcoming crop
year, which leads me to this second action Congress must take.
We must redouble our efforts and pass a farm bill before the end of
the calendar year--one that meets this moment, one that provides the
support our farmers desperately need to stay in business.
I am committed to sitting down with my counterparts for as long as it
takes to hash out a deal that our Members can support. I was encouraged
to see House Ag Committee Ranking Member David Scott make a similar
appeal last week. I know our respective chairs are eager to pass a bill
this session of Congress, but the window to make this happen is closing
quickly. Our family farmers are staring down a crisis that is growing
more dire by the day, and many fear that the Senate simply doesn't care
about their plight.
The Presiding Officer and I both know, as the Presiding Officer is
one of our stellar members on the Ag Committee, that that is far from
the truth. I know that our colleagues--all of our colleagues on both
sides of the aisle--want to make sure our farmers can continue to
produce the safest, most affordable, and most abundant supply of food,
fuel, and fiber in the world, but without action, it is an
understandable sentiment. We have been sounding the alarm on this
brewing crisis for months. It is the very reason we have been adamant
about the need for more farm in the farm bill.
I suggest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
The senior assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mrs. BLACKBURN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order
for the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

Unanimous Consent Request--S. Res. 669

Mrs. BLACKBURN. Mr. President, across our country, more than 3
million female high school and college athletes compete, practice, and
train every day to achieve athletic success. For many of these young
women and girls, their sports are more than just a game; they are a
lifelong passion that improves their physical health, boosts self-
confidence, and teaches them the leadership skills to succeed on and
off the field.
In short, women's athletics have done incredible things for women,
which is why it is so deeply disturbing to see the Biden-Harris
administration wage a war on women's sports--in their crosshairs: title
IX, the landmark civil rights law that codified protections on the
basis of sex by requiring equal resources for training, recruitment,
and scholarships for female athletic programs.
Title IX led to an explosion of women's participation in sports. In
fact, since 1972--the year title IX became law--the number of female
college athletes has increased by a factor of seven while the number of
female high school athletes has increased by more than tenfold. Yet,
for years, we have seen this administration undermine the very title IX
protections that have enabled greater women's participation in sports.
In 2022, on the 50th anniversary of title IX, the Department of
Education announced new rules that forced schools to allow biological
males to play on female teams; and just in April, the administration
redefined ``discrimination'' to allow biological men to use women-only
locker rooms and bathrooms.
Are Tennesseans and the American people really expected to believe
this is OK? You do not need to be a biologist to understand that there
are fundamental, biological differences between men and women, and when
it comes to sports, these differences undermine fair play, erase
women's hard-earned achievements, and put female athletes in danger.
Thankfully, many young women are bravely speaking out against the
Biden-Harris administration's radical agenda, including Tennessee's
Riley Gaines. In 2021, Riley was forced to compete against and share a
locker room with a biological male during the NCAA women's swimming and
diving championships. During the 200-meter

[[Page S6081]]

competition, Riley tied for fifth with her male competitor, but when
Riley went to the awards ceremony to pick up her trophy, officials told
her that they were giving the fifth place trophy to the biological
male. ``Yours will be coming in the mail,'' they told her.
This should never happen in the United States. Now, more than ever,
Congress should stand with the female athletes fighting for fair play
and celebrate the incredible contributions women have made in the world
of sports. That is why I am calling for unanimous consent for my
resolution to establish October 10 as American Girls in Sports Day. Of
course, we picked that date for a special reason. As the 10th day of
the 10th month, October 10 is represented by the Roman numerals XX, the
same numerals of the female sex chromosome.
In the last 50 years, female athletes have gone from the sidelines to
the center stage of competition. As we continue to fight for women's
participation in sports, we must keep in mind what is at stake, and the
American Girls in Sports Day resolution will help to ensure that we all
join together and celebrate our female athletes.
Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on
Commerce, Science, and Transportation be discharged from
further consideration and that the Senate now proceed to S. Res. 669;
further, that the resolution be agreed to, the preamble be agreed to;
and that the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the
table.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
The Senator from Connecticut.
Mr. MURPHY. Mr. President, in reserving the right to object, first of
all, let me offer my thanks to the Senator from Tennessee for all the
work that she has done with my colleague Senator Blumenthal to protect
our kids online. I am truly grateful for what they have done together,
and although she and I have not worked closely together on legislation,
I hope that we will be able to find partnerships to work together to
further protections for our kids. I mean that sincerely. She and I may
not agree on a lot--as you will hear, we don't agree on this particular
resolution--but I do hope that we get the chance to work together. I
mean that.
I also mean this with all due respect: Let's be clear about what this
is. This isn't an effort to solve a problem. This whole obsession with
transgender kids from the rightwing is just about picking on vulnerable
kids so that adults can make themselves feel big--bullying and
harassing kids because it makes adults feel powerful. As far as I am
concerned, this whole effort is shameful.
It is important to understand that resolutions like this do not stand
in isolation. It is part of a massive campaign by the right to convince
Americans that they should fear immigrants, that they should fear
Muslims, that they should fear gay children, that they should fear
transgender athletes.
The world in which Republicans want us to live is a world where the
biggest problems are not low wages or expensive healthcare or addiction
or loneliness, but the threats posed to us by people who are of a
different race or speak a different language or are of a different
sexual orientation or gender identity. It is a massive, coordinated
attempt to marginalize people who aren't White, straight, and
Christian, and it exists for a reason: to distract you.
I have a ton of close Republican friends in this Chamber whom I work
with a lot, but let's be honest. The Republican Party's platform today
is maybe the most unpopular agenda of any major political party in
recent memory: ban abortion, cut taxes for corporations and
millionaires, ban books, loosen gun laws. Nobody wants any of that.
So what do you do if the things you actually want to do if you
achieve power are super, super unpopular? You distract them with giant,
gross lies, like immigrants are eating our pets, or greatly exaggerated
untruths, like our high school sports are under assault from
transgender kids.
It is all an effort to hide the ball from the real agenda--abortion
bans and millionaire tax cuts--by trying to make you believe that you
should spend your entire day, that you should spend your entire life,
just being afraid of people who are different from you.
Let me give you the facts, not the fearmongering, about high school
transgender athletes, and I will let you decide whether this situation
is worthy of hundreds of bills having been introduced by Republicans
all across the country and whether it is worthy of debate continuously,
over and over again, on the Senate floor.
There are over 6 million kids competing in high school sports today.
For the problem of transgender girls competing in girls sports to be a
national crisis, what percentage of that 6 million would be transgender
girls? Ten percent? Is that a crisis? Five percent? One percent? It is
none of those.
Let's take Florida as an example. More than 800,000 students in
Florida participate in high school athletics. Before they enacted their
ban, how many transgender athletes were in Florida of those 800,000
students? One hundred? Nope. Fifty? Nope. Over the course of 8 years in
the entire State of Florida, before their ban, there were 13
transgender high school athletes--13. Those 13 girls were apparently
waging a war against girls sports. That is a pretty small army to be
waging a war.
You are more likely to be killed by a falling object in this country
than to have your daughter compete against a transgender girl in high
school sports, but what if she did? I think every State and every
school district should decide these questions for themselves. I don't
think the Federal Government should get involved. But as a parent,
personally, I celebrate those few transgender kids, who often spend
their entire adolescence being shamed or marginalized by the kind of
small people who push resolutions like this--I celebrate the fact that
they get the experience of the comradery and the happiness that come
with being part of a sports team. I think that is great. I don't think
that is a threat to my kids. I don't think that is a threat to my
community or the Nation.
I teach my kids to love everybody, to include everybody, to see
people who are different from them--who are a different race, a
different religion, even a different gender identity--as potential
friends, not as enemies, waging war against them, to be shamed or
bullied.
This is an absurd resolution. It is designed to distract Americans
from Republicans' real agenda. It is designed to build a culture of
fear and mistrust, a culture that I and, I am going to tell you, most
Americans reject.
Therefore, I object.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The objection is heard.
The Senator from Tennessee.
Mrs. BLACKBURN. Mr. President, I would encourage my colleague to go
read the Republican Party platform. It is very short, as a matter of
fact. There is nothing in it about banning anything, believe you me. I
know that. So I would encourage him to take the 15 or 20 minutes. It is
not a long, lengthy document. It has 20 actions that we are going to
take, and then it has some principles on which we stand and believe.
I also find it very interesting that he looks at a resolution that
would celebrate women as something that should be feared, because it is
not about fear. It is not about division. It is not about distraction.
This is something that says to our young girls and these young
athletes: We are proud of you. Keep it up.
I mean, here is some of the language from the resolution:

Athletic participation has an important, positive impact on
young girls, improving their physical health, self-
confidence, and discipline. . . . Women have been responsible
for some of the greatest athletic feats in the sports history
of the United States, from the Olympic games--

And we all cheered our young women who excelled and won those medals
and those who were in competition in the Olympics--

[all the way] to professional competition. . . . [F]emale
athletes have served as inspirations for generations of women
and girls.

In Tennessee, I will tell you, there are young girls probably out in
the driveway bouncing a basketball right now. They want to be a Lady
Vol. That is one of their goals in life.
As for the number of titles and things that have been lost since
2003, biological men have displaced women and girls from over 950
championship titles, medals, scholarships, and

[[Page S6082]]

records that should have rightfully gone to these girls and at least 28
women sports titles in volleyball, swimming, mountain biking, track and
field, weightlifting, and cycling.
This is a celebration of female accomplishments. This is a
celebration of female accomplishments.
So while I enjoy the opportunity to work with my colleague, I am
disappointed to hear him feel and express his opinion that celebrating
women and giving a day to celebrate our female athletes would be
something that would strike fear and would cause division. We should
all be united around celebrating our female athletes.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Washington.

Right to IVF Act

Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, today we once again attempted to move
forward on the Right to IVF Act, and Republicans once again stopped us.
Now, let's remember a few things about how we actually got here,
because it is infuriating. Republicans have tried to claim the right to
IVF is not under attack, but it was Republicans' own votes that killed
this bill, and it was the Republicans' own efforts to overturn Roe v.
Wade and champion fetal personhood--which treats an embryo like a
living, breathing, person--that caused the chaos and uncertainty around
IVF access. That caused women in Alabama to have IVF appointments
canceled earlier this year, jeopardizing women's hopes of growing their
families and lighting on fire the thousands of dollars some of these
patients spent ahead of treatment.
And despite that hard lesson, to this day, there is still widespread
Republican support for fetal personhood bills. To this day, in
Republicans' own bills to supposedly protect IVF, they say nothing
about fetal personhood and do nothing to make sure parents can dispose
of unused embryos.
Now, Democrats came forward with a bill that would actually protect
IVF. Our bill, the Right to IVF Act, protects the right to IVF
nationally, and it lowers the cost of IVF for families with stronger
insurance requirements. It also includes my bill to make sure more
veterans and servicemembers can access IVF services.
And many of the same Republicans who have supported fetal personhood
laws--the single greatest threat to IVF--are pretending this bill is
unnecessary. Many of the same Republicans who are desperate to posture
as pro-family and who constantly say they stand by our troops are
saying: We can't afford to help more military families get IVF.
Funny how they are always game to shovel more money at tax breaks for
billionaires, though. But I digress.
Mr. President, Republicans voted this bill down--again. They voted
down protecting IVF--again. They voted down making IVF more
affordable--again. They voted down helping servicemembers and veterans
grow their families--again. And they did it fresh off another round of
pretending to support IVF. They did it just as Donald Trump, the man
who kicked all of this off, the man who proudly boasted that he ended
Roe, is trying to say he is the leader on IVF.
When Donald Trump says he is the leader on IVF, hear me on two
things: First, he almost certainly doesn't understand what IVF is.
Secondly, he doesn't understand what leadership is. You do not get
credit for opposing a problem that you caused in the first place,
especially when your party--the party you lead--won't let us solve it.
The entire country just saw, plain as day, that Donald Trump is lying
again and that nothing has changed for Republicans since they
overturned Roe v. Wade. Nothing has changed for Republicans since the
absolute heartbreaking chaos their extremism caused in Alabama. Nothing
has changed for Republicans despite Trump's imaginary leadership on IVF
and despite all the families who are calling for action.
But Democrats are not going to stop pushing. And I have a message for
my Republican colleagues who think they can talk about this issue, make
big promises to desperate families--like Trump's promise to cover IVF
treatment--and then fail to follow through. I would urge them to think
again and tread lightly, because that promise may just be an empty
sound bite to Donald Trump, but it is so personal to these families. It
is personal to women who have been trying for years to start a family
with no luck, women who, month after month, get their hopes up and face
another heartbreak.
The last thing these families need is a broken promise. The last
thing their heart can bear is false hope. So don't you dare breathe
another word about helping them get IVF when you are not willing to put
up the votes and make it happen. Don't you dare talk about protecting
their chance to grow their family when you are not willing to stand
clear and strong against fetal personhood laws.
Don't you dare raise your voice in more fake support when you won't
lift a finger to actually help, because these families have been
listening to your words. They saw how you voted today. And, Mr.
President, they will not forget.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Hawaii.
Mr. SCHATZ. Mr. President, here in this Chamber, it is your vote that
counts--not your tweets, not your public statements, not your TV
interviews. Your votes. And today for the second time in 3 months,
Republicans voted against protecting IVF. Some of them claim to support
IVF. All of them profess to be pro-life. But given a chance to be both,
they failed.
Republicans are doing a lot of mental gymnastics to try to justify
their cruel extremism on this issue. But let's be very clear about what
the Right to IVF Act does. It protects every American's right to access
IVF and lower the cost of treatments for families who need it. That
means anyone struggling to start or to grow a family can undergo IVF
without fear of interference or punishment by the government.
And think about the fact that we have to make a law that says
families should not be punished for trying to start a family. That is
what this bill does. It says you should have access to this care and
you cannot be punished for trying to start a family. It means providers
can administer the treatment without worrying that they will be thrown
in jail or have their license taken away just for doing their jobs. And
it means insurers can cover IVF without implementing absurd
restrictions and onerous requirements that would make it all but
impossible to access this miraculous treatment.
This bill is a commonsense measure that is necessary precisely
because of the environment Republicans created with the fall of Roe, an
environment where over half of women of reproductive age in America now
live in States that are hostile to abortion rights. And let's be clear,
Republicans did that through their vessel of the U.S. Supreme Court.
And so they can pretend to be for IVF but vote against the bill that
would actually protect it for good. They can pretend to be for life
while also trying to restrict access to a miraculous treatment that
creates life. They can pretend to have their own bill to support IVF
when, in fact, that bill literally does the opposite. It literally does
the opposite because here, it is your vote that counts. It is not your
rhetoric. It is not your statement. It is not even your explanation.
They voted no against IVF. And shame on them.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. HELMY). The Senator from Washington.
Ms. CANTWELL. I rise to join my colleagues and want to thank my
colleague, Senator Murray, for her leadership on this important issue
over many, many years.
I join my colleagues to say it is time to put partisan politics aside
and stay out of family planning issues and leave that up to families in
America.
My colleagues on the other side of the aisle had an opportunity today
to believe that women deserve the chance to start a family through IVF,
the miracle for people who have been struggling with fertility
challenges.
In 2022, more than 2,000 new babies were born in the State of
Washington thanks to IVF. This is something we would like to see every
year. But as the Court has struck down important issues and States have
gone on various efforts to try to restrict women's access to healthcare
and full reproductive care, IVF has even been questioned.
Practically everyone knows someone who overcame the challenge
desperate to have a pregnancy and the sadness of

[[Page S6083]]

infertility. And that is probably why 86 percent of Americans say that
IVF should be legal.
This afternoon, we voted on that right, the Right to IVF Act. That is
what we were voting on, a straightforward vote. One of those that would
just show the American people, the mainstream of America, that we agree
with them. That is all we were trying to do, as people have punted
around this very important right that now, because of actions by
individual States, no longer seems to be guaranteed.
Yet we all here could have cast a vote saying we wanted to protect it
in voting for this act. It was an opportunity for us to ask our
colleagues who previously voted against this measure to say that they
actually agreed this time on IVF; to show that they mean what they say,
not some version of a bill that basically curtails and makes it
impossible for somebody to run an IVF organization.
We have no time for that--no time for that. My colleagues' voting
history shows that if you didn't support IVF before and you didn't
support it today, I am not sure what it is you think you support.
Democrats are trying to guarantee the access, and Republicans are
blocking us. Democrats tried to guarantee the right to contraception,
which 81 percent of Americans say should be protected, and Republicans
blocked us.
We tried to pass a law saying you can't put a woman in jail for
trying to leave her State just to get abortion care, and that was
blocked. And we tried to pass a law saying that you can't put a
healthcare worker in jail for performing abortions in their State where
the procedure is legal. Republicans blocked that, too. And today
another block of just something very basic--the Right to IVF Act.
So reproductive freedoms of all sorts and family planning is under
attack. We had a chance to speak as one voice and to talk about
fertility treatments in the United States of America. Instead, families
will continue to wonder whether IVF is going to be available in the
United States of America. Americans should have the access to these
reproductive rights. Americans should have the freedom to decide for
themselves when and how to have children. And they should have the
freedom to use IVF for their families and to plan to start a family.
This summer, I released a healthcare report, along with my
colleagues, that talked about people who lived in red States where they
were forcing people to travel to other States just to get healthcare.
It was so sad and scary to find out that, basically, almost weekly,
someone from Idaho was walking into a facility with a pregnancy
complexity, only to be told: I am not going to see you. And then have
them flown to a facility in Seattle. What kind of hardship are you
putting on people?
Then, with great sadness, I read this article that came out late last
night about the death of a young woman from Georgia ``who died after
waiting 20 hours for a hospital to treat her complications from an
abortion pill shows the consequences of [the actions that we passed]
Donald Trump's actions.''
This is what we are doing to America. We are leaving reproductive
choice up in the air. We are making women travel all over just to get
care. And now we are telling Americans we don't even know if we believe
in IVF. This nonsense has to stop. This is about families planning.
This is about families planning for their future. It is not about
politicians putting hardships on patients seeking healthcare and then
turning them away and affecting their lives. And in this case, the
tragedy of this young woman.
I thank my colleague, Senator Murray, for helping organize us. I ask
our colleagues: We can do better than this. They need to do better than
this for the American people.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Hawaii.
Ms. HIRONO. Mr. President, I want to thank Senator Murray for her
leadership on reproductive freedom issues and my colleagues talking
today about the IVF bill we just voted on.
Once again, today, our Republican colleagues have shown us where
their priorities truly lie. Despite insisting time and again how much
they support the right to in vitro fertilization, or IVF, they just
voted again, nearly unanimously, to block a bill providing that very
right.
For decades, IVF and other assisted reproductive technologies, or
ART, have helped people who otherwise couldn't start families of their
own. While some on the right like to depict IVF as some sort of new or
untested technology, that is not so. The first baby delivered via IVF
was more than 45 years ago. And since then, IVF have helped bring more
than 10 million babies into this world.
In fact, as a State representative in Hawaii in the eighties, I led
the passage of a bill making Hawaii one of the first States in the
Nation to require health insurers to cover IVF treatment.
Earlier this year, I met Dr. Lori Kamemoto, an OB-GYN in Hawaii who,
decades ago, helped deliver the first baby born in Hawaii via IVF.
But now, thanks to the chaos created by Dobbs, a whole range of
reproductive rights, including the right to IVF, are on the chopping
block. Look at Alabama where the State Supreme Court invoked a ``fetal
personhood'' law to call into question the legality of IVF, effectively
halting IVF treatment in that State.
Despite the fact that more than 85 percent of Americans support IVF,
Republicans here in the Senate have now, on several occasions, blocked
our attempts to pass a bill to protect IVF treatments. Apparently,
Republicans' obsessions with power and control over women's bodies and
our lives knows no bounds.
Republicans insist that they support IVF but refuse to protect access
to IVF. They insist access to contraception is safe and they support
it, but when given the chance, refuse to codify that support into law.
Frankly, can anyone take Republicans at their word when they say they
won't enact a nationwide abortion ban if given the opportunity? We
can't. They have shown us who they are and just how wildly out of step
they are with the American people.
As Republicans continue on their anti-freedom, anti-women crusade,
Democrats will continue fighting to protect the right to IVF as we work
to ensure people can make decisions about their bodies, their lives,
and their futures free from government intrusion.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Connecticut.
Mr. BLUMENTHAL. Mr. President, actions speak louder than words.
Actions always speak louder than words. For all their words, our
Republican colleagues have acted today in a way that will speak for
years and longer.
It will speak to Lisa, a constituent of mine in Connecticut. I ask my
Republican colleagues to listen to Lisa and what she shared with me
after the Alabama Supreme Court ruling and before she and her husband
became parents to a healthy, happy baby girl as a result of IVF. She
said:

If a woman is willing to go through the physical,
emotional, and financial toll of IVF treatment to bring a new
life into the world, you had better believe she is going to
love that baby more than anything one can imagine. And we
need more love like that in the world.
For Lisa, that Alabama Supreme Court ruling banning IVF treatment was
``heartbreaking and infuriating.'' Families like Lisa's wouldn't exist
if it weren't for IVF.
I ask my Republican colleagues to listen to Kim and Tina, who were
married in 2013 and immediately knew they wanted to start a family in
Connecticut. As a gay couple, they needed to rely on reproductive
technology, and they were forced to meet standards that their straight
friends never encountered. And IVF worked for them. They are now proud
parents to twins whom they call ``the greatest gifts of our lives.''
Interested in politics and government, trumpets and sailing, they are
gifts to their community, their friends, and their school.
Listening to parents who have gone through the heartbreak and pain of
infertility and who have found this miracle of IVF--it is not limited
to Kim and Tina and Lisa; it is all of America who knows these stories
in their own lives. Every American knows a couple that has tried year
after year, and finally, if they are really lucky and can afford it,
discovers the miracle of IVF.

[[Page S6084]]

Very simply, every one of those families, every American ought to
have access to that miracle of life. Yet our Republican colleagues,
even though their own constituents would tell them, if they were
listening, about the reasons why IVF should be protected, have acted
today, despite their words and their rhetoric, to block IVF protection.
This scientific miracle is so immensely important, it ought to be
nonpolitical, nonpartisan, noncontroversial. There ought to be
unanimity.
And this vote is the second one. I believe in second chances. If we
had wanted to be strictly political about this bill, we could have
said: Well, no second chance here; we are going to take you on that
first vote, because that would be the one politically advantageous. We
gave them a second chance to get right on IVF, and they refused.
I am angry. I am disgusted. Most important, I am sad because this
vote was an opportunity to tell American families: We are with you. We
stand with you. We know how physically painful IVF is. We know how
emotionally painful infertility can be. We know how great families want
to build greater families with children who will serve our country,
make it greater.
The callousness and cowardice of our Republican colleagues speak
louder than words, and this vote will haunt them. It will haunt at the
very least their consciences--or it should.
We have the courage to stand with the American families who need and
deserve IVF.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Michigan.
Ms. STABENOW. Mr. President, first, I am so grateful to be here with
colleagues who care deeply about protecting our reproductive freedoms
and supporting families all across America. I want to thank Senator
Patty Murray, who has been our leader on this for many years.
It is just incredible to me that in 2024, we are standing here even
having to talk about this. It is really incredible.
I just want to take us back to it because this Congress, Republicans
have had 16 chances to protect reproductive freedom--over 16 chances--
and every time, they have voted no. So today, once again, they block a
bill to protect access to IVF for thousands of American families.
Now, we had this vote before, and then the former President said he
changed his mind and he wanted to make IVF free and he wanted to force
insurance companies to cover IVF. I thought, well, that is great. Let's
come together in a bipartisan way to be able to move forward and
protect this really important part of reproductive freedom. So we bring
the bill up again.
Now, I assume that the former President was on the phone all last
night calling our colleagues, calling all of our Republican
colleagues--I mean, like he did for his effort to block and kill the
bipartisan border security bill. When he wanted to make sure that
didn't go forward and he had an issue to run on, he was burning up the
phones.
Well, given what he said to the American people about his now support
for IVF, I assume he was burning up the phones last night. Well, if he
was, it wasn't very effective. And, Mr. President, we know he wasn't.
We know, when he really wants something, what he does. When he really
wants something, he is calling the Speaker of the House to say: Don't
support a bipartisan bill to continue the government; shut it down.
But I bet there wasn't one phone call made last night to support this
effort to protect a woman's reproductive freedom and the freedom of
families to grow their families.
Since the fall of Roe, Republicans have continued their assault on
reproductive freedom: IVF; questions about birth control; of course,
abortion access; and then a whole range of privacy questions for women
in terms of what happens during their pregnancies.
We know that IVF is about allowing the freedom to have children. If
you struggle with infertility, it gives you a way, an effective way, to
start or grow a family. It has helped thousands of Americans, thousands
of American children, including my friend Ellen, who now has a
beautiful little boy, Carter. He just had his first birthday party not
long ago. I mean, how could you not love that face? Carter is
incredible, and we are all so excited for Ellen and for Carter. That is
the miracle of IVF.
IVF has also helped Brittany from Holly, MI, start her family. After
being diagnosed with PCOS at 16, she experienced fertility issues when
she was ready to start a family. After 3 years, six rounds of fertility
treatments, countless tests, and two rounds of IVF, she gave birth to
her beautiful baby girl, Eloisa, who is now 11 months old. What a
blessing.
Despite the strain this journey put on her relationships, Brittany
told me that every penny was worth it. ``Every penny was worth it for
our daughter. IVF has made our family complete.''
She is not the only Michigander who has been able to start a family
because of IVF. When her husband was serving our country in the U.S.
Navy, Sue from Brighton, MI, used IVF to bring her son into the world.
At the time, she was an elementary school teacher, and her husband was
deployed for months at a time. Her entire salary went towards the seven
rounds of IVF that were needed to have a successful pregnancy. With
insurance only paying for some of the medication, she spent over
$100,000 out of pocket on treatment to be able to have that baby. This
journey put an emotional and financial strain on Sue and her husband,
and that is surely not surprising, and this situation is not unique.
Our veterans and servicemembers sacrifice so much for our country.
They shouldn't have to sacrifice their ability to start or grow a
family because these treatments aren't covered and politicians tell
them they don't have that choice.
Families shouldn't have to choose between going into debt to cover
the enormous cost of treatment and having a baby just because it is not
covered by insurance.
That is why voting for the Right to IVF Act was a no-brainer for me.
We need to protect this freedom, access to this opportunity for
families. We need to expand and protect fertility treatments for our
servicemembers and our veterans and cover adoption assistance. We need
to cover and lower the cost of IVF treatments for all. We need to make
sure women have the freedom to make our own reproductive decisions, not
rightwing politicians, not judges.
When I hear the former President say that this was all about sending
the decision back to the States rather than the Federal Government--no.
This is about having individual women and their families make a
decision. It doesn't matter if it is a Federal politician or a State
politician; the point is, there should be no politician. It should be
the woman and her family making those decisions, the woman herself
making that decision about what will happen for her.
So that is what we are fighting for, and we are not going to stop
fighting for that. In America, we had that freedom for over 50 years,
and it got ripped away by Donald Trump and the appointments he made to
the U.S. Supreme Court. Now it has just unleashed all kinds of harm,
all kinds of damage for women, and death, because of the fact that some
folks think they can control women's lives.
I am incredibly disappointed that our Republican colleagues did not
join us today in protecting this important freedom.
I yield the floor.
I suggest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
The bill clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for
the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

____________________